Saving the Traditional Latin Mass

 

I have had time to think over Pope Francis’ changes to the use of the Traditional Latin Mass, also known as the Tridentine Mass, the 1962 Missal, or the Extraordinary Form. I find the reasoning to be generally good: Latin Mass devotees, typically blessed with cultural and economic abundance, must not isolate, but share their talent and resources as one church community. The execution of this motu proprio, Traditionis Custodes, at least at the Vatican’s level, is not pastoral. Some bishops, notably in Costa Rica and Arkansas, received the motu proprio on Friday, and cancelled masses scheduled for Saturday and Sunday. How does that serve the faithful? Other bishops have been more tactful: In Washington, DC, a Solemn High Mass in Latin planned to be held and televised at the National Basilica was cancelled, but Latin masses in the parishes would continue against the Vatican’s advice.  

First, let’s address the elephant in the room: This motu proprio only applies to law-abiding Catholics. Schismatic groups like SSPX will continue to say the Tridentine Mass, under the 1962 or earlier missals. As the good shepherd left the flock to find one lost sheep, Pope John Paul II in the 1980s permitted both forms of the mass to bring Catholics “attached” to the old form back into full communion. Stripped of its steam, SSPX must now peddle sedevacantist theories, that the papacy has been vacant since Pope Pius XXII’s death in 1958, to fringe groups. Weakening support for the Traditional Latin Mass by the Vatican or American bishops will give SSPX new energy.

What if the Traditional Latin Mass of the 1962 missal is ultimately suppressed? The ordinary traditional Catholic would be satisfied by a devoutly orchestrated Mass of 1970 sung in Latin, with the priest facing the altar (the Novus Ordo in Latin). This mass incorporates the reverence seen at Justice Antonin Scalia’s Requiem Mass at the National Basilica, with further nods to traditional practice. The Novus Ordo in Latin was commonplace before the widespread return of the 1962 missal in Pope Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum of 2007. This mass is ideal for smaller traditional-practicing communities, as it requires little additional training for altar servers who serve at regular masses said in the vernacular.

The Traditional Latin Mass is an effective vehicle for conversions and returns to the faith. Each pierced and tattooed young person dressed club clothes, but sitting in a Latin Mass pew, is a victory for the greater Catholic community. Indeed, the Latin Mass community has simply outgrown the Novus Ordo in Latin, and now has its own altar servers, priests, and even seminaries at full capacity dedicated to the Tridentine Mass of 1962. The Traditional Latin Mass (or a Novus Ordo Mass in Latin) is Catholic Church’s unique product; a clear differentiator from Protestant Establishment and Evangelical churches. It is possible to receive converts who are moved by Catholic theology, but the unique liturgy is the most outward form of parish life.  The Traditional Latin Mass fills pews, funds Catholic education and ministry, and energizes a church community to fulfill charitable works. This small but vigorous revival of Catholic faith and institutions in America ebbs an attrition that has occurred since the 1950s. Why cut down the healthy tree for a handful of bad apples?

Are you looking to scorn “rigid” traditionalists? Go to any upper-income Catholic church, and you will find a group of them, regardless of whether the parish offers Latin mass or not. Undeniably, attitudes of clericalism and self-righteousness exist. The source of these attitudes is not the parishes, but the multitude of unvetted right-wing media outlets that fancy themselves as Catholic authorities. (Here’s a litmus test: is your “catholic” programming sponsoring anti-vax opinions? If so, change the channel).

Some parishioners insist that the 1962 missal is immutable. Yet careful evolution has been a part of the mass since Pope Gregory’s times. Then-recent additions to the Mass were excised in 1958; the Latin Mass’ Good Friday prayers were revised in good faith to the Jews in 1955, and again in 2008. If there is a place for reform of the 1962 missal, it would be to emphasize liturgical readings in the vernacular. There are not enough years in a lifespan to fully absorb the scripture in Latin, as the readings and gospel rotate, in the traditional mass, on an annual schedule.

Strictly speaking, the Mass of 1970 in Latin could have become the primary representation of the Ordinary Form of the Eucharist. If this motu proprio proves to be lasting, it could be the future format of Latin mass performed within church structures. However, faithfulness to clerical hierarchy in the 1970’s led to some of the more bizarre changes instituted at behest of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). In this came renewal for the sake of renewal, claimed to be “in the spirit” of Vatican II. In clear contradiction to the reverence found towards Catholic art and music in the Vatican II documents, the USCCB criticized traditional music and church statuary (1). In areas where the Catholic Church held influence, historic preservation authorities allowed radical reconstruction of old church interiors without room for public debate.   

A certain generation embraced the “opening up of the church” with new forms of expression such as folk mass with guitars; and found spiritual fulfilment in it. However, younger generations who might have been attracted to that form of spiritual practice found satisfaction outside the church. When I attended grade school in the 1990’s, this language of “renewal” was still in use, the felt banners hanging on the wall, and folk masses being sung (2). In a short-lived reversal of history, I grew up believing that incense and candlesticks belonged to Protestantism, and plain churches belonged to the Catholic Church. The excesses of the “Spirit of Vatican II” in America perhaps led to a recursion for traditional practice. Our nation is home to the vast majority of Tridentine masses performed worldwide.

What is disconcerting about Pope Francis’ motu proprio is the feeling that the Catholic church had reached an equilibrium in America that, in everyday practice, satisfied a supermajority of Catholics. The dark, destabilizing effects of sex scandals and pederasty were atoned for, financially and spiritually.  When new parishes are built in the American South, there will inevitably be an altar rail and high altar to facilitate traditional masses alongside vernacular masses. When parishes are renovated in old Catholic cities, architects will invariably consult historic photographs and drawings to create a continuity of time and space.

In these times, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI’s opinions should hold exceptional weight. As a young theologian, he actively participated in the Second Vatican Council, and was known at the time to be a liturgical progressive. He was, and still is, supportive of the Council itself, but had clearly stated reservation about certain expressions of the “Spirit of Vatican II”, whether it be on clapping in the mass, interior design of churches, or on pastoral counseling. Perhaps wisely, he has not yet offered a point of view on the latest motu proprio of Pope Francis. With the retired pontiff at 94 years of age, now is the last chance to set the record straight on the objectives and fulfilment of Vatican II.

(1)   Environment and Art in Catholic Worship, USCCB. 1977.

(2)   “How Felt Banners and Altar Girls Arose form a False Sense of ‘Participation’ in Liturgy”, Life Site News, 2/28/2019