Prepare Your Soul for the TLM Suppression

“What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.” ~ Pope Benedict XVI

From One Peter Five

By Joseph Fredriksson

At the present hour we are in a dark night of the Church…and, if this is true, it is a ‘happy chance!’ – because there is absolutely no reason left to be Catholic now except the only one there ever really was – that in the invisible life of the Church you will find the love of Christ.

– Dr. John Senior

I never will forget that mid-July morning of 2021.  On the feast day of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel and the anniversary of my baptism, I received a text from a friend containing a link to Traditionis Custodes.  I was horrified, outraged, and wounded to the core, like so many others who had come to be nourished through the ancient Roman liturgy.  Though I had heard rumors a document like TC would be promulgated, I didn’t think it would ever happen (or at least during Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI’s lifetime).  In short order, the diocese decided to limit all its Latin Masses as an act of obedience to the Curia’s vision for the liturgical life of the Church.

Readers of OnePeterFive are well aware of the news, relayed here and elsewhere, that some authorities are trying to double down on Traditionis.  While a new document may indeed be on the horizon, my preparations are different than they were the first time around, and I would encourage fellow Catholics who adhere to Tradition to prepare similarly in at least one way; work to see this unkindness, whatever form it takes or doesn’t take in the coming months, as an opportunity to peacefully join Christ the High Priest on His Via Crucis.

How does one find peace when, as my favorite author, John Senior, once put it in the 1970’s, “the liturgy [is] set upon by thieves?”  A bit of historical and theological reflection goes a long way to cultivating this most precious disposition, one which is specifically exalted in the Beatitudes.

When Pope St. Pius V issued the apostolic constitution Quo Primum in 1570, it seems to a layman like me that he intended the relevant Roman Missal to be treated in a similar way to the codification of the books of Scripture; while new translations of the Bible may continue to be produced until the end of time for a variety of pastoral reasons, the books it contains are not the kind of thing one can substantially change as the Council of Trent makes clear.  Similarly, minor alterations of that Missal (such as the ones which came from Pius V’s own hand after Quo Primum) are permitted for the sake of manifesting more clearly God’s Providential actions in each age.  Wholesale revisions of that Missal’s structure, on the other hand, are forbidden.  Of course, other missals like those which belong to the East, those belonging to certain Western religious orders or dioceses, or the new Roman Missal can exist as additional “valid” missals (just as the East has long believed a few additional Scriptural texts are also inspired by the Holy Ghost), but Pius V doesn’t see his missal as something that can ever be abrogated.  If this seems like too far-fetched of a claim, consider these words from the sainted pontiff:

In virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force.

Many theologians have persuasively argued that this is necessarily a disciplinary decree, not one concerning faith and morals which infallibly comes ex cathedra, and as such it may in fact be legitimately changed by subsequent popes.  Either this is the case or it is not.  Suppose it actually is the case that a pope cannot bind a future pope on any liturgical matters because these matters are necessarily disciplinary in nature.  In that case, the rumors that the Dicastery for Divine Worship is seeking “a stringent, radical, and final solution banning the Traditional Latin Mass” should not distress us and render us inconsolable.  Even if the hypothetical document were to receive Pope Francis’ stamp of approval, no matter how tragic the provisions of the hypothetical document would be, it could always be reversed according to the mind of future popes.  Put differently, a “final solution” is impossible according to our supposition no matter how much Cardinal Roche as prefect or others may desire it.

On the other hand, suppose it is the case that a pope can constrain his successors’ efforts to reform the liturgy in at least some ways.  What language would a pope have to use to communicate his intention that a particular missal be perennially available for use?  It seems that one could not put it more clearly than Pius V did.  In fact, that clarity may be the reason Pope St. Paul VI and Pope Francis never attempted to abrogate Pius’ Missal; to (attempt to) formally declare obsolete a rite guaranteed to last forever invites the flock to personally do likewise with the newer rite you intend to replace it with.  The Tridentine Mass was so saturated with the Faith of the Fathers and its missal was promulgated with such authority that Pope Benedict XVI’s famous statement in Summorum Pontificum about it holds true: “What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.”

In any case, Catholics who love the Tridentine Mass should, as I have said, cultivate a peaceful interior life and be peacemakers throughout the Church in this difficult period in history.  If dealt with well, this cross some intend to burden us with in their queer quest for liturgical monopoly is an opportunity to be united with Our Lord in His sorrowful passion which is at the heart of the Mass.  Senior captures the suffering, the apparent abandonment, and epiphany involved in this hidden union well:

One day you say, silently, “Lord, my prayers have not been answered.  I’ve tried to do what St. Teresa says.  I’ve looked and looked at You, and You do not look back.  No one understands, not even You.  I am alone.”  And then He says, “Alone?”  And you say, “Yes, alone.”  He says, “Forsaken by everyone?”  “Yes.”  And He replies, “Now your prayers are beginning to be answered for the first time.  You have just begun to be like Me who cried out on the Cross the bitter Hebrew words which if you listen in the silence you can hear Me cry at every Mass: Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?”

The hypothetical document from the Dicastery according to Almighty God’s plan may be unavoidable and be permitted to temporarily obfuscate truths which hitherto had been most clear, but before us is the choice to see this torment as did either the unrepentant, spiteful Gesmas or the contrite, hopeful St. Dismas.  Despite all of the mockery and assaults Christ received, He prayed for those fickle souls who initiated the abuses rather than spending His time lashing out against the obvious injustice against His Person which deserves perfect reverence.  Why does He pray and forgive?  His charity, in addition to converting some persecutors such as the soldier St. Longinus, would win over those people “in the middle” who somehow were still unsure of what to make of His claims.  Traditionalists have long claimed, with good reason, that we are some of the people most relegated to the fringes of the Church and that papal calls to reach out to those on the peripheries have not in practice often included us as recipients.  If we choose to “console” ourselves by ignoring the divine mandate to pray for our persecutors, by imagining acts of vengeance which uniquely belong to the Lord, by declaring according to the new Protestant zeitgeist the Petrine See is vacant, or by crossing the Bosphorous to the Orthodox East with its own numerous problems, we fail to prove we are any different from what many suppose us to be and turn them away from the Church’s patrimony.  If we truly believe that the Tridentine Mass conforms us to the love of Christ, then we must see the threat of (or forthcoming) liturgical suppression as an occasion for martyrdom which only zealously seeks the conversions of the wicked and lukewarm. 

Am I recommending any particular, practical course of action for all?  No, I am not.  I am more concerned with dissuading others from entertaining some of the fruitless paths which I or others I know have been tempted to take.  Each in his or her state in life will have to make different prudential decisions, always with charity in mind.  Whatever anyone decides they must in good conscience do, they should always remember the saying of the great padre who both intimately knew the agony of the crucifixion and was instrumental in actor Shia LeBouf’s conversion and turning to the Tridentine Mass (i.e. St. Pio of Pietrelcina); “Pray, hope, and don’t worry.”