One of the reasons I remain a Roman Catholic is its inclusiveness, diversity, and universality. I am privileged to be part of worshipping community that can accept me along with greats along a spectrum of political and liturgical practice, such as Dorothy Day, Thomas Merton, Megan McKenna, Mother Angelica, and Cardinal Sarah. We are all part of that welcoming community that seeks to follow Christ and put his teaching into practice even though we might not agree on every point of detailed theology. Tabloid editors are quick to stress the differences between our present Pope, Francis and his predecessor, Benedict XVI. Obviously, they are very different personalities, but they share a deep and loving faith: the papacy is not a case of 'one size fits all.' We are living in unique times: not for centuries has a living Pope had to look over his shoulder at his predecessor who broke accepted protocol by resigning his position.

Benedict was generally perceived as the steady hand on the barque of St Peter, carrying out the policy plans of his mentor St John Paul II. Under his reign the Church suffered much criticism, especially in the way it handled clergy abuse. We saw him raiding the Vatican 'dressing up box' to wear clerical garb that we had not seen in decades. Both himself and John Paul were victims of autocratic regimes in their homelands that resulted in barbaric communism or fascism—two sides of the same coin that could only belittle and harm others. While the Polish pontiff exuded a confidence and charisma befitting his global superstar status, his German successor appeared more bookish, at home in academia, playing Schubert on his grand piano.

It became very obvious that Benedict was trying to appeal to that group within the Church who felt disenfranchised since Pope John XXIII saw the need to open the windows of the Church and call the Second Vatican Council. This group had a great love for the Tridentine form of celebrating the Eucharist that only those in their late sixties will really remember. It followed a very elaborate form in which you really earned your spurs as an altar server. Latin was used throughout, with the exception of the homily; priest and congregation faced the same direction, giving the impression of the priest turning his back on his parishioners. While some saw it as very reverential and helped one come closer to God in prayer, others felt that it did not allow for a communitarian expression of the memorial of the Last Supper. The 'Latin Mass' as it became to be known was noted for its exaggerated use of symbolism that may have been suitable for a grand Medieval cathedral but, was perhaps a little out of place in a typical inner city parish church. Much play is made of the fact that 'this was the mass that our martyrs gave their lives for!' The reality was this style of liturgy was introduced as a reaction to the Reformation—if anything this style was, for the later martyrs, a 'new' form of the mass. The Council of Trent approved this style of celebration, but Trent never sought to impose uniformity, as some supporters of this Rite today would like to imply: the practice of the Ambrosian, Benedictine and Carthusian Rites prove that this was never in the mind of the Church. We celebrated a strong unity in our diversity back in the day and should still do so today.

Under Pope Paul VI a new order of the Eucharist was introduced with a much greater emphasis on scripture than was the case in the Tridentine Rite. Clergy were asked to preach on the readings of the day, that followed particular evangelist over any given year. Anti-Semitic references were taken out of prayers, and the focus of the Eucharistic was at the lectern where the Word of God was proclaimed, and the altar where the bread was broken, and the cup shared. The priest faced the congregation so they could see what was actually going on, especially at the moment of consecration—most importantly, there was no need to learn Latin responses, as this new rite was celebrated in one's national language. In order to ensure unity, the Church advised that this should be the accepted way of celebrating liturgy. Exceptions would be allowed, and priests and congregations could celebrate the 'old mass', as it came to be known, if there was a pressing pastoral need. Sadly, this led to division and schism with the Church, with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre leading a breakaway group that refused to accept the teachings of Vatican II and remaining faithful to the Tridentine Rite. Some like-minded clergy joined him and set about ordaining both new priests and bishops so that the rebel community could be served. While these ordinations were valid, they were illegal, and promoted automatic excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church. So began decades of tension with crazy caricatures being brought up on both sides: the supporters of the 'new mass' were 'happy-clappy' liberals, while the Tridentinists were dinosaurs trying to drag the Church to an era of 'smells and bells.'

This division deeply hurt Benedict and he tried desperately to re-integrate the Lefebvrists back into mainstream Catholicism. Like a good pontiff, he was seeking to be a true 'bridge-builder.' Sadly, his genuine, some might say naive, attempt fell at the first couple of hurdles. His advisors forgot to do a simple Google search on one of the group, English Bishop Richard Williamson to discover that he had a conviction from the German courts for Holocaust denial. The olive branch offered by Pope Benedict to incorporate the 'Fraternal Society of Pius X' (SSPX) back into the mainstream was ultimately rejected by its leader, Bishop Bernard Fellay. Williamson was expelled from the SSPX for his anti-Semitic stand and for his refusal to obey Fellay's authority. This led to Williamson setting up his own traditional group, claiming that the SSPX was too liberal!

While John Paul II made many concessions to those wanting access to the Tridentine Mass, it still required a formal permission from a local Bishop. In my experience, good pastoral provision was made for those who wanted to experience the 'old mass'; however, it was made very clear that separate parishes could not be established, offering a parallel liturgical experience. In over thirty years of priestly ministry, I have never been asked to celebrate mass in what became known as the 'extraordinary form', but I would always be able to signpost people to a neighbouring parish if required. In 2007, Benedict eased all the restrictions, allowing any priest to celebrate the 'old mass' without seeking permission from their bishop or superior. On the face of it, it can be seen as a magnanimous and kindly gesture—a pastoral response to a group who might feel marginalised. The young and academically brilliant Joseph Ratzinger was an advisor at the Second Vatican Council; as a Bishop and as Holy Father he was fully committed to its documents and teaching—this led to the breakdown of his outreach to SSPX. Compromise involves a meeting of minds and a willingness to let go. We saw that with Benedict, but so many supporters of the old liturgy, sadly, adopted an ecclesiology that does not seem to understand the true meaning of compromise. Ecclesiology or a sound theology of our Church lies at the heart of this dispute and not the way we celebrate the Eucharist. Priests are perfectly free to celebrate the 'new mass' in Latin if pastoral needs demand it. Even I have concelebrated a Eucharist in a Latin at the shrine in Lourdes. The Latin language became our common language, as we strive to be a Church of Pentecost and not Babel. Pope Francis, in his July 2021 letter to the whole Church, has rescinded the general permission to celebrate Mass in the Tridentine form. The liberal wing of the Church sing 'alleluia' while the traditionalist side have gone into meltdown, if postings on social media are to be believed: the Jesuit Pope from Argentina has ruined their party!

We need to get the whole dispute into perspective: this more traditionalist, some would say 'conservative' element of the Church account for a tiny percentage—only forty-six parishes offer the Tridentine mass in England and Wales on a regular basis, according to the Latin Mass Society. They do occupy headline space in the Western world due to very strong backing especially from media outlets such as EWNT, and Catholic action groups like the Knights of St Columbus. There are millions of Catholics in the world who are lucky if they can attend Mass a couple of times in the year—this arguing on what 'type' of mass to celebrate must be very much a first world problem. This was brought home to me when a traditionalist group asked if they could hold a mass in the extraordinary rite in Marian shrine of Knock. They were going to bring a Cardinal from Rome to preside, and naturally booked the huge basilica for the Mass. The pilgrimage was growing closer, but the numbers booked to attend were proving to be very small—they would hardly fill a few rows in the vast worship space. The decision was made to move the Mass to the small parish church building, the home of the original apparition at Knock. The Cardinal had reached the high altar, following the elaborate procession demanded by a formal High Mass of the Tridentine Rite. His 'cappa manga' or ceremonial cape was still trailing down the centre aisle to the main entrance door. Relatively few chose to take part in this activity: it reminded me that we must be careful not to assign too much influence to this group. While we can all recognise the beauty and splendour of worship, we must see beyond that beauty and recognise the Lord in the celebration of the Eucharist.

Lockdown denied us the experience of a needed community experience. Our attendance at Sunday Mass became yet another Zoom session as we tried our best to share our faith across the airways. The Church of lockdown forced to return to an era where we 'heard' mass. We became onlookers and were denied the opportunity to receive Holy Communion. Without doubt, whatever form of the mass you might feel attracted to, the pandemic denied us so many of the certainties that we had formally taken for granted.

If you read the letter of Pope Francis, you will see his clear reasoning for cancelling the generous permission of his predecessor. The present Holy Father feels that the Benedictine freedom allowed a deep division within the family of the Church to widen. Interestingly, specific permission for newly ordained priests to celebrate the Tridentine form can only be given in consultation with the Vatican itself. There is a real concern that supporters of the Tridentine Rite, especially among the clergy, fail to accept the teachings of Vatican II-a Council that is over fifty years old. One has to feel for parish communities who have experienced new clergy coming in and, unilaterally, changing worship styles. The spirit of Benedict's 2007 ruling might not support such action, but the letter of the law allowed these changes to take place, causing pan and alienation. The ecclesiology encouraged by the more conservative element places central control with the clergy. In such situations parish councils and collaborative forms of ministry were discouraged and abandoned. Female altar servers were dismissed, and singing was relegated to a specialised choir. Community-facing altars were removed, and women banned from the sanctuary unless, of course, they were cleaning! Pope Francis made it very clear that Bishops must make provision for the Tridentine Mass in places other than the parochial setting. The teaching affirms that the local parish must be a place of unity, fully committed to the teachings and practice of Vatican II.

In his letter Francis has faced up to his fiercest critics, like the retired Cardinal Sarah, who pointedly claimed that the relaxation from Benedict was 'irreversible.' Mass can still be celebrated in Latin, and, I feel, that is disingenuous of organisations like the 'Latin Mass Society' to claim that the present Holy Father is denying their rights. Pope Francis is trying to move the Church away from the rigidity that seems to be encouraged by this traditionalist movement. He wants to see a greater emphasis on good pastoral practice, rather than mere application of rules. Francis recognises that, if we are not careful, an adherence to the 'old mass' could be seen in a 'rejection not only of the liturgical reform, but of the Vatican Council II itself, claiming, with unfounded and unsustainable assertions, that it betrayed the Tradition and the 'true Church.'

The vitriol and hatred that our present Pope has to endure is on par with the recent racist attacks on England's Black players that, rightly, generated such a backlash. It beggars' belief that individual Catholics, along with organisations, can claim to be 'traditional Catholics' when they spew such naked bitterness. The Holy Father wants unity and certainly does not want the Eucharist to be used in some sort of religious 'cultural war' as he writes:

'Regrettably, the pastoral objective of my Predecessors, who had intended "to do everything possible to ensure that all those who truly possessed the desire for unity would find it possible to remain in this unity or to rediscover it anew," has often been seriously disregarded. An opportunity offered by St. John Paul II and, with even greater magnanimity, by Benedict XVI, intended to recover the unity of an ecclesial body with diverse liturgical sensibilities, was exploited to widen the gaps, reinforce the divergences, and encourage disagreements that injure the Church, block her path, and expose her to the peril of division.'

Perhaps Pope Francis is reflecting on the fall-out from lockdown: the Eucharist can never be a private matter. The pandemic protocols have forced us to re-access the importance of our community celebrations, even as we watched remotely at home. I recently welcomed Ruth into the Church; her baptism was held under social distancing guidelines with the congratulation fully masked. However, due to the internet family and friends were able to join us from across the world to show Ruth just how special and loved she is. The Pope wants us to return to that sense of unity and his global consultation on the impact of the Tridentine Rite in 2017 will have had far more influence on this new teaching than the impact of the pandemic.

Vatican II taught us clearly that the 'Eucharist is the source and summit of the Catholic faith.' ('Lumen Gentium' 11). It has saddened the Pope to see how the sacrament of unity can be used to hurt—this can come from either a liberal or more traditional understanding. This abuse should sadden all Christians: we are called to live and work with each other, aware of our strengths and weaknesses, as Francis reflects, we all need to be bridge builders:

'Liturgical celebrations are not private actions, but celebrations of the Church, which is the sacrament of unity; they must be carried out in communion with the Church. Vatican Council II, while it reaffirmed the external bonds of incorporation in the Church — the profession of faith, the sacraments, of communion — affirmed with St. Augustine that to remain in the Church not only "with the body" but also "with the heart" is a condition for salvation.'

Ultimately, we work for the Lord and aligning oneself with a particular pastoral style of a Pope that you happen to support or like does not help the cause of unity. Of course, we are free to have our favourites and heroes that might support our own theological outlook. However, the Holy Spirit has given us Vatican II and Pope Francis, just as we were given Trent and Pope Pius X. We are an evolving Church which does not mean we have to change for the sake of change. The promise of Jesus is that he will always be with us—Jesus is with us now and we need that presence more than ever. The global community is enduring a common pain and hardship that we have not seen since the World War—more than ever we need to re-engage and be the pastoral Church of Christ. Why are so many seminarians and young priests so tied to the Tridentine Mass? Time spent in learning the complicated rubrics could be well spent at the local youth club or hospital.

Time will tell what the fall-out from this ruling will be: there will be outcries and shouts of 'foul.' I pray that this will strengthen our Church but a line has been drawn in the sand by Pope Francis, and we are called to show respect. Vatican II is part of the tradition of the Church and deserves that respect and commitment. Are you prepared to show that respect too?

Author: Fr Gerry O'Shaughnessy SDB

Image: © Alessio Fiorentino on Unsplash