Skip to main content

SSPX.ca: Bishop Roche and Summorum Pontificum ... or this does not bode well for the 'Ecclesia Dei' Communities

 +
JMJ

 With the transfer of the "Ecclesia Dei" communities (e.g. FSSP, IBP, ICK et al) to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, they have been thrown into the swamp.

When under the defunct auspices of the PCED, there was a degree of organizational isolation and the cultural gap between was bridged by clergy at least familiar and comfortable with the perspective that arrives from the Tridentine Mass.

That bridge is now cast down, the moat has been filled, the protectors are gone and the hordes are now ready to invade.

... perhaps a little melodramatic ... perhaps not.

We will see in a few weeks which way that wind of iconclastry blows.

P^3

Courtesy of SSPX.ca 

 

Bishop Roche and Summorum Pontificum

July 02, 2021
Source: FSSPX Spirituality

On May 27, 2021, Pope Francis appointed Msgr. Arthur Roche as Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, to replace Cardinal Robert Sarah, who had resigned on February 20 due to the age restriction.

Aged 71, Msgr. Roche is from Yorkshire in the United Kingdom. He was appointed secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship in 2012, by Benedict XVI. He was thus the collaborator of Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera until 2014, then of Cardinal Sarah.

In La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana of May 27, Luisella Scrosati sees in Msgr. Roche an “anti-Sarah”: “It will be difficult to find in Roche an ardent defender of the old liturgy and of the right of the faithful and priests to be able to take advantage of the ‘never abrogated,’ Missal, according to the expression of the Motu Proprio.”

“Roche's generosity towards the sensitivity of the faithful and his justice with regard to their rights have already become clear in his response to the dispute between Bishop Richard F. Stika and one of the faithful of his diocese concerning communion in the hand. Roche had in substance defended the right of the bishop to shred all the authoritative statements of the Church on the matter, including those of the Congregation of which he was the secretary, and those of Pope Benedict XVI, under whose pontificate the now ex-secretary showed a more traditional sensitivity.”

The Italian journalist continues: “Roche, admirer of Piero Marini [former master of pontifical liturgical celebrations, who was a secretary of Bishop Annibale Bugnini, the main architect of the post-conciliar liturgical reform. Editor's note] and Andrea Grillo, was in fact the thorn in Sarah's side and represented internal opposition to the incumbent prefect. And, in due time, he has received the mission which was Sarah's.”

And Luisella Scrosati then connects this appointment to the announcement of a forthcoming modification of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum: “The intervention announced on the extraordinary form of the Roman rite appears then as a direct attack against the line imprinted by Benedict XVI on the liturgy.”

The Paix liturgique letter no. 798, of May 25, 2021, [English no. 116] presents the announcement of this modification in these terms: “Last Pentecost Monday [May 24], the first day of the meeting of the Italian Bishops’ Conference (the CEI)…, once the reporters were out of the assembly hall, the pope broached a topic that is a matter of consensus among many Italian bishops: detestation of Summorum Pontificum.”

“Francis confirmed the upcoming release of a document he had been urged to put together to ‘reinterpret’ Benedict XVI’s motu proprio. Indeed, its publication was long in coming, because the document in question seems to have met with objections and delays, particularly from Cardinal Ladaria and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. They pointed out that it would cause troubles and an unmanageable opposition throughout the world.”

“Nevertheless, the Secretariat of State has apparently been pushing for the release of this text. Its basic terms appear to be the following: those communities that celebrate according to the older form would be able to continue to do so; on the other hand, from now on diocesan priests would have to obtain a specific permission.”

“Clearly this document, which is inapplicable in many countries including France, will first of all be symbolic: to turn the celebration of the traditional Mass from a right into a tolerated exception.”

In the next letter [no.799 of May 28; English no.117], Paix liturgique compares the present situation to that of 40 or 50 years ago: “The ‘official’ Church today has nothing in common with the solid machine it was in the first decades after the Council. She has been bled dry in terms of priests and religious. The number of seminarians, in fact the number of seminaries themselves, ever decreases.”

“Practicing Catholics are getting ever older—and ever more spaced out in the pews, even without any ‘social distancing’ health measures. Logically enough, this has precipitated a catastrophic financial situation in a good number of dioceses. Add the fallout of what is called the “health crisis,” which has caused about 30% of the remaining parishioners to disappear.”

And to point out in passing: “Here is a very revealing recent event: the bishops of France and elsewhere have foolishly extended government-imposed ‘sanitary measures’ to Eucharistic Communion by forbidding Communion on the tongue. As a result, a certain number of the faithful who respect the Sacrament have left ‘ordinary’ churches to go and receive the Holy Eucharist in a worthy manner at traditional celebrations.”

According to the Paix liturgique letter, all this would make the motu proprio as revised and corrected by Francis much more difficult to apply.

As FSSPX.News article on June 3 prudently acknowledges: “It appears, according to Roman sources, that the subject of the conditions of the celebration of the Traditional Mass is well under discussion. But it would be reckless to risk saying more about the content or about a publication date of a text..”

“If, as one might fear, a limitation were made to the letter of the motu proprio of Benedict XVI, it would be abusive. And since it would be directed against the common good of the Church, null in itself: there is no valid law against the common good according to the doctrine of St. Thomas. Instead, the Tridentine Mass is at the heart of the common good of the Church.”

Even if the Society of Saint Pius X should not feel concerned, it would deeply regret such a limitation, because it would be a step back on the way back to Tradition which would delay the solution of the crisis of the Church initiated by the Second Vatican Council and its calamitous reforms, in particular in the field of the liturgy.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles.  From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.

America Magazine: Why liturgy is not a space for self-expression

 + JMJ Introduction I subscribed to Jesuit Review America Magazine in order to improve my perspective on the crisis of the Church. At first, I found that I had a hard time reading through the articles that caught my attention.  Actually, at best, I didn't get further than a few sentences.  Mostly due to demands on what time I have left on this Good Earth. Then a title caught my eye in a latest article ... someone is saying that the Liturgy is not a space for self-expression.  Then there's the Performative Piety?  What does this mean? What is Performative Piety? I had a sense that "Performative Piety" is the practice of making external acts of piety to be seen by others and Matthew 6:1 (link) confirms this thought. Let's break down the Knox translation: Be sure you do not perform your acts of piety before men ,  for them to watch ;  if you do that,  you have no title to a reward from your Father who is in heaven. If you stopped after the first ph...

SSPXasia Timeline

+ JMJ The SSPXasia website has an excellent compilation of documents.  One day I may try to fuse it with my own chronicle project. P^3 https://sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/Part_I/ (1987) June 29: Ordination Sermon of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre July 8: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger July 28: Letter of Cardinal Ratzinger to Archbishop Lefebvre October 1: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger October ...

Canonical Mission and State of Emergency - A Response to Mr. John Salza - Part B

 +  JMJ  I was trying to think of a way to map out the time course I discussed in Part A of this article.  Early this morning it came to me that this is more about obedience and duty than canon law.  As is my wont, I mapped out my thoughts (see image) to draw linkages between the core concepts. My conclusion is that, at least subjectively, Archbishop Lefebvre had sufficient information to make good decisions concerning whether or not he was obliged to obey.  I know that the Jesuits, some Sedevacantists and the priests that left over the years will not agree with my thoughts. So be it.  The core pieces of information include: Attacks against the SSPX were launched because they kept the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar understanding of the Truths of the Faith. The authorities in the Church were willing to go against the laws of the Church. The same authorities encouraged the various dangers to the Faith embedded in popular interpretations of ambiguo...