Just a quick interjection: I find it interesting that the adjective “Extraordinary” is used to describe both Extraodinary Ministers of Holy Communion and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. Yet, your typical parish in the United States has an abundance of EMHC’s which are used at every Sunday Mass. On the contrary, there are only one or two EF Masses in a typical diocese every Sunday (and there may even be zero!).
Anyone else find this odd?
In regards to the Pope’s comment, it remains difficult to ascertain how he defines rigidity. Does he mean the Latin Mass is too structured? Sometimes I think that too: “Why was the Church so strict?” But Holy Mother Church, in Her infinite wisdom, developed the Liturgy on purpose; i.e. there must be a good reason for the “structure” of the Mass, not “rigidity.” I have to remind myself that people weren’t as stupid back in the day as I make often make them out to be
As someone who has suffered from the scruples, I also wonder if the Holy Father’s comment relates to scrupulosity? But in my limited experience as a 20 year old, scrupulous people aren’t necessarily attracted to the TLM. If someone scruples over the Liturgy, then maybe he/she is trapped in a mindset of, “I must only attend TLM because NO is deficient.” Most scrupulosity (again, in my limited experience) deals with human sexuality, particularly lustful thoughts.
My question to the Holy Father is, “What do you envision as a solution to so-called rigidity?” If he is defining “rigidity” as “only attending the TLM and refusing to attend any NO,” then the solution is quite simple: both Forms of the Mass are equal; neither one constitutes a superior form of worship, because they are both the Mass; i.e. the greatest way man can worship God. Unfortunately, the guidelines of Sancrosanctum Concilium have not been lived up to, especially in the minds of the Council Fathers. As the Church, we must work and pray to implement the features as laid out by the Council Fathers. For example, Ora Labora suggested that the laity form Scholas - excellent! Gregorian Chant will develop the “place of pride” it deserves to have in the Mass.
But if the Holy Father refers to the structure of the TLM as “rigidity,” he is (sadly) not recognizing the wisdom of the Church which developed the Liturgy. A solution to structure seems like something akin to “free-spiritedness” or even at the furthest extreme, “chaos.” The TLM does indeed contain a very ordered composition but for a good reason. Liturgy Guy wrote a fantastic article on why critiquing the TLM as “too-structured” ignores the reality of the essence of the Mass.
I will close my post by just adding that I am 20 years old. The number of young people I know who are fond of the Latin Mass is not negligible. The number is growing, and, rather sadly, the number of young people at NO continues to decline. Now, don’t get me wrong: I am not bad-mouthing the NO, because I attend one every day (or at least try to)! This is a simple observation, and the Church will need to address it as the years move along.
Jesus tells us to know one another by our fruits. It seems as if the FSSP, ICRSS, Clear Creek Abbey, and others affiliated with the TLM are experiencing a vocation boom, not only in terms of priestly and religious callings, but also large families. There are also NO religious orders and dioceses who are doing well in these categories, such as the Dominicans, Norbertines, etc.
At the end of the day, they are both the Mass. At Holy Communion, we receive Jesus Christ - Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. The Mass is the highest form of giving praise and worship to our Creator. Liturgy is also not a personal expression of Faith, and it should always be celebrated in accordance with what Mother Church teaches. Let’s stop the judging on both sides and let the fruits grow.
