Francis Pontifical Priority: Stop Traditional Latin Mass

 

Arthur Cardinal Roche, the failed former bishop of Leeds who was booted upstairs to Rome to get him out of the way (look how well that strategy has worked!), has made it absolutely clear what the priorities of this papacy are. Hammering tradition.

Roche has published a rescript which reserves permission for the use of a parish church for celebrations of the 1962 Missal to the Dicastery he heads. The Rescript makes reference to Canon 87.1 which states that bishops may lift the obligations of universal law for the good of souls in their diocese: this no longer applies, as the matter is ‘reserved to the Holy See’. This does seem to somewhat contradict Traditiones custodes art #2 which states: "It belongs to the diocesan bishop, as moderator, promoter, and guardian of the whole liturgical life of the particular Church entrusted to him, to regulate the liturgical celebrations of his diocese."

Vatican watchers knew this was coming, because we had seen the rather bizarre spectacle of Cardinal Roche responding to direct criticism from Canon Lawyer J.D. Flynn in, of all places, the rather obscure blog Where Peter Is (where I am noted as a Prominent lay traditionalist and reactionary - quite proud of that one!).

Flynn had stated that Roche had suffered criticism because Traditiones custodes had arrogated power to him not due to his office. Roche clearly went to Pope Francis and Francis backed him.

The rescript followed letters sent from Cardinal Roche to several U.S. bishops, in which he sought to argue that the power to issue the dispensation regarding parish church buildings was reserved to his dicastery already, under the norms of Traditionis — despite the general legal prerogative of diocesan bishops to dispense from universal laws, unless the power is explicitly reserved to Rome.

Although Roche initially insisted that he already had the implicit power to reserve dispensing any of Traditionis’ norms, sources close to the Dicastery for Divine Worship told The Pillar he decided to request the rescript after receiving advice from canonist friends.

A key project of the Francis pontificate has been the reorientation of the Roman curia towards a role of service and collaboration with diocesan bishops. The pope has, in his speeches, writings, and legal documents, repeatedly stressed his desire to see the governing center of gravity shift away from the office blocks of the via della Conciliazione.

Recognizing the apostolic role and authority of the bishop in his own diocese, Francis wrote in his apostolic constitution Predicate evangelium, that the Roman curia “is not set between the Pope and the Bishops, but is at the service of both.”

A key purpose of his curial reform, Francis wrote, is “in the spirit of a ‘sound decentralization,’ to leave to the competence of Bishops the authority to resolve, in the exercise of ‘their proper task as teachers’ and pastors, those issues with which they are familiar.”

This general premise of “sound decentralization” and “service” was also present in the text of Traditionis custodes. That motu proprio’s incipit title comes from its opening sentence which recognizes bishops as “guardians of the tradition” who “govern the particular Churches entrusted to them.”

All this rhetoric seems the direct opposite of the way we have seen Traditiones custodes implemented. It also brings to mind the way the Synod on Synodality relegated bishops to secretaries, gathering information from their dioceses to present to Rome.

Despite all of this, there are still people (like Where Peter Is)defending Pope Francis, but exchanges with these people leaves me with the impression that they simply don't know the facts. That or they refuse to accept them, choosing only to focus on the positive things the Pope says. Those who support Pope Francis & Cardinal Roche's draconian attack on faithful Catholic families must first demonise them, portraying them as sedevacantist or troublesome in some way. In reality, all my experience is that Catholics who love the traditional Mass are those most obedient and loyal, those who most love the Church and the Pope. These facts make this action all the more mendacious and reprehensible. Also, it has been demonstrated, all the evidence is that the information which led to the Pope writing Traditiones custodes had been manipulated and, in fact, misrepresented the position.

Take the incredibly toxic Rupnik story - a confirmed mass abuser - is cosseted, protected & promoted by the Pope himself: He is OK ...Perhaps this is because he doesn't say the Latin Mass? Increasingly, it seems the worst sin in Francis Church is being faithful.

A further 15 new victims have come forward to testify about Rupnik (12 women and 3 men) who was excommunicated, then had his excommunication overturned, possibly by Pope Francis' direct intervention, as the matter is reserved to the Holy See & would be down to Ladaria or the Pope and Ladaria had just imposed the excommunication, so it is hard to see how it was him! The Holy See is remaining tight lipped, which just makes you think it was the pope. Also, lifting the excommunication means repentance must be shown, but Rupnik refuses to respond...Doesn't seem much like repentance to me!

Even after all this was known, Pope Francis invited Rupnik to speak at a retreat.

Because being a serial sex abuser is no big deal, as Pope Francis teaches, sins of the flesh "are no big deal".

Wanting to follow the teachings of Benedict XVI however, is banned. Attending the Mass of the Saints? Banned. Serial abuse - no problem. Latin Mass - problem. Gay Mass? - no problem. 1962 Missal? Absolutely not.

And the dismay with this goes way beyond just those who love the Latin Mass. Indeed I think any reasonable, thinking Catholic would wonder at the vehemence and determination being directed at stamping out beautiful and powerful liturgy. Not liturgical abuse or erroneous teaching - that's all fine to continue with - Latin Mass is the problem.

How does this fit with Pope Francis' consistent rhetoric about inclusion & accompaniment. How do we reconcile this with him taking the sacraments and even churches away from faithful Catholics?

I'm wondering if, in my own parish, we will be kicked out of the Church and forced to worship in the Church hall?

As a friend said to me today "All I know is, if we end up in the hall, our kids, when they’re old are going to remember Francis as the Pope who made us have Mass in the hall.. and the bishops and priests as the men who did nothing to help us."