I am going to try to parse together some thoughts that I have developed in ohter threads as they relate to this one.
Latin, as I said earlier in this thread, in and of itself is neither unifying or divisive. People who have a preference for Latin can choose to be either unifying or divisive, as can those who prefer the venacular.
If someone prefers Latin, but understands and accepts that the Church desires that Liturgies in the vernacular be widley available to the people, they can pursue the proper channels within their parish or diocese to find or make available a Latin EF Mass and demonstrate that they agree with HH Pope
Benedict that both forms of the one Mass are equally valid and efficient. In so doing they serve unity. If they choose to look down on those who wish to worship in their native tongue, desparaging not only those who worship in the venacular, but the Holy Mass itself, they serve division.
Likewise if someone who prefers the newer Rite, especially a bishop or pastor, sees a need for a (or another) Latin EF Mass, and works to fill this need, thus encouraging those who may have gone to schismatic movements to come home to Holy Mother Church, they serve unity. If on the other hand they throw up obstacles and try to prevent the EF Mass from being available, they can drive away those who wish to worship in according to the older Missal, they too serve division.
I personally prefer a solomnly celebrated OF Mass for a number of reasons. First and foremost, I can follow it easily. When I say the prayers and responses, I can think and meditate on the words as I say them rather than say wrote words in Latin with little or no thought to their meanings. The prayers of the Mass contain a wealth of cathecesis. If they are said in a language that people understand, this cathecesis can be reinforced every Sunday, or better yet, daily. Finally, the increased coverage of the scriptures in the readings allows for a much more comprehensive view of the Bible for the faithfull, most of whom do not read their Bibles at home.
I have noticed that some of the proponents of the TLM seem to view the Latin language and the silent canon as a kind of temple veil, keeping the unwashed masses from getting to close to the Holy of Holies, thus preserving a sense of mystery and hopefully reverence for the Eucharist and the Liturgy itslef. For me however, the more I learn of the wonderful mystery that is the
Eucharist and the Liturgy surrounding it, the more in awe of both I find myself. And part of my understanding of this comes from Hearing (Faith comes from hearing) the Eucharistic Prayer spoken or chanted at every Mass I attend and meditating on the words as the Priest says them.
Now there are some places where I do fall back on tradition, I like to hear the Kyrie in Greek, and the Sanctus and the Angus Dei in Latin, perhaps even the Lord’s Prayer, and I do wish that Eucharistic Prayer I was used more often.
As I said earlier, if you prefer to worship in the older Rite, I believe that this should be available, maybe not at every parish, but probably at more parishes than currently offer it. I would just hope that those who prefer the TLM recognize that this is not the majority prefernce right now, nor is it the norm right now, it is the Extraodinary Form. Perhaps as the EF is made more available more people will go out of curiosity and fall in love with it, and if God wills, it may well become the preferred Mass of more people. But this will not happen if “traditionalists” come across with a holier than thou attitude and act as if those who prefer the OF are some how second class or marginal Catholics. A little humilty on both sides will go a long way towards unity.
