Who is Archbishop Vittorio Francesco Viola, OFM? The Secretary of the Dicastery for Divine Worship is said to be proud to wear the episcopal ring of none other than the devious creator of the Novus Ordo, Archbishop Annibale Bugnini (cf. here, in Italian).
 |
| (Archbishop Viola, celebrating something - image: Silere non possum) |
We can affirm today that he is the main dangerous ideologically motivated cleric whose final intent is to completely ban the Traditional Latin Mass. We could add much more, in much more detail, but instead will present the translation of the post just published by the Italian religious blog Silere non possum (a centrist, non-traditionalist blog) on the appalling ban Viola imposed on the continuation of the celebration of the Traditional Mass in the Cathedral of Melbourne, Australia -- as if the Metropolitan Archbishop of Melbourne were some kind of naughty altar boy who is not in charge even of the liturgy in his OWN cathedral! The absolute opposite of the deceitful allegations contained in Traditionis custodes.
In the letter, he orders the bishop to celebrate only the reformed liturgy in his own cathedral, but allows the use of a church (not the cathedral) if the faithful want to remain with the Traditional rite (there is already an existing traditional parish in the diocese, that is only unaffected by Traditionis custodes because it had been instituted before it). So much for the bishop as the overseer of the liturgy in his diocese...
Since Silere non possum has posted the letter, we can now present it below, along with their post.
The Dicastery for Divine Worship says no to the Vetus Ordo in the cathedral
Silere non possum, June 18, 2024
In recent months, the Archbishop of Melbourne, H.E. Archbishop Peter Andrew Comensoli sent to the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments a request for a decree, as provided for in the Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes, authorizing the celebration of the Eucharist with the 1962 Missale Romanum in several places in the Archdiocese.
The response of the Secretary of the Dicastery, Archbishop Vittorio Francesco Viola, is emblematic and clearly explains what is the purpose of Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes, a document that has created much division within the Catholic Church. Rather than uniting, in fact, it has chosen to proceed by exacerbating the positions of those who misinterpret the Second Vatican Council and those who even disavow it. It is surprising how Viola, trained in the Aventine school [Rorate note: the Pontifical Institute Anselmianum], cites the Ceremonial of Bishops to reiterate how, "the preeminent manifestation of the local Church (...) when the Bishop, as high priest of his flock, celebrates the Eucharist and in particular when he celebrates in the Cathedral, surrounded by his college of presbyters and his ministers, and with the full and active participation of all God's holy people." Fortunately, once in a while, someone remembers this.
The problem is that this is used to say that the ancient Mass cannot be celebrated in the cathedral precisely because the bishop's celebration must be exemplary. One has to wonder: so when bishops celebrate according to an unspecified rite that would like to ape that of St. Paul VI, does no one get outraged? When there are bishops who commit liturgical abuses and promote sloppiness, no one dares to write two lines?
While Benedict XVI tried to make it clear that these two rites could peacefully coexist in the Church - not forgetting that the German pontiff had in his heart the hope of seeing a new rite that would enhance all the positive things of both the old missal and the new one - today, on the contrary, people are working to curb those who are linked to this rite and are talking about it in terms of "forced re-education."
It is true that there are some groups attached to the old rite who are attached only to the form, often criticizing the Pope and disavowing the Second Vatican Council, but it is equally true that there are groups, certainly attached to the new rite, who are talking about theordination of women (which is a canonical crime), the elimination of priestly celibacy, communion to the divorced and remarried, and other various follies. The problem, then, is not the rite itself but what people profess, but if we get down to the theological-moral convictions of individuals, there would be countless rites to be abolished.
Contrary to what Viola states, therefore, it would be desirable that at the very altar where the bishop ordinarily celebrates, both rites could be celebrated. All an expression of the Lex Orandi of the Roman Rite, all celebrated with dignity and devotion. In this way unity could be fostered. Also, should we not work on the application of Sacrosantum Concilium and make sure that everyone celebrates following what the Roman Missal provides, so that people understand, precisely, all its positive aspects? As Benedict XVI mentioned several times, the big problem today is that few people have studied and understood the Second Vatican Council. Many talk about this event but refer to a bad interpretation that has been made of it. This is precisely where the pathology of this event arises: there are those who use the Council to affirm ideas that are their own and there are those who attack the Council by looking at those who misapply it. A real drama.
Viola is a liturgical bandit, a fox put in charge of the liturgical treasury of the Latin Church. If he gets his way, all will be destroyed.
Letter below (click for larger view):
 |
 |
