This is immensely interesting: the Diocese of Phoenix is holding a Conference on October 3-4, 2001, on the 1965 Rite of the Roman liturgy.
Many people are not even aware of the existence of this Rite following the Second Vatican Council. But then, neither are many people aware that Vatican II mandated Latin language and Gregorian Chant as normative for the future reformed Catholic liturgy it envisioned, or that it never prescribed Mass with the priest facing the people, free-standing altars, the absence of altar rails, Communion in the hand, female altar servers, or church choirs in front of the congregation singing songs like Marty Haugen's "Gather Us In." A large part of what Catholics take for granted in their Sunday Masses today consists of innovations following the Council.
A quick look at an English translation of the 1965 Rite will show, on the one hand, that it involves some significant changes from the 1962 Missal of Blessed Pope John XXIII (for example, the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar are "optional"); and, on the other hand, that it is vastly different from anything one finds in nearly all Catholic parishes these days (it still looks in many ways like the old "Tridentine" Mass).
It has been reported by Rorate Caeli that the D. of Phoenix conference is not a Tridentine Conference, but "that the underlying message of the conference is that the 1965 Rite was supposed to have been the end of the reform," and that "a future New Rite was not intended by the bishops in 1963," that the Council's "reform was dutifully implemented by 1965 -- and ulterior developments were, ultimately, a rupture with tradition."
On the other hand, the same source also maintains that the D. of Phoenix conference is not a "reform of the reform" conference either, for which the Novus Ordo would be seen as embodying the proper direction anticipated by the Council, but just needing to be reigned in and tweaked a bit. In other words, suggests Rorate Caeli, this conference "is very quietly suggesting that the Novus Ordo should not have been."
One thing is clear: neither of the two forms of the Roman rite distinguished by the Holy Father in Summorum Pontificum is the form of liturgy envisioned by Council fathers. From a historical perspective, the "Ordinary Form" of the Mass (Novus Ordo) cannot yet be called even an "established" liturgy, even if one did not go as far as the French Catholic Jesuit revisionist following the Council, Fr. Joseph Gelineau, who suggested that the Novus Ordo is a "permanent workshop" of perpetual innovation. The "Extraordinary Form" of the Mass (Traditional Latin Mass), on the other hand, has the virtue of being a well-established and venerable liturgy that does not lend itself easily to innovation. Neither form, however, is exactly what the Council fathers had in mind (though of the two, they would have arguably been far more at home with the unreformed Extraordinary Form than with what most of us experience every Sunday today as "Ordinary").
In light of this, the D. of Phoenix symposium ought to garner some serious attention, though whether it will or not is another question. The contemporary liturgical atmosphere is not one that lends itself readily to considerations of history and tradition. As Fr. Gelineau declared, without a shred of regret (in Demain la liturgie, Paris: Ed. du Cerf, 1979): "the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed." And as the former Cardinal Ratzinger, though animated by radically different sympathies, similarly wrote: "Today we might ask: Is there a Latin Rite anymore? Certainly there is no awareness of it. To most people the liturgy appears to be rather something for the individual congregation to arrange." (Feast of Faith, p. 84)