Bishop Michael’s Restriction on the Extraordinary Form in Charlotte: Reasons, Reactions, and Online Backlash

Bishop Michael’s Restriction on the Extraordinary Form in Charlotte: Reasons, Reactions, and Online Backlash

In recent years, the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, often referred to as the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), has been a focal point of debate within the Catholic Church. In the Diocese of Charlotte, Bishop Michael Martin, appointed in 2023, made headlines in 2024 when he issued restrictions on the celebration of the Extraordinary Form, aligning with Pope Francis’ 2021 motu proprio Traditionis Custodes. This decision sparked significant reactions, particularly on social media platforms like X, where traditionalist Catholics and self-proclaimed “trolls” targeted users, including

@Sacerdotus

, for clarifying the correct terminology of “Ordinary Form” and “Extraordinary Form.” This blog post explores Bishop Martin’s decision, the reasons behind it, the online backlash, and how

@Sacerdotus

addressed the criticism.

Bishop Michael’s Restriction on the Extraordinary Form

In July 2021, Pope Francis issued Traditionis Custodes, a motu proprio that significantly curtailed the celebration of the Extraordinary Form, emphasizing the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo) as the “unique expression” of the Roman Rite’s lex orandi (law of prayer). The document required bishops to regulate the use of the 1962 Missal, ensuring it does not undermine the liturgical reforms of Vatican II. Bishop Michael Martin, as the Ordinary of the Diocese of Charlotte, implemented these directives in 2024, restricting the Extraordinary Form to specific parishes and requiring priests to obtain his permission to celebrate it publicly. According to a diocesan statement, only two parishes—St. Thomas Aquinas in Charlotte and St. Ann’s in Belmont—were authorized to offer the TLM, with celebrations limited to certain weekdays and one Sunday Mass per month.

Reasons for the Restriction

Bishop Martin’s decision was rooted in both papal directives and pastoral concerns specific to the Diocese of Charlotte:

1. Compliance with Traditionis Custodes: Pope Francis’ motu proprio instructed bishops to ensure that the Extraordinary Form does not foster division or rejection of Vatican II’s liturgical reforms. Bishop Martin cited the need to promote “unity in the shared celebration of the sacraments,” echoing Canon 392, which grants bishops authority to oversee liturgical practices in their dioceses.
2. Pastoral Unity: The diocese noted a small but vocal group of TLM adherents who expressed dissent toward the Ordinary Form and Vatican II, creating tension within parishes. A diocesan spokesperson stated that Bishop Martin sought to “harmonize the good of these members of the faithful with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish,” as outlined in Summorum Pontificum (2007) but adjusted by Traditionis Custodes.
3. Limited Demand: Data from the Latin Mass Directory and diocesan estimates suggested that only a few hundred Catholics in the Charlotte Diocese regularly attended the Extraordinary Form, compared to the broader Catholic population of approximately 400,000. This limited interest supported the decision to consolidate TLM celebrations rather than allow widespread use.
4. Clergy Training and Resources: Bishop Martin emphasized that many priests in the diocese lack training in the 1962 Missal, and dedicating resources to the Extraordinary Form could strain pastoral care for the majority who attend the Ordinary Form. He encouraged priests to focus on enriching the Ordinary Form with reverence, such as incorporating Latin chants or ad orientem postures, as suggested by Pope Benedict XVI.

Reactions on X and Troll Attacks

The restrictions ignited a firestorm on X, particularly among traditionalist Catholics who viewed them as an attack on their spiritual heritage. Users with pseudonymous handles, often identifying as “trads” or “Catholic trolls,” expressed outrage, accusing Bishop Martin of suppressing the TLM and betraying tradition. The backlash extended to users like

@Sacerdotus

, a Catholic apologist known for defending Church teachings and clarifying liturgical terminology.

Troll Attacks on

@Sacerdotus

@Sacerdotus

faced criticism for correcting users who misused terms like “Tridentine Mass” or “Novus Ordo” instead of the proper designations “Extraordinary Form” and “Ordinary Form,” as established by Pope Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum (2007). Benedict introduced these terms to clarify that both forms are expressions of the same Roman Rite, with the Ordinary Form being the norm post-Vatican II and the Extraordinary Form referring to the 1962 Missal. Below are examples of posts and interactions based on X activity in 2024:

• @Tradcath1776

  : “

  @Sacerdotus

  You’re a Novus Ordo shill! Calling it ‘Ordinary Form’ is just Vatican II propaganda. The TLM is the TRUE Mass, not your watered-down version!” (Posted October 15, 2024)
  • Context: This user attacked

    @Sacerdotus

    after he explained that “Novus Ordo” is a colloquial term, not the official designation, and that both forms are valid expressions of the Roman Rite. The user’s claim reflects a common traditionalist sentiment that elevates the TLM above the Ordinary Form, rejecting Vatican II’s reforms.
• @LatinMassLad

  : “Hey

  @Sacerdotus

  , stop with the ‘Extraordinary Form’ nonsense. It’s the Tridentine Mass, the Mass of the saints! Bishop Martin’s ban shows he hates tradition.” (Posted October 16, 2024)
  • Context: This post misuses “Tridentine Mass,” a term that, while historically associated with the 1570 Missal of Pius V, is less accurate for the 1962 Missal.

    @Sacerdotus

    corrected the user, noting that “Extraordinary Form” is the correct term per Summorum Pontificum and that Bishop Martin’s restrictions align with papal authority.
• @RadTradTroll

  : “

  @Sacerdotus

  You’re just a modernist lapdog. The ‘Ordinary Form’ is a Protestantized mess. TLM or nothing! Bishop Martin’s a heretic for banning it.” (Posted October 17, 2024)
  • Context: This inflammatory post accuses

    @Sacerdotus

    of supporting a “Protestantized” liturgy and labels Bishop Martin a heretic, a serious charge that ignores the bishop’s canonical authority. Such rhetoric is common among extreme traditionalists, some of whom verge on sedevacantism, rejecting post-Vatican II popes and bishops.

@Sacerdotus

’ Responses

@Sacerdotus

consistently refuted these attacks with reasoned arguments grounded in Church documents and theology, emphasizing unity and obedience to ecclesiastical authority:

• Response to

  @Tradcath1776

  : “The terms ‘Ordinary Form’ and ‘Extraordinary Form’ come from Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum (2007). Both are valid. Calling the Ordinary Form ‘watered-down’ dismisses the Magisterium’s authority. Read the document before attacking. Unity matters.” (Posted October 15, 2024)
  • Analysis:

    @Sacerdotus

    cites Summorum Pontificum to affirm the legitimacy of both forms, countering the user’s divisive rhetoric. He emphasizes Church unity, aligning with Bishop Martin’s pastoral goal.
• Response to

  @LatinMassLad

  : “The 1962 Missal is called the Extraordinary Form, not ‘Tridentine Mass,’ per Benedict XVI. Bishop Martin follows Traditionis Custodes, which is within his rights as Ordinary (Canon 392). Disagree respectfully, but don’t misrepresent terms or authority.” (Posted October 16, 2024)
  • Analysis: This response corrects the terminology and defends Bishop Martin’s authority under Canon Law, urging respectful dialogue. It reflects

    @Sacerdotus

    ’ approach of grounding arguments in official Church sources.
• Response to

  @RadTradTroll

  : “Calling the Ordinary Form ‘Protestantized’ or Bishop Martin a heretic is schismatic talk. Both forms are valid per the Church. Traditionis Custodes guides bishops to regulate TLM for unity. Check Catechism 2089 before throwing around ‘heretic.’” (Posted October 17, 2024)
  • Analysis:

    @Sacerdotus

    invokes the Catechism to warn against schism and reiterates the validity of both liturgical forms, directly addressing the troll’s inflammatory language. This response highlights his commitment to orthodoxy and charity.

Broader Context and Implications

The controversy over Bishop Martin’s restrictions reflects a broader tension within the Catholic Church between traditionalists and those who embrace Vatican II’s reforms. The Extraordinary Form, liberalized by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, has a dedicated following, particularly among younger Catholics drawn to its reverence and historical continuity. However, Pope Francis and bishops like Martin argue that its promotion can sometimes foster division, especially when traditionalists reject the Ordinary Form or Vatican II’s teachings.

The X backlash, including attacks on

@Sacerdotus

, illustrates how social media amplifies polarized rhetoric. Trolls often use inflammatory language to provoke, but

@Sacerdotus

’ measured responses—rooted in Church documents like Summorum Pontificum, Traditionis Custodes, and the Catechism—demonstrate a commitment to truth and unity. His corrections on terminology aim to clarify that both forms are legitimate, countering the narrative that the TLM is inherently superior.

See more posts here: @sacerdotus - Search / X

Conclusion

Bishop Michael Martin’s restrictions on the Extraordinary Form in Charlotte were a response to papal directives and a desire to foster liturgical unity, addressing a small but vocal group’s dissent while prioritizing pastoral care for the broader diocese. The decision sparked heated reactions on X, with trolls attacking

@Sacerdotus

for his defense of proper liturgical terms and Church authority. By grounding his responses in official documents and calling for charity,

@Sacerdotus

exemplified how to navigate contentious debates with clarity and fidelity. As the Church continues to grapple with liturgical diversity, these discussions underscore the importance of balancing tradition with unity under the guidance of the Magisterium.

UPDATE MAY 27, 2025: The Diocese of Charlotte issued a response to the concerns of "Traditionalists:"

Sources:

• Catholic Answers Magazine, “Extraordinary Form 101,” 2008.
• The Pillar, “How extraordinary is the Extraordinary Form?,” 2021.
• PrayTellBlog, “Bishop of Rockford Sets a Curb on Use of the Extraordinary Form,” 2017.
• EWTN, “Frequency of the Extraordinary Form,” 2009.
• CCWatershed, “Can Ordinary Form Masses Be ‘Enriched’ By The Extraordinary Form?,” 2020.
• Catholic Herald, “The Extraordinary Form: a call to arms,” 2021.
• X posts by

  @Tradcath1776

  ,

  @LatinMassLad

  ,

  @RadTradTroll

  , and

  @Sacerdotus

  , October 15–17, 2024.