“Last Friday, July 16, the Holy Father issued guidelines regarding the use of the Traditional Latin Mass, known as the Extraordinary Form. We will need time to properly study the document and its implications.
“In the meantime, I grant permission to those priests and parishes that already have my authorization to offer Masses according to the 1962 Missal to continue to celebrate them, following the norms of the Church.
“The Holy Father’s constant concern throughout his papacy has been the care of souls and preserving the unity of the Church. These are my goals as well. I want to assure those faithful in the Diocese of Oakland who find sustenance and the consolation of Jesus Christ in the ancient form of worship that your spiritual needs will continue to be met.”
The above comes from a July 18 statement issued by the Diocese of Oakland.
That is not a picture of the TLM at SMM. It is of the Novus Ordo, likely in the originally intended form of mostly Latin. However, I understand that even that is to be stripped of its Latin (!) and made English, contrary to Paul VI’s intent (?), so we will see a flight of souls to the Mass times that are strictly 1962 Tridentine. I appreciate Bishop Barber’s efforts, but his “In the meantime…” phrase is ominous. Pope St. Pius V, ora pro nobis!
No, you’re wrong: there’s no intent to prohibit celebrating the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin.
Whatever the bishop’s final decision, he must comply with the requirement the TLM must not be celebrated in territorial parishes, such as St. Margaret Mary, anymore, as per the express directive in the new motu proprio.
People need to realize that this motu proprio requires eliminating the TLM over time, not preserving it.
People need to accept the liturgical reform of Vatican II.
So, Anonymous, where exactly in the motu propio do you get the impression that it “requires eliminating the TLM over time, not preserving it”?
1. No TLMs at territorial parishes anymore. Only in already existing personal parishes or in another specially-designated place.
2. No new personal parishes may be established for celebrating the TLM.
3. Priests ordained after July 16, 2021 must receive permission from Rome to celebrate the TLM; the local bishop’s permission is insufficient.
All of those are regulations intended to shrink the availability of TLMs in dioceses, leading to its eventual elimination.
Furthermore, Pope Francis explained in his accompanying letter to bishops that they are to implement TC with a view towards bringing everyone into union celebrating the Novus Ordo: “Indications about how to proceed in your dioceses are chiefly dictated by two principles: on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration ***and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II,*** and, on the other hand, to discontinue the erection of new personal parishes tied more to the desire and wishes of individual priests than to the real need of the “holy People of God.”
It’s very clear that the new liturgical legislation requires eliminating the TLM over time, not preserving it.
Anon is probably correct re the pope’s intent. But what this whole reversal demonstrates is that liturgical norms now have all the staying power of a presidential ‘executive order’. The next pope can just as easily reverse it and reinstate Benedict’s directives. No objection on the basis of precedent would make sense. So, in reality it will be a diocese-by-diocese environment, depending on the preferences of that bishop. Expect people to vote with their feet.
I take exception to the comment that “the next pope can just as easily reverse” things. It’s not as “easy” as you portray it to be, because there has to be cause. Remember that it is because of the results of the survey last year to bishops that necessitated an intervention. There was sufficient and just cause for the new motu propio. If the next pope were to “reverse” Traditionis custodes, there will have to be an equally just and legitimate reason to do so. If no such reason exists, there will simply be no reversal.
jon, from the letter:
Indications about how to proceed in your dioceses are chiefly dictated by two principles: on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II, and, on the other hand, to discontinue the erection of new personal parishes tied more to the desire and wishes of individual priests than to the real need of the “holy People of God.” At the same time, I ask you to be vigilant in ensuring that every liturgy be celebrated with decorum and fidelity to the liturgical books promulgated after Vatican Council II, without the eccentricities that can easily degenerate into abuses.
It occurs to me that the reason for Summorum Pontificum has almost ended. You would need to be 65+ to have had an attachment to the older form which was what they were trying to provide for. Since permitting the Latin Mass, younger people have discovered it and attend. Some of this is due to homeschooling because many Catholic homeschooling materials were written before Vatican II. Now they are attached and for some younger people it is the Mass they grew up with.
I do not think that providing for the 65+ who are attached to the TLM is the only reason for Summorum Pontificum. There were other worthy aims that Benedict wanted to achieve with it. Sadly, over the course of 14 years, the TLM was “hijacked” (to use Archbishop DiNoia’s word) by those with self-interested aims: power, money, influence, more parishes under their belt, all of which they can obtain but only through division, through “encouraging disagreements,” and if need be, the elimination of the Ordinary Form and the reversal of Vatican II. Oh they’d say things like, “we only want to worship God according to tradition, what’s wrong with that; leave us alone.” But at the same time they malign and belittle the Ordinary Form and Vatican II. Just look at the beloved FSSP and the beloved ICRSS (that’s the Institute of Christ the King, people). On the outside they pay lip service to Vatican II; but scratch deeper, they’d have nothing to do with Ordinary Form if they can help it. At least the beloved SSPX, as disobedient as they are, has the guts to be consistent. The price they pay for that consistency is not having any legitimate standing in the Church.
I used to be sympathetic to them but I have seen so much lying and distortion that I do not anymore. I do feel sorry for the people who believe their lies. The errors have creeped into many Catholic’s beliefs. It is weird that this is an issue so many years after Vatican II. People liked Vatican II; they liked the changes. Ok. Not everyone but everyone adjusted except for a very few.
There is a representative at ICK at this parish.
It’s still a territorial parish. So no TLM. Sorry, Charlie. Francis’ orders.
Yes! Good Bishop!
God bless Bishop Barber– a fine Bishop. Hope he is doing okay, after that terrible robbery he endured. Hope he got his episcopal ring back, and his wallet, too– and hope the criminal will be caught and punished.
We will continue to be blessed with Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest (ICKSP) priests offering the holy Tridentine Mass at St. Margaret Mary Church, in Oakland. Wonderful!
Glad to see many Bishops looking and thinking, before leaping.
Wait this out with a couple of years of “consultation about the meaning of the text”.
Time has a way of calming the storm.
May he be an example to those bishops too frightened to do what he has done.
Well I’m happy to hear that it takes guts to do what you just did in allowing the continuation of the traditional Latin mass in his diocese. On the other hand The Bishop of Little Rock Arkansas has canceled all Latin masses except 2 F.S.S.P. sites in his Diocese, he has always been hostile to the TLM and tradition so no surprise there.
Rather, it could be that the Bishop of Little Rock has the courage to do what the motu proprio says should be done without delay. Why is only courageous to do what you approve of?
The church does not exist without The Mass.
The novus ordo does not exist, except for The Mass.
Ban The Mass, lose the church and the novus ordo.
Commenter, that makes no sense.
The title of the article is really inaccurate. He did not affirm people’s “right” to the Latin Mass. You can click the link and see exactly what he actually said.
You are not listening, Anonymous. You don’t care what Bishop Barber said. All you care about is your own prejudice. Yes, all Catholics have a God-given right to their Latin Tridentine Mass.
no they don’t
You are not listening, Anonymous. You don’t care what Bishop Barber said. All you care about is your own prejudice. Yes, all Catholics have a God-given right to their Latin Tridentine Mass. That’s common sense.
And what do you presume is my prejudice?
Again– Bishop Barber affirmed the right of Catholics to the Catholic Latin Tridentine Mass.
Catholics have a right to Mass.
All Catholics have a right to the Catholic Tridentine Mass. Stop your foolishness.
They don’t have a right to the TLM. Eventually the TLM is going to go extinct in the Catholic Church. That wouldn’t happen if the TLM was a right.
Catholics absolutely have a right to the TLM — forever. Pope Saint Pius V dogmatically and infallibly declared in Quo Primum (14 July, 1570):
Think about that. He says “forever.” What should one suppose he means? And there is still more:
Incredible. He says it can “never be revoked.” Never.
And notice how the Pope says it shall “forever” have the force of law. In fact, Pope Saint Pius V was so serious about what he was saying here that he warned all opponents of his declaration with no less than Divine Wrath. So, it is dogmatically certain — every Catholic (priest and layman) has a right to the TLM.
UH OH!!!Juan. I think you or someone else altered it.
Juan needs to be corrected. Pope St. Pius V in his “Quo primum” never intended for this document to be interpreted in the way Juan is interpreting it. Historically, the intent of the strong language in “Quo primum” was to protect priests from those bishops who did not want their priests offering the new Mass. “This language in ‘Quo primum’ is quite clearly not directed against a subsequent pope who might issue his Apostolic Constitution on the Mass by virtue of the same papal authority Pope Saint Pius V was exercising in issuing Quo Primum.” (Likoudis & Whitehead)
In other words it was not the intent of Pope Pius V to bind future popes to his document. That would be un-catholic. The only person who can amend, abrogate, correct “Quo primus” is another supreme pontiff, another pope, who will exercise the same papal authority that Pope Pius V had exercised in revising the Mass.
Juan, future popes could and did make minor changes to the Tridentine Mass, such as changes in feast days.
I am going to get off of here as this is getting too confusing for me. I will leave it up to the canonists and cardinals. Just don’t anyone ask me to break the Ten Commandments and commit idolatry.
From what little I’ve read, that survey the pope based his MP on wasn’t widely responded to. Now that he issued the MP, he’ll learn what people really think. (Maybe he was angry that few bishops thoroughly responded to the original survey?). I’d like to know what the survey asked, because for me and many daily communicants I know, it’s not an either‐or position. People attend NO on a daily basis, but go TLM on Sundays. We’re comfortable in both. Did the survey ask about that?
Bishop Barber is my bishop; thank you Bishop for allowing us to meet the spiritual needs of all the people. The MP seems to me to be like in the Gospel when the children ask for an egg, a scorpion is given!! Thank you bishop.
i dont think i would like being your parishioner
You need respect, kiddo.
Pope Francis I abrogated Benedict XVI. The nerve. The discord. The damage to the Church.
Benedict hasn’t said he disagrees. Silence implies consent. So Benedict agrees with the decision and the reasons behind it.
Well, to be fair, Benedict abrogated prior Popes when he issued Summorum Pontificum.
The Tridentine Latin Mass at St. Margaret Mary Church in Oakland, will continue. The Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, invited to come to the Oakland Dioese by the Bishop many years ago, is still in charge of that Mass, at St. Margaret Mary Church. They are excellent! There are many vocations to groups of priests who offer the Tridentine Latin Mass! And many Ordinations each year. On July 1, 2021, Cardinal Burke ordained eight ICKSP candidates to the Priesthood at their church in Florence, Italy. Three of the newly-ordained priests are Americans. Congratulations to them all!