Bishop expands TLM provision ahead of illicit consecration
Bishop Hugh Gilbert of Aberdeen has approved weekly Traditional Latin Masses at two churches in Fetternear, expanding from a monthly schedule. The decision follows the Transalpine Redemptorists’ shift toward sedevacantism and their plan to hold an illicit episcopal consecration on July 25. Gilbert has appointed Frs. Yousef Marie and Peter Mary—former Papa Stronsay members who have dissociated from the community—to celebrate the Masses. He also directed diocesan priests to use prayers for the Unity of the Church in Masses before the scheduled consecration. The illicit ceremony will involve Canadian sedevacantist Bishop Pierre Roy as principal consecrator on Papa Stronsay in the Orkney Islands.
2 months ago
The Diocese of Aberdeen’s Bishop Hugh Gilbert has increased the frequency of Traditional Latin Masses and issued a pastoral letter condemning an upcoming illicit episcopal consecration by the traditionalist Transalpine Redemptorists, emphasizing the importance of papal authority and Church unity. 1
The Transalpine Redemptorists, a traditionalist community that emerged from the SSPX in 1988, were reconciled with the Holy See in 2008 and erected as a diocesan institute in 2012. In October 2025 the group issued an open letter rejecting several papal documents of Pope Francis, and in May 2026 it declared post‑conciliar popes “papal pretenders.” 1
Fr. Michael Mary, the 72‑year‑old superior general of the community, is scheduled to be consecrated as a bishop on July 25 2026 on Papa Stronsay in the Orkney Islands. The ceremony will be led by Canadian sedevacantist Bishop Pierre Roy, who, along with two other unauthorized bishops, will perform the rite without a papal mandate, an act the bishop describes as schismatic. 1
In a pastoral letter read on July 18‑19, Bishop Gilbert warned that the planned consecration constitutes a grave act of disobedience that separates participants from communion with the Catholic Church. He linked the event to recent SSPX illicit consecrations and stressed that such actions threaten Church unity. 1
To counter the schismatic move, Gilbert authorized weekly Traditional Latin Masses at the Church of Our Lady of the Garioch and St. John the Evangelist in Fetternear, increasing the schedule from a previous monthly offering. The new celebrants, Fr. Yousef Marie and Fr. Peter Mary—both former members of the Papa Stronsay community who have dissociated from its current direction—will lead the liturgies. 1
Gilbert’s letter highlighted the role of the papacy, now held by Pope Leo XIV, as essential to preserving a universal Catholic identity and preventing a fragmented, national‑oriented Christianity. He urged the faithful to pray for the unity of the Church and to recognize the Pope’s Petrine ministry as the safeguard against schism. 1
Examine Church authority over illicit consecrations and Latin Mass rights
The Church’s authority over illicit episcopal consecrations (especially those done without the required papal mandate) is exercised through a mix of: (a) strict juridical requirements for episcopal ordination, (b) latae sententiae penalties (automatic excommunication), and (c) the ecclesiological principle that bishops must act in hierarchical communion with the Bishop of Rome in order to exercise governance and teaching. At the same time, “Latin Mass rights” (use of the 1962 Missal) are real but not absolute: they are regulated as a matter of ecclesial communion and liturgical law, with key decisions reserved to the diocesan bishop and—through dispensations—to the Apostolic See under Traditionis custodes.
In Catholic ecclesiology, a bishop is not merely a person who has received an episcopal sacrament; bishops are also constituted pastors who teach, sanctify, and govern.
Canon law states that through episcopal consecration bishops receive the function of sanctifying, and with it the functions of teaching and governing, but these latter can only be exercised in hierarchical communion with the head and members of the college.
So, even where an episcopal consecration involves the sacrament’s external reality, the Church still treats juridical communion with the Roman Pontiff as essential for lawful governance.
A dicastery text addresses illicit episcopal consecrations in precisely these terms: such consecrations “break communion with the Roman Pontiff” and violate grave ecclesiastical discipline, and the Holy See acts to prevent them.
Canon law attaches severe penalties to consecrating or receiving episcopal consecration without a pontifical mandate.
Canon 1387 provides:
“Both the Bishop who, without a pontifical mandate, consecrates a person a Bishop, and the one who receives the consecration from him, incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.”
Latae sententiae means the penalty is incurred by the fact of the act (not only after later confirmation by a tribunal).
Pius XII likewise described the Church’s response to consecrations done “contrary to right and law,” emphasizing automatic excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See “in a special way,” incurred by both consecrator and irresponsibly consecrated recipient.
A key nuance in Church law is that the Church can condemn an act as illicit (against law and discipline) without denying the sacramental reality in every respect.
The 2011 dicastery explanation notes that although certain prohibitions apply to the excommunicated person, acts “derived from the power of order” in those circumstances “would be valid.”
In other words: the Church guards unity and discipline (licitness, communion, governance) while also addressing practical consequences of excommunication for ministerial and juridical acts.
Canon 332 teaches that the Roman Pontiff obtains full and supreme power through acceptance of legitimate election (tied to episcopal character/consecration).
And canon 375 frames bishops’ pastoral office as requiring communion with the head and college—again linking the sacrament to lawful exercise of teaching/governing.
The Church teaches that liturgy must not become “anyone’s private property,” and that Christ’s faithful have a right that ecclesiastical authority regulate the sacred liturgy so it does not drift into arbitrary control.
Pius XII further states that bishops have the duty to watch the exact observance of sacred worship canons, and that private individuals may not decide for themselves in matters bound up with Church discipline and unity.
Traditionis custodes explicitly places authority for regulating 1962-Missal celebrations in the diocesan bishop’s hands.
It states that:
This means “Latin Mass rights” are juridically structured as authorized permissions within dioceses, not as an entitlement to self-authorization.
A rescript confirming implementation of Traditionis custodes clarifies that some dispensations are “reserved… to the Apostolic See,” including:
It also states that the Dicastery exercises Holy See authority in these cases and supervises observance.
For dioceses where groups exist that celebrate under the pre-1970 Missal, Traditionis custodes requires designation of places for the faithful to gather, explicitly stating that the bishop should do this “(not… in parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes)”.
The accompanying Responsa ad dubia explains that the exclusion of parish churches is intended to affirm the celebration is a limited concession and “not part of the ordinary life of the parish community.”
It then answers a question about whether the bishop can ask for a dispensation to allow celebration in the parish church: the answer is affirmative, but only if it is established that it is impossible to use another church/oratory/chapel—assessed carefully—and the permission should not be integrated into the parish Mass schedule.
Because Traditionis custodes ties authorization to the diocesan bishop (as moderator/guardian of diocesan liturgical life), the question becomes: can an illicitly consecrated person be the competent juridical authority?
The Church’s logic about hierarchical communion directly blocks this.
A scholarly compilation summarizing Church teaching on illegitimate episcopal consecrations notes that those outside hierarchical communion are not invested with the juridical powers corresponding to these offices and cannot perform valid acts of authentic magistery and governance.
Coupled with the dicastery’s teaching that illicit episcopal consecrations break communion with the Roman Pontiff, and canon 375’s insistence that governance/teaching functions are only exercised in hierarchical communion, the practical implication is: