Rorate Caeli

Father Barthe on the Motu Proprio

Father Claude Barthe, author of "Beyond Vatican II: The Church at a new crossroads" and one of the most well-informed clergymen in France, had this to say on the possible Motu Proprio in an online interview given today to the readers of Le Forum Catholique:

As far as it can be known, there have been two successive drafts of the MP. It was the second one -- which should be more complete and which should detail the resolution of problems -- which was examined by the full membership of the Ecclesia Dei Commission in December. A handful of modifications would have been added by the Commission and the text is "ready for signature" on the desk of the Pope. It is notorious that he takes his time for the decisions (that became legendary in Munich, during the short time in which he was Archbishop).

The text is now known to Cardinal Ricard, Cardinal Barbarin, and a certain number of French bishops, at least in its general lines. Their reactions, the precautions which they take, the manner in which they speak to their clergy seem to indicate that there is nothing institutional in the document (it would not refer at all, in theory, to the Ecclesia Dei communities themselves), but that the "needs of the faithful" must be compulsorily satisfied, without their being able to oppose it, except in a justified manner.

I do not believe, but I may be wrong here, that the freedom shall be restrained. I believe that the psychological shock which the freedom will generate will be salutary, even if it creates difficulties, those which we can predict and others which we quite surely cannot predict. ... I insist on the conditional tone which I have constantly used [in this answer].

31 comments:

Janice said...

This is great news. I welcome the changes that will come as a result, not only in the Mass, but a climate change overall. It will also change the way catechesis is done and also evangelization (and that can't happen fast enough). If you think the NO is Protestant, you haven't seen the blogs that proffer a quasi-Protestant way of evangelizing Catholics!

Simon-Peter said...

"except in a justified manner."


"manner."

Does that speak to substance, or form? I smell an empty vessel into which our Roman Protestant brothers can pour their own meaning...sort of like "saint", "great", "dialogue", "heresy", "ecumenical" "hell", "sin" "scandal", "catholic", "subsists / is" &c.

Does anyone think those opposed have not already got plans a, b, c ready to stifle this, pastorally-speaking, naturally.?

I do.


Put no faith in princes.

thetimman said...

New Catholic, I know that exerpt was in English, but can you please interpret this into English English English?

Janice said...

Simon-Pete,

Take "yes" for an answer.

New Catholic said...

Yes, I apologize for the cryptic translation, but I believe it is pretty close to the original French...

What is the exact point you could not understand?

thetimman said...

New C, sorry, wasn't trying to flip, but can you distill what he is saying-- what I took it to mean is that the "not institutionalizing" of the m.p. is essentially good, that the permission is not limited to the e.d. groups but is guaranteed in a way that cannot be denied. Is that correct?

And, simon-peter, I do agree that there are plans to squelch it. Will they succeed is the question.

New Catholic said...

Yes, that is correct -- except that he does not give his opinion of the "non-institutional" character of the possible MP. He merely describes it as he sees it.

New Catholic said...

Any speculation on what the possible MP could include and what its implementation could look like should be avoided here.

With the exception of one sentence ("J’ai répondu un peu dans le désordre, mais je crois sur le fond de votre question.") and of the historical conclusion ("Par ailleurs, j’avais parlé du « progressisme modéré » de Jean XXIII, en l’opposant au « traditionalisme éclairé » de Benoît XVI. Étant concédé le caractère journalistique de la formule, je persiste et signe. « Eclairé » aussi en ce que Joseph Ratzinger n’est pas sans une certaine ascendance intellectuelle joséphiste, au meilleur sens du terme : il cherche à sauver ce qu’il a pu y avoir de bon dans les Lumières."), which is not directly related to the possible MP, the whole answer was translated.

Simon-Peter said...

Well, timman, they have been trying real hard for some time...

Check this out linked from CathCon

http://tinyurl.com/2kh3sa



Psalm (73) 74 (NAB...sorry, but it does a better job than the DR at getting the point over...how ironic).

3 Turn your steps toward the utter ruins, toward the sanctuary devastated by the enemy.
4 Your foes roared triumphantly in your shrine; they set up their own tokens of victory.
5 They hacked away like foresters gathering boughs, swinging their axes in a thicket of trees.
6 They smashed all your engraved work, pounded it with hammer and pick.
7 They set your sanctuary on fire; the abode of your name they razed and profaned.
8 They said in their hearts, "Destroy them all! Burn all the shrines of God in the land!"

MacK said...

Still no MP. Wait and see the framework - too much speculation and too much emotion. And if & when it comes, what price when Pope Benedict XVI passes away? Pray then a good Holy Father who honours Pope St Pius V's perpetual blessing on the true Roman Catholic liturgy.

Progressives never rest.

Jon said...

...22 Arise O God; defend Your cause;
remember how the fool blaphemes You day after day.
23 Be not unmindful of the voice of Your foes;
the uproar of those who rebel against You is unceasing.

alsaticus said...

Simon-Peter wrote :
"Does anyone think those opposed have not already got plans a, b, c ready to stifle this, pastorally-speaking, naturally.?
I do. "

At least a plan A is already at work in France : in Lyon, the cardinal-abp has removed the apostolate from FSSP and entrusted (future) ex-FSSP priests of the church Saint-Georges. In Versailles another main apostolate of FSSP is on the same road, the Bp tightening first his control evicting the former lay association responsible of the building.
Two neo-cons bishops, cardinal Barbarin and Bp Aumônier.

I think "plan A" is to have docile diocesan priests in charge so to be able to pressure them a maximum after a while. FSSP under Fr. Berg is considered with hostility due to the absolute fidelity of the Superior general to TLM.

Then plan B, C, D will come according to the loops offered by the eventual Roman document.
It has to be seen yet : I've become "thomasian" with this pontificate now. My neck hurts after nearly 2 years of watching the rumor-mill turning.

Simon-Peter said...

No, progressives never rest...

Job 1:7.

Ez: 28:18a.

Simon-Peter said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
quaremerepulisti said...

"Turn your steps toward the utter ruins, toward the sanctuary devastated by the enemy.
4 Your foes roared triumphantly in your shrine; they set up their own tokens of victory.
5 They hacked away like foresters gathering boughs, swinging their axes in a thicket of trees.
6 They smashed all your engraved work, pounded it with hammer and pick.
7 They set your sanctuary on fire; the abode of your name they razed and profaned.
8 They said in their hearts, "Destroy them all! Burn all the shrines of God in the land!"

During my years in seminary in the land of darkness and the shadow of death, we disciples of Trent referred to this as the Vatican II Psalm. It could not be more apposite to the senseless devastation we have endured.

Pascendi said...

The key seems to me the dicoesan bishop and the desire of the clergy to say the Mass. Sadly most priests will continue as is.
Two aspects seems to be evolving from the possibilities of the MP: 1) The MP's application will be strongly dependant on the local ordinary and his desire to either promote (or obstruct) the MP; 2) If the ordinary can no longer "forbid" clergy to say the Mass will "conservative" priests move to Tradition?

An analogy might be like having a Rolls-Royce but no driver. You still aren't going anywhere. I still fear the spectre of "collegiality".

Pascendi said...

The key seems to me the dicoesan bishop and the desire of the clergy to say the Mass. Sadly most priests will continue as is.
Two aspects seems to be evolving from the possibilities of the MP: 1) The MP's application will be strongly dependent on the local ordinary and his desire to either promote (or obstruct) the MP; 2) If the ordinary can no longer "forbid" clergy to say the Mass will "conservative" priests move to Tradition?

An analogy might be like having a Rolls-Royce but no driver. You still aren't going anywhere. I still fear the spectre of "collegiality".

michigancatholic said...

Is "Beyond Vatican II:...." a good book? I am surprised to see that it is available to us from the usual outlets....

Anonymous said...

If it will help the implementation of this document be more successful, I hope the Holy Father takes many more months before revealing it to us.

Jon said...

Anonymous,

"Many more months?" The Holy Father is not a young man. Should he die, heave forbid, be assured, the MP dies with him.

Arieh said...

michigancatholic,

"Beyond VII" is a pretty good book, though the translation is a bit clunky. I had to read some paragraphs over and over to get the gist.

Anonymous said...

Come, Motu proprio!

Veni ad liberandum nos!

St. Joseph, Patron of the Universal Church, pray for the Pope.

May the Holy Spirit, Lord and giver of life, inspire our Holy Father to sign, seal and deliver the universal indult, for the good of the much troubled Catholic faithful, the salvation of our souls, and for the greater glory of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and of His holy Church.

Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of the Apostles, help us! Let the Eucharistic Presence of Your most dilect Son be more faithfully adored, and the significance of his Sacrifice on the Cross - our redemption - more widely appreciated.

Simon-Peter said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
MacK said...

simon-peter

I prefer to obey Pope Leo XIII on this one - to not speculate on the souls of the dead. I would presume nothing.

Objectively, we can observe the actions and sayings of the man himself while he was on earth. As he changed the system of beatification and canonisation quite radically, among a host of other items, one has to question the validity of both processes in today's church. It is clear some of his "saints" and "blesseds" do not in all honesty match up to the traditional requirements of Catholic norms and values. As he is being treated in like manner, any residual role left to the Devil's Advocate and the criteria for "sainthood" and "martyrdom" accord with post-conciliar benchmarks, I certainly will avoid any intercessory prayers with this one, if it goes through. Thankfully, salvation does not depend on saints or blesseds. I won't be obeying his example.

Many Catholics can see this is an undignified rush to counteract all the considerable & overwhelming arguments by orthodox Catholic holy fathers, doctors and theologians weighted against his many contradictory and unclearly expressed doctrinal statements. This says nothing about the public behaviour at times which scandalised Catholics and raised questioning eyebrows even in The Vatican. The whole process has the hallmarks of papolatry.

I have often prayed over my children when they are ill and they have regained their health days later, sometimes without a medical visit. This could be a qualification for modernised sanctity one day.

Keep reading Ezechiel, you quote the prophet earlier, and Daniel - they help us to understand the contemporary church and society. Our Blessed Lord Himself confirmed their validity.

Aa said...

This is a truly remarkable blog. The stories that you are covering are more important than any others on Fox News, CNN or anywhere else. One day, saints will speak about this period in the history of the Church. Rorate Caeli should be a topic of that conversation. Cheers!

Simon-Peter said...

Mack:

right, just as it is unlawful for us to probe too deeply into the areas covered by EENS's "not to hold out a good hope."

I should have expressed it better: I do hope he is in heaven, but I hope we don't know about it. We don't need any repeats. That IS all I meant.

You know, no matter how "bad" things seem / are, there fact is that I was created for *this* time, and my life has been ordered and shaped (with vast but finite redundancies) to give me the best possible opportunity for responding through free will to His invitation to sanctification.

It's terrifying.


By the way, here is a link to an address entitled "We Screwed up For 40 Years: Big Oops, Kinda Sorry" given by Cardinal Arinze in October in Paris

http://tinyurl.com/3dsu42

I found it on Carolina Cannonballs Blog (The Crescat)...and I noticed it was touched on -- but not really discussed -- here at the end of October 2006.

Given the recent French "intellectuals" statement, the comment by Alsaticus here about the FSSP, the ICK, and the opposition of the French episcopacy I thought it was interesting it was given in France back in *October*.

I still think something's going on here with our new Bishop and his new FSSP Chaplain and his new young orthodox vocations director...

I mean, if FSSP movements are any indication...?

Simon-Peter said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Matt said...

Mack,

As he changed the system of beatification and canonisation quite radically, among a host of other items, one has to question the validity of both processes in today's church

So are you saying that Pope John Paul II had no authority to change the process of beatification and canonisation in the Catholic Church, of which he was the Supreme Pontiff? Are you saying that it's possible for the Catholic Church to err in the canonisation of a saint?

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that the process for canonisation is reformable, and that the declarations are considered infallible. Does that mean you chose to reject these dishes and like a cafeteria Catholic, or are you saying that the Church has collapsed and there is no valid pope, rejecting the whole Church in it's promise to never fall?

Pascendi said...

With regards to the canonization process. I ask, did we really need the changes? For what purpose? Was the previous stricter system inadequate?

And why such rushes to declare this or that person a saint? There simply is no need. What is needed is a quiet and detached assessment of the life of the person in question.

We already have instant coffee; there is no need for "instant saints".

Simon-Peter said...

Oh, and welcome back Matt :-).

Jordan Potter said...

"canonisations are not infallible"

Ditto what Jared said.

"(what happened to St Philomena)."

Nothing happened to her. In my diocese we have a church under her patronage, and her cult there remains strong. She may not be on the universal calendar of the Roman Martyrology any more, but that doesn't mean she has been "decanonised" (same with St. Christopher -- no longer on the calendar, and little of a historical nature is known about him, but his cult has not been suppressed). There are no examples of a formally canonised saint ever being later declared an "oops, sorry about that." There are many uncanonised "saints" who have been popular in the past but whose cults have now been outlawed by the Church (the blood libel saints, for instance, some of whom probably never existed), but St. Philomena is not one of them. I don't know where people got the idea her cult had been suppressed, but you're not the first person I've come across to think it was.