Rorate Caeli presents a hearsay report that Bergoglio told the recent meeting of the Italian Bishops Conference that he intends to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum. Some thoughts on this item, in order to reiterate some key points before such a thing may occur.
1. One must always remember that only a pope can abolish a motu proprio issued by the pope. This “duh” principle must always be remembered in our corrupt times. Let’s just spitball, and “speculate”, that Pope Benedict is still the pope. Who cares what a heretical prelate from Argentina says about Summorum Pontificum. His authority to do anything about it is about the same as his authority in my homeowners association: zero. But, for the sake of completeness, let us assume, arguendo for the rest of this post that Bergoglio is definitively and actually the pope.
2. One must always remember what Summorum Pontificum did and did not do, legally speaking, and thus understand the legal effect of abolishing it. Pope Benedict mostly just acknowledged a preexisting fact: the TLM was never abrogated and thus in principle could always have been (and can be) celebrated by any priest without need of any episcopal approval. Abolishing the motu proprio does not change the preexisting fact.
3. What the motu proprio did do was establish a juridical regime that declared that the ancient rite and the novus ordo were actually two different expressions of one only Roman Rite of Mass. This always seemed hard to square with reality, as it sure SEEMS like the two Masses are two different rites. Abolishing the motu proprio abolishes this purely juridical reality and thus we can go back to the more logical way of contrasting the two rites of Mass, the Roman Rite and the novus ordo.
4. Some say that abolishing the motu proprio would bring everyone back into an indult-only TLM regime. Of course Bergoglio and his minions will assume this and act as it is so. But since the TLM hasn’t been abrogated and every priest continues to have the right to celebrate it, it will be like the scamdemic regime has been in the secular sphere. Do you pretend that lies are reality, or do you man up? It is a question for all priests, prelates and laymen to answer at the appropriate time.
5. Since only the motu proprio limited (at the time) the TLM to the 1962 Missal, contra Quo Primum, any attempt to limit use of the immemorial custom of the Mass formally codified in 1570 has to address Quo Primum‘s declaration that it can never be prohibited for any priest to celebrate it. It would be interesting to watch the current intellectual lightweights in the curia try to do so.
6. Finally, abolishing Summorum Pontificum would be extremely interesting in Bergoglio’s interactions with the SSPX. He has showered them with Francismercy in the past several years, granting jurisdiction for confessions, lowering hurdles to be able celebrate weddings and attendant Masses, providing canonical review of their disciplinary decisions, and basically giving them more breathing room to operate without being hassled. Well, interestingly enough, Summorum Pontificum states any priest who is not “prevented by law” may say the TLM. Here is where my lack of canon law expertise prevents a fuller analysis. But I find the elimination of this requirement interesting. Is a cleric who is suspended a divinis “prevented by law”? Is this a loosening of restrictions on their priests by default? Likely not, but I just want to note the provision allegedly being abolished.
In short, as I have written before on my deleted pages, it is time to brush up on Quo Primum and to grow a spine. We have a right to this Mass. Priests have a right to this Mass. Anyone who maintains otherwise is like a person wanting to risk death to have an experimental biohazard derived from aborted fetal cell lines injected into their bodies to gain a 1.3% reduction in the likelihood of catching a cold.
jbq2 said:
I am pretty sure that the picture used with the article is an important one. This is where the Asian woman in the background is the one who grabbed Bergoglio’s sleeve and said something to him about persecution in China. He slapped her hand and stormed off. You can see the scowl on his face from the experience.
Anne Bernhardt’s newest fan said:
This is, of course, excellently written. My question would be how this is to affect me, my family, my friends. See, we all attend a mass said by the Institute of Christ the King in St. Louis, MO, under the watchful and progressive eyes of Archbishop Rozanski. Come with me on a lovely hypothetical trip please. Let’s assume Bergoglio is Pope. Then let’s say that this “Pope” annuls Summorum Pontificum (SP for short). Would that annulment of SP then put my Sunday mass in jeopardy? Do you believe “Francis” and his minions will stop at just the annulment of SP and not the widespread ban of it?
thetimman said:
I doubt it would have any immediate effect on TLM communities. Also, I would assume that recourse to the TLM is written in the ICRSP’s governing documents already approved by the pope.
P. O'Brien said:
“…the TLM was never abrogated and thus in principle could always have been (and can be) celebrated by any priest without need of any episcopal approval.” Here Benedict admitted what only rabid traditionalists had been saying for decades. And one has to ask why Archbishop Lefebvre was attacked by Rome when he was encouraging and training priests to do what they had a right to. And then a further question is how Paul VI, who all but eliminated the Traditional Mass, could have been canonized.
thetimman said:
Canonized by Bergoglio I think…
Kate R. said:
As a diocesan TLM-attending Catholic, my personal feeling is, his tinkering/banning, whatever he intends to do may be the final act of decoupling people from the mainstream Church. I can’t speak for others, but we only tolerate him from afar. If he interferes with SP and it impacts the Holy Mass we attend? We may be out for good. What this pope and these bishops, the USCCP-CCP types need, is to have empty churches for a while. They told us the Mass was non-essential, they need to reap the consequence of those words. Unless and until it comes home to them, they will continue on their mission, to empty the church of any actual Catholic content.
God knows we have done what we can, if they are intent on destroying it, they can, as long as their is no consequence to them. There are however, enough mainstream Catholics to keep it going, they who see no evil, hear no evil, let it be on them. For our part, we want nothing to do with Bergoglio or his kind. We’ve felt dodgy about the tiny connection we have, not wanting to support Rome in any way, but if he does this, if he limits or interferes, it’s probably over. We will go SSPX or FSSP, and if he does away with them to (if he can), we will stay home on Sunday, pray, pray the Rosary, read scripture, keep our devotions, and finish it out that way. We say NO to this destroyer, NO to his tormenting us once again, NO to these evil pedophiles and homosexuals and Christian West haters, NO to these men who have animus to Christ and clearly hate Catholicism and faithful Catholics. NO to them all.
dunderberg said:
Since they want to destroy the Church, the empty pews are a feature, not a bug.
Jane-Frances said:
Thank you. Well stated. I support your view.
I even wonder why TLMs would even consider to obey him if he dares to do so. Is it to prove they know how to obey or that they don’t understand what ‘Obedience’ is? I guess not.
Kate R. said:
sorry…USCCB-CCP…
CR said:
Man oh man do I wish Father Hesse had lived to see this pontificate…and comment on it all.
CookieLady said:
Without a doubt, he would be saying what Barnhardt says….AND she’d have him as a guest on one of her podcasts!
John said:
Fr Hesse was such a blessing to me in learning the faith and what happened at V2.
John said:
What ponticate?
gloveraa said:
“Still Think It Doesn’t Matter Whether or Not Pope Benedict Abdicated?”
Well, it matters at all times to whom the Keys of Peter belong. It has been reasoned that the only man who can judge the pope is the pope himself i.e. the infallible pope judges the fallible pope as an ex cathedra act(Abbe de Nantes).
To whom does one bring accusations of heresy against the man who fashions himself “Pope Francis”?
Aqua said:
That is an insightful sequence of thought. Thank you for that.
My tiny little addition:
I find it curious the V II Church uses Latin for only one term in their Church – the name of their recently invented liturgy.
Novus Ordo. It allows them to leech off the Tradition and authority of the Latin Rite and it’s ancient, common language while at the same time trying to abolish the Latin Rite and its language.
New Mass. Call it what it is. New. An invention. Its roots go all the way back to 1965.
New Mass. They are trying to replace the language of the Roman Catholic Church with vernacular. So they should be honest and use the vernacular. It’s not Novus. It’s New.
Now we know what it is. Defend that in the annals of Sacred Tradition Vatican II churchmen. Where is your *right* to abolish what WAS and replace it with something NEW – disconnected, foreign, strange, worldly? Defend that choice, please. Prove your work.
Kate R. said:
That’s true Aqua, it’s the one term they use in Latin. And they have no right. They make war against God by going after the TLM.
It all does seem reasonable, about Benedict still being pope, but why did Benedict say so many things affirming Francis and his words and actions. He make positively glowing statements about him. If the pope can be coerced to that point, what are we to believe at all.
MadMagyar said:
It’s pretty obvious what was intended in Quo Primum (the title says it all, really): that the ” . . . ordinance applies henceforth, now, and _forever_ . . .” and the “. . . present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and _forever_ . . .”. Plain as day. I haven’t read the Latin, nor would I pretend to comprehend it fully, but trust that whoever DID translate it, did so correctly. So, just as the Bill of Rights merely RECOGNIZES our pre-existing Rights, (among others NOT enumerated), SP merely does the same. Whatever Bergoglio does or has done is of NO effect anyway.
However, one should consider this: the Rite of Exorcism IS in Latin for a very good reason and, as pointed out quite often by Fr. Ripperger, because THAT language is most ‘efficacious’, whereas the vernacular is not. The ‘targets’ MUST obey commands given in the former, the latter, not so much. That says it all right there.
Pingback: Saint Louis Catholic: “Still Think It Doesn’t Matter Whether or Not Pope Benedict Abdicated?” – Ad Meliora
Pingback: CATHOLIC HEADLINES 5.30.21 – The Stumbling Block
magnusdominus said:
Timman – thought we’d share this with you and your readers.
Looking beyond both argument and opinion within the Traditional Catholic world regarding the SSPX, U.S. District Superior, Father Fullerton, has asked the priests and faithful to consider making the Act of Reparation to the Sacred Heart of Jesus during the month of June in reparation for the sins that continue to plague our world.
Penance is something that all Catholics can do, and this is a worthy undertaking for the month of the Sacred Heart. Please consider posting it in whatever fashion you may find it appealing to your readers.
Link to the Act of Reparation to The Sacred Heart: https://sspx.org/sites/sspx/files/media/usa-district/pdf/actreparationsacredheart2.pdf. (A partial indulgence is granted to those who recite this prayer. A plenary indulgence is granted if it is publicly recited on the feast of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. This prayer was prescribed to be recited on this feast by Pope Pius XI)
Link to the article: https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/fr-fullerton-asks-faithful-pray-act-reparation-sacred-heart-june-66613.