Catholics react to Pope Francis’ sweeping restrictions on extraordinary form Masses
Vatican City, Jul 16, 2021 / 08:31 am (CNA) – New Vatican restrictions on extraordinary form Masses elicited passionate responses from Catholics nearly as soon as the motu proprio was published shortly after noon Rome time on Friday.
Many Catholics reacted strongly to the promulgation of Traditionis custodes, a motu proprio signed by Pope Francis on July 16, offering pithy comments on Twitter as well as more detailed takes.
In the motu proprio, the pope made sweeping changes to his predecessor Benedict XVI’s 2007 apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum, which acknowledged the right of all priests to say Mass using the Roman Missal of 1962, which is in Latin.
The new document is dedicated to “the use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the reform of 1970” and contains eight articles that go into immediate effect.
In an accompanying letter to bishops, Pope Francis wrote: “In defense of the unity of the Body of Christ, I am constrained to revoke the faculty granted by my Predecessors. The distorted use that has been made of this faculty is contrary to the intentions that led to granting the freedom to celebrate the Mass with the Missale Romanum [Roman Missal] of 1962.”
Joseph Shaw, the chairman of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales, told CNA that the motu proprio appeared to “undo entirely the legal provisions made for the Traditional Mass by Pope Benedict, and to take us back not only to the situation before the 2007 apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum, but even before 1988, when Pope John Paul II — who was canonized by Pope Francis — described the more ancient Mass as a ‘rightful aspiration’ of the faithful.”
“The many priests and lay Catholics who have worked hard to combine an interest in the ‘riches’ represented by the EF [Extraordinary Form] with sincere loyalty and affection for the hierarchy and the Holy Father have been let down by this document,” Shaw said.
He added: “The provision that the EF not be celebrated in parish churches appears to be unworkable, and will certainly impede the implementation of this document.”
Kurt Martens, a professor of canon law at Catholic University of America, noted that the term “extraordinary form” is no longer used in the new legislation and that the new motu proprio “establishes that liturgical books promulgated in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”
“Diocesan bishops are given broad responsibility with regard to the use of the former liturgy,” Martens noted on Twitter.
Cardinal Raymond Burke, the former prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, the Church’s highest judicial authority, queried the document’s tone.
Burke told the National Catholic Register that the text was “marked by a harshness” towards participants in extraordinary form Masses.
“I pray that the faithful will not give way to the discouragement which such harshness necessarily engenders but will, with the help of divine grace, persevere in their love of the Church and of her pastors,” the former Archbishop of St. Louis said.
Some Catholic blogs that promote traditional liturgy expressed anger at the changes.
“It’s war,” Rorate Caeli posted to Twitter immediately after the motu proprio’s promulgation.
Others called for prayers for the 84-year-old pope, who was discharged from hospital this week following colon surgery.
Meanwhile, other Catholics expressed alarm at the tone of the motu proprio’s critics.
While I respect others views, I applaud the Pope’s action and the reasoning he has used. I have been concerned at some of the divisive comments by proponents of the Latin mass, who claim that it is the more perfect form of worship. I am also concerned by the rejection of the validity of Vatican II which is increasingly associated with the Latin right
Freedom to choose is the way we Catholics show our respect….what would JESUS do
Probably not say mass in Latin. It was the language of the occupying forces at that time. Maybe we need to go back to saying Mass in His traditional religious language of Hebrew.
And of course Archbishop Burke has never been a fan of Pope Francis. Perhaps Daily Voice could also print some opinions from people who understand and appreciate the Pope’s position and reasons for this document?
Agree
Strongly agree Beth. I attended a convenient Mass at St Mary’s Cathedral Sydney recently and found the Latin being used and all the associated detailed observances rather lovely and quaint. However I was horrified to hear the priest’s sermon in its derision of the Church’s contemporary approaches (ie
‘weaponisation’ of the liturgy for ideology). And there were other signs there that this bastion of our Australian church is becoming a magnet for corrupt traditionalist influences, unwanted in their home diocese here.
How much effort did CNA put in to find out the views of those Catholics who support Pope Francis’s directive to promote the primacy of the post-Vat2
Mass in the vernacular & to curtail the various implementations of the Mass in Latin. The critics mentioned are the usual suspects in the anti-Francis alliance.
Good on Pope Francis. Consistent with the spirit of Vatican II. He does not have an easy job. He needs all our prayers. Cardinal Burke’s comments disturbing. Yes, it could be war, but not a great way to resolve this issue.
I enjoy going to latin mass and feel led to go by my conscience and also the leading of the HOLY SPIRIT. how will the wider world see this as unity and love for each other…especially now with covid surely this is a time to encourage community?
Overall, I agree with Pope Francis’ decision not only because I have seen the growing divisiveness over the Mass in the ACT but even more so because of the approach of Pope Francis has taken. He consulted widely, sought the views of his bishops across the globe, listened and was guided by the Holy Spirit.
I struggle to come to terms with the restrictions on the Latin Mass which has served the world well for nearly 500 years and was compulsory at the time of the counter reformation. Also, at a time when the world and the Church is looking for unity and solidarity, and singularity among plurality, surely after 500 years, the voice of the Mass in Latin must be a lighthouse for those who, through personal circumstances, are searching for an historical pillar for their faith, or approaching faith.
In those early years the Church was predominantly European (Western) and Latin was acceptable. Today, the Church is predominantly non-European and so Latin prayers and rituals are definitely not the norm. Our Church is, after all, Catholic.
Hi Colliss, you wouldnt remember me. I am in agreement with you. Many powerful Catholic beliefs and devotions have been trampled under modernism, etc. Lack of reverence and belief in the True Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is tragic. Some good Priests jokingly call the congregation “saints”, because very few go to Confession.
God is merciful, He is also just. I once asked a very senior Priest why his Masses were noisy and like a circus. He stated that if he cracked the whip, very few people would come to Mass. God is smart, nowadays, if you can get to Mass, reverence is being restored.
The Latin Mass and Modern Mass go hand in hand, never throw the baby out with the bath water. The Old Testament and New Testament go hand in hand. Justice and Mercy shall meet. Hang in there cobber.
I agree with Pope Francis decision in this matter.Pope Benedict was ultra conservative and attempted to undo much of the work of Vatican II .In my travels I have heard the Mass in quite a few different languages. I found it uplifting and refreshing to hear congregations respond on their own tongue.I agree that Pope Francis, like John XXII in the 1960’s , is facing a concerted action by reactionary forces within the Church, notably the extreme Right.
That is a grossly inaccurate and insulting characterisation of Benedict XVI; it is true only if you think of Vatican II as some kind of Pol Pot Year Zero remaking of the Church from scratch. You might get a pleasant surprise if you were open-minded enough to listen to him.
In that contxt it is worth noting that Summorum Pontificum, unlike Traditionis Custodes, did not compel or forbid anyone to do anything. Where have all the objections to top-down clericalist authoritarianism gone?