A wound, a "vulnus". Could it eventually lead to Summorum's slow demise?
In his long presentation of the Bergoglio pontificate so far, Sandro Magister dedicates his space mostly to Francis' words (for good reason). Amidst all words of the analysis, this explosive revelation, very relevant for all Catholics, runs the risk of being left unremarked. We will not let it go unnoticed:
But to distance the last two popes are also arriving the facts.
The ban imposed by pope Bergoglio on the congregation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate against celebrating the Mass in the ancient rite has been an effective restriction of that freedom of celebrating in this rite which Benedict XVI had guaranteed for all.
It emerges from conversations with his visitors that Ratzinger himself has seen in this restriction a "vulnus" on his 2007 motu proprio "Summorum Pontificum."
In the interview with “La Civiltà Cattolica," Francis dismissed the liberalization of the ancient rite decided by Benedict XVI as a simple "prudential decision motivated by the desire to help people who have this sensitivity," when instead the intention made explicit by Ratzinger - expressed at the time in a letter to the bishops of the whole world - was that “the two forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching."
In the same interview, Francis defined the postconciliar liturgical reform as “a service to the people as a re-reading of the Gospel from a concrete historical situation." A strongly reductive definition with respect to the vision of the liturgy that was proper to Ratzinger as theologian and pope.
Moreover, also in this field, Francis replaced en bloc last September 26 the five advisors of the office of papal liturgical celebrations.
Among those removed was for example Fr. Uwe Michael Lang, a liturgist for whom Ratzinger himself wrote the preface to his most important book, dedicated to the orientation of liturgical prayer "to the Lord."
While among those promoted are liturgists much more inclined to second the celebratory style of Pope Francis, this too visibly far from the inspired "ars celebrandi" of Benedict XVI.
The intervention on the Franciscans of the Immaculate, whatever its motivations (and there may be many we do not know), should not have had as a collateral measure the restriction on Summorum, wounding the general law of the Church that the motu proprio intended to be. FI priests have at the present moment (considering the literal legalistic view of the matter, not its legitimacy) fewer liturgical prerogatives than all priests of the Latin Church. This page has always considered this liturgical restriction on the FI a very grave wound on Summorum Pontificum. For this we have been considered "alarmists" and of a condemnable "style" by the usual suspects who always want to be on the right side of the moment, even if they are on the wrong side of history and Tradition. Benedict's opinion, as reported, shows that our aprehension and view of the gravity of the matter were, as usual, absolutely correct.
We do not doubt a "denial" is forthcoming, but Magister has not been wrong in his main revelations in his pontificate. To use Pope Francis' native tongue, "La buena es la primera"...
We do not doubt a "denial" is forthcoming, but Magister has not been wrong in his main revelations in his pontificate. To use Pope Francis' native tongue, "La buena es la primera"...
