Is Pope Leo XIV's attitude toward the Latin Mass Catholic or is it dismissive?

 As reported here:

"Pope Leo XIV appeared to take a jab at the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in a homily during Vespers on Friday at the Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris.

Leo discussed the liturgy during his homily, saying that the Second Vatican Council 'deepened' our liturgical heritage and asking that 'liturgical celebrations are always carried out with dignity and reverence.'

The liturgy is 'a reflection of life,' Leo said. 'Eucharistic joy takes root and spreads wherever harmony is restored, wherever dignity is renewed, wherever authority becomes service, and wherever freedom is able to flourish again. This is the greatest gift we can share.'

'Therefore, place communion with the successor of Peter and with the Church before your personal preferences, so as to foster the unity of God’s people.'"

Have you ever encountered a priest, Bishop or layman who impugned the Latin Mass? Is such an attitude even Catholic? In a word, no. In his Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, Pope John Paul II said that, "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition."

And, in his book "Salt of the Earth," Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent."

To be sure, Vatican II called for an extended use of the vernacular. But nowhere did Vatican II call for the Latin language to be abolished from the liturgy. And anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or a liar. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) No. 36 states clearly that, "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."

Number 54 of this same Vatican II document teaches that, "In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and "the common prayer," but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them."

This is the teaching of Vatican II and the mind of the Church on the use of Latin and the attitude Catholics should have toward those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition.

Is Pope Leo’s attitude Catholic? Or is it dismissive?

The case for the Latin Mass as laid out by Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand,  the man Pope Pius XII described as "The Twentieth Century Doctor of the Church" here.

"The right of parents [to form their children] is irreplaceable and inalienable, and therefore incapable of being entirely delegated to others or usurped by others"

Vatican II teaches us that, in raising children, the responsibility of parents is primary: "Since parents have given life to their children, they have a very grave duty to educate them, and so are to be recognized as their primary and principal educators" (GE, No. 3). And Pope John Paul II, explaining the conciliar teaching more fully in Familiaris consortio, No. 36, says that: "The right and duty of parents to give education is essential, since it is connected with the transmission of human life; it is original and primary with regard to the educational role of others, on account of the uniqueness of of the loving relationship between parents and children; and it is irreplaceable and inalienable, and therefore incapable of being entirely delegated to others or usurped by others."

Canon Law is also very clear on this matter. Canon 793, 1., states that: "Parents as well as those who take their place are obliged and enjoy the right to educate their offspring; Catholic parents also have the duty and the right to select those means and institutions through which they can provide more suitably for the Catholic education of the children according to local circumstances." And Canon 1136 says that: "Parents have the most serious duty and the primary right to do all in their power to see to the physical, social, cultural, moral and religious upbringing of their children."

This inalienable right of parents has been recognized by the United States Supreme Court. In 1922, the State of Oregon attempted to enact legislation which would have forced all children to attend the public schools within that state. But the Supreme Court overturned that legislation and established that "The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations."

The State of Massachusetts has rejected this inalienable right in its war against the family under Governor Maura Healey. See here.

This represents a serious prayer need.

Cardinal Carlo Caffarra shared that he received a letter from Sister Lucia [of the Fatima apparitions] explaining that the ultimate battle between the Lord and Satan's reign centers on the sanctity of matrimony and the family unit.

Reflect upon that very carefully.