NCR on the "Liturgy Wars"

The National Catholic Reporter is running a series of editorials on liturgy this week.
I applaud the fact that the first one acknowledges right off the bat that there is "good reason" for the liturgy to "occupy [so] much of our time and energy."

It is tiresome to read objections to the new translations, or to the preference some have for ad orientem worship, or whatever, with the "rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic" cliche, the disingenuous pretense that those who advocate a return to greater formality, or a liturgy that respects the traditions and history of the Church are concerned with trivialities, with mere matters of taste and preference -- if those opposed to the Reform of the Reform really though such matters were insignificant, wouldn't they ignore them and let those with different taste indulge them?

No, however some might pretend otherwise, they know that they matter very much indeed.

When the assembled bishops of the world ratified the first document of the Second Vatican Council on Nov. 22, 1963, the groundbreaking Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, the tone and direction of the rest of the council’s session was irrevocably set. It is not overstatement to say that with that document, the church as the modern world knew it was changed forever.

For even with the “reform of the reform” in motion, history has amply recorded what followed the council:

• Altars were turned so the priest faces the people;
• Communion rails disappeared;
• The Eucharist was distributed to standing, rather than kneeling, communicants;
• Latin was replaced the world over by languages spoken by the people;
• The liturgy was seen as intimately connected to what takes place outside the sanctuary walls, particularly regarding issues of social justice;
• In a deeper change, an understanding of Christ’s humanity took its place in a profound way in the Mass alongside reverence for the divinity of Christ, and there was a shift in emphasis from a vertical relationship with God to a more horizontal relationship to God in the community;
• Perhaps most important for average churchgoers, everyone became participants, and not simply passive observers, in the eucharistic celebration.

Say what?Are they trying to imply that the first four are even mentioned in SC, much less "set" by the Constitution?

Anyway, I look forward to the rest of the week's editorials.