Posted on 07/28/2025 11:25:53 AM PDT by ebb tide
From the feast of the Apparition of St. Michael (pre-55), when Pope Leo XIV was elected, the worldwide traditionalist community has looked to him and wondered what he will do with the ancient Roman Rite, the apostolic liturgy of the city of Rome. Notably, Pope Leo XIV chants and celebrates his own Mass (both things Pope Francis never or rarely did) and the Holy Father’s Latin is superb. Rumours circulated that Cardinal Prevost himself celebrated the Latin Mass, but I have not seen these rumours ever confirmed (please send me a credible source if this is confirmed).
Otherwise, Pope Leo has explicitly stated that he intends to continue the pet projects of Pope Francis, including “synodality” (whatever that means to His Holiness, time will tell). But he has not done anything explicitly about Traditionis Custodes… until now.
From our allies at Rorate:
In 2021, the Vatican issued a decree, Traditionis Custodes, which severely restricted the use of the Latin Mass worldwide. However, on February 6, 2025, Bishop Michael Sis of the San Angelo Diocese submitted a petition to the Vatican, seeking an exemption for St. Margaret’s Parish. That petition was granted on May 28, 2025, with Pope Leo XIV approving the request, making St. Margaret’s one of the few parishes in the world to be allowed to continue offering the Traditional Latin Mass.
So what happened here? It’s important to remember how the Vatican swollen bureaucracy (a “necessary evil” of the Counter Reformation) works. You have a system of dozens of officials doing dozens of things, overseeing hundreds and hundreds of clerics and lay people… attempting to manage more than one billion souls.
In other words, the whole system is completely contrary to subsidiarity and is thus literally impossible to manage.
What does this really mean? It means that every “act” of a pope since Trent may or may not have anything to do with his personal involvement. The only things we know he does personally are the words that we see come out of his mouth.
Everything else (and I mean everything else) that has his name on it, may or may not be done personally by him. A bureaucracy relies on hundreds of trusted advisors, and it’s safe to say that a vast majority of them are corrupt liars. But the actual percentage – as to who is corrupt and who is not – is known to God alone and we will never know who is who. (This is why Fr. Charles Murr thinks this current Vatican corruption can only be solved if a new pope “drains the swamp” and literally sacks every Vatican bureaucrat – good and bad – and then puts his own trusted people in place. That hasn’t happened, so Pope Leo has inherited the swamp of the Vatican which has existed since at least Paul VI, probably much earlier.)
And so, Pope Leo “appointed” this bishop or that bishop (he “provisionally” re-confirmed all Cardinals at their posts). But to what degree was he personally involved? God knows.
Remember: Pope Francis also “confirmed” Cardinal Robert Sarah (who had been appointed as liturgical head by Benedict to continue Benedict’s liturgical peace (the “Pax Benedicta”) with Summmorum and the “Reform of the Reform”), but Pope Francis and his Vatican later humiliated Sarah and sacked him, which led eventually to Traditionis Custodes.
Remember again: Pope Francis also confirmed the Latin Mass twice, before he abrogated himself with Traditionis Custodes.
Pope Francis’s real intentions – again, only prima facie, based on the words “from the horse’s mouth” as we say in the States – only became apparent much later.
So too with Pope Leo. Does this confirmation of an “indult” for a Texas diocese really mean anything? On the one hand, no, since the Vatican bureaucracy prevents us from knowing who’s really pulling the strings.
On the other hand, we do know that the New Iconoclasts since Traditionis Custodes have been personally pressuring bishops (who largely ignored TC worldwide) to suppress the Latin Mass. So we know there are enemies in the Vatican putting their full weight behind TC, and Pope Francis gave them full reign. Previous attempts at an indult for TC have been denied or severely restricted by the Vatican Iconoclasts drunk with power. So this news could mean Pope Leo got a hold of the reigns and reigned in those bad guys.
In any case, it’s important to go back to Pope Benedict. He gave us the principles of liturgical tradition which allow Trads to disobey unjust laws like our good Catholic forefathers did.
[In] the motu proprio [Traditionis Custodes] they did not dare to explicitly contradict Summorum Pontificum, but invented the historical fiction that Benedict’s document was primarily [a pastoral concern] about the SSPX.
In a comical twist of the Holy Spirit’s Providence, this exact idea was posed to Benedict XVI by Peter Seewald before the motu proprio. In other words, the entire justification given in Traditionis Custodes was explicitly proposed to Benedict XVI after Summorum Pontificum. Peter Seewald told Benedict in 2017 what Francis would say about Benedict’s work in 2021. How did Benedict respond?
[Peter Seewald:] The reauthorization of the Tridentine Mass is often interpreted primarily as a concession to the Society of St Pius X.
[Benedict XVI Emeritus:] That is just absolutely false! It was important for me that the Church is one with herself inwardly, with her own past; that what was previously holy to her is not somehow wrong now. The rite must develop. In that sense reform is appropriate. But the continuity must not be ruptured. The Society of St Pius X is based on the fact that people felt the Church was renouncing itself. That must not be. But as I said, my intentions were not of a tactical nature, they were about the substance of the matter itself. Of course it is also the case that, the moment one sees a Church schism looming, the Pope is obliged to do whatever is possible to prevent it happening. This also includes the attempt to lead these people back into unity with the Church, if possible (Benedict XVI, Last Testament: In His Own Words, trans. Jacob Philips (Bloomsbury, 2016), 201-202).
What does this mean? It means that an indult is not necessary. It’s not necessary for any priest or bishop to ask permission to keep the Tradition and say the Latin Mass. They should ask permission for the sake of good order and reverence, but if they are given an answer contrary to Tradition, Benedict’s own principles justify disobedience. I respect Trads (and especially clerics) who cannot disobey in good conscience. But for the laity, we are way past playing the clericalist hyperüberultramontanist game.
Because of our sins, we do not deserve the Latin Mass.
But our children do deserve it. And we will fight for them to receive the fullness of Church Tradition, most especially the ancient Roman Rite of our fathers.
DEUS VULT!
Remember again: Pope Francis also confirmed the Latin Mass twice, before he abrogated himself with Traditionis Custodes.
Pope Francis’s real intentions – again, only prima facie, based on the words “from the horse’s mouth” as we say in the States – only became apparent much later.
Ping
If you are trying for a reversal, and you are not a Donald Trump type, you might pick some very remote diocese that is nowhere near any of the urban trouble centers. Look at San Angelo on the map. It is literally smack in the middle of Texas, near nothing anyone from Chicago, or L.A. had ever heard of. Perfect place to start the unraveling of Traditionis.
Q. Your Holiness, how many people work in the Vatican?
Pope John XXIII: About half of them.
Several forms of the word “reign” should be “rein.”
This sounds promising.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.