Skip to main content

FSSXP.News: Traditionis Custodes Part 4

 +
JMJ

 While some bishops are playing the waiting game, (Do they know something we don't about PF's health?), others either defend or attack the Tridentine Mass.

P^3

 

 Courtesy of FSSPX.News

 

 

Special Dossier: “Traditionis Custodes” (4)

September 02, 2021
Source: fsspx.news
Mgr Robert Mutsaerts

In the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis has implemented a battery of measures seeking to circumscribe the Tridentine Mass, with the hope of making it disappear to the exclusive advantage of the Mass of Paul VI.

Such relentlessness prompts some questions: The first concerns the motives, published or hidden, given in the accompanying letter. The second tackles the basic question: the link between the Council and the Novus Ordo. The third concerns the principal reactions to the motu proprio.

Overall, the reaction by the bishops to Traditionis Custodes has been mostly a prudent waiting game, even if some of them—few in number—have expressed a lively indignation.

Asked about the predictable reactions of the French bishops, by Anne Le Pape in Présent on July 20, Fr. Claude Barthe answered: “Their reactions will vary. Some will use the Pope's text to repress as much as possible. Others will simply be realistic, they will not want to light fires in their own homes.”

“I am thinking of the bishop of Versailles, who has just published a communiqué that is a little difficult to interpret but which seems to say that nothing will happen for the moment. There are still others who are in favor, there is no doubt, of this traditional life in their dioceses, even if they do not share the ideas. They will circle the wagons, play for time.”

“If they wanted to resist, they could do so, even canonically: Canon 87 paragraph 1 of Canon Law says that, ‘A diocesan bishop, whenever he judges that it contributes to their spiritual good, is able to dispense the faithful from universal and particular disciplinary laws issued for his territory or his subjects by the supreme authority of the Church.’ This opens up many possibilities.”

“The bishop still has to want to act. Now, contrary to what we are told about synodality, it really only works one way, in favor of bishops who think like the pope. But when this is not the case…”

“I’m reminded of the words of Archbishop Roche, the new prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, who recently said expressly - with a laugh: ‘We are going to destroy Summorum Pontificum. Liturgical power will be given to the bishops... but not to the conservative bishops!’”

On the site Aletia on July 21, the episcopal reactions were seen to be of an irenic type. The communique of the Conference of Bishops of France of July 17 is thus presented as playing “the unity and appeasement card”:

“The French bishops ‘wish to express to the faithful who usually celebrate according to the missal of St. John XXIII and to their pastors, their attention, their esteem for the spiritual zeal of these faithful, and their determination to continue the mission together, in the communion of the Church and according to the norms in force,’” they declared.

“Each bishop will be eager to be up to the challenges described by the Holy Father in order to exercise the responsibility which is given to him in justice, charity, the care of each and every one, the service of the liturgy and the unity of the Church. This will be done through dialogue and will take time,” they warn.” This is what is called “conciliar speak.”

Msgr. Luc Crepy, Bishop of Versailles—mentioned above by Fr. Barthe—explained to have found “a calm situation” in the diocese since his arrival in April 2021. He will have a meeting with the priests serving the concerned communities during the month of September. “I have already renewed my trust in them and my desire to continue together on this journey of unity,” he stated, while waiting to return home.

In a long communique, Msgr. Marc Aillet, Bishop of Bayonne, Lescar, and Oloron, attested “that the priests in the diocese of Bayonne taking care of the service of the liturgy according to the 1962 Missal, fully adhere to the Second Vatican Council, recognizing the legitimacy of the 1970 Missal, the expression par excellence of the lex orandi of the Latin Church, and are cultivating a keen sense of ecclesial communion by actively participating in events and celebrations, as well as in the pastoral and missionary guidance of the diocese.”

“I want to reiterate my confidence in them and invite them to continue their efforts in the same direction, in the spirit of the new Motu Proprio Traditionis custodes,” he added.

Regarding the Ecclesia Dei communities, directly concerned by Traditionis Custodes, a sense of incomprehension dominates, reinforced by the impression that their Roman fidelity was hardly taken into consideration.

The Fraternity of St. Peter received the moto proprio “with astonishment.” In an unsigned communique, they said they were “deeply saddened by the reasons invoked to limit the use of the Missal of St. John XXIII ” and added that, “it is surprising that what is not mentioned are the many fruits visible in the apostolates attached to the Missal of St. John XXIII.”

“The incomprehension is deep among the faithful,” stated Canon Louis Valadier, French Provincial of the Institute of Christ the King, while Fr. Mateusz Markiewicz, superior of the District of Europe of the Institute of the Good Shepherd, in the July 17 issue of Famille chrétienne, describes the motu proprio as an “act against charity, because we do not know on what the charges against us are based.”

A more lively reaction came from Msgr. Robert Mutsaerts, auxiliary bishop of the Bois-le-Duc in the Netherlands, who did not hesitate to classify the Motu proprio as a “malevolent imperial edict.” “It feels like a betrayal and is a slap in the face to his predecessors.”

“The Church has never abolished liturgies. Not even the Council of Trent. Francis has completely broken with this tradition. The motu proprio contains, briefly and powerfully, some propositions and injunctions. Things are explained in more detail by means of a longer accompanying statement [the accompanying letter to the bishops].”

“This statement contains many factual errors. One of them is the claim that what Paul VI did after Vatican II was the same as what Pius V did after Trent. That is completely false. Remember that before that time [of Trent], there were various transcribed manuscripts in circulation and local liturgies had appeared here and there. That was the confusion.”

“The Council of Trent wanted to restore the liturgies, eliminate inaccuracies, and check for orthodoxy. Trent was not concerned with rewriting the liturgy, nor with making new additions, new eucharistic prayers, a new lectionary, or a new calendar.”

“They simply wanted to ensure uninterrupted organic continuity. The 1517 Missal harkens back to the 1474 Missal and so on back to the fourth century. There was continuity from the fourth century onwards. After the fifteenth century, there were four more centuries of continuity.”

And to denounce the true liturgical revolution brought about by the Novus Ordo Missae: “Only 17% of the orations of the old missal of Trent can be found in the new missal of Paul VI. You can hardly speak of continuity, of an organic development.”

“Benedict XVI recognized this, and for that reason gave ample space to the Old Mass. He even said that no one needed his permission (‘what was sacred then is still sacred now’).”

“Pope Francis is now pretending that his Motu proprio belongs to the organic development of the Church, which utterly contradicts the reality. By making the Latin Mass practically impossible, he finally breaks with the age-old liturgical tradition of the Roman Catholic Church.”

“The liturgy is not a toy of popes; it is the heritage of the Church. The Old Mass is not about nostalgia or taste. The pope should be the guardian of Tradition; the pope is a gardener, not a manufacturer. Canon law is not merely a matter of positive law; there is also such a thing as natural law and divine law, and, moreover, there is such a thing as Tradition that cannot simply be brushed aside.”

“What Pope Francis is doing here has nothing to do with evangelization and even less to do with mercy. It is more like ideology. Go to any parish where the Old Mass is celebrated. What do you find there? People who just want to be Catholic. … This is ideology: it is either Vatican II, including its implementation, with all its aberrations, or nothing!”

And to conclude energetically, “I have never heard Bergoglio speak about the many liturgical abuses that exist here and there in countless parishes. In parishes everything is possible—except the Tridentine Mass.”

“All weapons are thrown into the fray to eradicate the Old Mass. Why? For the love of God, why? What is this obsession of Francis to want to eradicate this small group of traditionalists? The pope should be the guardian of tradition, not the jailer.”

On July 23, Msgr. Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary bishop of Nousoultan, Astana, Kazakhstan, gave an interview to Diane Montagna in The Remnant, where he said: “The Motu Proprio and accompanying letter commit an injustice against all Catholics who adhere to the traditional liturgical form, by accusing them of being divisive and of rejecting the Second Vatican Council.”

“In fact, a considerable portion of these Catholics keep far away from doctrinal discussions regarding Vatican II, the new Order of Mass (Novus Ordo Missae), and other problems involving ecclesiastical politics. They just want to worship God in the liturgical form through which God has touched and transformed their hearts and lives.”

Further on, he forecasts an effect contrary to the looked-for aim of the Motu proprio: “the new decree will ultimately have a boomerang effect. The many Catholic families and ever-growing number of young people and priests—particularly young priests—who attend the traditional Mass, will not be able to allow their conscience to be violated by such a drastic administrative act.”

“Telling these faithful and priests that they must simply be obedient to these norms will ultimately not work with them, because they understand that a call to obedience loses its power when the aim is to suppress the traditional form of the liturgy, the great liturgical treasure of the Roman Church.”

And it is evident: “The admirable, harmonious and quite spontaneous spread and continuous growth of the traditional form of the Mass, in almost every country of the world, even in the most remote lands, is undoubtedly the work of the Holy Spirit, and a true sign of our time.”

“This form of the liturgical celebration bears true spiritual fruits, especially in the life of the youth and converts to the Catholic Church, since many of the latter were attracted to the Catholic faith precisely by the irradiating power of this treasure of the Church.”

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...