From our friends at Argentine blog Caminante Wanderer:
July 16, the feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and the third anniversary of Traditionis custodes, was the date set for the release of a new document from the Holy See putting an end to the traditional Mass, which, it was said, would be reserved exclusively for the so-called “Ecclesia Dei institutes.” It was, as we called it in this blog, the final solution.
But, perhaps through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin of Mount Carmel herself, nothing happened. And some have begun to comment on what happened in the Vatican's mendacious circles. I offer here the explanations given for the facts.
1. The document in question exists, and has existed since the end of 2021, with more or fewer details. It was intended to be signed in February 2022 by Pope Francis in the form of an apostolic constitution, as we said at the time; but not only did he refuse to do so, but he intemperately had the person who brought him the proposal, Cardinal Arthur Roche, expelled from the office.
2. Cardinal Arthur Roche, from that day on, was never again received individually by Pope Francis. And the situation is very unusual because he is the prefect of one of the Vatican dicasteries. Rumors about the reasons for such a mistreatment indicate that, in the first place, Roche is not exactly a skillful person, much less an intelligent one. On the contrary, he is a person who has a habit of messing up any project and any organization. In fact, that was the reason why he ended up in Rome. He had been appointed bishop of Leeds, in England, and had the "merit" of provoking, in only three years, a chaos of all kinds in a diocese that had until then been orderly. It was Cardinal Nichols who asked Pope Benedict XVI to remove him from England because neither his brother bishops nor his Leeds faithful could stand him, and the good Benedict had no better idea than to make him secretary of the Congregation for Worship.
And the second reason for the pontifical scorn is that Roche was the clumsy editor and promoter of Traditionis custodes. Although the document was supported by several cardinals of the curia, such as Ouellet, Stella, and Parolin, the visible face was Roche. And Francis has understood that this document was a mistake that brought him more headaches than anything else, and not because he has sympathy for the Traditional Mass but because it made even more visible the groups that support it, which, instead of diminishing, continue to grow steadily.
3. A dicastery with such a prefect has caused a very powerful internal conflict to arise in Divine Worship. The leader of the rebel faction is Archbishop Vittorio Viola, secretary of the dicastery and desperate to obtain the cardinal's hat which, he knows, he will either get in this papacy or not at all. He is a Franciscan (Order of Friars Minor), and was the custodian of the friary of St. Clare in Assisi when Pope Francis visited that city -- a typical Bergoglian bishop, made so by the whims of the pontiff, to whom he must have seemed nice or handsome when he met him during his visit to Assisi in October 2013. It was on that same occasion that he met the custodian of the Basilica of St. Francis, Fr. Mauro Gambetti, a Conventual Franciscan, whom he ended up creating a cardinal and archpriest of St. Peter's Basilica. The fact is that Viola, who wears the episcopal ring that belonged to Bishop Annibale Bugnini, is a Taliban of the reformed liturgy and has launched the intifada against the traditional Mass.
4. This new onslaught, which has been neutralized for now, was being pushed by Bishop Viola and not by Cardinal Roche, who is already neutralized. The document reached the hands of Pope Francis, who studied it but was not convinced. And this for several reasons. First of all, and most importantly, because liturgy is not his war. Traditionis custodes caused him too many problems that he does not need new ones, and because (as he always advises those who visit him) he is very careful when it comes to making martyrs. A highly restrictive document such as the one presented to him would generate a legion of martyrs among priests and faithful, and that is not something he would allow himself: he would have no damage control.
5. On the other hand, requests from many bishops, priests, faithful, and personalities of the world reached the Pope's desk begging him not to take such a step. And it seems to have had an effect. But this is not just a synodal act of “listening to the People of God”; that is for the unwary who believe in synodality. It was also the advice of a group of cardinals and prelates who, without having any sympathy for the traditional liturgy, consider the hatred of Viola, Grillo, and their ilk to be an exaggeration that would end up damaging not only the Church as the mystical body of Christ, which probably does not bother them, but the papacy as well.
6. But the motives of these cardinals and monsignor advisors were not only those. They know that the pope's health is declining; slowly, yes, but declining all the same, and that it will not be long before the bells of St. Peter's will toll his death. And they consider that the next pope will necessarily be a moderate; another pontificate like that of Francis would put an end to the Church. And, for this very reason, they want to prepare the ground where they will safely land, and they prefer to do so in moderate territory in order to win the graces of the new pontiff in advance. As a good connoisseur of the Curia told me, for once they have even paid attention to the Gospel and have followed - literally - the teaching of the parable of the dishonest steward (Lk. 16:1-12): they took the receipt of their account and wrote “fifty” instead of one hundred. [source]
