Rorate Caeli
Latest information on the Instruction, from Messa in Latino:
Great concern was raised in the Traditional world (and in Roman dicasteries...) by the leak of news of which we have been the co-authors, along with Rorate Caeli, regarding the contents of the Instruction on the motu proprio; for which we have spoken openly of the watering down of the motu proprio and have promoted, along with the New Liturgical Movement, an international appeal. How much the latter may influence matters is unknown; but we do know with certainty that what was set in motion, thanks to our sources (honestly concerned with the fate of the Church and of Tradition), has indeed made the Holy Father discreetly receive requests of the very highest levels regarding this famous Instruction. The Instruction is ready and Cardinal Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (and President of the Pontifical Commission 'Ecclesia Dei'), discussed its final details in his audience with the Pope last Friday; but some amendments are perhaps still possible.

19 comments:

Patrick said...

How can Messa in Latino refer to "the leak of which we have been co-authors, together with Rorate Coeli"? The news was first leaked by Rorate, in the early hours of January 15th. The French blog Summorum-pontificum.fr was then the first to echo it, just a few hours later: http://www.summorum-pontificum.fr/informations/du-nouveau-sur-l%e2%80%99instruction-concernant-l%e2%80%99application-du-motu-proprio When Rorate Coeli deleted the post after only a couple of hours online, www.summorum-pontificum.fr checked with its own sources and carried on with the story, with a second post on January 15th: http://www.summorum-pontificum.fr/documents/voici-un-complement-assez-troublant-a-mon-precedent-post
Messa in Latino did not step in until January 16th.

This is not to criticize http://blog.messainlatino.it , which is an excellent blog, but they should get their facts straight.

Fernando said...

I'm praying for a good document that will help the faithful. But we're dealing with bishops and high-level priests that simply hate that motu proprio. They can do a huge damage but I'm confident.
I don't think that the Pope can (un)do such thing. He was pretty brave at 2007 so why back now when the hard-hard time has gone? I know there are a lot of resistence by the bishops but it is already there, for the last 3 years! The "Evil" Instruction, I think, is just a pontifical hoax or a canonical spam.

Cruise the Groove. said...

The Holy Ghost and the Holy Father are in charge of this now.
They have the final authority.

LeonG said...

Personally speaking, the SP contains the fundamental weakness of compromising the unique position of the Roman Catholic liturgical norm which has for centuries maintained successfuly the lex supplicandi with the lex credendi. It attempts to link inseparably the status of The Holy Latin Mass with the revolutionary NO. This rite is completely deconstructionist because it has disembodied The Roman Catholic Faith using postmodern anthropomorphic vernacular linguistic trends which are at once changeable and significantly subversive. This liturgial interrelationship is unsustainable and cannot produce any "mutual enrichment".

When all is said and done what Traditional Roman Catholics need is a public restatement of "Quo Primum" with its conciliar doctrinal guarantees "in perpetuum". Already the dissident NO coterie of presbyters has spoken - refusal of obedience to changes toward orthodoxy in the NO, its translations or its revolutionary values. The writing is on the proverbial wall. The fabricated NO is a shambles, a battle ground for various liberal radical parties & this puts the authentic Latin Rite of Holy Mass at risk of change to suit the modernists i a post-conciliar environment of novelty with compromise.

Who in their right mind can give their assent to this?

benjoyce said...

If SP ends up getting diluted and tradition is delt a blow, won't this derail any progress anticipated by the Holy Father in the talks with the SSPX. Won't Bishop Fellay & Co. "flip out" and go home ie end of talking with Rome?

Paul Haley said...

I have to agree with Bishop Fellay of the SSPX who said recently to a US audience:

"The time for that is not yet ripe; we are not there yet, but I think that it will happen. It will be difficult; we will have to look closely at how we can manage to achieve that. It will be absolutely necessary that this be done with bishops who have really understood the crisis and who really want to work with us.

I have to agree with His Excellency especially with respect to the boldfaced text. The modernists are running things and they are anathema to us. There is a division, a chasm, that cannot yet be bridged despite the efforts of some prelates to side with us on certain matters. The online petition to the Holy Father is a good example as I was recently advised that it was not "helpful" by one who knows the ins and outs of the Vatican.

Nevertheless, canon law gives to the Faithful the right and even the duty in certain circumstances to make their opinions known to the "sacred pastors" and this we shall continue to do until our last breath on this earth. If they (the modernists) believe that we are going to fold up our tents and go home, they are sadly mistaken. We will not give up; we will never give up - not one iota for the cause of sacred Tradition in the Church.

Anonymous said...

"with bishops who have really understood the crisis and who really want to work with us", says Bishop Fellay.

Good, but why on earth are only few such bishops been appointed whereas it seems that the nomination of "modern" bishops is continuing at least as strongly as before. I have not seen any radical change to the better which was what I really hoped for when Pope Benedict was elected.

M

LeonG said...

M

If you read all of Pope Benedict's works from beginning to end you will understand why he has disappointed you. If you look at those writings sincerely put into action this will validate the conclusion you draw from his writings. It is, therefore xtremely doubtful if he is going to do any more for traditionalists than he has done already.

Prof. Basto said...

Let us pray to the Holy Spirit, that he will illuminate the heart of the Holy Father.

Although this will be only a disciplinary, and not a doctrinal document, still, the Holy Spirit can aid the Holy Father in making the best determinations for the Church and for a restoration of due Christian worship.

The TLM is a powerful weapon in the battle to restore Christiandom to its proper place. It is a powerful weapon to combat heterodoxy, to create vocations, to nurture new generations of Catholics ready to fight secularism, etc.

And the TLM is more reverent to God than the NO, and more clearly and explicitly proclaims in its rubrics the doctrinal truths of our Faith.

So, this is a worthy cause, a cause worthy of a miracle, of a powerful intervention of the Divine Spirit.

Let us then place our hopes in the Triune God, and recite the Veni Creator, praying that the Holy Spirit will guide the mind and the hand of the Holy Father in this matter.

Blessed Mother, pray for us to God your Son!

John Lamont said...

For what it is worth at this date, I can confirm with total reliability that the clarification is severely problematic and that alarms about it are not just rumours.

Anonymous said...

Catholic splinter group sees no Vatican accord

By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor | February 22, 2011 5:55 AM AEST

Anonymous said...

I second Professor Basto's plea. I have spent the evening in prayer over this.

I don't think that Mr. Lamont would come on this list and tell us lies. Therefore, since it is looking rather bad at this point, I encourage everyone to remember that a restriction on an instrument which is no longer very productive is not all that bad and MAY lead, through our prayer, to additional provisions from the Holy Father. At the end of the day, the major importance of the m.p. lies in its admission that the ancient Roman Mass was never abrogated and is permissible.

P.K.T.P.

New Catholic said...

This Reuters article mentioned by the last anon. is based exclusively in Fellay's interview and seem to completely overstretch the meaning of his words.

NC

Bill McEnaney said...

I'm trying not to jump to conclusions about the rumors about SP restrictions. But each time I remember that frightening possibility, it reminds me how strongly agree with John Vennari when he says that Benedict's traditionalist gestures are only examples of progressivism with a conservative veneer. God bless the Holy Father. Unfortunately, I still see him as a less progressive version of John Paul II.

Anonymous said...

"I personally know the founders of a new monastic community in the U.S. who, at present, have the support of their bishop in their use of a missal peculiar to the branch of monasticism to which they belong, but which the rest of that branch worldwide stopped using 50 years ago."

There is only one such group in the USA, so they're rather easy to identify. We're still trying to confirm it but we've just received information to the effect that this group has just been forbidden by their bishop to use their ancient Rite, thus forcing them to switch to the 1962 Missal.

~ Pascal

LeonG said...

" it reminds me how strongly agree with John Vennari when he says that Benedict's traditionalist gestures are only examples of progressivism with a conservative veneer."

This is precisely it - he does it sincerely as a genuine liberal would. Everyone is welcome under the neo-catholic umbrella.

Anonymous said...

I wonder,could the alleged restrictions of SP mean that the discussions with the SSPX are not going as expected? Did the balance of power shift in favor of the anti "reform of the reform" faction of the Catholic Church? The HF has been over ruled?

The restriction of SP makes sense only if the Holy Father has given up on the talks with the SSPX. Even the carefully balanced interview of Bishop Fellay and its timing may suggest this.

Anonymous said...

There is only one such group in the USA, so they're rather easy to identify. We're still trying to confirm it but we've just received information to the effect that this group has just been forbidden by their bishop to use their ancient Rite, thus forcing them to switch to the 1962 Missal.

~ Pascal


Well: (if true) that cuts deep. I know those guys. What they had been doing up to (I hope not) now was rather integrated into their life.

--Zakhur

Anonymous said...

I wonder if all the fuss over the instruction has been much ado about nothing. It certainly seems to have quieted down!