.
I find the choice of terms used by Sandro Magister
rather educational:This is from Sandro Magister's Chiesa blog:
For the First Time, Francis Contradicts Benedict
by Sandro Magister
He has touched upon the sore spot of the Mass in the ancient rite. Ratzinger permitted its celebration for all. Bergoglio has prohibited it for one religious order that favored it
ROME, July 29, 2013 – One point on which Jorge Mario Bergoglio was eagerly expected to weigh in, after his election as pope, was that of the Mass in the ancient rite.
There were those who predicted that Pope Francis would not distance himself from the stance of his predecessor. Who had liberalized the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite as an “extraordinary” form of the modern rite, with the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificuм" of July 7, 2007and with the subsequent instruction "Universæ Ecclesiæ" of May 13, 2011.
And there were instead those who prognosticated on the part of Francis a restriction - or even a cancellation - of the possibility of celebrating the Mass with the rite prior to Vatican Council II, even at the cost of contradicting the decisions of Benedict XVI with him still alive.
To read the decree issued by the Vatican congregation for religious shortly before the voyage of Francis in Brazil, with the explicit approval of the pope himself, one must agree more with the latter than with the former.
The decree bears the date of July 11, 2013, the protocol number 52741/2012, and the signatures of the prefect of the congregation, Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, a focolarino, and of the secretary of the same congregation, Archbishop José Rodríguez Carballo, a Franciscan.
Braz de Aviz is the only high-ranking official in the curia of Brazilian nationality, and because of this he has accompanied Francis on his voyage to Rio de Janeiro. He has a reputation as a progressive, although that of a scatterbrain fits him better. And he will probably be one of the first to go when the reform of the curia announced by Francis takes shape.
Rodríguez Carballo instead enjoys the pope's complete trust. His promotion as second-in-command of the congregation was backed by Francis himself at the beginning of his pontificate.
It is difficult, therefore, to think that pope Bergoglio was unaware of what he was approving when he was presented with the decree before its publication.
The decree installs an apostolic commissioner - in the person of the Capuchin Fidenzio Volpi - at the head of all the communities of the congregation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.
And this in itself is cause for astonishment. Because the Franciscans of the Immaculate are one of the most flourishing religious communities born in the Catholic Church in recent decades, with male and female branches, with many young vocations, spread over several continents and with a mission in Argentina as well.
They want to be faithful to tradition, in full respect for the magisterium of the Church. So much so that in their communities they celebrate Masses both in the ancient rite and in the modern rite, as moreover do hundreds of religious communities around the world - the Benedictines of Norcia, to give just one example - applying the spirit and the letter of the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificuм" of Benedict XVI.
But precisely this was contested by a core group of internal dissidents, who appealed to the Vatican authorities complaining of the excessive propensity of their congregation to celebrate the Mass in the ancient rite, with the effect of creating exclusion and opposition within the communities, of undermining internal unity and, worse, of weakening the more general "sentire cuм Ecclesia."
The Vatican authorities responded by sending an apostolic visitor one year ago. And now comes the appointment of the commissioner.
But what is most astonishing are the last five lines of the decree of July 11:
"In addition to the above, the Holy Father Francis has directed that every religious of the congregation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate is required to celebrate the liturgy according to the ordinary rite and that, if the occasion should arise, the use of the extraordinary form (Vetus Ordo) must be explicitly authorized by the competent authorities, for every religious and/or community that makes the request.”
The astonishment stems from the fact that what is decreed contradicts the dispositions given by Benedict XVI, which for the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite “sine populo" demand no previous request for authorization whatsoever:
"Ad talem celebrationem secundum unum alterumve Missale, sacerdos nulla eget licentia, nec Sedis Apostolicae nec Ordinarii sui" (1).
While for Masses "cuм populo" they set out a few conditions, but always guaranteeing the freedom to celebrate.
In general, against a decree of a Vatican congregation it is possible to have recourse to the supreme tribunal of the apostolic signatura, today headed by a cardinal, the American Raymond Leo Burke, considered a friend by the traditionalists.
But if the decree is the object of approval in a specific form on the part of the pope, as it seems to be in this case, recourse is not admitted.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate will have to comply with the prohibition on celebrating the Mass in the ancient rite beginning Sunday, August 11.
And now what will happen, not only among them but in the whole Church?
It was the conviction of Benedict XVI that "the two forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching." He had explained this in the heartfelt letter to the bishops of the whole world with which he had accompanied the motu proprio "Summorum Pontificuм".
But from now on this is no longer the case, at least not for all. For the Franciscans of the Immaculate, forced to celebrate the Mass only in the modern form, there remains just one way to take to heart what Benedict XVI also hoped: to "demonstrate" in this form as well, "more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage."
The fact is that one pillar of the pontificate of Joseph Ratzinger has been cracked. By an exception that many fear - or hope - will soon become the rule.
________
(1) Curiously, even six years after its publication, the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificuм” of Benedict XVI continues to be present on the website of the Holy See only in two languages, and these among the least-known: Latin and Hungarian.
Imagine what would be happening now if Bishop Fellay had had his way.
The terms themselves that Sandro Magister uses offer something
toward a better understanding of what is going on here, especially
when considered with respect to their context, and comparison to
their alternative (that is, the CTLM and the NovusOrdoNewmass):
1)
the Mass in the ancient rite vs. 'mass' in the modern rite
{Unpronounced principle: They're both the same thing, both Mass, but
the old is just, well, geriatric, and the new is, well, vivacious and youthful.
Which likewise would explain why PEB16 bowed out - he's geriatric and
the Church needs a more youthful image, even if it means puerile in
theology, like Francis!! (Note: Francis, who apparently sidelines a
Fokolare practitioner, Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, who willl be "one of the
first to go when reform of the curia announced by Francis takes shape,"
while "Rodríguez Carballo instead enjoys the pope's complete trust. His
promotion as second-in-command of the congregation was backed by
Francis himself at the beginning of his pontificate."}
2)
an “extraordinary” form of the modern rite vs. ordinary form
{Unpronounced principle: the CTLM is now a subset of the Newmass, or
takes second place to the Newmass, or is merely an alternative expression
of the Newmass, and as such, is less up-to-date than the Newmass, and
is therefore a deficient or lacking-in-whatever kind of Mass compared to
the Newmass.}
3)
the rite prior to Vatican Council II, (Implied ~ vs. rite post Vat.II)
3 a.) Implied:
the rite of Trent vs. the rite of Vat.II
3 b.) Implied:
Tridentine Mass vs. Newmass
4)
the two forms of the usage of the Roman Rite (Implied: Old vs. New)
4 a.) Implied:
usage in the old form vs. usage in the new form
b.) Implied:
the old usage vs. the new usage
4 b. i.) Implied: undesirable vs. desirable
4 b. ii.) Implied: unappealing vs. appealing
4 b. iii.) Implied: vicious vs. virtuous
4 b. iv.) Implied: bad vs. good
4 b. v.) Implied: terrible vs. wonderful
4 b. vi.) Implied: uncool vs. cool
4 b. vii.) Implied: negative vs. positive
4 b. viii.) Implied: GRODY TO THE MAX vs. TUBULAR, YOU KNOW?
4 b. ix.) Implied: Gag me with a Spoon! vs. So-o-o-o B*tchen!
c.) Implied:
the old Roman Rite vs. the New Roman Rite
d.) Implied:
the Mass in the ancient rite vs. 'mass' in the modern Rite
e.) Implied:
the Extraordinary form of Mass vs. Ordinary form (or NovusOrdo)
f.) Implied:
the rite prior to Vat.II vs. the rite of Vat.II
g.) Implied:
the rite of Trent vs. the rite of Vat.II
h.) Implied:
the Tridentine Mass vs. Newmass (or NovusOrdomass)
i.) Implied:
the VetusOrdo vs. the NovusOrdo
5)
the use of the extraordinary form (Vetus Ordo) (Implied: Vetus Ordo vs. Novus Ordo)
{Unpronounced principle: They're coming out into the open now,
saying what they have long avoided to say, that the CTLM is
most notable for the fact of its AGE. It is OLD, and the Newmass
is NEW. This is a Hegelian dialectic between old and new: Old Mass
vs. Newmass, or Vetus Ordo vs. Novus Ordo.}
6)
the Mass in the ancient rite “sine populo" (Implied: CTLM celebrated by the lone priest vs. Mass with congregation present)
{The subliminal effect is a distinction on two levels: the form of
the Mass itself, and whether or not there are any other people
present. Thus, it would seem that a Mass "sine populo" would
be thought less desirable than Mass with faithful assisting. At least
this is the subliminal implication overall. BTW this is a principle
borrowed from the Eastern rites, such as Byzantine, where it is
always preferred for the priest to say Mass with at least one
faithful in attendance. This was told to me in NO UNCERTAIN
TERMS by several Maronite priests and faithful at St. Anne's Melkite
Church in North Hollywood, CA, on Magnolia Blvd.}
In effect, there is a subliminality that is the ultimate goal of these
Modernists-in-disguise, to the effect that
they can indoctrinate
the masses without them knowing they're being indoctrinated. As TheRecusant says, you don't know that you're already a half-
Modernist when you halfway accept the false principles of
Modernism. But a half-truth is a whole lie. Therefore, a
half-Modernist is the same thing as a whole Modernist!
This subliminal preaching fails to define,
per se, while it nonetheless
pronounces its doctrine in a roundabout way, typical of Liberalism.
It results in duplicity, really, but the Liberals shun this word, duplicity,
because it is so revealing of their core nature.
We have PEB16 and Francis, both Modernists, but of two different
styles. PEB16 attempted to force the unclean spirit of Vat.II down
our collective throats by saying that the "old" and the "new" are
mutually compatible and enrich each other and are not contradictory,
all of which, of course, are obvious lies. Because, the CTLM and the
Newmass are in fact mutually INcompatible, do NOT enrich each
other, and are absolutely contradictory.
The devil would have us believe that contradiction equals agreement,
and sin is the same thing as holiness, good is bad, yes is no, up is
down, and wrong is right.
How about payment is the same thing as non-payment? How would
the local utility company appreciate that principle at work? How would
your employees like that idea? Or your bank - a positive checking
account balance and an overdraft are the same thing? Or an
accountant - an overpayment and a balance due are one and the same?
There is more to this message.
Latin and Hungarian ~ Why would
Summorum Pontificuм, six
years after its publication (5 of which were under the author's papacy,
PEB16), continue to be only in Latin and Hungarian on the Vatican
website? There must be a reason. Hungarian was the language of
the great Josef Cardinal Mindszenty, who was a VERY popular man. (But he was very UNpopular in the Vatican! -as was Padre Pio, and
as have been so many other great saints in the history of the Church!)
There must be something about Hungarian, or at least the Hungarian
version of this motu proprio, that is somehow less troublesome to
whoever it is that decides what goes on the website. Is it the
obscurity of the language, or is it that they want to keep Hungarian,
Latin and
Summorum Pontificuм all in obscurity together?
There is more to this message, but I have to go right now..............
Topic: Pope Francis cracks down on the ancient rite (Read 4262 times)