Pope, in interview, laments 'rigidity' of youth who prefer Latin Mass [CWN]

Cardinal-designate Blase Cupich of Chicago joined Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican’s Secretary of State, as a presenter at a Vatican press conference on the publication of *Nei tuoi occhi e la mia parola *(“In Your Eyes Are My Word”).


A few questions–why is this part of the interview reported and not other parts? Is it meant to shame or rile up those with such preferences? It helps drive traffic, I suppose.

Does the interview address youth/young people who prefer no Mass and don’t attend any? That would seem to be of greater concern…


Why would it be ‘rigidity’ to prefer one form of Mass over another? People have many individual preferences.

Is this the same pope who said, “Who am I to judge?” or am I confused?


but does he mean that folk refuse to attend any other mass as then that is rigidity? and yes that does happen, here at least

The Latin Missal has been used in the Church for Centuries just because a Catholic prefers it to the modern Novus Oro Missal does not mean that they are rigid.


Without more context, it’s impossible to know what he means.

I’d also point out that some people who attend the “ordinary form” would refuse to attend the “extraordinary form.” I don’t think that is a problem or even a sign of something problematic.


“Why so much rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”

So odd for the Pope to say this. He should know better than to misunderstand the older form of the Latin Mass this way.

Is he saying that all Catholics who attended the Latin Mass before the Novus Ordo were “defensive” and lacked true love because it was too “rigid”?

I agree with other posters that this is too little context to understand his full meaning, but nonetheless, I fear that this is, again, a very unwise statement to make off the cuff like this.

I think he was meaning that there are some Catholics who absolutely refuse to attend the NO mass and they berate those (often including the clergy) who prefer the NO mass. Some of the most extreme of them even doubt the validity of the NO mass.

Cause Novus Ordo is so great?

Inventions and modernism over sacredness and tradition what a great viewpoint to have for a pope…

It’s against forum rules to be disrespectful of the Pope. :thumbsup:

LOL? Modernism?

You are setting up a serious false dichotomy. Modernism has nothing to do with the order of Mass. And for the life of me, I do not see why you find the Mass funny. That you accuse the Holy Father of having the viewpoint of modernism over sacredness is just wrong. You should re-read the rules of posting here, and maybe the Catechism.

As to the article itself, before this thread is shut down, I suggest you read what is in the body. “Lament” is an editorial comment. There is no lament. The part quoted did not mention young people. The juxtaposition of paraphrase and quotes should be a clue that some sort of editorial monkeying is going on.

You would think that people who claim to be so wise to the “Mainstream media” would be equally wise to this stuff regardless of whether it is liberal, conservative, traditionalist or innovator editorializing a supposed news story.

LOL? Modernism?

You are setting up a serious false dichotomy. Modernism has nothing to do with the order of Mass. And for the life of me, I do not see why you find the Mass funny. That you accuse the Holy Father of having the viewpoint of modernism over sacredness is just wrong. You should re-read the rules of posting here, and maybe the Catechism.


Okay, you are almost there. Now instead of making a statement that the Pope is unwise and should know better, if there is “too little context to understand”, what is the default position that charity demands?

I think most here need a Catechism refresher. Hint, it is around #2478.

Pope Francis has made it clear several times that he has no personal interest in the TLM. That is his opinion and he has every right to it. We can very reasonably hope that he will, none the less, be respectful to those Catholics who prefer the older Mass. He has been respectful of the FSSP, and continues to pursue reunion with the SSPX.

The priest, who is director of the semi-official Jesuit journal Civiltà Cattolica, asked the pope if he saw dangers in some of those calling for a “reform of the reform.”

Francis answers: “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.”

He’s not talking about everyone.

He has a lot of experience working with people on a pastoral level. I don’t doubt him when he says rigidity always hides something.

Good point, although I do wish he himself would stop berating those who love the EF Mass. There are Spanish, French, and Polish Masses; why stick in the eye those who love the EF? Personally I do prefer it, after coming into the Church much after the OF. A reverently celebrated OF is just fine, though.:shrug:

We attend a TLM Mass frequently, but have seen very few young people attending. But if they were attending a Mass period, even the TLM Mass that would be a shocker. After teaching CCD last year I found that most don’t even attend on Christmas! And this is the New Mass, which I don’t object to as I’m a lector. We’re losing our youth for various reasons but I hope they aren’t blaming the TLM Mass for this. Our parish is having the priests sign off on a handout they get that that they attended Mass. This is how bad it’s getting

[quote=CCC 2478;]To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.

Fair enough.

However, I believe you misunderstand my purpose. CCC 2478 speaks of interpreting other’s words to avoid rash judgement. My post actually has nothing to do me claiming to correctly understand Francis’ meaning; I am more concerned with the effect it has on other people.

When one sits in such a public position as pope, one must shepherd his flock with care, so as to avoid confusion. Time and time again, Francis has unfortunately said things that are marvelously effective at causing confusion. It is not uncharitable for me to make this determination; it is objectively true.

This statement is another example. I honestly have no idea what he’s trying to get at by saying this, but I can say that it doesn’t seem wise, because those words seem to have a clear meaning, but he said very little to qualify or explain his meaning. Thus, he leaves it up for interpretation by anyone who may listen.

Lack of clarity is frustrating, is it not?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.