Totally banning the ‘Traditional Latin Mass’ (TLM) will cause fireworks in the Church — across the globe. There will be a schism — all we can speculate about is how BIG & far reaching it will be.
Not sure WHY Francis is trying so hard to force this issue.
It isn’t as if TLM is heresy or unacceptable. It was THE ‘Law of the Land’ for over 400 years. Wow.
The pope, looking mighty crotchety of late, is picking battles here, there and everywhere. Trying to excommunicate Vigano, antagonizing the Germans. There is no need. He sure doesn’t look like he had that many years left. Why not let sleeping dogs lie?
But, I suspect Francis wants to go out as a pope that will be TALKED ABOUT, MUCH, in years to come.
As the last Pope to have caused a schism would sure give him that wish.
Click to ENLARGE. News stories from ‘Google News‘.
Basically, what Cardinal Parolin & I are both saying is that it is unlikely that the Next Pope, even if he is NOT a ‘Francis II‘ (e.g., American Burke), will overturn ALL the reforms enacted by Francis. The best that might happen is that he might AGAIN (a la Benedict XVI) relax the barriers to celebrating the Latin Mass. I am sure the other reforms will remain on the books due to the respect that new popes pay to their predecessors. This has to do with the decorum exercised by modern popes. Quickly overturning prior reforms look undignified. And that is the rub.
IF the Next Pope is a traditionalist he is unlikely to have too much time. A non-Francis II will only get enough votes if he is seen as a compromise, caretaker pope — not likely to hang around for much more than 7 to 8 years. While that may sound like a lot, that probably isn’t enough leeway to OVERTURN Francis’ reforms without making Francis look real bad.
IF a Francis II is elected, the whole issue is moot. I have a feeling that Francis will hold another cardinal creating consistory in August or September this year & create 20 to 22 cardinal electors. IF he does that (& Parolin might already know of the pope’s plans) it is GAME OVER. The Next Pope will be Francis II — possibly even Tagle!
So, that is the lay of the land. If the next pope is NOT a Francis II we might see some slack cut on Latin Mass. But, that will be about it. But, as ever, I could be wrong.
Click image to access the Motu Proprio at the Vatican site.
I do believe that Pope Franciscould very well be working on an edict that defines the role of a ‘Pope Emeritus‘.
That, however, should NOT be taken as an indication that Pope Francis is planning to resign anytime soon.
If anything it could indicate the very opposite, i.e., that Pope Francis intends to be in absolute charge for many years to come (God willing (of course, in his special case)). What?
We already have a Pope Emeritus.
That pope emeritus has NOT lived up to his original promise to stay, firmly, in the background, devoting his entire time & energies into prayer & meditation.
NO! That pope emeritus has over the years, with increasing frequency, become quite the gadfly. Of late, with the Latin Mass controversy not abating, the pope emeritus has become lightning-rod. A rallying point. A figure who could inspire a genuine schism.
So, my druthers is that Pope Francis will issue an edict limiting the ‘visibility’ of the pope emeritus. Essentially putting a gag order on the ex-pope. To be fair, Francis has the right — & the motives — to do so. The ex-pope is becoming too much of a distraction.
That is my take. Yes, Francis could very well be working on an edict to redefine the status of a pope emeritus. But, that does NOT mean that he is planning to resign. The edict is to curb the voice of the current ex-pope.
I do not see Pope Francis resigning in the coming 12-months, if not longer. He has become addicted to his power & stature. There is no way he will give it up now — even if his health starts to falter. He will do what other popes have done. He will cling on to the papacy until ‘God’ makes the final summons. That used to be the way until the current ex-pope rocked the boat.
I could, as ever, be wrong, but this is by current take. Please feel free to contradict me. Comments are open.
by Louis Epstein (Carmel, New York) on July 27, 2021
Pope John XXIII said “I have to be Pope for those with their foot on the gas and those with their foot on the brake.“
The Pope who canonized him would rather pick one group and then try to keep that group all together — furthermore invoking his office to put everyone’s foot on the pedal he has chosen.
I am reminded of the action of President Mobutu of the country he renamed from ‘Democratic Republic of the Congo‘ to ‘Zaire‘, who shut down a constitutional convention he had convoked when it voted to return the nation’s name, flag, and anthem to what they had been before he changed them. He considered this vital to his legacy vital. (He has since died and the country’s name has been changed back to DR Congo with only pre-Zaire flag designs used since he left power).
Pope Francis is of a Catholic generation that sees the Second Vatican Council as its crowning achievement, its contribution to history. As such, it is not to be reconsidered or seen negatively. The directions in which it pointed are the only ones he, i.e., Francis, sees as progress.
He is also the first Pope since that Council to have played no part in it, but was of impressionable age at the time, as opposed to having the historical distance to see it as flawed as so many past Ecumenical Councils have proved to have been.
It appears that to Francis the ‘Thou-Shalt-Nots‘ of doctrine exist primarily to provide opportunities to hierarchs to conspicuously display magnanimity by waiving them … thus his ‘who am I to judge?‘ to a world that looks to him for judgement, his scolding of bishops who look to make ‘teaching moments‘ when politicians who advocate against church policies seek Communion.
It was said of the efforts to reshape the church after the Council that they were ‘dogmatic about nothing except the need not to be dogmatic‘ … even though the Council declared itself merely ‘pastoral‘ rather than dogmatic in nature, its ‘dogmatic constitution of the church‘, Lumen Gentium, is pointed to by some on the right-fringe as having taken the church into heresy by its wording not seeking to exclude all outside the institutional church from being Christianity.
Those who prefer the forms of worshipactually used at the Council to those construed by their writers as inspired by the Council (which as a rule merely sought to permit new options that have since been presented as required) are seen by advocates of the latter as mired in the past and having an obligation to ‘get with the program‘, as Francis pretty close to declared in ‘Traditionis Custodes‘.
The fundamental issue of the definition of a religion is: a) Is it a fixed set of beliefs and whichever persons are adhering to those beliefs, or
b) A self-declared set of people and whatever beliefs those people happen to hold?
Though not an adherent of any religion myself, I consider the former characterization as a matter of sincerity and seriousness, while the latter begs the question of why one needs to belong to the religion in the first place.
The broad and lenient approach lets more people feel they are not under pressure, and in Germany is key to keeping people inclined to stay enrolled and pay their government-collected church tax … hence its embrace by the hierarchs there.
But unfortunately for Francis and those of like mind, it is those who take doctrines really seriously who are minded to stick with a church no matter what (examples being those who stick with one when its ‘end-of-the-world‘ dates pass with the world unended), and while he thinks his invocation of “I’m the only Pope you’ve got and this is the only way” will bring them to heel, the ways he presses are designed for those who do not take things as seriously.
The steady growth of old-style Masses embarrasses those who want them seen as a fading historical relic, but those adhering to a vision of a necessary and fixed church are far likelier to think it worth becoming clergy with all the sacrifices involved. The mile-wide-and-inch-deep want to drain the inch-but-widening-wide and mile-deep trenches.
So Francis has sought to root out pockets of organized traditionalism under his obedience, from the Knights of Malta to the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate to the Community of the Holy Apostles in Belgium and make them ‘get with the program‘.
He is also concerned about deviation to the farther left, such as with the Germans, but since left is the way he leans he would prefer that it be the right that openly breaks with his authority … so he has been on the one hand open to the Society of St. Pius X, which is not under his obedience, by granting recognition to their sacraments, and now on the other provocatively harsh with the clergy and congregants who seek out the older Mass within his dioceses … he is greasing the path for them to leave the RC Church for the SSPX if they won’t modernize their practices. If they continue to stay in the RC Church while the left leaves he would be embarrassed by their being a proportionally greater part of the remaining church and still intent on heading in directions he is trying to abandon. So,the bludgeon to protect his legacy and intimidate its opponents to the best of his ability.
There are already groups stepping too hard on the gas (e.g., Roman Catholic Womenpriests-USA (RCWP)), or too hard on the brake (e.g., ‘Fathers‘ of ‘Traditio‘ whose ‘opiate‘ is the gleeful repetition that anyone even a trice to the left of them is a heretic who can only be saved from hell fire by following their advice).
None of these groups, on either side, should have stayed on the lurching bus of the RC Church proper. Many of them don’t recognize each other as belonging to the church they all claim to personify in superior form. Those still on the bus such as the epicurean traveller John Zuhlsdorf of WDTPRS may grip hard onto their seats and wait for Francis to be gone from the scene … or some may leave into new or existing splinters. (I should note that some have given up on being traditionalist Catholics and entered Eastern Orthodoxy, such as Rod Dreher, while others at least ponder leaving the Latin Rite for an Eastern Catholic rite if it seems more change-proof which some are not).
But various iterations of 1962 and pre-1962 Latin liturgies (the Society of St. Pius V started because the Society of St. Pius X felt too newfangled to them with the 1962 version) seem guaranteed to continue with or without the blessing of Pope Francis.
P.S., A bishop who can expect no promotion from Francis confronts Traditionis Custodes.
Click to ENLARGE. From the ‘National Catholic Register‘.
Click to ENLARGE & read here. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility. Click to ENLARGE & read here. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_supremacy.
This is my take on it, but I did discuss at length with a couple of others who also happen to know there way around the Catholic Church, its ‘laws’, traditions & practices.
We don’t need to get too technical or pedantic here.
A pope, Francis (or otherwise), has absolute, unilateral, AUTOCRATIC POWER over the Catholic Church in all matters. Period.
It is well understood & acknowledged that a pope cannot be judged, corrected, censored,or disciplined on Earth. Only God has (any) sway over a pope. Period.
A pope cannot be impeached or removed from office.
There are NO councils, courts, parliaments or whatever to hold a pope accountable.
When it comes to matters of the Catholic Church, the pope is SUPREME & can do whatever, whenever. Period.
A pope does not have to have any of his decisions validated, voted upon, endorsed or whatever from anyone else. ‘Pope has spoken, the matter is settled‘. Period.
And all of this BEFORE we even broach upon the thorny issue of Papal Infallibility (above).
So, all I can say is that Burke must be smoking too much incense! His claim holds no water.
In the case of the Latin Mass the pope is NOT even trying to change doctrine. But, let’s say that he was. He can do that — worst case doing it (so called) ex-Cathedra (i.e., from his throne) so that he is infallible! It is good to be the pope. Period.
The pope can change liturgy. Trival. The pope can even do so on-the-fly. John XXIII did this when he removed the offensive phrase ‘Perfidious Jews‘ from the Mass. On-the-fly. John XXIII wanted it removed. Done & dusted. Period.
Burke might be trying to say that some MAY not buy that the pope has the authority.
Well, the pope, unilaterally, just by saying the words, can excommunicate Burke. Snap of his fingers. Poof. Burke becomes a berk. (Smile).
The pope can excommunicate a whole bunch of people.
But, he can’t prevent a schism. That he can’t. Other than that, he can do whatever.
So, maybe what Burke is trying to say, clumsily (as befits another old man), is that those that question the pope authority will have to be schismatic.
The pope has already ‘busted’ Burke at least once. The pope might decide to show him, once & for all, how much power a pope has over Catholics, even U.S. cardinals.
Click image to access the Motu Proprio at the Vatican site.
Click to ENLARGE. My take on the current Catholic Church.
Click to ENLARGE & read here. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_Catholicism
Click to access my June 3, 2021 post in my OLD Blog. So, I had addressed this issue earlier.
Since Friday I have been asking a few of my Catholic friends to explain what possessed the pope to go ahead with this. It appears unnecessary. Overkill. They have tried, gallantly, but I am still at a loss.
So, I am going to take a crack at it myself. This is MY take. I am also going to start off by throwing a bunch of thoughts at you in ‘bullet point’ form. You work them out. If you pull them all together, you might find a satisfactory explanation.
>>If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
>> Don’t try to fix something that isn’t totally broke & end up breaking it.
>> Francis has thrown a stick of dynamite into what was but a crack claiming that he was trying to stop the crack from spreading.
>> The ‘Latin Mass’ was the least of the problems facing the Catholic Church & the pope — but focusing on it was a ‘shiny object‘ (à la Donald Trump) to distract the media & the ‘followers’.
>> The Latin Mass per se was never going to be the sole basis for a schism. There are bigger/better issues that could lead to a split such as the so called ‘German Schism‘.
>> Francis is NOT an intellectual, far from it — he may be a Jesuit (albeit an Argentinian one), but he only has ‘street smarts’ as opposed to intellect. He is the least intellectual pope is 100-years IF not of modern-times!
>> Probably not coincidental to my point directly above, Francis is also the LEAST educated of recent popes — again one has to go back a long time to find one less academically blessed. He, atypically for a modern prelate, let alone a pope, does not have a postgraduate degree.
>> Prior to becoming pope he, again extremely uncharacteristically for a pope, had spent virtually NO TIME in Rome, at the Vatican or with the curia. He really was the consummate outsider. His experience of the Church was limited to that of Latin America.
>> In marked contrast to prior popes, starting at Benedict XVI & going back to Pius XII, Francis has come across as shallow. He can be shrewd at times, but most of the time he is ‘Mr. Smiling Nice Guy‘ rather than ‘Mr. Cerebral‘.
>> At 84, & not in the greatest of health, his thinking, never his strong suit, cannot be that acute or astute. That is am sure, is one of the reasons, for this decision. Francis did not make a very good decision. He didn’t think it through.
>> This Motu Proprio (despite it meaning ‘on his own impulse’) was NOT written by Francis. That is pretty clear. This would have been beyond him. A committee, possibly appointed by him (but maybe even NOT), wrote this in HIS name. This could have been the work of the ROGUE-CURIA who bamboozled the old pope to put his name on it.
>> Like Trump Francis, since becoming pope, has just loved the attention — especially the media attention. It, as was with Trump, has become the cornerstone of his papacy. Media attention.
>> As with Trump, with Francis it has all become: “ME”, “ME”, “ME”.
>> As with Trump, Francis will say & do stuff just for attention. I think this Motu Proprio falls into that category. A shiny object to get & gold attention.
>> As with Trump, Francis is not that bothered with future consequences. Francis too likes to be pope as if he is starring in a reality TV show.
>> This level of severe restrictions was not needed, not necessary.
>> Francis has thrown a stick of dynamite into what was but a crack claiming that he was trying to stop the crack from spreading.
>> Ahead of the 2013 conclave there was much talk that St. Malachy’s infamous ‘Prophecy of the Popes‘ & its ‘Peter the Roman‘ claim was about to come to pass. ‘Peter the Roman’ would destroy the Church by undermining it. At that time, I was adamant that ‘Peter the Roman’ was tripe. I might have been wrong.
