Francis to Abolish Summorum Pontificorum?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximilian75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn’t mean they couldn’t be upset about it or petition the Pope for redress - I would be writing the Pope a letter myself letting him know how disappointed I was in such a bad decision on his part.

I meant up in arms as in being defiant and continuing to attend the EF even if it was being done illicitly.
 
It wouldn’t be so traditional then.
Perhaps the “revised Latin Mass” is what it could be called
 
These rumors have been around for at least a few months now. Pope Francis certainly has the ability to revoke SP, but I personally doubt that he will. If anything, according to the original rumors, he intends to limit the TLM to chapels of the SSPX, but such would only occur after both the society’s regularization (or at least unilateral recognition on the part of Rome, something also rumored) and the death of Benedict XVI. In this case those attached to tradition still have little to fear in my opinion.

For one thing, regular TLM goers who live near a now newly regularized SSPX chapel will simply switch their membership over there. Eventually this would cause some growth in the SSPX which would necessitate more chapels. With regard to other now formerly TLM parishes that aren’t in the vicinity of an SSPX chapel, I imagine that pastors would begin offering a more traditional OF Mass with Latin, chant, near exclusive use of the Canon and likely the “ad orientem” posture. In the end I don’t think there will be much of an issue. Besides, while Pope Francis has expressed confusion over those who are interested in the TLM, he has not to my knowledge expressed any desire to hurt the millions of Catholics who support the traditional Mass or to instigate the schism which he knows would likely result. As a side note, have any of you seen the OF Masses that he says in Rome? For the most part they’re filled with reverence, traditional chant and a nice mix of Latin and Italian. I’m just going to give him the benefit of the doubt and pray for the best.
 
I meant up in arms as in being defiant and continuing to attend the EF even if it was being done illicitly.
I’m sure a few people would do that, but most would complain and continue on, perhaps grumbling
 
. What I DO think that the Pope is likely to do is to revise the Traditional Latin Mass, which it hasn’t seen for more than 50 years. Change some of the prayers, have it use a common lectionary with the Mainstream Vernacular Mass which is an act ecumenicalism, bring girls aboard as altar servers, possible examples given.

But getting rid of the TLM, I don’t think that is even being considered.
What I’d like to see would be a new Franciscan Mass.

Take the suggestions you just made, take the best elements of the OF, as well as things which were pulled from the EF when the Pauline Mass was created, and synthesize the two into a new form of the Mass. Then suppress both the EF/Tridentine and the OF/Pauline and promulgate the new Franciscan Mass.

That would take a TON of work however, and I just don’t see it happening.
 
This six month old article is really bizarre speculation. Francis offering to restrict the TLM to the SSPX as a way to lure them back into the Church? I do not believe for a minute that Francis would try something so risky.
 
I personally wish the TLM would have stayed the OF and they simply revised the rubrics to it - like allowing it to be translated and said in English, expanding the Bible readings, things like that.

I do agree that I wish they would have taken a page from the Eastern book on this.

But alas, God ordained for the things to happen how they happened, and the OF is here to stay at least for the foreseeable future.

The coming to fruition of the OF was in large part the consummation of the 20th century Liturgical Movement.

IMO, I see both good and bad fruit which resulted from it — I’d like to think more good than bad, but in the end only God knows.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, and how would those priestly order who only say the Latin Mass fit into this? Would the FSSP and the ICK be merged with the SSPX? That would be rather disruptive since the FSSP is originally a split off from the SSPX when they went south.
 
Why intinction? I, personally, have no problem with the common cup, and with the protestantization of intinction (At least in America), I dont think it would go over well.
 
I came across intinction for the first time at a Catholic college last year. It was quite interesting. Everyone once in a while some visitor would get mad and tell the chaplain that it was not allowed. But then the chaplain would explain that it is allowed. :roll_eyes:
 
ive seen it at a lutheran and methodist church near me for multiple pastorates in a row, and only at 1 Catholic church, a state away from me.
 
To the OP, of course the pope can change any discipline, not just those involving the liturgy. So I do not understand the initial question. Did you think one pope can bind his predecessors in matters of discipline? That cannot happen.

As to the prudence, likelihood, wisdom or reality of this, then we have to go back the misnomer Life Site News which is no longer about life, nor is news. It is a website.
 
Last edited:
Are you suggesting changing ALL of the Masses to conform with this, or only the Latin Masses?

The thing is that a lot of people really don’t like change. If the priest is suddenly turned around after 45 years or so of facing the people, there is going to be a lot of grumbling, ditto for parents who are proud of their altar girl daughters, etc.
 
I know you don’t want to hear this, but LSN is FAR from a reliable source.

If the Fishwrap (National ‘catholic’ Reporter, NCR) is a garbage far left rag, then LifeSiteNews (LSN) is the opposite side of the same coin - a garbage far right rag.

The Pope has the authority to modify or suppress SP, but I highly doubt he would.
I wouldn’t say LifeSiteNews and the National ‘catholic’ Reporter are unreliable. But they both have an agenda. I would argue that both of them don’t publish fiction, but stretch the truth from time to time.

Either way, my guess is that this article actually might have some truth to it because a number of bishops who are die-hard Pope Francis supporters would like to ban the Extraordinary Form, esp the “St Gallen Mafia” bishops who tried to get Francis elected in 2005.

God Bless
 
Last edited:
a number of bishops who are die-hard Pope Francis supporters would like to ban the Extraordinary Form, esp the “St Gallen Mafia” bishops who tried to get Francis elected in 2005.
I miss the face palm emoji.
 
40.png
phil19034:
a number of bishops who are die-hard Pope Francis supporters would like to ban the Extraordinary Form, esp the “St Gallen Mafia” bishops who tried to get Francis elected in 2005.
I miss the face palm emoji.
I wasn’t saying anything derogatory. Cardinal Danneels himself called their group the “mafia” at St. Gallen.


https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...lization_is_disobedient_and_proud_says_bishop


http://cathcon.blogspot.com/2013/06/cardinal-hits-out-at-latin-mass.html

I was simply mentioning that a number of the Pope’s advisers/mentors are against the Latin mass, including the deceased Cardinal Martini

Therefore, the article MIGHT have SOME truth to it. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
Last edited:
Progressives loathe the Traditional Latin Mass. I believe that it is solely by the grace of God that it still exists today.
 
How can you not want to discuss a hysterical, unreliable source, while desiring to discuss the hysterical unreliable rumor they have regurgitated?

The Church is much stronger if such dissenting, murmuring voices are disregarded and the faithful submit in simple obedience and prayer.
 
A confessor and spiritual advisor I used to go to regularly was trained as a Canon lawyer and served in that capacity for our archdiocese until he retired. He said that there is kind of an unwritten rule that Popes try to avoid reversing their predecessors. It makes The Church look internally inconsistent and indecisive, lowering the perceived credibility of the office. They can indeed do it, but there is a bias toward avoiding it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top