CNA Staff, Sep 29, 2025 / 18:43 pm
Bishop Michael Martin of the Diocese of Charlotte, North Carolina, said the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) must cease at four parishes and will be only be permitted at a chapel beginning Oct. 2.
After delaying the restrictions three months, Martin said in a Sept. 26 letter that the Chapel of the Little Flower in the St. Therese Parish in Mooresville, North Carolina, which was recently renovated by the diocese and can seat just over 350 people, will have two Masses each Sunday and on holy days of obligation, both of which will be said by Father Brandon Jones, the recently appointed chaplain.
The bishop said the chapel is “not a parish, nor is it a parish-like community being formed for those who desire to celebrate the TLM.”
Brian Williams, a leader of Charlotte Latin Mass attendees since 2009, told CNA there were nearly 700 people at Sunday’s extraordinary form Mass at St. Ann’s, his parish and what he called the “flagship” Latin Mass parish in the diocese, and more than 500 at St. Thomas Aquinas parish.
Recognizing that the chapel is too small to accommodate all the regular attendees of the TLM, and that many will now have to drive long distances to reach the chapel, Martin encouraged all those attending extraordinary form Masses at the four parishes to continue attending those parishes’ ordinary form Masses and to view the chapel as a shrine chapel “that you might visit for Mass on occasion.”
He expressed his understanding of the possible grief faced by the TLM attendees, saying he has “listened to your stories of faithfulness and the ways the TLM has enriched your spiritual journeys.”
Martin said he prays members of the TLM community “will be open to [the] opportunity” for grace that “faithfulness to the discipline of the Church” can bring, acknowledging the “uncertainty” many may experience because of the restrictions.
The restriction of the extraordinary form of the Mass to the Little Flower Chapel is the result of the tighter regulation of the TLM initiated by Pope Francis in his 2021 motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, which brought about a marked change from Pope Benedict XVI’s more welcoming approach to the extraordinary form communities in his 2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum.
Williams said members of the community are “sad, angry, reluctant, resigned, and everything in between” over the changes.
“Everything flows out of the Mass,” Williams said. “From there you get the different ministries: St. Vincent de Paul, children’s faith formation, OCIA, etc. Forcing us away from our parishes weakens the community altogether and weakens the parishes we’ve left behind because we’re not part of it fully.”
Williams told CNA that of the large number of seminarians in the Charlotte Diocese — at least 50% — have come from the parishes with a Latin mass or which previously had one. There are so many boys interested in the priesthood that a minor seminary has been created in the diocese.
He said from the TLM community at St. Ann’s Parish alone, there are nine young men in various stages of seminarian formation in the past seven years.
“This Mass, this parish has created vocations,” Williams said.
Addressing the issue of unity, which has been used by those restricting the TLM, he pointed out that most people he knows who attend it “absolutely believe in the validity of the novus ordo Mass.”
He credited the tremendous growth in the TLM community in recent years, however, to “a level of reverence and beauty that helps them recognize the timeless aspect of the liturgy.”
The Latin Mass community is an extremely “welcoming” community that has “really thrived organically,” Williams said. It attracts a diverse and growing number of people: young families, single people, a variety of ethnic groups, “women who veil, and some who don’t.”
Williams, who recently appeared on EWTN’s The World Over to discuss the TLM in Charlotte, said members of the TLM communities are experiencing the restrictions as “a lot of coercion. It all seems very strategic, like they’re setting up this chapel not to succeed, and for the parishes not to succeed.”
“Why is going to the Latin Mass a bad thing? It’s no different from the Ordinariate, or Byzantine, or any other rite. It’s all still Catholic. No one is threatened by them,” he said.
Williams told CNA that the previous Charlotte bishop, Peter Jugis, requested and received a two-year dispensation from Francis’ restrictions in 2023. He retired in 2024 and was succeeded by Martin.
Williams said he and other members of the TLM community are still hopeful that Pope Leo XIV’s pontificate will be more welcoming of the TLM and that things can change, citing a post on X on Sept. 29 showing a priest at the St. Michael’s chapel in St. Peter’s Basilica saying the Mass in the extraordinary form, as well as the recent granting of an exemption to the restrictions imposed by Traditionis Custodes in the San Angelo Diocese in Texas, the first exemption granted under the new pontificate.
The Diocese of Charlotte did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Yet, another man unworthy to be a bishop. The Church awaits a better day.
The persecution of Catholics by the Catholic Church’s leaders continues.
The legacy of Bergoglio lives on.
Meanwhile, the number attending mass in most US parishes has significantly declined in the last two decades,especially since covid lockdowns and sometimes discrimination against those who refused a vaccine derived from induced abortions. But yeah, limiting the Latin mass attendance will certainly help save more souls, I”m sure?
It’s weird isn’t it? You’d think encouraging devout young people who actually want to show up & worship, get married, have families, & follow Church teaching would be a game plan.
Unless there’s something missing in this story I just don’t get it.
It’s not complicated. The way the sins of pride affect prelates is more fundamental. It is easier for a man to lack self-awareness and grasp of how he’s abandoned his faith when he holds high status in the Church. Anyone can become disconnected from the question of what is the nature and origin of truth but it’s more consequential with bishops. With faith, we know an unchanging God is the source of all truth. Without faith we fill the vacuum with more faith in secular humanist explanations of the human condition with man-made propositions of “new truth” as though there can be such a thing. The pride of a prelate lacking faith can easily become envious and contemptuous of those who have it and become destructive towards what he previously committed to defend.
To Bishop Michael Martin of the Diocese of Charlotte:
Inimicus Missae Lantinae est Procurator Satanae.
He expressed his understanding of the possible grief faced by the TLM attendees, saying he has “listened to your stories of faithfulness and the ways the TLM has enriched your spiritual journeys.” But he clearly doesn’t care. Like a petulant child, it is all about him and not about ‘enriched spiritual journeys’ of his flock.
I grew up with the Latin Mass. Although I haven’t attended one in years, I totally
support those who wish to do so now. Many great saints were spiritually nourished
over centuries at his liturgy. What is motivating Bishop Martin is beyond me. The
lack of charity among some church and Vatican officials is astonishing and deeply
disappointing. Who is behind this war on the TLM? Is the ultimate goal to purge the
church of traditional, conservative Catholics?
“Women who veil…”
Aaargh!! “Veil” is not a verb. Wearing a headcovering is a custom, it’s not a sacramental nor a devotion. To continue promoting this myth of “veiling” is just faux piety. Stop already.
Wearing a headcovering is an outward sign of modesty, prayer, & awareness of being in a sacred space. Not a false piety in my experience. And much more than a custom. It’s found in different denominations & faiths.
My Mennonite friends wear headcoverings every waking hour because they believe all they do is a form of prayer & they want to do that in modesty, obedience & humility before the Lord. Whether in church or out.
Well stated. A veil is most certainly an act of devotion.
Head covering can be anything i.e. what you listed and also none of that. Being an Eastern Orthodox, I think I am a natural expert in those matters). There are plenty of Orthodox forums where women discuss head covering endlessly so it becomes a kind of a fixation. I saw women wearing headscarves together with a very lowcut dress or/and a mini-skirt, to the point that a size of a skirt prevented them from bowing down. That looked absurd.
In the past, I was prohibited to enter a church because, while wearing a huge headscarf, I was also wearing female trousers with a knee-length blouse, like a mini dress over them. Nevertheless, I was told by “a gatekeeper” that I could not enter the church because I wore trousers while females in mini-skirts, some even without headscarves entered freely. I was saved by a kind woman who rushed home and brought for me a skirt which was not longer than my blouse. For some reason, being dressed like that, a skirt over trousers, I was good enough to enter. That happened in the Orthodox equivalent of “trads” church. I have never been prevented from entering monasteries being dressed like that (i.e. covered totally but not with a skirt). The whole story is a good illustration of the latter of the law – while it is being immodest what matters.
I suspect that experience cured me from attributing too much significance to outer signs of piety.
““Veil” is not a verb.”
Of course “veil” is a verb.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/veil
And lots of other dictionaries.
https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/veil
🗿
Another masterpiece of commentary.
Let’s pray that Pope Leo will be led by the Holy Spirit to do the best thing for the whole Church.
Is it possible that the strong reaction toward the TLM was caused at least in part by actions of a few very vocal members of the TLM community? Perhaps it’s time for all the good TLM people to distance themselves from them and seek peaceful solutions with their Bishops. A healthy Church can be both unified and diversified at the same time. Dialogue is not always easy, but it IS possible. Reach out to your bishops. Make friendly gestures to him. Go above and beyond in meeting parish goals for the campaigns of the diocese. Show him that you care and support him. Smother him with love and prayer and you may be surprised at how he changes. What have you to loose?
You’re kidding, right? Someone who treats you with disrespect, doesnt deserve yours. In fact, trying to brown nose the guy will result in giving him the impression that being dictatorial is the way to go.
I suggest the Latin Mass folks attend the new Mass as ordered, and withhold every cent they would have otherwise donated to the diocese and give it to some worthy charity. Money talks.
The Bishop appears to be a person on a power trip, who lacks empathy. A leader he is not. Sad.
It’s not about money, it’s about taking souls to hell.
Agreed- honey attracts more flys than vinegar. 🫠
Hello James. I attended the TLM ever since Pope Benedict made that possible & I never encountered any strange stuff until TC. And I never experienced any anti Semitism until after Oct. 7th.
When people feel demeaned & you suppress something they’re deeply attached to you can create paranoia & distrust. I believe the answer is to engage each other more in dialog & build bridges. A little respect & empathy goes a long way.
The anti Semitism unfortunately is something that’s been a problem for centuries & harder to solve. It lingers on both the Left & the Right. For me it only emerged from the shadows on Oct. 7th but I know it’s been lurking about for a long time.
The Latin Mass is a liturgy, not a problem but a few who follow it have gone off the deep end. And that’s disappointing & unhelpful.
“Is it possible that the strong reaction toward the TLM was caused at least in part by actions of a few very vocal members of the TLM community?”
Is it possible that the strong reaction towards the TLM is caused by those forming baseless stereotypes of who defenders are and falsely characterizing what they say? Putdowns from anyone, including the gratuitous insults from our recent pope, are not exactly representative of a “loving attitude.”
“Is it possible that the strong reaction toward the TLM was caused at least in part by actions of a few very vocal members of the TLM community?”
Hardly. Satan, in fact, hates the Mass in Latin don’t you know. (And I have never been an attendee at Latin Masses)
You really need to look at the history of the church for the last 150 or more years in the US. There was much discrimination endured by Catholic immigrants and there also was much (real) sacrifice by families, religious and priests for the faith and building the church in the new world.
Now the faithful are being told fall in line with this new management’s thinking or else. Now we’re more like a protestant church than Catholic, but with the Eucharist. The Vat II experiment did not work in bring the prots back to the true church so a few remnants of what did work is not hurting anyone, and may save souls!
Hardball = Defund “the Vatican” until “the Vatican” reverses this Bishop and “re-assigns” him, to a post agreeable to the TLM faithful abused by this man.
Vatican has plenty of money. This “Bishop” is one of their soldiers. The Catholic Church is alive and not-so-well – you need to get away from the diocese to find it. The gates of hell shall not prevail against it. But it will prevail against many hierarchy and plenty of the laity.
I’ve read they’re 2 billion in debt?
Yes, the drunk-with-power Francis spent like a drunken sailor on left wing causes to have himself adored by the liberal establishment, and the pervasive amorality among our bishops paid out billions to abuse victims because they made the conscious decision to open seminaries to degenerates and keep Catholic men out. But do they ever learn? No.
What do these “shepherds” gain by restricting the Latin Mass. As a Catholic who survived the 1960s and all the turmoil generated, I welcome the opportunity to attend the Mass that sustained our Church for nearly two millennia. The answer may be their desire to preside over what they believe is true worship. They are wrong!
I take comfort in the fact–the belief–that Christ is with us until the end of time.
In 77 years I’ve rarely attended a Tridentine Mass (save in my pre-Vatican II youthful days). That said, I have NEVER heard of anyone who attends or supports the Extraordinary Form of the Mass advocate giving an award to a politician who has supported, funded and voted on behalf of murdering babies in their mother’s womb.
Why is that????????
The comments above convince me that trads are in de facto schism with the Roman Catholic Church. No, you don’t get to celebrate the preconciliar Mass when the Church herself decided that that Mass was to be reformed, which entails its replacement by the reformed version after the reformed version’s promulgation. The reformed Mass is the Mass of Paul VI, which is now the Mass of the Roman Rite.
Traditionis Custodes was good, just, and necessary to halt the ridiculous bifurcation of the Roman Rite into maintaining preconciliar and postconciliar liturgical forms for the sake of placating a very small and increasingly troublesome fringe outlying group of people who don’t want to accept Vatican Council II, and TC’s full implementation toward the total elimination of the preconciliar Mass can’t happen quickly enough.
Scott Walker: and Kumbaya to you.
II did not work in bringing in the protestant sheep, they may want a III to fix some things.
‘ the ridiculous bifurcation of the Roman Rite into maintaining preconciliar and postconciliar liturgical forms”
So, you argue that Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI did not have the right to allow the traditional Mass, but Pope Francis had the right to ban it?
Why?
And if you’re going to yammer on about Vatican II, I remind you that both Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, unlike Pope Francis, were actually at the Council and would presumably know quite well what was intended.
The Latin Mass is a vestige of our past. It seems so strange to me that people think that the Latin Mass is somehow holier than Mass in the local language (English). Worshipping God is what makes Mass holy, not the language you do it in. I’ll never understand you guys.
1998 MA Theology and Christian ministry.
Respectfully James, have you looked at a TLM missal? It’s much more than just the language.
Het, James J! You wrote:
“Worshipping God is what makes Mass holy, not the language you do it in. I’ll never understand you guys.”
You made my point exactly! This is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, for Heaven’s sake!
Why do you people want to suppress it? Why are you persecuting people who want to praise and worship God through it?
Never before have Catholics persecuted Catholics in this way.
I meant, “Hey James J!”
Not, “Het James J!”
Sorry.
So your “studies” precluded not making any effort to understand what “us guys” have to say? Does focusing on the Holy Sacrifice of Our Lord rather than a community meal not create any distinctions in the pursuit of holiness and a humble sense of unworthiness? Does the very mockery of worshiping God practiced at various undisciplined forms of what is falsely called a Vatican II Mass not cause concern?
Can you name the prayers and practices of what were intentionally and specifically expunged from the liturgy of the “New Mass” to accommodate the expectations and preferred sensitivities of anti-Catholics? Do your “studies” preclude the recognition that it is impossible and unholy to believe that the people of today can be superior to the people of the past? Do our obligations towards the Communion of Saints not a part of what you would call “holiness?” Does a universal language that actually does unite all Catholics, throughout the world, past, present, and future, not matter? Does it not even spark reflection that an adaptation of any new Mass was explicitly condemned by Pius V for all time?
Dear James,
Until the 9th century there were exclusively 3 sacred languages for holy sacrifice of the mass: Latin, Greek, and Araméen. What we can describe as the triptych of the Logos features on the cross of Christ.
The decision in the 9th century to aĺlow a vernacular language nearly exploded the Church, for the above reason.
Just as the old covenant had fossilised Hebrew as its sacred language – the one God communicated the 10 commandments in – so too the New Covenant had the three languages of Christ.
Otherwise put, to attack the sacred TLM – the unbroken apostolic liturgical tradition – is to attack the Logos Himself. This is an assault on Christ.
JamesJ: “1998 MA Theology and Christian ministry.”
I think I found the root of your problem.
If you watch the EWTN mass they are using some Latin, it’s different and you get used to it as being special and reverent. There is some mystery present in the delivery.
I think so , too. As human beings we need all the assistance we can get to connect to what’s transcendent. A language set aside for worship helps in that.
That’s how it worked for Jews for centuries until modern Hebrew came into everyday use in Israel. Some ultra Orthodox Jews refused to use Hebrew for everyday business because they wanted to reserve it for prayer.
We should have room for many liturgies & rites in a universal Church. It’s not a competition.
Forgive me but I experience a lot of dishonesty and hypocrisy and animosity among traditionalists/conservatives. Our priest has kneelers to the left and right for all who want to receive kneeling and on the tongue; that’s great. The trouble is “they” want to convert the rest of us and call us blasphemers receiving on the hand. We are members of the body of Christ, He is the Church, and we obey the teachings of the Church. Trads condemn the Council and the popes and the Fathers of the Council who approved the Novus Ordo. The Church Fathers voted for “Holy Simplicity”; that means going back to the beginning at the Last Supper. The changes in the 1960s were only here in the USA substantial in Europe many places traditions and the New Mass go wonderfully together. There are many that love the TLM but you cannot reject the Church and its teaching. If Eucharistic ministers are allowed we have them until we have more priests again. On top of all the conversions to 1.4 billion Catholics globally there is an arising in European countries going on, 17,800 baptism and many young ones in France on Easter. The Holy Spirit is very busy and the renewal of the Church is like fire again. At the memorial of Charlie Kerk 90,000 inside and outside many thousands Catholics and Evangelicals together and that starts a revival already. It is time for unity in love and peace. Come back to the true and only Church, you cannot make your own Church. I think the real holy remnant are the bloomers who held the torch and labored in the Church. I receive by hand then I can kiss my hand as a one star relic of the Risen Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord made it a commandment: Love each other as I love you. God bless!
I make typos on a regular basis Miss Edith but thank you for “bloomers”. That’s more descriptive than “boomers”. I’ll have to remember that one.
🙂
It seems like my mother used to talk about baggy bloomers they wore during the depression, but maybe I’ve got that mixed up with the 20s? (or the feed sacks with nice prints Grandma made dresses out of)
“Baggy bloomers” is what came to my mind also.
🙂
I wish they still sold feed in those nice printed cloth sacks. Now it’s just paper or woven plastic. Not even burlap. At least the burlap was useful for something. Not bloomers though.
🙂
They used to give you money back at the feed store for the feedsacks you returned but now they’re 100% disposable. It seems so wasteful to me.
They stopped allowing us to return that one year when there was that pig virus; we could reuse but no refunds. Farming is all big business now, the frugality of yesteryear the youth know nothing about.
Thank you knowall. I wondered if it was about something like disease transmission. It’s too bad.
I used to enjoy buying Red Rose tea because they’d include a little china figurine in every box. Our local Krogers & Piggly Wiggly offered blue willow dishes at very reasonable prices. They’d feature one piece per week to shoppers at a special price. If you shopped there every week you could score the whole collection.
My dishes were all from the grocery store & some of my silverware, too. My mother’s drinking glasses used to contain jelly. After you used up the jelly you had a pretty flower-decorated glass for juice. Years ago boxes of laundry soap used to have a free dish inside .
It used to be a lot more enjoyable to go grocery shopping .
I love feedsack fabric! There are so many pretty patterns in lovely colors. There are even a couple of books about them.
Many things used to come in nice, reusable packages. Old Spice was, as it happens, originally a women’s product, with soap, cologne, powder, pomanders, and more, and they came in really lovely boxes with early American (around 1800ish) motifs on them. One was a sewing box, complete with padded pincushion on the top. It really bothers me how much packaging I have to throw away when I buy anything these days.
What exactly is “loving” about composing a long list of condescending false accusations?
At the very least you might learn that the “Fathers of the Council” were not involved in “approving” the Novus Ordo Mass.
The Novus Ordo mass is the mass liturgy of the Church. So tell why it is rejected considering that the Church Is CHRIST
It is not “rejected.” And your “loving” assumptions are continuously false in your need to indulge “loving” disparagements. It is the Mass of the Ages, and for all time, that is blatantly rejected by contempt-filled “loving” Catholics.
The Papal Bull of His Holiness Pope Saint Pius V, Quo Primum, July 13, 1570, giving perpetual permission to every priest of the Roman Rite to say the Traditional Latin Mass:
“We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.”
“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”
“…Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Also, John Paul II commissioned a group of 9 cardinals in 1986 to investigate the issue, Namely: 1) Whether pope Paul VI suppressed the old rite of mass and 2) does the priest have the right to say the traditional rite of mass promulgated by Pius V in public or in private, even if it goes against the will of his bishop. 8/9 cardinals said pope Paul VI did not suppressed the old rite of mass and 9/9 said it was the right of the priest to say the mass in public or private against the will of his bishop. John Paul II was going to write a statement to the same effect but was brow beaten by liberal cardinals that flew to Rome stop him doing that. He got so much resistance he caved.
It is not “rejected.” This is a baseless slur. Rather, it is the Latin Mass of the Ages, and for all time, that is blatantly rejected by Catholics submitting to a cult of inevitable progress, an unacknowledged contempt for the idea that faith must involve transcendent truths through time that reminds us we are not superior to the Communion of Saints. Utopian progressivism is antithetical to faith.
The Papal Bull of His Holiness Pope Saint Pius V, Quo Primum, July 13, 1570, gave perpetual permission to every priest of the Roman Rite to say the Traditional Latin Mass:
“We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.”
“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”
“…Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Also, John Paul II commissioned a group of 9 cardinals in 1986 to investigate the issue, Namely: 1) Whether pope Paul VI suppressed the old rite of mass and 2) does the priest have the right to say the traditional rite of mass promulgated by Pius V in public or in private, even if it goes against the will of his bishop. 8/9 cardinals said pope Paul VI did not suppress the old rite of mass and 9/9 said it was the right of the priest to say the mass in public or private against the will of his bishop. John Paul II was going to write a statement to the same effect but was brow beaten by liberal cardinals who flew to Rome to stop him.
Edith Wohldmann: CWR published my redundant comment, my second posted because I believed they thought the sarcasm of my first attempt crossed the line, which is correct, and refrained from posting it. So, I toned it down with a second post. I was sarcastic originally, and I apologize.
I believed I was responding to your concluding comments emphasizing love and unity being at odds with the values of supporters of the TLM. I’ve lived decades with liberal sentiments that say if you don’t embrace sentiments the way we do, it’s because you’re lacking the ability to be loving or compassionate or empathetic, or scientific, or value fellowship, etc. This presumptuous attitude offends me, and I sometimes respond in kind, which is one of my recurring sins.
It is not true that supporters of the TLM possess an idiosyncratic desire to isolate themselves. Nor do most of us harbor hostility to what we believe is a shortened and weakened, liturgy in the N.O., which is valid and has its place. Although a case can be made for its reform. Working New York Catholics like me (well, now retired) have valued being able to receive daily Communion during lunch hours, as numerous churches have provided a noon Mass. We do, however, believe in considering a reversal of the language of reference to what is called ordinary and extraordinary.
And we are not thrilled with being lectured when it appears that our presumed betters seem to not grasp what is really at stake. The patrimony of Catholicism includes the realization that Catholics do not and should never assume superiority to the past. We should avoid being seduced to a utopian temptation when past historical evils become discredited in popular awareness while we adopt indifference to the continuing expansion of contemporary evils. And evil can never be swept under the rug when we take refuge in a fantasy of “unity” as benevolent rather than an agreed upon illusion leading to a denial of our sins.
I’m currently reading “Lord of the World” and just as Benson wrote so long ago, it is striking that to watch the faith be destroyed so handily while the Church fails to stop it. Bergoglio claims it was his favorite manual (I mean novel).
Just keep digging deeper holes for yourselves, trads. It’s comical to watch. The sun is setting on the TLM. Accept it.
Is that a charitable comment to your brothers and sisters in Christ Miss Dorothy?
Wow! are you kidding me?
Dorothy I hope you don’t call yourself a Catholic or a Christian with that kind of attitude.
Why de-Cathlosize the Church? These non-Catholic bishops should move their episcopate to an Episcopal church.