That depends on a variety of things, including which Church(es) one is speaking about. I’ll spare the world a repetition here, but a search of some of my past posts will show a number of examples.
Simple answer to that one: Rome. Perhaps not forcibly, but the “influence” (“pressure” might be better) was there nonetheless. It’s interesting, though, that in recent times, Rome has stepped back from exerting any such influence, and in fact has promoted the restoration of traditional practices in the East and Orient. The sad thing is that some Churches (mainly among the Orientals) have twisted that in a way that has caused an unstoppable wave of Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinizations.
Again it depends, in this case on the person perhaps more so than the Churches themselves. For some, yes, it’s pretty close to the same concept. For others, it’s far closer to the Novus Ordo mindset of false “restoration.”
Well … that one is a “yes, but” …
To say the adoption of such devotions was strictly “voluntary” seems to me to be a bit of a stretch. True, most of them were not exactly imposed, but at the same time there was a certain pressure from Rome. And in at least one case (that of the Syro-Malabars) latinization was anything but voluntary.
