Why Pope Francis REALLY Restricted the Latin Mass

Not everyone who attends the Latin mass is a total Vatican II hater who thinks they’re a part of something SOOOO much better than the Novus Ordo (thus giving into pride). Restricting it is just needlessly fanning the flames and making people who weren’t mad before mad now.

Pope Francis supported TLM before and after he took office. The Latin Mass Supremacists worked hard to ruin it for the regular TLM attendees who just wanted to attend the Mass of their choice and were loyal to Peter regardless of who sat in the seat. I lay the blame squarely at the feet of the rabid TLM supremacists who actively sought/seek to undermine the seat of Peter, V2 and the NO. Self inflicted injury.

Based like always 😎🇻🇦

I can see where the Pope is coming from here. Summorum Pontificum was issued to help bring groups like the SSPX back into a regular status in the Church again, but that didn't happen.

The Pope is absolutely right

How would you respond to the comment that forbidding the Latin Mass contradicts Vatican II? Thanks

Cannot disagree with the description of the motivations of some as mentioned in the Pope's letter. A question I have is what behaviors from the American Bishops would assuage the Pope's concerns? Francis should articulate the "get out of jail" conditions.

The worrying part here, though, is that the more traditional elements of the Church have been a source of a new wave of conversion of young people -- myself included.

Ahhh, I like the clips. Short sweet and to the point. I listen to the long form at work when I have all night to listen.

Wasn't this rejection of Vatican 2 already a problem among radical traditionalists before Summorum Pontificum? Did this rejection worsen after the promulgation of SP? If Benedict had continued his pontificate, would he had — as Pope Francis did — also come to decide to abrogate SP / restrict the use of the 1962 MR? Or, what concrete situation, would have motivated Benedict, were he still Pope, to issue something like Traditiones Custodes in 2021?

Hey, dumb question unrelated to this subject, but definitely related to current Catholic news. When Pope Emeritus Benedict passes, do beneplenists become sedes by default? How does that work? I know that it will differ on an individual basis, but what about as a group?

People today love conspiracies and controversy rather than the best and simplest explanation for things.

Ok these clips are 🔥

My parish is ICKSP, but I function as a scout leader and attend NO masses regularly with the boys and their families.

How would that be a good witness to the TLM, if we begin by denying the validity of that mass and refuse to attend anything related to Novus Ordu? If I met someone that did that I'd be like... why would I ever try that?

Bonjour 🙏 j'essaie de suivre, même si je ne comprends pas chaque mot (si un jour vous en avez le temps et les moyens ça me ferait plaisir d'avoir des sous titres en français... mais c'est un détail... anyway 🙂).
Je crois que le sedevacantisme n'est pas une bonne chose, comme dirait un prêtre que j'aime beaucoup :"hors de l'Eglise Point de Salut".
En attendant Prions pour le pape émérite Benoît XVI,

Que la Sainte Vierge Marie, notre Dame de tous les peuples vous donne la grâce et la Paix.

AMen.

I mean the thing is, he doesn’t even really limit it – it’s the bishops who limit it

There are Catholics in all "camps", TLM and NO, that deny Church Tradition, Ecumenical Councils and consequently the Holy Spirit Himself. Denial of this fact (intentional or not), inadequate root cause analysis and inconsistent action (intentional or not) have been roadblocks.

🇻🇦

Why ? The Rad Trads ask for it ! They are the cause of the restriction because of their errorneous radicalisation!

I'VE BEEN saying this! But still no excuse

It's the same thing with Ecumenism. I'm actually making an article about that. There is misunderstanding from trads and modernists about it.

Thank you for making these shorter clips!

Thank you for your integrity

Yes, I agree that is why TC was implemented; and I would agree Pope Francis has this concern, but also possibly this stereotype, toward TLM'ers rejecting V2 . From my personal, but limited experience, the TLM'ers I have come across have been regular, nice, everyday people saying nothing along the lines of rejecting V2.

Secondly, I am not sure if limiting the TLM is helping people realize the importance of why V2 was implemented. SSPX parishes and FSSP parishes are not as affected. As I see it writen, TC affects the churches with occasional TLMs, and areas where I would predict more TLMers support V2. But that may be a bit of a different topic. Maybe that's why there are conspiracies as to why Pope Francis implemented TC. I don't know what conspiracies are out there, but I am not surprised to learn that they exist.
--God Bless!

Possible Problem for People: The closest parish I can easily find offering the TLM on a weekly basis around me is SSPX. With an increasing amount of people wanting to attend the TLM along with an increasing amount of restrictions, people might start joining SSPX Churches. I'm not saying all SSPX Congregations are radical, but they are well known to be along the lines of having conspiracies and other problems like rejecting V2. TC might have a backlash on what it was intended to do.

My take is that Pope Francis has in the past been very critical to young people attending TLM. I have conflicting thoughts with Pope Frances ways of leading the church.

Pope Francis claims to want restrictions on the Tridentine Mass because SOME of those who love it reject the Novus Ordo, the Second Vatican Council, and embrace conservative/traditional views that don't jive with "modern church thinking". He's worried, he says, about "division" in the Church. Odd thing is, during a wave of "renewal" some decades ago, SOME Catholics who embraced the New Mass - including a number of priests and nuns, as well as laity - began to be okay with things like same sex marriage, married priests, female priests, and certain left leaning socio-political agendas or constructs. All of these things fly in the face of traditional Church teachings - teachings that even Francis defends and which no pope can change.

At no time however has Francis blamed the activities of liberal Catholic extremists on the Novus Ordo itself, even though liberal Catholic extremists rally around it! Why not? Because you can't blame a "Mass" for divisiveness or extremism. BOTH the Tridentine Rite and the Novus Ordo have attracted extremists from opposite ends of the spectrum, yet Pope Francis connects extremism to the Tridentine Mass only, while refusing to acknowledge that the upheaval and division seen among Catholics today has its roots in certain attitudes and changes, whether coming from such sources as Marxism and secular humanism, or, whether intentional or not, coming out of Vatican II.

Yeah, this is accurate unfortunately

A rejection of the TLM is logically a rejection of Vatican II. If the TLM is incompatible with Vatican II then Vatican II is a rupture and incompatible with all that came before it. This is Benedict's genius in admitting that logically there must be a hermeneutic of continuity for Vatican II to have any authority. The only reason to ban a rite is because it is heretical... Historically that is why Trent banned rites, but if the Rite of Trent is heretical then Trent and Vatican II are two different faiths. This simply can't be true for Catholics. If the litmus test on "faithfulness" to V2 is that we have to pretend mistakes were not made, including the well known weaknesses and deceptions surrounding the missal of 68, then this "faithfulness" is based on lies. If you in contrast have critiques--many shared by the Bishops in the Synod of Rome in 67--but fundamentally believe in the authority and continuity of Vatican II then you must acknowledge that the 62 Mass that opened Vatican II is of the same cloth of Vatican II.

The biggest attack on the Novus Ordo liturgy has been the liturgical abuses practiced by most Novus Ordo parishes. Few if any actually have a mass that is anything like what the Vatican II documents called for.

Both TLM and Novus Ordo Catholics acknowledge that Vatican II occurred and the Francis is the legitimate Pope. We can also acknowledge that no serious Catholic would ever trust Pope Francis to catechize their children. We all know that we are living through a bad papacy. There is nothing from this papacy that is worth promulgating or defending. As Cardinal Pell wisely stated, it is a "toxic mess." Hopefully it will all be reversed by a future Pope. Let's pray for Pope Francis' conversion.

Surely you don't really believe what you are saying. Do you? This explanation is far worse than any of the conspiracy theories.

The persecution of traditional catholics after Vatican II was what led to the bitter divide in the first place. That was largely resolved by Pope Benedict XVI and the Church was moving toward healing. Now, Pope Francis has ripped open the scabs from old wounds and made it even more impossible for traditional Catholics to reconcile the post conciliar Church.

The "rad trad" attacks on Vatican 2 drastically diminished when Pope Benedict opened the doors to allow the TLM. That removed 90% of what Pope Francis is claiming was his "reason."

Can anyone produce the Vatican II document that supports Pope Francis' claim that traditional Catholic Latin liturgy equates to a rejection of the council?

I seem to remember reading something about folks who cling to old wineskins...

Methinks the key paragraph in there is "which ORIGINATES from the Apostles and PROGRESSES in the Church". Wisely the Holy Father is never against but FOR.