Two notable events have taken place since Pope Leo XIV ascended the Throne of Saint Peter: Bishop Michael Martin of Charlotte angered pretty much every traditionally-minded Catholic in the Anglo-sphere, and 20,000 pilgrims, mostly young, marched the Chartres and attended an internationally televised/streamed Latin Mass said by Bishop Athanasius Schneider.
Bishop Martin’s actions became an international sensation and the documents leaked to the public came off like a temper tantrum by an unhinged ideologue who wanted to stick it to the Trads for not loving the New Springtime enough; whereas Bishop Schneider’s actions, along with the pilgrims, seemed simply Catholic and holy.
What we see in the dichotomous reception of these two events is indicative of an undeniable truth that the hierarchy must deal with, even if some want to ignore it: Tradition is winning and will win, whereas the experiment of the conciliar era will lose and is losing.
Even if we assume the best about the more “moderate” post-conciliar approaches—reform of the reform, etc.—what we find is that the fight is primarily between a general Novus Ordo parish paradigm, and Traditional communities that are bursting at the seams. Of course, I speak in generalities here, and there is not enough time to go into detailed specifics, so please forgive me if I fail to acknowledge some exceptions, which given their infrequency tend to prove the rule.
Now, the conciliar zeitgeist is far from dead, which makes sense since the Vatican II generation is still around and the youngest of it will be for a decade or so. Also, so many of the theologians and clerics who committed their lives to work for the Church during the 70s-90s did so when Tradition was barely acknowledged or maligned. I am thinking of the George Weigels of the world, and while they may not be as influential as they once were, they still get the front page of major journals and mainstream publications, which is a privilege Traditionalists rarely, if ever, are granted.
It is worth calling to mind that during the heyday of the John-Paul II conservative Catholicism, an attachment to the Latin Mass was seen as a problem to be solved. In 1984 under Pope John-Paul II, the famous “Indult” Mass was permitted, which was rightly—you’ll see why—referred to as the “Insult” by Traditionalists.
Released on behalf of the Polish Pope by the Congregation for Divine Worship, the letter Quattuor Abhinc Annos stated: “… [I]t appeared that the problem of priests and faithful holding to the so-called ‘Tridentine’ rite was almost completely solved… however, the same problem continues…”
Gee, how warm and fuzzy it must have been to hear from Rome, “You can have your pretty little missal, but we are giving you this because you are a problem that won’t go away.” Another example of the “pastoral” attitude of clerics in the wake of the pastoral Vatican II.
Now, the Indult failed in its true intention, which was to clarify “beyond all ambiguity that such priests [who say the TLM] and their respective faithful in no way share the positions of those who call in question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.”
In 1988, Archbishop Lefebvre went ahead with his consecrations, which I view as heroic and providential, and Tradition still continued to grow even though it was associated in the public mind with disobedience, schism, and excommunication. The communities established by Rome to try and pull traditionalists away from the SSPX or give those who were Tradition-curious a place to go continued to grow, and their priests, by and large, still don’t seem to be huge fans of the Novus Ordo or have glowingly positive things to say about Vatican II. I can say from personal experience as someone who has publicly professed himself to be a Lefebvre diehard that when I travel the world and interact with Catholics of all stripes, I constantly hear, “Keep up the good work, keep fighting.” I hear this frequently from priests of the FSSP, the ICKSP, and even diocesan bishops at times.
