I have to say, I kinda feel sorry for the Traditionalists in the Catholic Church.
They were going along so sure of themselves, secure in the belief that they were the only real Catholics in the world. They were confident that they were going to get rid of heretical Pope Francis, confident that the dreaded Novus Ordo Mass would be stamped out of existence for the travesty it is and that the Traditional Latin Mass would reign supreme as the Mass of the Roman Rite. They believed with all their hearts that Vatican II would be exposed for the sham Council it was, and that the Church would be returned to the glory days of the 1950's.
And then came Traditionis Custodes. They were traveling down the highway at 60 mph and with little warning, a wall popped up in front of them and slowed them down to a crawl. Suddenly things didn't look so rosy anymore. This looked like it might be the end of the line for them.
Ah, but not to worry! They've always been able to shape their own reality up to this point. Why should a little thing like a Motu Proprio stand in their way? They will just make it say what they want it to say. And if something can't be manipulated into their own reality, they will just prove that they have a right to ignore it.
We have now seen the ability to ignore a Papal document with Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois (who is often in conflict with Pope Francis). Bishop Paprocki has used Canon 87, section 1, to support his position that he is allowed to ignore Traditionis Custodes:
Pope Francis’ motu proprio Traditionis Custodes (“Guardians of the tradition”), issued last Friday and effective immediately, allows individual bishops to authorize the use of the Traditional Latin Mass in their respective dioceses. Previously, Pope Benedict’s 2007 apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum recognized the rights of all priests to celebrate the Traditional Mass, and did not require them to obtain the permission of their bishop to do so.
A provision of the new document says that bishops are to “designate” the locations of traditional liturgies, adding that they cannot be offered at “parochial churches.”
Paprocki cited Canon 87, section 1 of the Code of Canon Law for his decision to issue the dispensation for the two parishes in his diocese.
The canon states: “A diocesan bishop, whenever he judges that a dispensation will contribute to their spiritual good, is able to dispense the faithful from universal and particular disciplinary laws issued for his territory or his subjects by the supreme authority of the Church."
There is no way that the original purpose of Canon 87 was to allow bishops to disobey a Motu Proprio. This canon was for the purposes of allowing something like eating meat on a Friday during Lent, or changing a Holy Day from a weekday to a Sunday, or dispense the obligation to attend Mass during an epidemic, as we saw last year. Canon 87 has never been used as Bishop Paprocki has used it. Canon 87 was never meant to be used to countermand a Motu Proprio.
Paprocki's misuse of Canon 87 has certainly created a great Get Out of Jail Free card for the Traditionalists in his diocese. Other bishops have also jumped on the Canon 87 bandwagon, such as Bishop Daniel Thomas of Toledo, Ohio.
I would not be surprised if these dispensations are challenged by the Vatican. Canon Law Art. 90 §1:
One is not to be dispensed from an ecclesiastical law without a just and reasonable cause, after taking into account the circumstances of the case and the gravity of the law from which dispensation is given; otherwise the dispensation is illicit and, unless it is given by the legislator himself or his superior, also invalid.
I am certainly not a Canon lawyer, so these are just my observations. But at the very least, I would suggest that these bishops are not contributing to the spiritual good of the faithful, as is stated in Canon 87, but are actually harming the faithful in their dioceses by teaching them that they can ignore the Pope. Such actions could result in actually leading the the Traditionalists even closer to official schism. It is a very dangerous path indeed.
The bishops should also keep in mind that the Pope always has the last word. He can decide to replace any and all bishops without even giving a reason. And of course, there is always that pesky little problem of answering to Jesus Christ.
Then we come to the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales (LMS). This is a lay group which has absolutely no canonical standing in the Church. They are just a bunch of Traditionalists who promote the Latin Mass. From their website:
The Latin Mass Society, founded in 1965, is an association of Catholic faithful dedicated to the promotion of the traditional Latin liturgy of the Catholic Church, the teachings and practices integral to it, the musical tradition which serves it, and the Latin language in which it is celebrated.
The President of the LMS is Joseph Shaw, who declared Pope Francis a heretic in 2017 when he signed the Filial Correction, which was a document written by a bunch of hard core traditionalists accusing the Pope of seven different heresies. HERE is my very long rebuttal to the Filial Correction, if you're interested.
By this act, accusing Pope Francis of being a heretic, Mr. Shaw and the LMS have shown that his actions and those of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales are part and parcel of the reasons for Traditionis Custodes.
The LMS has now published a document entitled "Some Notes on the Application of Traditiones [sic] Custodes in light of Canon Law from the Latin Mass Society" You know there is a problem when they have a misspelling in the title of the document.
In this document, the LMS tells us that Traditionis Custodes (TC) is no big deal because Traditionis Custodes is really not all that different from Summorum Pontificum and anyway, it can be interpreted in such way that bishops can ignore it and continue business as usual. In effect, nothing has changed.
When it comes to the authority of the bishops, LMS states that Pope Francis has merely echoed Summorum Pontificum (SP):
The Apostolic Letter is, at this point, not making any innovation, or investing bishops with special authority, but merely reiterating the existing legal situation, which had itself not been altered by Summorum Pontificum.
To equate Traditionis Custodes with Summorum Pontificum is like equating day with night. Contrary to the above statement, SP did drastically reduce the bishops' authority and oversight in regard to the TLM.
Under Summorum Pontificum, the bishop was not normally a part of the decision to allow a TLM in a parish. All authority was given to the pastor of the Church "under the governance of the bishop".
Article 5 of SP:
Art. 5, §1 In parishes where a group of the faithful attached to the previous liturgical tradition stably exists, the parish priest should willingly accede to their requests to celebrate Holy Mass according to the rite of the 1962 Roman Missal. He should ensure that the good of these members of the faithful is harmonized with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the governance of the bishop in accordance with Canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church
Pastors were actually obligated to allow the TLM, and if they denied it, the group could appeal to the bishop, who would then allow it. If the bishop couldn't, for whatever reason, comply with the request, it was then sent to Ecclesia Dei (which no longer exists).
From Summorum Pontificum:
Art. 8. A bishop who wishes to provide for such requests of the lay faithful, but is prevented by various reasons from doing so, can refer the matter to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, which will offer him counsel and assistance.
This line of authority has been completely abrogated by Traditionis Custodes.
Traditionis Custodes has basically put the TLM in a box, and said it can only be opened with the strict permission of the Bishop. The role of the Church's pastor has been eliminated completely. TC has restored the bishops' authority which was taken away by SP. The bishops now have total control over Masses in their dioceses and, in fact, have been charged with a much more rigorous oversight. Nothing can be done without their express permission, and there is no appeal to their decision.
Thus, the title "Guardians of Tradition." Bishops, in communion with the Pope, are now the sole Guardians of Tradition in their dioceses. Neither the laity, pastors nor anyone else has authority. It now belongs solely to the bishops.
This is hardly "reiterating the existing legal situation."
The purpose of SP was to free the TLM to be celebrated any where at any time with little to no input from the bishops. The purpose of TC is to give complete authority to the bishops. The goal is to slowly restrict the TLM and eventually unify the entire Church under the Mass of Pope Paul VI, as Pope Francis states in his letter to the bishops:
In the Motu proprio I have desired to affirm that it is up to the Bishop, as moderator, promoter, and guardian of the liturgical life of the Church of which he is the principle of unity, to regulate the liturgical celebrations. It is up to you to authorize in your Churches, as local Ordinaries, the use of the Missale Romanum of 1962, applying the norms of the present Motu proprio. It is up to you to proceed in such a way as to return to a unitary form of celebration, and to determine case by case the reality of the groups which celebrate with this Missale Romanum.
The Latin Mass Society of England and Wales is trying to convince us, as well as themselves, that nothing is going to change and the Latin Mass will continue in dioceses around the world as it has for the last 14 years. Yes, there are a few restrictions that will make it a little harder, such as no new groups are allowed. But these restrictions are not really going to get in the way because the bishops are on the side of the Traditionalists and are basically going to ignore the Pope.
To summarise, Traditiones [sic] Custodes is concerned to maintain the pastoral care of officially constituted ‘groups’ attached to the ancient Mass, for example in personal parishes, but wishes to emphasise the authority of the bishop to regulate where, when, and by whom, their Masses are celebrated.
At the same time, it does not prevent priests in general celebrating the older Mass, even in public, but it wishes to emphasises [sic] the authority of the bishop to give permission for this.
In both cases, it should be observed that in practice under Summorum Pontificum bishops continued to exercise the kind of care and control which Traditionis Custodes underlines, though they might sometimes have done this implicitly and indirectly: for example, by choosing where to assign priests. Although they are given more direct power over the situation by Traditionis Custodes, it seems likely that many bishops will continue to exercise this power as a matter of general oversight, rather than micro-managing each parish and apostolate.
As I have shown, this is a complete misreading of the Motu Proprio. The status quo may continue for a while, but the Traditionalists will out themselves and prove more rebellious than ever. The bishops will realize they have a rebellion on their hands and will have no choice but to enforce the provisions of Traditionis Custodes, realizing it is actually their lifeline.
Those bishops who refuse to implement Traditionis Custodes will also be exposed for being in rebellion against Rome and will have to be dealt with accordingly.
This is not going to be an easy time in the Church. The Traditionalists are actually a very small group in the Church, and most of them are in the United States, with other large groups in England and France, but they are loud and have been and will continue to create chaos and division. We are in a very difficult time.
I continue to pray for the souls of the Traditionalists, that they will repent and come back into union with Peter.
And I also pray that they will finally learn to live in reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment