The Mass was in Latin until I was about 13. This required – for me-- to have a “missal” to follow along with the priest. So, I was more engaged reading in parallel to the priest. Whereas today, we’re supposed to “listen” to the priest say the prayers – this active listening is called participation today, but I think the “business case” for Latin is that I was more engaged before. But, I couldn’t say that for everybody at Mass. Private recitation of the rosary at Mass was common.
Today we need large hymnals and/or printed sheets for all the songs. Congregational singing was one of the BIG developments of the Reformation, and now Catholics are doing it. Previously, the sung parts were standardized hymns (for the most part) and I could follow along the words in the missal, no matter what the tunes were.
Carrying a missal, the scripture readings could be read privately, and there were lots of prayers in the missal for private devotion.
People don’t carry their missals to Mass now, so they get to church and just talk before, during, and after Mass.
It was a big culture shift which many people did not like.
The rebound argument is that communal prayers like today were the gold standard before TLM was standardized.
There’s a whole wasteland of distracting songs in the NO Mass. They’re songs for the sake of singing, but distract from the progress of the Mass.
There would be nothing wrong, in principle, if the choir sang a song and the congregation just listened to it, but we have the rigid adherence to congregational-only singing - with some rare exceptions.
The business case is this: give people the choice and see which they like more. You know, this was never done. And, it’s done only in isolated cases now. You can see how this would complicate parish assignments of priests who were not cross-trained in both forms of the Mass.
The NO is not a mature liturgical rite. Before, we had 1st thru 8th graders at daily Latin Mass and the world did not fall apart.