The devilish enemies of the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum now have found a really powerful argument against its application...
From this Saturday's edition of Corriere della Sera:
YET, THE MOTU PROPRIO REMAINS IN THE BOILING PAN
by ALBERTO MELLONI
They are called the Acta Apostolicæ Sedis [The Acts of the Apostolic See-AAS] and have been for a century the organ which gives force to papal provisions. It may happen that the [Holy See] Press Office or that the website vatican.va precede them, but their wording [sic] is the official one.
The fact that the motu proprio on the use of the Tridentine Missal, in force from September 14, has still not been published on the Acta, maybe in the expectation of solving some of the doubts which it brings, causes reflection.
Other than the objection which the Pope showed himself to know in his letter to the Bishops, there were the Latin flaws detected by Carlo Ossola... Then, Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini stepped in to explain why he had not used the privilege which the motu proprio granted. Some liturgists have underlined that the conditions established by the motu proprio for the use of the Tridentine rite are rather severe, more than the Traditionalist enthusiasm may make believe.
A great scholar of the Latin liturgical books, Manlio Sodi, documented afterwards that there is a Missal of Tradition and Scripture, that is, the well thought out Missal of Paul VI, and not the one born from that chaotic phase of the post-Tridentine Council. The reality, in fact, [is that] the distinctions between ordinary and extraordinary form of the Mass (which then-Cardinal Ratzinger in 1982 and 1983) demands harsh pastoral forcefulness.
From [all of] this he wise decision to keep still in the boiling pan [lit. bain-marie] a text which is creating more problems than those which it does not solve: even at the cost of putting into force an act which exists (how to say it?) in "Web tantum". [Rorate note: that is, only 'on the web' not in 'law'.]
There is, first, an incredible lie when Melloni says that, "some liturgists have underlined that the conditions established by the motu proprio for the use of the Tridentine rite are rather severe" - the use of "some" in such comments hides the fact that no names are mentioned, since no honest person can state that there are any "severe" conditions established by the motu proprio. On the contrary: all distortions in the application of the motu proprio have been caused exclusively by ill-intentioned bishops who have sought to "interpret" the motu proprio their own way, as if it were a second "Ecclesia Dei", not a document which clarifies the rights (not "privileges") of priests and faithful.
There is also the lie that the Traditional Missal was somehow "created" after the Council of Trent (in the "chaotic post-Tridentine years"...), which no mediocre student of the liturgy of the Latin Church would ever ascertain. Naturally, lying is all that is left for Melloni and his companions of intellectual thuggery.
The fact that the official publication of Summorum Pontificum in the AAS has not appeared is absolutely irrelevant to its application, as Melloni knows well (then again, distortion is the favorite sport of the "Rupturists-discontinuists" of the school of Bologna, the heirs to what Pope Benedict calls "the hermeneutic of rupture and discontinuity" - now in definitive exile from the Vatican halls). For the sake of our readers, the appropriate texts of the Code of Canon Law:
There is also the lie that the Traditional Missal was somehow "created" after the Council of Trent (in the "chaotic post-Tridentine years"...), which no mediocre student of the liturgy of the Latin Church would ever ascertain. Naturally, lying is all that is left for Melloni and his companions of intellectual thuggery.
The fact that the official publication of Summorum Pontificum in the AAS has not appeared is absolutely irrelevant to its application, as Melloni knows well (then again, distortion is the favorite sport of the "Rupturists-discontinuists" of the school of Bologna, the heirs to what Pope Benedict calls "the hermeneutic of rupture and discontinuity" - now in definitive exile from the Vatican halls). For the sake of our readers, the appropriate texts of the Code of Canon Law:
Can. 7 A law comes into being when it is promulgated.
Can. 8 §1 Universal ecclesiastical laws are promulgated by publication in the 'Acta Apostolicae Sedis', unless in particular cases another manner of promulgation has been prescribed. They come into force only on the expiry of three months from the date appearing on the particular issue of the 'Acta', unless because of the nature of the case they bind at once, or unless a shorter or a longer interval has been specifically and expressly prescribed in the law itself. [Translation: Canon Law Society of America]
There is obviously no doubt that Summorum Pontificum is in full force, irrespective of its official publication in the AAS: "We order that everything We have decreed with this Apostolic Letter given Motu Proprio be considered as having full and lasting force, and be observed from September 14 of this year, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary." What is left is for priests and faithful to exercise their rights and for Bishops to provide for what the new law asks of them, when their intervention is at all necessary - and not to "interpret" the new law, a role reserved to the Apostolic See and its special dicastery, the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei.
___________________
Transcript of Corriere article: Papa Ratzinger Blog
Transcript of Corriere article: Papa Ratzinger Blog
