Thread / Historical notes on the Latin Mass Traditionalist moment

1. The Latin Mass (Missal of 1962) was SUPPRESSED in 1969 with the promulgation of Missale Romanum (Novus Ordo) Mass. Paul VI stipulated that this was a universal law (November 19, 1969). https://meaningofcatholic.com/2019/08/09/why-the-term-extraordinary-form-is-wrong/

2. The Latin Mass was only allowed by “indult” (an exception to a universal law) and this “indult Mass” was promoted by approved Traditionalist groups such as Una Voce http://unavoce.org/about/ 

3. Notably, Dietrich von Hildebrand, whom Ratzinger would call one of the greatest intellectuals of the 20th century (The Soul of a Lion: Dietrich Von Hildebrand, A Biography, 12)had this to say about the Latin Mass:

4. “I hope and pray…that in the future the Tridentine Mass will be reinstated as the official liturgy of the holy Mass in the Western Church.” (Charitable Anathema, 33)

5. He also wrote that the Novus Ordo “is without splendor, flattened, and undifferentiated…truly, if one of the devils in C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters had been entrusted with the ruin of the liturgy, he could not have done it better” (Devastated Vineyard, 71)

6. So it cannot be argued by Conservatives or Liberals that the effort to restore the Latin Mass is some crazy tinfoil-hat “reactionary” schismatic movement. They usually convince others of this successfully by discussing the controversial trads: (cf. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2020/04/clarifying-my-coined-term-radical-catholic-reactionary.html)

7. The most prominent trad movement was undoubtedly the SSPX, led by the controversial +Lefebvre. He asserted that the Latin Mass was never abrogated and he had a right to celebrate this Mass by Quo Primum of St. Pius V. He agreed with von Hildebrand’s assessment of the New Mass

8. Some prominent Catholics defended him, such as Michael Davies, but others condemned his as a schismatic. https://www.amazon.com/dp/0935952004/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_dsUOEbYDWAC8C

9. Throughout the years since its first suppression in 1974, the SSPX and Lefebvre were condemned everywhere by churchmen as schismatics, and Rome kept its distance. Meanwhile, the Latin Mass was suppressed and barely available to any of the faithful.

10. The SSPX was condemned by Rome as “schismatic” in 1988 but their demands for the Latin Mass were somewhat realized by Rome allowing wider celebration of the Latin Mass via the FSSP, but this was successfully hindered by innumerable bishops.

11. Finally, after repeated demands, Rome conceded in 2007 that the Latin Mass “was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted.” Thus admitting that popes and bishops were guilty of a grave injustice for decades regarding the Latin Mass.

12. However, the Latin Mass was also erroneously labeled “the Extraordinary Form” and the Novus Ordo “Ordinary” when in reality it was exactly the opposite, as Ratzinger himself had admitted on multiple occasions. https://meaningofcatholic.com/2019/08/09/why-the-term-extraordinary-form-is-wrong/

13. In recent times under Pope Francis, at least one bishop has expressed his desire that the Latin Mass should be suppressed again. Meanwhile, the pope has suppressed the Latin Mass in various religious or lay orders (directly or indirectly). https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/12/for-record-franciscan-friars-sisters-of.html?m=1

14. In my opinion, it is abundantly clear that the Modernists want to suppress the Latin Mass again. Frankly, I’m surprised it has taken this long, but we should not underestimate their cunning. https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/04/breaking-important-summorum-under.html?m=1