Sandro Magister writes an article in Chiesa describing some more details about the possible Universal Indult, and how the French hierarchy wants the right to veto the implementation of the rumored Matu Proprio to celebrate the Mass of Pope Pius V, or the Tridentine Mass.
This surprising admission was made during the October 26th conference celebrating the 50 years of the Institut Supérieur de Liturgie:
In his address, Vingt-Trois admitted that the liturgical renewal that had been implemented in France over the past decades had seen developments that were “sometimes clumsy or crude, which may have given the impression of a rupture with tradition.”
He also recognized that “in some liturgical gimmicks or tendencies one has been able to identify the assembly’s celebration of itself, instead of the celebration of the work of God – means the proclamation of a new model of the Church.”
But then he continued, to the applause of those present:
“On the other hand, one has witnessed a radical criticism of Vatican Council II, a pure and simple rejection of some of its declarations, under the pretext of mobilization in defense of a form of the liturgy. The rejection of validly promulgated liturgical books was followed by public insults against the popes, and crowned by acts of violence such as the forcible seizure of a parish church in Paris. [...] None of the protagonists of these uprisings either believed or stated that the problem was primarily, much less exclusively, liturgical. It was, and remains, an ecclesiological problem. It clearly poses the question of the meaning of ecclesial unity in communion with the see of Peter. It clearly poses the question of the authority of an ecumenical council.”
The uproar was quickly stifled by comments from Cardinal Arinze, who said:
“We must distance ourselves from that coldness, that horizontalism that places man at the center of the liturgical action, and also from the openly egocentric showmanship that our Sunday assemblies are sometimes obliged to witness...”
“Unfortunately, many homilies seem like addresses marked by considerations of sociology, psychology, or – even worse – politics. Sometimes they are delivered by members of the lay faithful, who are not even authorized to deliver the homily, which is reserved for those who have received ordination...”
Read the entire article from the link above. I promise it's worth reading!