Rise of the “Trads”

The Church of the Holy Innocents (NYC), where the Latin Mass is offered daily.

Yes, it’s actually true. More and more, Millennial Catholics are flocking en masse to more ‘traditional’ practices and devotions. Churches which offer Mass in the Extraordinary Form are being filled by young 20-somethings and 30-somethings. Chapel veils, once considered a sign of women’s oppression, are finding more and more support among the young. Religious orders and communities which use the Latin Mass are bursting at the seams with vocations. Most recently, groups like the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and the Institute of Christ the King had to turn away applicants, because they could not fit any more men into their seminaries. Traditional religious orders for consecrated women religious have seen a surge in growth, as well. For the Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist, who rocked the Catholic music world with their album of Gregorian chant, the average age of a member is 26! What gives? Is this a sign of retrograde Catholicism?

Some think so. Pope Francis has expressed his confusion at this recent trend of young people seeking out traditional liturgy and devotions. Speaking in an interview this past November 2016, Francis lamented this growth:

“I ask myself about this. For example, I always try to understand what’s behind the people who are too young to have lived the pre-conciliar liturgy but who want it. Sometimes I’ve found myself in front of people who are too strict, who have a rigid attitude. And I wonder: How come such a rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something: insecurity, sometimes even more … Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”

The claim that Latin Mass attendees are “rigid” is not a new one, by any means. Often, the charges are as such: those who attend the Latin Mass are ultraconservative in their theology, especially on things like sexual morality and Church doctrine. In other words, those who attend the Latin Mass, labeled “rigids”, happen to support Church teaching on matters of faith and morals. And, because these young trads actually agree with Church teaching, they are “rigid”, because they are trying to put God in a box (or something like that). Sometimes, the “rigid” label is applied with political connotation: Those who attend the Latin Mass probably voted for Trump and hate the poor. Many times, the claim is that, by focusing on the Sacred Liturgy, we are somehow neglecting important Christian teachings, like care for the poor and outreach to the marginalized. However, such a claim is made in pure ignorance. This is to say that every saint since the 16th century, including St. Vincent de Paul, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Jean Vianney, St. Peter Claver, among others worshiped in the Tridentine Latin form of the Mass, somehow discouraged social justice. It would take some serious mental gymnastics to ever defend this. If anything, one could argue that the Latin Mass fosters a more wholesome and excellent effort at living out Catholic social teaching.

We who attend the Extraordinary Form are used to such pejorative claims. We get it — we are “rigid”, “ultra-conservative”, and “backwards”. But here’s the thing — we’re not. If the fear is that we hate Vatican II, rest-assured, we don’t. If anything, we are the ones desperately trying to do justice to what the documents actually said. And when it comes to the Sacred Liturgy, the “source and summit of the Christian life” according to a document from the Second Vatican Council (LG #11), we are trying our best to preserve a sense of continuity between pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II. We’re often portrayed as snarky, close-minded, and excluding, but cannot the same be said about “liberal” Catholics ? Interestingly enough, many of us who prefer the Extraordinary Form actually attend the Ordinary Form often and faithfully. In other words, “traditional” Catholics attend mass in both forms… can the same be said in reverse? Is there any effort from opponents of the Latin Mass to actually attend it, without resorting to flippant claims against it?

Another claim made by some is that the Latin Mass promotes clericalism, that is, the belief that the priest is somehow better, holier, or more important than the people assembled. Their basis for this is in the priest’s facing ad orientem, towards the east, as pictured here:

An example of “ad orientem” worship

“His back is facing us”. Such claims of clericalism assume a few erroneous things — first, that the Mass is somehow about the people. Hint: it’s not. The Sacred Liturgy is about God’s gift to humanity, which humanity (in the person of Christ, the High Priest) returns back to God. Thus, it is God — not us — who should be the center of all worship. Are Orthodox priests “clericalist” because they face ad orientem? What about Jewish people in their synagogues, or Muslims at the mosque — both religions which stress the importance of bodily, liturgical orientation? Facing a common direction was historically a sign of unity of mind and purpose — not a sign that the principal celebrant was rude or selfish.

If anything, those who consider the Latin Mass to be “clericalist” would do well to spend their energy fighting what I call “reverse clericalism”, such as when the priest decides to ad-lib the liturgy, making up his own words, paraphrasing the words the universal Church prays to God. For example, during the Agnus Dei, what you’re supposed to hear is: “Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb.” How many times, however, have we heard something different than the text as written? A few Sundays ago, I attended Mass, and I heard the following: “Behold the Lamb of God, behold Jesus, the Gentle Shepherd, Prince of Peace, the One who takes away all of our sins, all of our failings, all of our weaknesses. Happy, how truly happy are we, who are called to partake in His Eucharist.” Priests who treat the Mass like a game of mad-libs are, ironically enough, clericalist in their own right, because they assume that the congregation is too dumb to understand the language of the Mass as it is already written. They take the Mass and make it about them, their personality, their tastes. Such actions are foreign to the nature of true, solemn, Catholic worship.