The EWTN News portal, drawing from its Spanish-language sister service ACI Prensa, reports that thirty-four dioceses received Vatican authorization to celebrate the 1962 Missal in parish churches during 2025, a figure identical to 2024, with twenty-four of these concessions granted to the United States. Seven decrees were issued under the antipope Francis before his death on April 21, 2025, and twenty-seven under the new usurper Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) following his installation on May 8. The vast majority—twenty-nine—were mere renewals of existing two-year permits. The article presents this bureaucratic stability as evidence of “continuity in the Vatican’s case-by-case handling” under the restrictions of Traditionis Custodes (2021). This managerial consistency reveals not a restoration of liturgical justice, but the calculated maintenance of a controlled opposition within the conciliar sect, ensuring that the immemorial Mass remains a privileged concession rather than the inalienable right of the Church.
The Administrative Farce of “Permission” for the Unbloody Sacrifice
The very premise of the report—that the Holy See must “grant permission” for the celebration of the Mass codified by St. Pius V Quo Primum (1570) and only slightly modified by John XXIII—is a blasphemous inversion of divine and ecclesiastical law. The Council of Trent anathematized anyone who would dare to abrogate or impede this rite: “If anyone shall say that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church… can be despised… let him be anathema” (Session XXII, Canon 6). St. Pius V’s Bull Quo Primum decreed this Missal in perpetuity: “We… grant and concede in perpetuity that… this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of penalty… This Constitution can never be revoked or modified.” The conciliar sect’s requirement that bishops beg the Dicastery for Divine Worship—a modernist construct replacing the sacred Congregation of Rites—for a two-year license to offer the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary is an act of lèse-majesté against Christ the King and His immutable liturgy. As Pius XI taught in Quas Primas, “Peace is only possible in the kingdom of Christ”; there can be no peace, no order, no legitimate authority where the King’s own rite of worship is held hostage by usurpers.
The Linguistic Camouflage of Apostasy
The article’s vocabulary betrays the naturalistic, bureaucratic mindset of the neo-church. Terms like “decrees,” “permissions,” “case-by-case handling,” “concessions,” and “regulations” reduce the Actio Christi to an administrative permit. The phrase “The Traditional Latin Mass, also called the Tridentine Mass, traces its form to the liturgy codified by St. Pius V…” treats the Mass of the Ages as a historical artifact, a “form” among others, rather than the lex orandi expressing the lex credendi of the immutable Faith. The description of the priest celebrating “ad orientem… as he leads the faithful in common prayer” strips the orientation of its theological gravity—the priest acting in persona Christi leading the Church Militant toward the rising Sun of Justice, Orientem (cf. Malachi 1:11). This is the language of the Syllabus of Errors condemned by Pius IX: “The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government” (Error 20), here mutated into: the sacred liturgy cannot be exercised without the permission of the modernist dicastery. The article’s tone is one of neutral reportage on a statistical stability, utterly silent on the supernatural reality of the Sacrifice, the state of grace, the Four Last Things, or the rights of God. Silence about supernatural matters is the gravest accusation.
The Theological Impossibility of a “Restricted” Immemorial Rite
Traditionis Custodes (2021), issued by the manifest heretic Francis (Jorge Bergoglio), is canonically null and void ab initio. As St. Robert Bellarmine teaches in De Romano Pontifice, “A Pope who is a manifest heretic, by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head… he may be judged and punished by the Church.” A heretic possesses no jurisdiction; Cum ex Apostolatus Officio (Pope Paul IV) declares the elevation of a heretic “null, void, and of no effect.” Canon 188.4 of the 1917 Code confirms that an office becomes vacant ipso facto by “public defection from the Catholic faith.” The line of usurpers from John XXIII onward has publicly defected by promulgating the heresies of Vatican II (religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality, evolution of dogma) and the Novus Ordo Missae, which Cardinal Ottaviani and Cardinal Bacci warned contained “a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass.” Therefore, the “Dicastery,” the “Summarium Decretorum,” and the very concept of “permission” derive from a paramasonic structure occupying the Vatican, not the Roman Curia. The 1962 Missal itself, while vastly superior to the Novus Ordo, bears the scars of modernist tinkering (suppression of the Confiteor before Communion, alteration of the Good Friday prayer, reduction of genuflections). To treat this 1962 version as the exclusive “Extraordinary Form” subject to modernist veto is to accept the modernist framing that the liturgy is positive law subject to the whim of the legislator, rather than jus divinum.
The American Indult Ghetto: Symptom of the Conciliar Captivity
That twenty-four of thirty-four permissions (70%) go to the United States exposes the distinctly American character of the indult movement. This is the fruit of the 1984 Quattuor Abhinc Annos and 1988 Ecclesia Dei indults—concessions granted by the modernist hierarchy to co-opt traditionalist resistance into the structures of the neo-church. The dioceses listed—Sacramento, Nashville, Lincoln, Davenport, Cleveland, Seattle—are largely those where the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) or similar indult institutes operate. These groups, like the SSPX (Lefebvrians), function as a “schism within a schism of the neo-church.” Abp. Lefebvre’s fatal compromise—“give us the old Mass, that is enough for us”—while recognizing the validity of the usurpers, produced a controlled opposition that legitimizes the conciliar sect by its very presence within its canonical boundaries. The “steady” numbers (34, 34, 55, 35) reflect not pastoral zeal but the management of a pressure valve. The modernist managers know that suppressing the TLM entirely would provoke a schism they cannot control; granting limited, revocable permits neutralizes the threat while maintaining the principle that the Novus Ordo is the “ordinary expression” of the lex orandi. This is the hermeneutic of continuity in action: the Tradition is tolerated as a museum piece, not confessed as the living heart of the Church.
Continuity of the Anti-Liturgical Agenda Across Usurpers
The article notes with apparent approval that “the Holy See continued to consider requests individually under the restrictions established during Francis’ pontificate” and that “continuity in the Vatican’s case-by-case handling” was maintained across the “papal transition.” This seamless handover from Francis to Leo XIV (Prevost) confirms the monolithic nature of the conciliar revolution. There is no “conservative” or “traditional” faction in the neo-church; there is only the Modernist agenda advancing through managed dialectics. Leo XIV’s first acts—repealing COVID pay cuts, remembering 9/11, organic gardening—are trivialities masking the essential continuity: the defense of Traditionis Custodes, the Novus Ordo, Vatican II, and the false ecumenism condemned by Pius XI in Mortalium Animos (1928). St. Pius X in Lamentabili Sane Exitu condemned the Modernist error: “Christ did not proclaim any specific, all-encompassing doctrine suitable for all times and peoples, but rather initiated a certain religious movement…” (Prop. 59). The neo-church’s treatment of the Mass as a “form” to be permitted or restricted is the practical application of this condemned proposition. The Summarium Decretorum itself, listing “approvals of translations,” “canonical coronations,” and “recognitions of new heavenly patrons” alongside TLM permits, reveals a bureaucracy manufacturing a counterfeit Catholicism.
The Only Legitimate Response: Rejection of the Conciliar Sect
The integral Catholic, adhering to the quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus of St. Vincent of Lérins, cannot participate in this charade. To seek “permission” from the usurpers is to recognize their jurisdiction, contradicting the dogma that a manifest heretic “cannot be the head of something of which he is not a member” (Bellarmine). The true Church endures in the catacombs—among bishops and priests retaining valid orders (pre-1968 rites) and the faithful who reject the new rites, the new “saints” (Kolbe, Newman, Faustina, JPII, Ulma), the new ecumenism, and the new “popes.” The steady number of indult permissions is not a sign of hope; it is the pulse of a corpse kept animate by the machinery of the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:15). Non possumus. We cannot comply. The Mass is not a privilege to be begged for; it is the right of the baptized, the duty of the priest, the glory of the Trinity. Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat.
Source:
Vatican Latin Mass permissions steady across papal transition (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 14.09.2026