A different spirit?

According to persistent rumors, there is a move underway to further restrict the Latin Mass within the already constricted boundaries where its celebration is allowed.  Ah, Rome.  Always good for something interesting.  The Prefect for the Dicastery for Divine Worship, the Cardinal in charge of worship, English Cardinal Arthur Roche, seems to have made his position clear.  He has put forward the idea that the Latin Mass is of a different spirit than the post-Vatican II mass, that it a different liturgical theology than the Novus Ordo. There are those on both sides who would agree with this.  There are some who would also insist that the TLM by itself implies a rejection of Vatican II and that Vatican II implies a rejection of TLM. Many have surmised that the pope holds this view -- though Francis seems to be able to hold various and conflicting views in his mind and mouth at the same time. All of this is more curiosity to Lutherans than anything else after all, we do not have a dog in this fight.  Or do we?

Lutherans do not have a Latin Mass (well, we really do but that is a bit beyond the ken of normal Lutheran thought and practice now isn't it).  What we have is the Common Service of 1888 within the various formats, one of which is the Divine Service of The Lutheran Hymnal pretty much transplanted word for word into Lutheran Service Book as Divine Service 3.  It has become our version of Trent, for good or for ill.  Like the Latin Mass for Rome, it has become the distinguishing mark of the conservatives versus those who are progressive or liberal over theological matters and not only liturgical.  There are differences between Rome and Missouri -- all kinds of them -- but in this matter one of the distinct differences is that there is a far larger contingent of our churches and pastors using and promoting the Common Service than there are those in Rome encouraging TLM.  It may also be said that the Common Service as it has been used in Missouri has never suffered any kind of official sanction against its use and has always been an option (though one distorted by edit in Lutheran Worship to dissatisfy nearly everyone!).  

My point here is to ask a question.  Does the Common Service (Divine Service 3 represent a different spirit from the other Divine Services in LSB and is it a fair and valid supposition that this is the same kind of dividing line which exists in Rome with respect to the division between Vetus Ordo and Novus Ordo?  

My view is that the Common Service and the products of the Lutheran liturgical movement are clearly connected and the other Divine Services (1 & 2) are so intimately bound to Divine Service 3 that it represents an conservative evolution of text (music is worthy of another discussion) and form.  Where this thesis is tested is particularly in the context of the canon and the move away from the bare Words of Institution to include a fuller thanksgiving as a context for the Verba.  Even then, however, it must be noted that additions to replace what Luther excised have been included in Lutheran Church Orders all the way through our particular history and starting from the earliest days of the Reformation and its heirs.  This includes Lutheran Church Orders from outside of Germany.  I know that there are those who would agree with me but having grown up with and used page 15 from The Lutheran Hymnal, and having introduced Lutheran Worship, Hymnal Supplement 98, and Lutheran Service Book, I am even more convinced of the truth of the gentle evolution of these orders.  It is certainly not simply possible but the norm that each of these orders can be used faithfully by a confessional Lutheran pastor and congregation and it is equally true that the use of one or the other does not translate into the theological labels so inherent in the Roman argument over who is the true Roman Catholic.  

I would suggest that the use of both at the recent LCMS Institute on Liturgy, Preaching, and Church Music shows that this is indeed the case and that there is more that binds these two rites together than there is anything which would divide us according to rite.  But you are free to disagree....