On Friday, Nov. 14, after months of speculation, Catholics finally learned that Pope Leo XIV does not intend to overturn Traditionis Custodes. Rome signaled instead that it will consider more generous, renewable two-year dispensations at the request of bishops. With that announcement, the center of the liturgical conversation has subtly shifted.

Rather than hoping, working, or fighting for a total juridical reversal of TC, a more practical question has emerged: what will become of the revised Roman Rite as it actually exists in parish life?

For decades, proposals for improvement have ranged from “mutual enrichment” to starting over entirely. Some equate this position with the “reform of the reform,” though that term originally meant something closer to establishing more visible continuity between the old and new Missals while respecting the liturgical law of the reform. Some, like then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, envisioned a new edition of the reformed Missal that visibly bridged old and new. Ironically, once pope, Ratzinger set that suggestion aside.

More recently, some have proposed a fully Latin celebration of the reformed Missal as a meeting point between attachment to the TLM and fidelity to the post-conciliar books. Certain traditionalist writers—Peter Kwasniewski among them—have pushed back, insisting that such an approach fails to address deeper critiques of the reform itself. And many who welcome the Novus Ordo see an all-Latin model only as a limited pastoral bridge.

Beneath those disagreements, though, another current is emerging: a growing willingness to ask how the Novus Ordo itself—musically, linguistically, and catechetically—might be celebrated with deeper reverence and greater respect for the liturgical inheritance of the Roman Rite.

From Traditionis Custodes to the Novus Ordo We Have

It is into this moment that Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone’s recent reflections fit. At the U.S. bishops’ fall general assembly in Baltimore in November 2025, I sat down with Archbishop Cordileone, a growing voice in the liturgical conversation taking place in the Church, to discuss what a constructive path forward might look like.

Cordileone is fully aware that the Traditional Latin Mass has become a symbolic battleground in the Church, and he does not minimize the tensions or the depth of feeling surrounding it. Yet he does not speak of it as a crisis demanding eradication or as a fault-line to be exploited. He acknowledges the pastoral and juridical complexities with clear-eyed realism but approaches them with principled calm, seeing the love for reverence and tradition as an opportunity for the Church. But in this conversation—conducted two days before the news from Rome signaled that a repeal of Traditionis Custodes was no longer on the table—his attention was directed elsewhere.

His focus was turned to the liturgy that forms the overwhelming majority of Catholics: the normative celebration of the reformed Roman Rite—the Novus Ordo. What he wanted to address were the concrete ways the Novus Ordo can be celebrated with greater reverence, deeper beauty, and a more faithful embodiment of the vision set forth by the Second Vatican Council as interpreted by the post-conciliar popes. This choice reflects a pastoral instinct to move the conversation forward rather than deepen the trenches.

Vatican II’s Vision: Not Rupture but Fulfillment

From the outset, Cordileone frames Vatican II not as a rupture—though he acknowledges the abuses and deviations that occurred during its implementation in the twentieth century—but rather as an ongoing project in need of genuine attention.

He returns to Sacrosanctum Concilium’s (SC) insistence that the faithful should participate fully, consciously, and actively in the liturgy, and that the Latin language and Gregorian chant remain proper to the Roman Rite.

For him, the post-conciliar liturgical crisis is not that the Council went too far, but that pastors and liturgists have often implemented only one half of its vision: prioritizing accessibility and intelligibility in the vernacular—essential to the Council’s insistence on active participation, the “aim to be considered before all else” (SC §14)—while not insisting enough on the Council’s expectation that Latin and chant—elements that bring solemnity and beauty to the liturgy—retain “pride of place” (SC §116), which Cordileone notes effectively means “first place” in considerations of liturgical music and language, “all other things being equal.”

In his reading, the task now is to enact the reform more integrally. The reformed Missal of Paul VI is here to stay. The question is whether it will continue to be celebrated in highly variable, sometimes improvised ways, or whether bishops, pastors, and faithful will take seriously the Church’s norms regarding language, music, and the ars celebrandi (art of celebration).

Within that framework, Cordileone sees cathedrals and basilicas as having a distinctive responsibility. These churches, he notes, are mother churches for the diocese, and what happens there can set a tone for the entire diocese. If the Novus Ordo is going to grow into a more coherent, beautiful, and recognizably Roman expression, it will necessarily fall on cathedrals to model the best of what is possible within liturgical law and the Church’s norms.

Cathedrals, Music, and the Return of Chant

In our conversation, he pointed to several concrete elements that could enhance the experience of the Mass for the faithful: the consistent use of the proper texts of the Mass; curated moments of silence; carefully chosen and prepared lectors and servers; music that is clearly at the service of the rite and upholds doctrinal integrity; and a visible atmosphere of reverence marked by appropriate dress and recollected movement in the sanctuary. When these things are present—especially within the cathedral—they establish a benchmark that pastors, musicians, and lay leaders elsewhere can look to as an achievable vision.

Cordileone mentioned that a good place to start is with Jubilate Deo, the booklet of basic Gregorian chants that Paul VI offered to the entire Church. Another helpful resource for Church musicians, which he believes should be required reading for music directors, is Musicam Sacram, which situates hymnody, classical music, chant, and polyphony each in their proper place.

He stressed that the music program a parish offers is its first line of defense against irreverence and the best tool it has to inspire love and care for the liturgy.

Jubilate Deo gave every bishop in the world a concrete “minimum repertoire” of chant—the simple Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, Pater Noster, and a few Marian and Eucharistic chants—that all faithful could reasonably be expected to know.

The question of Latin’s place in the liturgy came up naturally, since the Council Fathers expected it to remain part of the Roman Rite and since it continues to be the Church’s own language and the language of the Missal. Cordileone noted the significance of Pope John XXIII signing Veterum Sapientia on the high altar of St. Peter’s—the only papal document ever signed there. This was a clear indication of how seriously the Church has regarded Latin in her worship.

He proposed renewed efforts to teach Latin in seminaries and Catholic schools as essential for recovering this dimension of the Church’s vision. Greek is valuable as well, he said, but Latin remains foundational for the Roman Rite and deserves focused attention in formation.

Cordileone suggested beginning “with what is simplest and most central.” He recommended starting with the Sanctus and Agnus Dei and, as the parish grows more familiar, gradually adding the Gloria and Pater Noster, always accompanied by catechesis. In his view, this steady formation in the Latin ordinary strengthens the ritual character of the liturgy. The wide variety of options introduced after the reform sometimes weakened that ritual stability, even though inculturation has its proper place. Reintroducing these common elements through repetition helps create a shared musical language that ties each local community more closely to the universal Church.

This approach also moves beyond familiar polarizations, whether between the TLM and caricatures of overly casual liturgy. Cordileone is not proposing that parishes suddenly shift into an all-Latin celebration; he knows that would unsettle many faithful and reinforce suspicions of clericalism or nostalgia. Yet he is equally clear that a model in which Latin and chant are effectively excluded is inconsistent with the Church’s vision.

Between those extremes lies a distinctly Catholic both-and in which the reformed liturgy is celebrated primarily in the vernacular while being enriched at key moments by Latin and chant in a way that is intelligible, well-catechized, and ordered toward deeper participation.

Cordileone avoided simplistic judgments about “good” or “bad” styles, but he was clear that music must follow the structure of the rite and express doctrinal coherence. He noted that polyphony, alongside hymnody and chant, has a well-established place in the Roman liturgical tradition and can supplement the sung ordinary in Latin. Depending on resources, polyphony can be used at the entrance, at the Gloria or Sanctus, during the offertory and preparation of the gifts, throughout Communion, after the post-communion prayer, and at the recessional. A Marian antiphon following the dismissal is also a fitting option.

The musical diversity this approach allows is considerable, even for communities concerned about alienating the faithful or losing familiar hymnody. In practice, a parish that typically sings four unrelated hymns at Sunday Mass might begin by introducing a simple Communion antiphon or by occasionally replacing the entrance hymn with a sung Introit while still retaining one or two well-known hymns.

Orientation and the Ars Celebrandi

For this to work, however, Cordileone acknowledges the need for better liturgical catechesis. This starts, he insists, with the celebrant fostering the ars celebrandi—the interiorized art of celebration that shapes how the priest and deacon inhabit the rites. In addition, formation of liturgical ministers should be a primary focus. When liturgical formation is fostered, the parish naturally gravitates toward reverential elements that create a culture of beauty. These elements can exist fully within current liturgical norms and without the pitfalls of equating reverence with restorationism.

The question of liturgical orientation, too, Cordileone treated with steady realism. He is aware that ad orientem and versus populum have become hallmarks of liturgical “camps.” However, he stressed that the post-conciliar rubrics permit both.

One way to determine which to use might begin with the building itself. In some churches, the architecture—pronounced apse, central tabernacle, elevated altar—naturally supports priest and people facing the same direction, expressing their shared orientation toward the apse, signifying liturgical east. In other settings, an open or in-the-round design and a freestanding altar highlight the gathered assembly around the table of the Lord. Both dimensions, meal and sacrifice, belong to the Eucharistic celebration.

Rather than treating orientation as an absolute, Cordileone acknowledged the legitimacy of asking which posture more clearly reveals the paschal mystery.

Another liturgical tug-of-war over orientation is not something the Church needs, especially at a moment when the Syro-Malabar Church is only beginning to emerge from its own bitter and at times violent conflict over liturgical orientation.

The priest, he insisted, is not a performer. His words, gestures, and posture should be transparent to the mystery he serves. This means resisting the impulse to ad-lib and remaining faithful to the texts. It also means allowing silence to stand on its own without nervous commentary.

Active participation, according to the experts, is not limited to outward speech or movement, but nor does it really allow for withdrawing into private devotions like the rosary during Mass.

As Sacrosanctum Concilium §48 teaches, it is the faithful’s conscious and devout union with the offering of the Mass itself—offered not just through the hands of the priest, but also with him. This interior participation is supported by the priest’s unhurried deliberation in preparing the altar and in handling the Eucharistic species. When a priest shows through his care that he believes what he is doing, the faithful believe along with him.

Forming Ministers and Faithful

Cordileone extends the same seriousness to lay ministers. Lectors should be chosen not merely because they volunteer, but because they can proclaim the Word with clarity and understand its Biblical nuances. This also means they should be engaged in parish Bible study. Servers should be trained to understand their role and the reverence required by those present in the sanctuary. Musicians should see themselves as servants of the rite, shaping an atmosphere of prayer rather than providing entertainment. Even matters as simple as appropriate dress in the sanctuary or maintaining silence in the church before Mass contribute to a culture in which the sacred feels tangible.

Underlying all of this is a strong emphasis on catechesis. If a parish that has never sung a note of Latin suddenly finds itself confronted on Sunday with an untranslated chant ordinary, resentment is predictable. Likewise, if a pastor abruptly shifts orientation or overhauls the music program without explanation, even well-intentioned changes can feel like ideology or shock the faithful into leaving.

By contrast, when pastors and liturgy committees patiently explain what they are doing and why—how a particular chant connects to Scripture, how the use of Latin situates the parish within the wider Church, how silence can strengthen participation—this preempts resistance, shows care, and can foster curiosity that ripens into co-responsibility for the rite.

Cordileone also encourages the faithful to take part in this work by joining choirs and scholas, serving at the altar, helping with catechesis, learning chants, and supporting their pastors when they introduce prudent and well-explained changes. He is not speaking in the abstract. Through the Benedict XVI Institute of Sacred Music, he is helping form musicians and has launched the Reverent Liturgy Project to promote more reverent celebration of the Mass. His work stands alongside a growing number of sacred music apostolates across the country that are training musicians and forming parish communities in the Church’s tradition of hymnody and chant, including the Catholic Sacred Music Project, Catholic Institute of Sacred Music, Higher Word Orchestra, and others.

A Path of Pastoral Realism

Viewed in light of Rome’s decision to retain Traditionis Custodes, Cordileone’s emphasis is pastoral realism. There will continue to be disagreements about whether Rome’s decision is wise or just. But Cordileone suggests that even within those constraints, there is immense room for serious, tradition-minded Catholics to invest themselves in the renewal of the liturgy that actually shapes their communities week by week. Since most Catholics already attend the Novus Ordo, it would seem to return far more significant dividends to invest in beautifying this liturgy rather than expending precious energy on a form that has been restricted and is steadily decreasing in availability.

In four years, the United States has lost close to 200 of its TLM venues, a reduction of roughly 30 percent from pre-Traditionis Custodes numbers. Even with Pope Leo’s signal that he will continue to allow renewable dispensations, it is unlikely these numbers will rebound significantly, and more than likely they will continue to dwindle, if current policy remains in place.

All Catholics are invited to turn their considerable zeal, energy, and liturgical instinct toward the enrichment of the reformed Roman Rite: first by fostering within themselves serious liturgical formation, and only afterwards seeking to address the form of the rite itself—instilling greater sacrality in tone and bringing out its best potential so that it can serve the faithful better in sustaining a life of deep prayer.

The juridical situation is unlikely to change soon. The texts of Vatican II and the post-conciliar Missal are not going away. Yet within that given, Cordileone argues that the Church still possesses immense room for renewal: reclaiming Latin and chant in their proper place, ordering music to the rite, fostering a disciplined ars celebrandi, and allowing the Eucharist to be what it truly is—the sacramental heart of a unified Church. When these elements are embraced and the reform is received as the Church herself presents it, that fidelity can reshape parish life from within. In this way, the Novus Ordo can serve the faithful as the Council Fathers and post-conciliar popes envisioned—as a liturgy capable of forming believers in holiness and drawing the whole Church more deeply into the mystery it celebrates.

---

Image: YouTube screenshot of Archbishop Cordileone celebrating Mass.