I don’t understand why we cannot accept that a mass in Latin, a mass in the NO and a mass in the Byzantine rite and languages are all equal in dignity and meet the pastoral needs of different Catholics?
Why are we trying to impress upon one another that the TLM or the NO is superior, holier, more reverent, etc etc? What is to be gained, if the individual Christian is not moved to a greater love of God and neighbor?
We are beginning to sound like Protestants as they divided from original Lutheranism, Calvinism and Anglicanism. “My way is better than your way.”
This is not what the Church teaches. All that the Church teaches is that the TLM is part of our tradition. Motu Propio does not downplay the NO. In fact, if you attend mass at the Vatican they use the NO. The only difference is that they pray the Eucharistic prayer in Latin, but the other prayers are said in either Italian or Latin, sometimes they combine the two languages. The homily is always delivered in several languages. Depending on the celebration, the readings may be in several languages, as are the prayer of the faithful.
Also, the Pope faces the people and he distributes communion in both hand or mouth, depending on the pilgrims who are there. Some people put out their hand or open their mouth. No one fusses about it.
Nonetheless, I can’t think of a more beautiful mass than the two masses that I have attended celebrated by Popes John Paul and Benedict.
Then there are the conventual masses which most people don’t get to see. These are masses celebrated by religious orders of men, not the religious congregations. The congregations use the NO. But many of the religious orders such as Franciscans, Dominicans, Carmelites, Benedictines, Trappists, Cistercians and others, add their own charism to the liturgy.
For example, the Cistercians do not wear an alb. They wear a choir robe with a stole over it. The Capuchins do not use kneelers. They are forbidden in the rule of St. Francis. During the conventual mass they stand for the Eucharistic prayer or they kneel on the bare floor, depending on whether the floor is cold or not. For centuries the Dominican Brothers had their own rite. It was done away with by Vatican II to bring them into union with the universal Church. The did not use the Tridentine rite
In the old Tridentine rite the priest entered the church with his head covered, except if he was a member of a mendicant order or a monastic order. From 1223 until the late 1960s the Franciscans were not allowed to wear shoes at mass, not even sandals, neither were Poor Clares. The Franciscan Friars had to wear a kippah at mass, which they took off at the consecration. The Carthusians were not allowed to concelebrate mass. Each monk celebrated mass in his private oratory. Today they concelebrate on Sundays as a sign of their unity. The Capuchin-Franciscan rule forbids the distinction between those who are ordained and those who are not. They call each other Brother and they all stand around the altar, because their alter is usually the center of their choir. At mass the ordained brothers wear either a choir robe over their habit or an alb if the weather is too warm and a stole. If you go to Cardinal O’Malley’s blog, you’ll observe tha he wears the traditional Capuchin habit with the red scull cap, but never the traditional cardinal’s robes. Because he is still a Brother. He wear the traditional mitre and bishop’s vestments over his brown habit. This has been a Franciscan tradition for more than 700 years.
My point is that there are many Catholic traditions that are hundreds of years old, even longer. There are also newer traditions that arose from Vatican II. They all mean to bring people closer to God.
I never saw the Benedictines, Dominicans, Cathusians or Franciscans quibble over their conventual mass and which was more reverent. When they celebrated mass in a parish they followed the diocese and when they celebrated inside their religious house they followed their order.
Even today, certain religious orders follow their own liturgical calendars, even in parishes. For example, the Franciscans have a Franciscan ordo, a Franciscan missal and a Franciscan Lectionary. It overlaps in some places with that of the universal Church and differs at certain times of the year and on certain holy days. Many people don’t even realize when they attend a mass at a Franciscan parish that the saint of the day is often different from the saint in the Church’s universal calendar, becaue according to the Rule of St. Francis, the Franciscan saints take precedence, except in certain cases, such as universal solemnities. And in every religious parish the feast of the founder is a solemnity not a feast. The priest wears white on the Solemnity of St. Dominic, St. Bruno, St. Francis, St. Augustine and so forth, according to his religious order, while the rest of the church wears the colours prescribed in the ordo and celebrates these as memorials or feasts.
This is much more complicated than just the TLM vs the NO.
The fact is that Vatican II wanted all Christians to participate and feel lifted up at the liturgy. If it happens for you at one form or at another, then the Church has met your pastoral needs. As far as the celebration and the validity of the Eucharist, they are all valid and they celebrate the same sacrifice and faith.
We should attempt to see the positves and what unites us.
Just my two cents.
JR
