BASTA! That’s Enough Holy Father!
Francis is at it again. During the recent “ad limina” visit by the French bishops (as reported by the French site Famille chrétienne), the Pope of mercy-and-dialogue™️ took the opportunity to once again decry the traditional Roman Rite of the Catholic Church:
Regarding the Motu proprio Traditionis custodes, the pope “insisted that the celebration of the ancient rite should not be a pretext for refusing Vatican II.” “A limit must be set and that’s it (basta!),” he insisted in front of French prelates, so that a liturgical attraction is not the cover of an ideological stance…
The ironically titled Traditionis custodes (Guardians of the tradition) is of course anything but that. The motu proprio and its accompanying letter is an unprecedented, purely political, and heavy handed attempt by progressives within the Church to impede the growing restoration of tradition among the faithful.
The dilemma for the Holy Father and other ideologically driven churchmen is that their very premise for attacking the Latin Mass contradicts what they themselves have argued in the past: the continuity of the Council and the New Mass.
First, Francis demands an acceptance of Vatican II. This of course is a given and unnecessary if Vatican II introduced nothing new and simply sought to engage an ever changing world in a contemporary manner.
However, the very argument the pope makes refutes the hermeneutic of continuity so long advocated for by Pope emeritus Benedict XVI. After all, why does Vatican II require unique and explicit acceptance if it is simply representing Catholicism in a completely consistent and traditional way? Wouldn’t our profession of faith (e.g. the Credo) suffice for his holiness?
And if it is ideological agendas hidden behind liturgical forms that is of such concern, then shouldn’t it be the Novus Ordo that is suppressed? From its creation by the Consilium in the 1960’s, to its multiple choice-Mass of options construct, to doctrinal innovation reinforced by liturgical innovation, it is the New Rite which statistically causes greater disunity of belief.
However, none of us should be so naive as to believe that tradition is actually guarded by attacking it. There is no way to interpret Traditionis custodes (TC) in good faith as it was clearly not promulgated in good faith. If anyone doubts this, simply read the embarrassingly disingenuous and error filled letter accompanying it.
No, when Rome presents the world’s prelates and the lay faithful with such a punitive, vindictive, unmerciful, and unprecedented document such as TC, the only proper response is to signal our fidelity to the Tradition, to the immemorial faith, and to boldly proclaim Basta! Enough!
[Photo credit: CNS/Vatican Media-from last years “ad limina” visit to Rome by the French bishops].
Posted on September 12, 2021, in liturgy and tagged extraordinary form, latin mass, Liturgy, novus ordo, pope francis, roman rite, second vatican council, summorum pontificum, tradition, traditional latin mass, traditional mass, traditionalists, traditionis custodes, vatican ii. Bookmark the permalink. 17 Comments.
What if continuity is not a given in healthy Christianity? A person makes a vow of celibacy, and there’s not an interim period where a person can still date people one or two days a week. So many saints had wake-up moments, even people who led objectively good lives prior to a conversion moment. The problem with the TLM was that people have used it as a banner for their own disobedience. It’s not anything new. Every Church council has had its post-conciliar dissenters.
Maybe it would help you to understand the mind of someone who prefers the TLM if you were to read this.
It has, for the vast majority, nothing whatsoever to do with “disobedience” or “dissent” or any other calumny you may choose to level at TLM adherents.
In answer to your question, “What if continuity is not a given in healthy Christianity?”— then it would not be Christianity. Continuity comes from eternal truth. Either the Catholic Church is the Truth or it isn’t. If it isn’t, then neither is any other purportedly Christian “church.” If it is, then all other “flavors” of Christianity depend essentially on the Truths of Catholicism, which are in fact eternal as taught by Christ and the Apostles. That looks like continuity to me. The Novus Ordo doesn’t look like continuity in anything except the bare bones. I attend it because I have no practical alternative to worship God and receive the Blessed Sacrament when properly disposed. But I would prefer to attend a TLM. If that makes me “disobedient” or a “dissenter”, then so be it.
God bless all here.
If people have used the TLM as a banner for their own dissension/disobedience, then that goes more than twice as much for the Novus Ordo. I have seen, lived and practice in, both forms of the mass. What is more important in the end? Fidelity to pastoral ideas (led by a council) – or fidelity to the immutable truths of the faith? If both can occur, good job. If both do not occur simultaneously, or one does not serve the other, hold fast to that which is good. And by good, I mean serves God, His Church and His Immutable Truths.
I will visit! I found it interesting that our chosen profile names were so similar.
(As in “Son of Blessed Mary” on your other WP site.) thanks Frank
“The problem with the TLM was that people have used it as a banner for their own disobedience.”
It probably doesn’t help when you so often make the mere act of celebrating or attending it proscribed: And thus, an act of disobdience.
Oddly, this happened less where bishops were generous in permitting it.
A well written and logical response to Francis and his liturgical terrorists in the Curia. I no longer listen with an open heart to this crazed person who doesnt want to referred to as the Vicar of Christ! Basta!
Really well said! Good on you!
Did any of the French prelates reply, “Well actually, Holy Father, we know very few TLM supporters who reject Vatican II; the situation is not really like that.” A rhetorical question perhaps.
Francis is the pope of the new religion of Vatican II
The Novus Ordo is a man made creation and should be avoided !
Return to the TRUTH and Tradition !
Reject modernism and the new false religion of Vatican II
Admittedly, the TLM got off to a bad start after 1970. There were pockets of people who found Mass in Latin in traditional church architectures not enough and staked out their claims on worship the way they wanted it. Often it was the Low Mass, an expression rather bereft of artistry. The problem since 2007 was as many bishops in the US, France, and a few other places reported: traditionalist communities and their online expressions became a haven in some cases for dissent, disrespect, and division. We can’t get around that.
There are certainly progressive strains in the Church that strain at unity. Here and there, readings and prayers may be edited for sexist language. Hardly anyone is making a public case for it. Nobody is forming new parishes.
I think when Catholics become intentional about anything–liturgy progressive or traditional, social justice, education, discipleship, and perhaps especially evangelization–their communities flourish as a whole or in groups. It is true many TLM communities thrive. They do so because they have a mission. The ones who continually criticize the pope, or label the modern Roman Rite as deficient, or celebrate Mass with frowny lemon-twisted faces thrive far less than any parish that exudes joy over grimness, gratitude over resentment, welcome and openness above all things.
I feel badly for my traditional-leaning friends. But I’ve seen the fruits of some online TLM advocates. These are rotten pieces indeed.
From whence comes your evidence for fruit in the Novus Ordo?
Closed seminaries, shuttered convents, dwindling church attendance perhaps?
The only number that is up in Novus Ordo land is the number of Bishops; lots of Chiefs and a sharp decline in the Indians.
I have 2 helped organize 2 National Studies on the TLM with over 3,500 samples in 39 USA States. The fruits in the TLM are superabundant to say the least.
You are quite off the mark when it comes to demographics and trends. The TLM is exploding and the NOM is imploding.
I think you are citing correlation, not causation. Outside of select communities in the US, France, and a few other places in Europe, the TLM isn’t even on Catholic radar. There are at least as many parishes that pray in the modern Roman Rite that are on the rise. But most parishes are shrinking and getting by, barely–as they have for the past century. Peak priestly vocations in the US were in 1947. In Europe, a few decades prior. The difference between your perspective and mine is that I’d prefer to think of the totality of the discipleship and evangelization problem for the whole Church. I observe your perspective is your way or the high way. Yours doesn’t work. Never has. It illustrates an offense against the first quality of the Church cited in the Creed.
Your comments might carry a bit more credibility if you actually responded to the points made here and didn’t feel the need to attack personally the people with whom you disagree, in nearly every comment you post. This time it’s accusing someone of “offense against the first quality of the Church”, which means schism where I live. At the same time, you constantly accuse your opponents of being myopic. The log just may be in your own eye. Just saying.
Pingback: Zap Big Pulpit – Big Pulpit
Pingback: TVESDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit