 |
| Picture by the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, available from http://fssp.org. |
We've had almost a year to let the dust settle after Pope Francis issued Traditiones Custodes, and perhaps now we can put the motu proprio in context.
First, we know that Tridentine life for the faithful is more constrained for those not served by the SSPX or Ecclesia Dei congregations. The FSSP was wise to get the Pope's words in writing.
Second, we also know that the fight is far from over, but as Bishop Fellay mentioned, the response to the SSPX and Trads is disproportionate to their numbers.
P^3
APOSTOLIC LETTER
ISSUED "MOTU PROPRIO"
BY THE SUPREME PONTIFF
FRANCIS
«TRADITIONIS CUSTODES»
On the Use of the Roman Liturgy
Prior to the Reform of 1970
Official translation
Guardians of the tradition, the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome constitute the visible principle and foundation of the unity of their particular Churches. [1] Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, through the proclamation of the Gospel and by means of the celebration of the Eucharist, they govern the particular Churches entrusted to them. [2]
Tradicat: I think the question arises, which tradition are they protecting? That which has emerged in the past 50 odd years since the end of V2 or ... that which preceded this era of decline and confusion?
In order to promote the concord and unity of the Church, with paternal solicitude towards those who in any region adhere to liturgical forms antecedent to the reform willed by the Vatican Council II, my Venerable Predecessors, Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI, granted and regulated the faculty to use the Roman Missal edited by John XXIII in 1962. [3] In this way they intended “to facilitate the ecclesial communion of those Catholics who feel attached to some earlier liturgical forms” and not to others. [4]
Tradicat: There are two points here that merit a deeper read.
First the 'reform' willed by the Fathers of V2, compared with what emerged from Archbishop Bugnini's workshop. The gap between what was desired and what was delivered is so great that it will have to wait until I have time to write part b.
Second, absent is the admission of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI concerning the Tridentine Mass in Summorum Pontificum. Namely that it was "... never abrogated ...". (Link:Summorum Pontificum)
In line with the initiative of my Venerable Predecessor Benedict XVI to invite the bishops to assess the application of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum three years after its publication, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith carried out a detailed consultation of the bishops in 2020. The results have been carefully considered in the light of experience that has matured during these years.
Tradicat:I'm not certain if this Motu Proprio is in anything other than a temporal line with his predecessors. The 1982, 1988 and 2007/11 motu proprio's provided for expanded use of the Tridentine Liturgy. Pope Francis explicitly does not.
At this time, having considered the wishes expressed by the episcopate and having heard the opinion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I now desire, with this Apostolic Letter, to press on ever more in the constant search for ecclesial communion. Therefore, I have considered it appropriate to establish the following:
Tradicat: So why is the question of ecclesial communion of between 1 and 2 million of the 1.345 billion faithful Catholics ( 0.15%) so pressing that a motu proprio is needed to address a desire to attend the Tridentine Mass? Putting this in the context of the German 'synodal path' is ludicrous. What isn't there a Motu Proprio about maintaining communion with the Germans?
Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.
Tradicat: Wow a direct correction of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. Of course, there is some merit to erasing the legal fiction of there being two 'lex orandi'. I believe we can conclude that there is now a clear dividing line between the led ordandi of the Second Vatican Council and what came before.
I will back up. If the Novus Ordo Missae is in conformity with Vatican Council II and is therefore the lex ordandi of the Roman Rite. Where does this put the lex orandi of the Tridentine Mass? Was lex crededi do the two rites invoke? Is there a difference between them? If so, what has changed? Does this mean that, as the Novus Ordo Missae is a stripped down version with a bunch of 'banal' fabrications, the lex credidi is now reduced to the same miserable level?
Art. 2. It belongs to the diocesan bishop, as moderator, promoter, and guardian of the whole liturgical life of the particular Church entrusted to him, [5] to regulate the liturgical celebrations of his diocese. [6] Therefore, it is his exclusive competence to authorize the use of the 1962 Roman Missal in his diocese, according to the guidelines of the Apostolic See.
Reference 6 calls cites two canons:
Can. 375 §1. Bishops, who by divine institution succeed to the place of the Apostles through the Holy Spirit who has been given to them, are constituted pastors in the Church, so that they are teachers of doctrine, priests of sacred worship, and ministers of governance.
Tradicat: No problem here :-)
Can. 392 §1. Since he must protect the unity of the universal Church, a bishop is bound to promote the common discipline of the whole Church and therefore to urge the observance of all ecclesiastical laws.
Tradicat: I think most have realised that there is an uneven application of this canon. To be explicit, those flaunting the laws, both Church and Divine, are left unpunished, while the Trads that simply want to believe as Catholics believed before the Second Vatican Council are punished.
§2. He is to exercise vigilance so that abuses do not creep into ecclesiastical discipline, especially regarding the ministry of the word, the celebration of the sacraments and sacramentals, the worship of God and the veneration of the saints, and the administration of goods.
Tradicat: It is interesting that I have witnessed a Archbishop invoke this canon in order to limit the Tridentine Mass. So they regard the TLM as an abuse, but when it comes to abuses such as 'liturgical dance' etc they simply ignore or permit it. Would they would be as encouraging to the Trads.
To quote an Archbishop speaking to a colleague:
How does one describe the African Catholic liturgy?
Whatever can move does.
Art. 3. The bishop of the diocese in which until now there exist one or more groups that celebrate according to the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970:
§ 1. is to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs;
Tradicat:Funny, the SSPX does not deny the validity and to an extent the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo. It's promulgated, but that doesn't make it a good liturgy. See point 7 in the SSPX doctrinal preamble (link).
§ 2. is to designate one or more locations where the faithful adherents of these groups may gather for the eucharistic celebration (not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes);
Tradicat: This is interesting in that I read two limitations. First, that Trads can have a church for the Mass . . . but what about other sacraments. I think this is a foreboding. Second, no more personal parishes or the use of parochial churches. So basically, not official status and no comingling with the non-Trads.
§ 3. to establish at the designated locations the days on which eucharistic celebrations are permitted using the Roman Missal promulgated by Saint John XXIII in 1962. [7] In these celebrations the readings are proclaimed in the vernacular language, using translations of the Sacred Scripture approved for liturgical use by the respective Episcopal Conferences;
Tradicat: Aah, can't have the gospel in latin because ... the faithful won't understand? They are illiterate and can't read their missals. I don't think that is it. I think the use of the approved translations are to avoid the hearing of the Gospel as it was preached before the Council.
§ 4. to appoint a priest who, as delegate of the bishop, is entrusted with these celebrations and with the pastoral care of these groups of the faithful. This priest should be suited for this responsibility, skilled in the use of the Missale Romanum antecedent to the reform of 1970, possess a knowledge of the Latin language sufficient for a thorough comprehension of the rubrics and liturgical texts, and be animated by a lively pastoral charity and by a sense of ecclesial communion. This priest should have at heart not only the correct celebration of the liturgy, but also the pastoral and spiritual care of the faithful;
Tradicat: Nothing wrong with this. A little hard to find priests that meet the description but a laudable goal.
§ 5. to proceed suitably to verify that the parishes canonically erected for the benefit of these faithful are effective for their spiritual growth, and to determine whether or not to retain them;
Tradicat: no comment.
§ 6. to take care not to authorize the establishment of new groups.
Tradicat: Interesting. Thou shalt not grow.
Art. 4. Priests ordained after the publication of the present Motu Proprio, who wish to celebrate using the Missale Romanum of 1962, should submit a formal request to the diocesan Bishop who shall consult [Tradicat: consult was an amendment] the Apostolic See before granting this authorization.
Tradicat:This flies in the face of Summorum Pontificum. There is something about the Tridentine Mass that is a burr under the saddle of some churchmen (and women).
Art. 5. Priests who already celebrate according to the Missale Romanum of 1962 should request from the diocesan Bishop the authorization to continue to enjoy this faculty.
Tradicat:
Art. 6. Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life, erected by the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, fall under the competence of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life.
Tradicat: A logical point, no gap will be tolerated between the Trads and the rest of the Church. Resistance is futile.
Art. 7. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, for matters of their particular competence, exercise the authority of the Holy See with respect to the observance of these provisions.
Tradicat:Now I am willing to bet they start to tinker with the Tridentine Mass even more than Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI did with his suggestion to modify the liturgical calendar.
Art. 8. Previous norms, instructions, permissions, and customs that do not conform to the provisions of the present Motu Proprio are abrogated.
Tradicat: Some that this meant that the Tridentine Mass was abrogated. Not the case.
Everything that I have declared in this Apostolic Letter in the form of Motu Proprio, I order to be observed in all its parts, anything else to the contrary notwithstanding, even if worthy of particular mention, and I establish that it be promulgated by way of publication in “L’Osservatore Romano”, entering immediately in force and, subsequently, that it be published in the official Commentary of the Holy See, Acta Apostolicae Sedis.
Given at Rome, at Saint John Lateran, on 16 July 2021, the liturgical Memorial of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, in the ninth year of Our Pontificate.
FRANCIS
[1] Cfr Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church “ Lumen Gentium”, 21 november 1964, n. 23 AAS 57 (1965) 27.
[2] Cfr Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church “ Lumen Gentium”, 21 november 1964, n. 27: AAS 57 (1965) 32; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree concerning the pastoral office of bishops in the Church “ Christus Dominus”, 28 october 1965, n. 11: AAS 58 (1966) 677-678; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 833.
[3] Cfr John Paul II, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “ Ecclesia Dei”, 2 july 1988: AAS 80 (1988) 1495-1498; Benedict XVI, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “ Summorum Pontificum”, 7 july 2007: AAS 99 (2007) 777-781; Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “ Ecclesiae unitatem”, 2 july 2009: AAS 101 (2009) 710-711.
[4] John Paul II, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “ Ecclesia Dei”, 2 july 1988, n. 5: AAS 80 (1988) 1498.
[5] Cfr Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Costitution on the sacred liturgy “ Sacrosanctum Concilium”, 4 december 1963, n. 41: AAS 56 (1964) 111; Caeremoniale Episcoporum, n. 9; Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament, Instruction on certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist “ Redemptionis Sacramentum”, 25 march 2004, nn. 19-25: AAS 96 (2004) 555-557.
[6] Cfr CIC, can. 375, § 1; can. 392.
[7] Cfr Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decree “ Quo magis” approving seven Eucharistic Prefaces for the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite, 22 february 2020, and Decree “ Cum sanctissima” on the liturgical celebration in honour of Saints in the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite, 22 february 2020: L’Osservatore Romano, 26 march 2020, p. 6.
Comments
Post a Comment