What, in fact, is the case? The Pope, by his motu proprio, places the Church in a great dilemma. After all, the Latin Mass (which Francis wants to put an end to) stands in an organic continuity of centuries. Benedict was very clear on this: what used to be holy cannot suddenly no longer be holy. This is the leitmotiv of his Summorum Pontificum. His starting point was not to please PiusX fraternities, nor to keep the faithful who had a preference for the Old Mass within the Roman Catholic Church, but to safeguard the liturgical heritage of the Church. Indeed, the liturgy derives its legitimacy from the continuity of its tradition. The Latin ordo can boast of more than eighteen centuries of history. It is as Pope Benedict said, "A rite that for centuries was considered the way to holiness cannot suddenly be considered a danger, especially if the faith expressed in it is still considered valid."
The novus ordo has a history of barely fifty years. And what is more, it was hastily put together by Bugnini et al. The documents of Vatican II (Sacrosanctum Concilium) also do not in any way show that the intention was to put the Traditional Mass down.
Benedict, through Summorum Pontificum, had succeeded in saving the New Mass despite the lack of continuity of tradition and thus saving both missals. But Pope Francis has now (Traditionis Custodes) harked back to the time before Summorum Pontificum and put an end to the peaceful coexistence of both ordos, leaving only one ordo which, given its sweeping changes, represents a break with liturgical tradition rather than continuity.
The big question remains: why? It does not serve unity in any way, quite the opposite. Bishops do not know what to do. They are now faced with a devilish dilemma: Do I act as a custodian of tradition? Or do I obey the Pope, thereby destroying tradition? Recent reports indicate that bishops are being generous, actually in violation of the motu proprio, but this is a disciplinary document and not a doctrinal one,which allows bishops to grant dispensation if they consider it conducive to the spiritual good (canon 87 Code of Canon Law).
It would be desirable if a correction to Traditionis Custodes would come, given its ambiguities and contradictions. This is already the case in the very first article of the motu proprio in which the pope posits the proposition that there is only one form ('the unique expression') of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite. This is strange when you consider that not so long ago Pope Francis himself promoted the missal "Divine Worship" (as a concession to Anglicans joining the RC Church), which is thus also part of the Roman Rite. Has that now also been implicitly abolished? On top of that, last year the Pope approved a number of new prefaces for the Old Mass, thus confirming that the Old Mass belongs to the Roman Rite.
It remains a curious phenomenon: a pope declaring war on some of his own faithful. In the same month that Pope Francis is praising James Martin's rainbow liturgy to the skies, he wants to get rid of the Mass that has been an expression of the Catholic faith for centuries. Perhaps he doesn't like large families ("they don't have to breed like rabbits"), perhaps he's not keen on priestly vocations, nor is he keen on full churches (which makes the empty rainbow churches look even emptier than they already are....).
+Rob Mutsaerts