Thanks for the ping! Odd article - Danneels is a Paul VI appointee who is probably one of those most responsible for the collapse of the Church in Europe, and all of a sudden he’s surfacing with this article, which seems to indicate an entirely different understanding.
He begins with an extremely defensive posture on the NO (and I think we’re going to see a lot of clergy and “scholars” defending the NO tooth and nail just because they were involved in developing or enforcing it), and then moves to identifyng just about every one of its shortcomings. Of course, he seems to feel that these would be corrected by just celebrating it “better,” although oddly enough, he also mentions some problems that are structural and can only be improved by revising the form radically - or going back to the Tridentine Rite.
Quite mystifying, given his track record.