Francis to Abolish Summorum Pontificorum?

[commenter]

commenter:

Johann_du_Toit:

I detect a hostility to Pope Francis on Lifesite which goes much further than simple prudential criticism of his actions and words.

If a website is hostile to Church authority figures, and also supports the Latin Mass, people tend to connect those two things.

Unfortunately, you are probably right. On the other hand, there are some I have seen here who are as traditionally-minded as anyone, demonstrate charity in all they do. There is no better antidote to poisoned examples than saintly examples.

True. I don’t mean that the Latin Mass affects the person who attends it with hostility - I go myself, on occasion - but that they are unfairly and inaccurately perceived as such by outsiders. If website A trashes popes and bishops, and also affirms the Latin Mass, people lump together “all those Traditional Catholics”. That is why I never refer to or quote those websites even if they happen to have an article I agree with.

 

[LoyalViews]

The real sad point here is that a Catholic is expected to adjust to a Latin Mass - which was never the aim of VII, nor the way our faith should operate. A layman is expected to be frightened by the tradition of his own Church. But, this is what it is. It’s only been fifty-five years with a vernacular Mass.

 

[stpurl]

The amount of disinformation and misinformation out there is staggering. As you note, the whole current Mass of Pope Paul VI as it is practiced today in the majority of U.S. parishes is not at all what the council itself voted on or called for; the first 40 some years of the translation recently corrected were marred by the poverty of that translation coupled with a disregard for the rubrics and an upheaval mirrored in the ‘spirit of the 60s’ society, and we aren’t even simply working in a spirit of companionship and "Maybe we were too quick to throw away things we thought of as ‘old’, maybe we complained we didn’t understand not out of a supposed wish for simplicity and ‘back to the roots’ (which, in any case, was never accurately carried out in either instance), but out of a misplaced understanding that instead of making things ‘modern’ (because much of that ‘modern thought’ is now as outdated as the supposed ‘old Mass’ was thought to be), we needed to be exploring the treasure of the Mass in all its nobility and ‘otherness’ more deeply.

The other day my 88 year old mother mentioned to me that through her youth and early adulthood, there was always a special atmosphere in any Catholic Church anywhere–a ‘sacred’ sense. A special sense. Even one’s Protestant friends who might come to visit remarked on it. . . everything from the stained glass, the music, the incense, the vestments, the Latin, stirred all the five senses, lifted people’s minds ‘upward’, made one think of the ‘otherness’ and the grandeur and otherworldly being of God. But for the last few decades, she said, "That has gone’. Some think they were just ‘externals’, but they weren’t! Oh mind you, she said, "There are still churches with lovely stained glass. There are churches full of smiling, friendly greeters. There is all kinds of music, announcements full of "groups’ and meetings and get-togethers, ‘stand and greet your neighbor’. . .there are still homilies where one gets to hear talk about the gospel (and not so much talk about politics, though there’s plenty of that). . .but 'there’s just nothing ‘other’ there. It’s all just. . .us. No sense of the sacred, no sense really of God as though it was His House where we would come to worship Him. This is just like going down to the local town hall, having a gathering, chatting, coffee, settling some things that affect ‘the community’, and going home. Pleasant, utilitarian, and easily forgotten and above all, it’s all about US.

 

[twf]

You’re right in regards to the use of Latin, but the exercise of infallibility is much broader than the Pope speaking “ex cathedra” (an exceedingly rare event in Church history). Ecumenical Councils exercise the charism of infallibility. As does the college of bishops spread across the world, united to the Pope, exercising the ordinary Magisterium: the consistent teaching of the bishops in every time and place.

 

[Entwhistler]

True. Bishops can speak infallibly when they teach something that the Church teaches on Faith and Morals. However, I always thought that Ecumenical Councils were infallible as long as the Pope gives his consent to it if they break new ground… Otherwise, it would just be a bunch of bishops (and Cardinals) speaking on something without the Pope.

 

[pnewton]

In any case, the language of the Mass is not a matter of faith or morals, whether spoken by a Pope or Ecumenical council. Disciplinary matters still should be adhered to by the disciples (it is right in the word) but it is not something that need stay static, or change.

 

[twf]

Yes, the Pope’s recognition is required, but the Council itself (pope and bishops) exercises infallibility, not the Pope alone.

 

[Johann_du_Toit]

I never suggested those who prefer the Latin Mass are hostile to the current Pope in the least. I am actually very traditional myself. I disagree with some of the Pope’s prudential judgments (Amoris Laetitia among them) but I recognize him as our legitimate Pope and continue to pray for him.

The tone of Lifesite’s articles go far beyond this however, and they post articles suggesting Pope Francis is a “dictator” and implying he is a Communist. A lot of the posters on the comments section also seem to believe that Benedict XVI never properly resigned, and that he is still Pope (some even believe all Popes since Pius XII are illegitimate pretenders). The commenters (and even some articles) also often refer to Pope Francis as “Pope Berdoglio” as opposed to his proper title.

Lifesite also has a tendency of supporting far right political candidates for offices simply because they are allegedly “pro-life” such Marine Le Pen (even though she is pro-abortion) Donald Trump (whose side they seem to take whenever the President has a dispute with the Pope) and even worse, Roy Moore. I expressed my dismay at this, noting that Moore was dismissed for judicial misconduct TWICE, consorts with neo-Nazis and white Supremacists, and that there is ample evidence he is likely a pedophile. As a result I was banned from the comment section.

 

[Mary888]

They make sense against LGBTQ and abortion. They also say they sponsor lawsuits against institutions that force the gender agenda on families. But they are filled with gossip about the Vatican. I just don’t know why do they publish every story they hear about the Pope.

 

[runningdude]

I guess you have your opinion on this. I do not see how it is possible to read so closely in the mind of either Pope Benedict…

I mean, it had been widely reported by Vatican observers and insiders as that this was an important issue to Benedict. For example: Time Article

Among all of the things that were happening during Benedict’s

I believe you have answered your own question - because he adressed the issue at all!

Firstly, Summa Pontificate was issued under his own personal intiative. It build on work he started as Pope Jean Paul II’s head of the congregation for doctrine and faith.

He also worked to rebuild ties to tradtionalist alieniated by the new mass, for instance meeting with the SSPX within the first few months of his papacy (see linked article above), and eventually lifting the excommunications on their bishops. He all this while under intense criticism.

This is also work that he started under Jean Paul II, as Ecclesia Dei was written in part as a reaction to the SSPX’s unlawful ordinations and excommunications. Jean Paul recognized as valid the attachment to tradtional sentiments, and made provisions that the traditional mass not be unreasonably withheld.

Benedict worked to implement this policy, and expanded it under his own papacy. I really can only conclude that this issue mattered to him greatly.

I also cannot see how Francis could reverse this policy, without it being a rebuke of how his predecessors ministered to tradtionally-minded Catholics. The past two Popes’ efforts have led to a Latin Mass being available in nearly every dioceses. Every diocese that invested resources would be impacted. Francis would only reverse Summa Pontificate if he believed the church needed to move in a fundamentally different direction than the direction his predecessors took.

 

[commenter]

They make sense against LGBTQ and abortion. They also say they sponsor lawsuits against institutions that force the gender agenda on families. But they are filled with gossip about the Vatican. I just don’t know why do they publish every story they hear about the Pope.

Because gossip attracts readers.

Keep in mind LifeSiteNews is not a Catholic Church apostolate. Based on the model they and similar organizations have, the number of readers is the driving factor.

 

[Mary888]

I resisted giving them money. But they are on my mail allert list because of their crude depiction of cases of abuse in gender identity cases.
Some of their members are Catholic priests though.

 

[commenter]

I resisted giving them money. But they are on my mail allert list because of their crude depiction of cases of abuse in gender identity cases.
Some of their members are Catholic priests though.

You will find Catholic priests individually connected to many organizations, whether it be the New Age Religion, Call to Action, some quasi-fundamentalists, and many others. You can be sure those organizations put the names of individual priest members on the front page.

In 1960, most Catholics would not give credence to any religious media source that was not itself directly affiliated with the Catholic Church. One might argue that the National Catholic Reporter (which has priests) is “independent” so therefore they can see and speak more clearly than a media source that is approved by their diocese.

I disagree (perhaps I am a 1960 Catholic). Approved media sources have some problems but in general they are more reliable than the Wild Cards. Once you concede that “independent is better”, in the long run that leads to many other things you really, really don’t want.

 

[OraLabora]

I also cannot see how Francis could reverse this policy, without it being a rebuke of how his predecessors ministered to tradtionally-minded Catholics.

There is also, a middle ground. Between the black or white options of doing nothing or revoking, he could make changes, for instance clarifying grey areas (which SP most certainly has, such as what constitutes a “stable number” of faithful) or giving more authority to the bishop, or simply adding explanations to avoid misunderstandings such as happened with a religious order some time after SP was proclaimed.

He could easily make changes without repudiating the legacy of his predecessors. In effect this is what Benedict XVI did with respect to the more cautious indult Tridentine Masses of his predecessor, John Paul II.

Of course he could also decide in retrospect that the more cautious approach was the better one, and go back to it.

Until however, we see concrete action it all remains idle gossip.

 

[Mary888]

Thanks for the explanation. What about CNA (Catholic News Agency). I haven’t read much havoc against the Pope or spreading too much gossip. Are they like… officially affiliated?

 

[runningdude]

I am only responding to the absurd rumors that he is considering outright repeal of SP, which would leave no high level guidance on traditional ministry (and to the strange assertions that traditional Catholicism was not a priority in Benedict’s ministry). Revision and natural development of ministry to traditionally minded Christians is an entirely different matter.

Withdrawing SP or similar regulations at some future time might be possible if traditional ministry becomes sufficiently mature so as not need Vatican intervention, as the church prefers devolving decisions to the lowest competent authority when possible.

 

[commenter]

Thanks for the explanation. What about CNA (Catholic News Agency). I haven’t read much havoc against the Pope or spreading too much gossip. Are they like… officially affiliated?

“Catholic News Agency is an apostolate of EWTN News”. EWTN itself has always been in union with its local bishop.

I don’t mean that an unaffiliated media source is always wrong. LifesiteNews, or for that matter a Baptist website, might have a good informative article on some subject.

And I certainly don’t endorse some “affiliated” media apostolates. Some of them got “approved” by their local bishop 100 years ago, when they were much more faithful than they are now. But even they would be somewhat better - less bad - than National Catholic Reporter, for instance.

But in general, I would tend to seek out good media sources from among those that are approved. It sounds nice to say that a source is “independent” but really they might be dependent on who-knows-what secular trends.

 

[ProVobis]

I also cannot see how Francis could reverse this policy, without it being a rebuke of how his predecessors ministered to tradtionally-minded Catholics

With a proposed Personal Prelature for the FSSPX and possibly the FSSP and ICRSS among others, it may be the most workable solution in the long run. The SP has IMO not worked to bring out high numbers for the Latin Mass at the diocesan level.

 

[Randolph]

When Pope Benedict issued Summorum Pontificum (SF) 10 years ago, he cited the level of enthusiasm among young people for the EF that had not been anticipated. But he never expected high numbers of people attending the EF at the parish level (at least not at this time), nor did he expect a dramatic rise in the use of Latin—nor was it the expectation of reasonable supporters of the SF. SF did allow for acceptable and wider (than it was) use of the EF and Latin—which was the intent of Vatican II. Only time will tell the true impact of SF. As often with many other initiatives in the Church, it may take many decades, or even centuries, to see clear results.

To be fair, the EF and the use of Latin, given decades of suppression and demonization, have faced many head winds and baseless opposition. Among which are: feasibility, capability, training for priests, servers and chanters, learning Latin and the EF itself for all, Ad Orientum altars, finances, communications, the false accusations of linking the Latin Mass attendees to ultra conservative groups, the reluctance of bishops and priests supporting SF, and so on and so forth.

I believe, for people who attend the EF and enjoy Latin, SF has been a special gift to them. Therefore, it is also enriching the Church. Keep in mind that, after the Council, the insistence on the use of the EF and the use Latin have been primarily stemmed from the laity, priests and a few religious communities—not from Church Hierarchy itself. The seeds of SF have been, and continue to be sown. I believe time will prove that its fruits will be of high quality, and the harvest will be plentiful.

 

[runningdude]

With a proposed Personal Prelature for the FSSPX and possibly the FSSP and ICRSS among others, it may be the most workable solution in the long run.

I concur with Rudolph:

the insistence on the use of the EF and the use Latin have been primarily stemmed from the laity, priests and a few religious communities—not from Church Hierarchy itself.

SP was issued based on the request of the faithful, allowing them to muster the resources at the local level for EF ministry. It was not about scale or reindroducing Latin to the majority.

Personal prelatures and ordinates add a whole extra layer of beauracy that may stifle any organic growth. The ordinates were created to preserve some elements of Anglican hierarchy and liturgical autonomy for converts. Prelatures similarly allow ordinary ministry to the laity outside of a diocese. In both cases, laity and priests must enroll in the prelature or ordinate to receive the full benefits of its ministry.

The Roman Rite - in any form, however - has never been limited to extra-diocesan bodies, and it would be strange for a priest to have to request transfer out of his diocese just to celebrate the sacraments according to the Roman Rite.

SP allows the priest to offer the mass on his own initiative, ideally with the Diocese’s support. Needing to seek membership and permission from a regional or national ordinate removes this flexibility for the local population seeking EF ministry.