The Latin Mass story is not going away.

At this point, the question is where this emotional and more than symbolic conflict is going.

It’s clear that there is a small flock of traditional Catholics who view the familiar cadences of the Tridentine Rite Mass as an escape from the reforms — some would say modernization efforts — of the Second Vatican Council. But it also obvious that many bishops believe that this is not the case for the majority of the Catholics (especially young Catholics) who prefer the beauty of the Latin Mass.

Meanwhile, it’s clear that many powerful Vatican leaders, including Pope Francis, see use of the traditional Latin Mass as a powerful wedge issue that divides Catholics and they want to see it go away.

The question: Will the renewed efforts to crush the Tridentine create more dissenters, instead of smothering them?

This brings me to this weekend’s “think pieces” — drawn from two very different sources — the progressive Jesuit magazine America and The Pillar, a more conservative news and commentary site.

First, consider this essay at America: “I love Pope Francis’ commitment to dialogue — which is why his Latin Mass restrictions confuse me.”

Author Gregory Hillis begins by praising the Pope Francis encyclical “Fratelli Tutti,” focusing on its call for unity — built on “genuine dialogue rooted in love.”

The big question: Where is the loving dialogue about use of the Latin Mass?

We cannot be closed to others, Pope Francis taught, whether they be political or ideological opponents or whether they be people yearning to find a new life as immigrants. A “healthy openness never threatens one’s identity,” he wrote (FT 148). Too often we deny “the right of others to exist or to have an opinion,” and as a result, “their share of the truth and their values are rejected” (No. 15). Instead, Pope Francis urged us “to give way to a dialogic realism on the part of men and women who remain faithful to their own principles while recognizing that others also have the right to do likewise.” This, he continued, “is the genuine acknowledgment of the other that is made possible by love alone.”

I have long found Francis’ vision of dialogue attractive. This vision has important antecedents in the church’s tradition, ranging from early Christian theologians to St. Francis of Assisi to St. Thomas Aquinas to the documents of the Second Vatican Council. More than that, his vision seems to me to be absolutely vital for our times when political and theological polarization seem intractable.

For this reason, I find myself confused by Pope Francis’ response to Catholic traditionalism, both in the publication of the motu proprio “Traditionis Custodes”last August and in the release of responses to questions regarding the implementation of the document last week.

I am not a traditionalist, liturgically or otherwise. The parish I attend with my family is about as far from a traditionalist parish you can get. Liturgical dance? Check. Felt banners? Absolutely. Guitars and drums? It goes without saying.

Here is another key chunk of the Hillis essay:

Unity without uniformity. This is what the kind of dialogue promoted by Pope Francis aims to achieve. I have long appreciated Pope Francis’ willingness to allow for seemingly conflictual theological and moral views to be held in a tension that can be brought into harmony through the Holy Spirit. As he said in a homily at a Mass for ecclesial movements on Pentecost in 2013, “only the Spirit can awaken diversity, plurality and multiplicity, while at the same time building unity.” Any attempts to force uniformity close the door to the Spirit. Yet, in the name of unity, Francis appears to be forcing the kind of uniformity he has consistently warned against

Meanwhile, at The Pillar, the big questions concern whether, in pronouncing judgement on Latin Mass advocates, the Vatican has also taken a shot at the rights of local bishops continue their own dialogues with Latin Mass worshippers. Here’s the headline: “On 'Traditionis' dubia, will power overrule authority?”

J.D. Flynn notes that:

… Bishops, for whom the instructions were actually intended, have thus far said very little.  Some may be planning how best to implement the congregation’s directions. But others have told The Pillar they’re giving the instructions a beat or two, to see whether anything more might be coming down the pike — including canonical clarity on the actual authority of Saturday’s instructions.

It doesn’t help that there are language issues in these documents — adding to the confusion for some bishops:

Consider an example: When Pope Francis published Traditionis custodes in July, the text was made available in English, Spanish, Italian, and German. 

In one provision, each language told bishops the same thing: If they wanted newly ordained priests to be able to offer Mass in the Extraordinary Form, they’d need to consult the Vatican before they gave permission. 

The English, Italian, Spanish, and German texts each used similar verbs: “consult,” “consulterà,” “consultará,” and “konsultiert.” 

But when the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments responded … to questions about the Traditionis custodes, it said that bishops should not “merely,” seek a “consultative opinion, but a necessary authorisation given to the diocesan Bishop by the Congregation for Divine Worship.”

It wasn’t that they had to consult, the Vatican said. It’s that they had to get permission.

Don’t forget that many bishops, in response the original orders from Pope Francis, had already put in place their own guidelines for use the the traditional Latin Mass. Thus:

… For many bishops, implementing the CDWS provisions wholesale would mean going back to communities for whom they have just issued implementation plans of the pope’s July text, and wiping most of those plans clear from the drawing board. 

If bishops had offered dispensations to have the Extraordinary Form in parish churches, because few other locations would be available, the CDWS expects they be revoked, at least temporarily, while Vatican permission is sought. 

If bishops had permitted local pastors to offer Extraordinary Form Masses for, say, cloistered religious communities, they would probably now be expected to withdraw that permission — at least for priests who also offer the Ordinary Form each day, as most do.

If bishops had okayed weddings or confirmations in the Extraordinary Form, many of them would now have to be cancelled.

Here is the key question for reporters: What is happening in the region covered by your newsroom? Yes, the orders coming from the Vatican are important. But what is the bishop or archbishop doing or saying?

Silence? In this case, silence is a story — that is not going to go away.

FIRST IMAGE: Free .GIF of The Thinker, care of GIFER.com