This is what I get when I procrastinate…
Peter K beat me to it.
He’s right on all three counts. That decree from the Bishop of Gaylord is a complete joke founded on… let it be said… a lie. There can be some discussion of the early practice of different ancient churches regarding orientation of worship (… not much discussion, mind you…) but using GIRM 299 like that… that’s brazen. I’ve written about 299 many times. (Esp. HERE) Why the strong word “lie”? Because even the Congregation for Divine Worship explained that the English translation used by the USCCB (then endlessly parroted by bishops in their attempts to stomp out ad orientem worship) was wrong. The Congregation even had to explain the Latin because, apparently, the brain trust of the USCCB at the time didn’t get it right. They were either too ignorant to get it right, or they purposely got it wrong. However, once Rome explained it, clearly, to continue to use the bad translation is, effectively, to lie.
A fine example of a decree that can have no legal force, because it is premised on several factual errors.
1. The practice of “versus populum” was not “restored,” because the original and authentic tradition was “ad orientem”; it’s not like that was a deviation that had to be corrected.
2. As numerous authors have explained, the Latin of no. 299 of the GIRM does NOT mean that Mass must be celebrated toward the people whenever possible. It means the altar should be freestanding so that it can be incensed all around, and so that Mass *may* be celebrated versus populum. Just do a search for GIRM 299 at Fr. Z’s site and you’ll get the nitty-gritty.
3. Most importantly, a bishop’s local law cannot trump universal law, and the universal law clearly allows (indeed, presupposes) Mass ad orientem. For the same reason, a local bishop cannot mandate communion in the hand, when communion on the tongue is still permitted, indeed is the universal norm.
— Peter Kwasniewski (@DrKwasniewski) October 11, 2026
GIRM 299:
Altare maius exstruatur a pariete seiunctum, ut facile circumiri et in eo celebratio versus populum peragi possit, quod expedit ubicumque possibile sit.
ACCURATE LITERAL VERSION
The main altar should be built separated from the wall, which is useful wherever it is possible, so that it can be easily walked around and a celebration toward the people can be carried out.
USCCB’s BAD TRANSLATION
In every church there should ordinarily be a fixed, dedicated altar, which should be freestanding to allow the ministers to walk around it easily and Mass to be celebrated facing the people, which is desirable whenever possible….
SSPX, necessity. More documented proof.
While for years those who wished to reform the Church have played a long game, hoping that with enough ambiguity and lack of clarification that eventually tradition and the teachings of Jesus and the Church will become so watered down and forgotten that anything can be accomplished, they know they have essentially failed.
It is no secret our young priests and many faithful are simply waiting for this generation to die. Holding on to tradition trying to preserve the ember so the next generation can fan it back into flame. We all know they are dying. They know they are dying and have lost.
So I believe what we are seeing, and will sadly see for the next few years are the death throes of the “spirit” of Vatican II, and a dying animal is a dangerous one. These bishops and cardinals who for a short while longer have the power and control will do everything they can to start documenting into (false)law all of their ideas and dreams of what they envisioned Vatican II would become. They will no longer hide or pretend. Their true colors will show and they will gladly desecrate the Church with their heterodox ideals.