Pope Plans to Restrict Traditional Latin Mass?

[Stone]

Pope's Plan to Restrict Traditional Latin Mass Backed by Two Curial Cardinals

Remnant Newspaper | June 1, 2021 

The Remnant has independently confirmed that a Vatican document restricting Pope Benedict XVI’s apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum is backed by at least two Vatican cardinals, is in its third draft, and threatens to thwart the growth of the Traditional Latin Mass and other sacraments particularly among diocesan clergy.

Two senior members of the hierarchy confirmed May 31 that the document, first reported by Messainlatino.it on May 25, is currently under review at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).

Multiple sources have also told The Remnant that Pope Francis wishes to soon publish the document, and that it is alleged to be receiving backing in varying degrees from two cardinal consultors to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, and Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops.

The sources also said that these restrictive measures will most probably be carried out by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and its newly appointed under-secretary Msgr. Aurelio García Marcías, whom Pope Francis is said to have raised to the episcopate for the very purpose of executing these plans.

Several senior Vatican sources have also confirmed that the first draft document was preceded by an introductory letter from Pope Francis that is said to have been very harsh and acrimonious toward the Tridentine Mass.

The document is now in the third draft, the first two having been thought to be too severe. If it is eventually published, it is likely to roll back the liberalization of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass introduced by Pope Benedict XVI’s 2007 apostolic letter, Summorum Pontificum.

That document authorized any stable group of faithful attached to the “previous liturgical tradition” to ask their local priest for the Mass who “should willingly accede to their requests.” The decree stated that the older form of the Mass was “never abrogated” and that both the Extraordinary and Ordinary Forms were “two expressions” of “one Roman Rite.”

N.B. With respect to the crumbs handed to Traditionalists via the Summorum Pontificum - Fr. Hewko has (as well as many other good traditional priests) written and spoken about this many, many times over the years. As a brief reminder of the true machinations in Summorum Pontificum granted by Pope Benedict XVI, one of the chief architects of Vatican II, here are Fr. Hewko's words from an article he wrote called Ambiguous Language, The Devil's Quicksand:

"How is it possible that those trained to refute Modernism and denounce the tactics of the modernists could possibly resort to using those very same means to attain their new goal; to be "recognized as we are" and have "justice done" to unjust penalties? What happened to the primacy of THE FAITH? Whatever happened to "no agreement until Rome converts to Tradition"? What happened to Abp. Lefebvre's proof for the moment of Rome's conversion, namely, the professing of all the papal teachings and condemnations from the Council of Trent down to Pius XII's "Humani Generis"? A few "crumbs of acknowledgement" to some aspects of Tradition are far from proofs of Rome's conversion! "Summorum Pontificum" and the so called "lifting" of excommunications that never existed, are mere tactics and maneuvers, as Abp. Lefebvre himself named other supposed moves on the part of the Holy See, and are none other than attempts to swing the SSPX into the Conciliar Church. Again and again, the proof is in the consequences of all the Traditional Catholic communities that made agreements with Rome. The proof lies in the Roman authorities unwavering adherence to Vatican II!"

The Remnant has learned that the first draft put strict limitations on the age of the celebrants and is described as somewhat similar to the indult of Paul VI, which allowed elderly priests to continue offering the Tridentine Mass after the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae by Paul VI. It also discussed whether to allow or prohibit the administration of the other sacraments in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.

In its present form, communities and diocesan priests who already offer the Mass in the Extraordinary Form may continue to do so, but diocesan clergy who wish to begin offering the Traditional Mass would have to obtain authorization. Whether local bishops or the Holy See will be responsible for granting such permissions is still under discussion.

The administration of the other sacraments in the Extraordinary Form, i.e. marriage, baptism, confirmation, etc., would be maintained for those who already have permission to celebrate the Traditional Mass.

The third draft moves the office of recourse for matters pertaining to the Traditional Latin Mass and oversight of priestly societies and religious communities that use the pre-1970 Missal, from the fourth section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei) to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

The first draft initially discussed placing these priestly societies (e.g. Fraternity of St. Peter, Institute of Christ the King, and Institute of the Good Shepherd) and other traditional communities under the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, two senior Vatican sources confirmed.

Such a move would be considered potentially more problematic for these communities, in light of the way the congregation has handled contemplative orders in the recent past, namely, through the 2018 Instruction Cor Orans, which requires autonomous female monasteries to belong to a wider federation, and asks novices and professed cloistered contemplative nuns to leave their enclosure for initial and ongoing formation, something alien to cloistered contemplative life.

Under the current plan, Msgr. García, who has served as head of office in the Congregation for Divine Worship since 2016, has been elevated to the episcopate in order to assume the responsibilities formerly carried out under Ecclesia Dei by its former president, Archbishop Guido Pozzo. A professor at the Pontifical Liturgical Institute at the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo, Msgr. García is not known to share Benedict XVI’s views on the sacred liturgy, one source describing him as “the most anti-Tridentine Mass person ever known.”

It is not clear yet whether the fourth section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will continue to handle doctrinal matters and relations with the Society of St. Pius X.

Several senior Vatican sources have also confirmed that the first draft document was preceded by an introductory letter from Pope Francis that is said to have been very harsh and acrimonious toward the Tridentine Mass. Jesuit Cardinal Luis Ladaria, Prefect of the CDF, strongly opposed both the first draft and the letter, senior Vatican sources confirmed. The letter has since been revised.

Concerns over possible curtailments of the Extraordinary Form arose after the CDF sent a letter to the presidents of bishops’ conferences worldwide asking them to distribute a nine-point questionnaire about Summorum Pontificum. Cardinal Ladaria said the questionnaire was issued because the Pope wanted to be “informed about the current application” of the apostolic letter. 

Approximately thirty percent of the world’s bishops responded to the questionnaire, and more than half of those who responded had a favorable or neutral response, multiple sources confirmed.

One source familiar with the consultation document said that, although the questions were notably biased against Summorum Pontificum, or formulated in a manner that did not always elicit a clear and specific response, what emerged from the questionnaire is how the Traditional Latin Mass has taken root. It has revealed that even in unexpected places, the old Mass is embraced and loved by young people and families, is bearing fruit in flourishing parishes, priestly and religious vocations, and in greater prayer and devotion among the faithful.

On May 31, the French traditional website Paix Liturgique, which was among the first to report on the forthcoming document, published an article titled, “The Summorum Pontificum Galaxy Prepares to Resist!”

Describing Summorum Pontificum as “provisions for peace” that “sought to bring peace to a Church that was sinking deeper and deeper into crisis,” the authors note how “from the very beginning, the traditional movement has been grounded in the action of laymen.”

Their efforts, it continues, were “a surprising and providential manifestation of the sensus fidelium, of the instinct of the faith among the faithful, which defends tooth and nail the lex orandi’s expression of the doctrines of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the Real Presence, the hierarchical priesthood, and more generally of the transcendence of the mystery: ‘Do this in memory of Me!’”

Should Pope Francis decide to restrict Summorum Pontificum by issuing such a document, Paix Liturgique asserts that “this capacity to resist ‘on the ground’… may well come to include powerful demonstrations and actions.

“Already now,” they add, “in various spots of the globe, they are being given serious consideration.”

[Stone]

As a reminder that the Summorum Pontificum is not the 'gift' to Tradition that the Vatican and many traditional communities have portrayed it to be, here is an excerpt from A Catechism of the Crisis in the SSPX:


9. Why would Menzingen (SSPX headquarters) be going down the wrong road?
Because the authorities of the SSPX refuse to get rid of the ambiguity which they have created.


10. What is this ambiguity?
It is twofold and concerns the two acts performed by Benedict XVI which are favourable to Tradition in a material way and which Bp. Fellay presents as formally favouring Tradition.


11. What do these strange words mean?
When you have cement, sand and gravel, you have a house materially speaking, but not formally. There is a huge difference.


12. What is the first act of Benedict XVI which is a problem?
This is the Motu Proprio of Pope Benedict XVI on the use of the Roman liturgy prior to the reform of 1970. Bishop Fellay claims that "By the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict XVI has restored to its rightful place the Tridentine Mass, stating clearly that the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V has never been abrogated." (Menzingen, 07/07-2007)


13. Where is the ambiguity?
In reality, the Motu Proprio says that the Traditional Mass has never been abrogated as the extraordinary form but that it was repealed as the ordinary form. By this act, Benedict XVI made the Roman rite of Mass lose, de jure, its status as the only ordinary and official form, and relegated it to the status of “extraordinary form”, after having humiliated it by comparing its sanctity to that of the “bastard rite.” Despite these facts, no official document from Menzingen exists condemning this liturgical cohabitation.


14. But that’s just the way you see things.
No, it’s also the view of Fr. de Cacqueray in his Letter to Friends and Benefactors of 2009. The Motu Proprio, he said, 

“does not correspond, and is not a response, to the first requirement of the SSPX except materially speaking.” (Suresnes, 31/12/2008)

What’s more, Archbishop Lefebvre, after realising that it had been a mistake to sign an agreement with Rome in May 1988, put us on our guard after the Consecrations:

“You can see clearly that they wanted to bring us back into the Conciliar Church... they want to impose these novelties on us in order to have done with Tradition. They don’t allow anything through esteem for the traditional liturgy but simply in order to trick those who they give it to and to diminish our resistance, to drive a wedge into the Traditionalist camp, in order to destroy it. That’s their policy, their tactics...” (Econe, 09/09/1988)

15. So how should Bp. Fellay have responded?
The same way the Society once upon a time responded to a similar action by Rome (the Indult of 1984). The Superior General of the SSPX said that this indult was “ruinous for the metaphysics of law”. It could only be an “argumentum ad hominem,” because “its conditions are unacceptable.” A Catholic, “who thinks with the Church, can only consider the indult as being the foundation of a request.” (Cor Unum, June 1985)


16. So, strictly speaking, the first requirement of the SSPX wasn't attained?
In effect, the General Chapter of 2006 spoke of “the necessity of having two requirements” in the “discussions with Rome.” A note recalled the first one: “Complete liberty without any conditions for the Tridentine Mass.” However, the liberating of the Mass, in addition to the deception already noted, was not unconditional. Article 2 of the Motu Proprio gives this freedom to say Mass without need for “authorisation from the Apostolic See or the Ordinary” only to “Masses which are celebrated without the people.”


17. Should we therefore not have pursued discussions with the Roman authorities any further?
If we had respected what the General Chapter of 2006 had decided: that’s right, yes. And yet, Bishop Fellay did the opposite, because after recalling “the Hegelian approach of Benedict XVI, according to which the change, which was necessary, nonetheless cannot be a rupture with the past”, he wrote:

“Regarding Rome, not knowing how and when the situation can change, we prefer to prepare the ground for discussions by an ad hoc group and not let ourselves be taken by surprise, if there are any surprises.” (Cor Unum, 16/07/2007)

[70three]

Pope's Plan to Restrict Traditional Latin Mass Backed by Two Curial Cardinals

Remnant Newspaper | June 1, 2021 

The Remnant has independently confirmed that a Vatican document restricting Pope Benedict XVI’s apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum is backed by at least two Vatican cardinals, is in its third draft, and threatens to thwart the growth of the Traditional Latin Mass and other sacraments particularly among diocesan clergy.

Two senior members of the hierarchy confirmed May 31 that the document, first reported by Messainlatino.it on May 25, is currently under review at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).

Multiple sources have also told The Remnant that Pope Francis wishes to soon publish the document, and that it is alleged to be receiving backing in varying degrees from two cardinal consultors to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, and Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops.

The sources also said that these restrictive measures will most probably be carried out by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and its newly appointed under-secretary Msgr. Aurelio García Marcías, whom Pope Francis is said to have raised to the episcopate for the very purpose of executing these plans.

Several senior Vatican sources have also confirmed that the first draft document was preceded by an introductory letter from Pope Francis that is said to have been very harsh and acrimonious toward the Tridentine Mass.

The document is now in the third draft, the first two having been thought to be too severe. If it is eventually published, it is likely to roll back the liberalization of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass introduced by Pope Benedict XVI’s 2007 apostolic letter, Summorum Pontificum.

That document authorized any stable group of faithful attached to the “previous liturgical tradition” to ask their local priest for the Mass who “should willingly accede to their requests.” The decree stated that the older form of the Mass was “never abrogated” and that both the Extraordinary and Ordinary Forms were “two expressions” of “one Roman Rite.”

N.B. With respect to the crumbs handed to Traditionalists via the Summorum Pontificum - Fr. Hewko has (as well as many other good traditional priests) written and spoken about this many, many times over the years. As a brief reminder of the true machinations in Summorum Pontificum granted by Pope Benedict XVI, one of the chief architects of Vatican II, here are Fr. Hewko's words from an article he wrote called Ambiguous Language, The Devil's Quicksand:

"How is it possible that those trained to refute Modernism and denounce the tactics of the modernists could possibly resort to using those very same means to attain their new goal; to be "recognized as we are" and have "justice done" to unjust penalties? What happened to the primacy of THE FAITH? Whatever happened to "no agreement until Rome converts to Tradition"? What happened to Abp. Lefebvre's proof for the moment of Rome's conversion, namely, the professing of all the papal teachings and condemnations from the Council of Trent down to Pius XII's "Humani Generis"? A few "crumbs of acknowledgement" to some aspects of Tradition are far from proofs of Rome's conversion! "Summorum Pontificum" and the so called "lifting" of excommunications that never existed, are mere tactics and maneuvers, as Abp. Lefebvre himself named other supposed moves on the part of the Holy See, and are none other than attempts to swing the SSPX into the Conciliar Church. Again and again, the proof is in the consequences of all the Traditional Catholic communities that made agreements with Rome. The proof lies in the Roman authorities unwavering adherence to Vatican II!"

The Remnant has learned that the first draft put strict limitations on the age of the celebrants and is described as somewhat similar to the indult of Paul VI, which allowed elderly priests to continue offering the Tridentine Mass after the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae by Paul VI. It also discussed whether to allow or prohibit the administration of the other sacraments in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.

In its present form, communities and diocesan priests who already offer the Mass in the Extraordinary Form may continue to do so, but diocesan clergy who wish to begin offering the Traditional Mass would have to obtain authorization. Whether local bishops or the Holy See will be responsible for granting such permissions is still under discussion.

The administration of the other sacraments in the Extraordinary Form, i.e. marriage, baptism, confirmation, etc., would be maintained for those who already have permission to celebrate the Traditional Mass.

The third draft moves the office of recourse for matters pertaining to the Traditional Latin Mass and oversight of priestly societies and religious communities that use the pre-1970 Missal, from the fourth section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei) to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

The first draft initially discussed placing these priestly societies (e.g. Fraternity of St. Peter, Institute of Christ the King, and Institute of the Good Shepherd) and other traditional communities under the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, two senior Vatican sources confirmed.

Such a move would be considered potentially more problematic for these communities, in light of the way the congregation has handled contemplative orders in the recent past, namely, through the 2018 Instruction Cor Orans, which requires autonomous female monasteries to belong to a wider federation, and asks novices and professed cloistered contemplative nuns to leave their enclosure for initial and ongoing formation, something alien to cloistered contemplative life.

Under the current plan, Msgr. García, who has served as head of office in the Congregation for Divine Worship since 2016, has been elevated to the episcopate in order to assume the responsibilities formerly carried out under Ecclesia Dei by its former president, Archbishop Guido Pozzo. A professor at the Pontifical Liturgical Institute at the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo, Msgr. García is not known to share Benedict XVI’s views on the sacred liturgy, one source describing him as “the most anti-Tridentine Mass person ever known.”

It is not clear yet whether the fourth section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will continue to handle doctrinal matters and relations with the Society of St. Pius X.

Several senior Vatican sources have also confirmed that the first draft document was preceded by an introductory letter from Pope Francis that is said to have been very harsh and acrimonious toward the Tridentine Mass. Jesuit Cardinal Luis Ladaria, Prefect of the CDF, strongly opposed both the first draft and the letter, senior Vatican sources confirmed. The letter has since been revised.

Concerns over possible curtailments of the Extraordinary Form arose after the CDF sent a letter to the presidents of bishops’ conferences worldwide asking them to distribute a nine-point questionnaire about Summorum Pontificum. Cardinal Ladaria said the questionnaire was issued because the Pope wanted to be “informed about the current application” of the apostolic letter. 

Approximately thirty percent of the world’s bishops responded to the questionnaire, and more than half of those who responded had a favorable or neutral response, multiple sources confirmed.

One source familiar with the consultation document said that, although the questions were notably biased against Summorum Pontificum, or formulated in a manner that did not always elicit a clear and specific response, what emerged from the questionnaire is how the Traditional Latin Mass has taken root. It has revealed that even in unexpected places, the old Mass is embraced and loved by young people and families, is bearing fruit in flourishing parishes, priestly and religious vocations, and in greater prayer and devotion among the faithful.

On May 31, the French traditional website Paix Liturgique, which was among the first to report on the forthcoming document, published an article titled, “The Summorum Pontificum Galaxy Prepares to Resist!”

Describing Summorum Pontificum as “provisions for peace” that “sought to bring peace to a Church that was sinking deeper and deeper into crisis,” the authors note how “from the very beginning, the traditional movement has been grounded in the action of laymen.”

Their efforts, it continues, were “a surprising and providential manifestation of the sensus fidelium, of the instinct of the faith among the faithful, which defends tooth and nail the lex orandi’s expression of the doctrines of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the Real Presence, the hierarchical priesthood, and more generally of the transcendence of the mystery: ‘Do this in memory of Me!’”

Should Pope Francis decide to restrict Summorum Pontificum by issuing such a document, Paix Liturgique asserts that “this capacity to resist ‘on the ground’… may well come to include powerful demonstrations and actions.

“Already now,” they add, “in various spots of the globe, they are being given serious consideration.”

---

Gee! What will the SSPX do now?

[Stone]

See also here, #'s 71, 76, and 79 for additional context of what Summorum Pontificum 'gives' to Tradition.

[Stone]

And so it begins? ... 


Excerpt from Fr. Z's blog regarding an unexplained, 'unforseen' expulsion of a French FSSP from the Novus Ordo diocese: 

FRANCE: FSSP suddenly expelled from a diocese after 23 years

Posted on 5 June 2021

At the French site Riposte catholique we read that the Archbishop of Dijon, Roland Minnerath, has expelled the FSSP from the diocese.  They are to leave by September.  They’ve only been there for 23 years.

No consultation. D’un trait de plume… with the stroke of a pen.

If there is anything to the rumors, if it is not in fact a disinformation campaign, about an upcoming “slave act of 2021” against Benedict XVI’s “emancipation proclamation” for diocesan priests, what shall the faithful of Dijon do then? ... 



From the above-linked Riposte catholique [by way of google translation]:

The Fraternity of Saint-Pierre expelled from the diocese of Dijon by Bishop Minnerath

JUNE 3, 2021


Next September, the FSSP, after 23 years of presence in Dijon and the Côte d'Or, is forced to abandon 300 faithful and leave Dijon. To date, the FSSP has still not been received by the Bishop!

Here is the newsletter sent to the parishioners of Dijon to explain the inexplicable decision of Monsignor Roland MINNERATH .

“Dear faithful,

The words that come to my mind these days are the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ quoting the prophet Zechariah: "I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered" (Mt 26:31). Here is what threatens our community following the recent decision of our archbishop to expel the Fraternity of Saint-Pierre from the diocese of Dijon after twenty-three years of presence in the service of the faithful attached to the traditional mass. During all these years, priests of the Fraternité Saint-Pierre took turns in Dijon to allow you to attend mass daily, to receive the sacraments easily, to have catechism lessons according to the pedagogy of the FSSP and given by priests, we have been able to develop activities for all ages in order to constitute a living and peaceful community within the Archdiocese of Dijon. And could all of this disappear with the stroke of a pen? Without any consultation?

On our side, the District Superior of France of the FSSP, Father Benoît Paul-Joseph asked for a meeting with Bishop Roland Minnerath and we will explain the reasons for our incomprehension and our hurt in the face of a decision that seems deeply unfair to us. The fact remains that you are, dear faithful, the most aggrieved in this case where you will be the main victims of this change of regime: you will no longer have all the services that the FSSP rendered you and the diocesan solution remains. always precarious since it depends on the goodwill of one or two diocesan priests who are already in charge of another parish and who cannot do so already. In addition, the FSSP allows your community to maintain unity among its members despite the diversity of pastors who worked at the birthplace of Saint Bernard.

What threatens us is therefore the division - between us or what would be worse with the diocese - since the pastors are struck. So let us not allow ourselves to be disturbed by the spirit of the wicked which sows discord in hearts. Let us therefore know how to remain united to present a strong front and to be able to overcome this trial which afflicts us while remembering the warning of the apostle Saint Paul: "Do not be in debt to anyone, except to love one another. ; for he who loves his neighbor fulfills all the Law ”(Rom 13).

In this month of June traditionally consecrated to the Sacred Heart, I invite you to pray every day the Litanies of the Sacred Heart for the intentions of our community.

Abbot Roch Perrel, Superior

The faithful have created a Facebook page and challenge the bishop:

[Stone]

Leading cardinal in Rome: Pope fears ‘traditionalist positions’ in priestly formation

Cardinal Braz de Aviz

June 10, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The head of the Vatican Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life recently said Pope Francis is concerned about “traditionalist” ideas creeping into “priestly formation.”

Pope Francis has expressed fear of “a certain tendency to go a little far from Vatican Council II, taking up traditionalist positions” in “priestly formation,” according to Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, as reported by Vida Nueva Spain.

The cardinal related the Pope’s concerns during a virtual discussion focusing on the theme “Sentire cum Christo et cum Ecclesia” on the occasion of the 50th National Week for Institutes of Consecrated Life. Other participants were the president of the International Union of Superiors General, M. Jolanta Kafka, and the Superior General of the Jesuits, Father Arturo Sosa, who is also president of the Union of Superiors General.

The May 17 discussion was part of a conference organized by the Theological Institute of Religious Life, which published notes explaining that the cardinal began by “commenting on the general principles of renewal of religious life expressed in the conciliar decree ‘Perfectae Caritatis’, signed by Paul VI in 1965.” ...

The expressed concerns of Pope Francis with traditional priestly formation appear to echo comments he allegedly made to Italian Bishops at the opening of their General Assembly on May 24, according to an unsigned article published by “Messa in Latina.” In this case, he is said to have zeroed in specifically on the Traditional Latin Mass.

“After once again warning against accepting ‘rigid’ (that is, faithful to doctrine) young men into the seminary, Francis told the bishops that he had reached the third draft of a text that contains measures restricting the celebration by Catholic priest of Mass in the Extraordinary Form made accessible by Benedict XVI,” Messa in Latina reported.

During the May 17 discussion, Braz de Aviz emphasized the importance of the fidelity of consecrated religious to the thought of Pope Francis, saying, “following Christ also entails having a vision of faith regarding Peter and his successors. How to live a consecrated life today without listening deeply to the guidelines of Pope Francis? Only in this way does it make sense to follow the founder.”

The cardinal continued, saying that we must “update our following of Jesus” using the “indispensable criteria” of “synodality and fraternity.”

Among the “fields that need this renewal, this new formation” is that of “the man-woman relationship,” according to Braz de Aviz. He then alluded to ideas common to Catholic theology and culture before the Second Vatican Council that he considers undesirable.

“Our models of life as consecrated, our organizational and governmental structures created in the past a mentality in which the differences between man and woman were accentuated, in such a way that the awareness of this equal dignity and complementarity was lost.”

“Consecrated women were also placed on the margins of the life of the Church, pastoral care and her mission. Things began to change with Vatican Council II.” Even so, according to Braz de Aviz, “the process of maturation in man-woman reciprocity still needs to grow.”

During his discussion with Kafka and Sosa, he also insisted that “it’s time to reform our way of thinking, above all, on our path of formation,” adding, “There is no longer room for a static formation, which is done once and for all.”

Braz de Aviz shares Pope Francis’s antipathy to traditional Catholic positions, to the point of having described traditionalists as “killing themselves.” During a 2015 speech at a “first-of-its-kind congress of many of the world’s religious formation directors” in Rome, Braz de Aviz warned them, “Do not distance yourself from the great lines of the Second Vatican Council.”

“In fact, those that are distancing themselves from the Council to make another path are killing themselves — sooner or later, they will die,” Braz de Aviz said. “They will not have sense. They will be outside the church. We need to build, using the Gospel and the council as a departure point.”

The National Catholic Reporter related that he “told the formation directors that they must know that the needs of people considering religious life in today’s age “are not the same” as when the founders of their orders first received their charism: “These contexts have changed.”

The very idea that holding “traditionalist” Catholic positions puts one at odds with Vatican II is consistent with the notion that Vatican II marked a rupture from the Catholic faith as it was taught and practiced by the saints and faithful of the ages.

Church prelates such as Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and Bishop Athanasius Schneider argue that this “hermeneutic of rupture” results not because Vatican II elucidated Church teachings that previously weren’t understand, nor merely because Vatican II has been misinterpreted, but because of problems inherent to the council that render it incompatible with Church magisterial teaching.

Archbishop Viganò, who is one of the most outspoken living critics of Vatican II, has traced today’s scandalous offenses against the faith committed by high-ranking clergy to Vatican II, saying that “the present crisis is the metastasis of the conciliar cancer.”

“If the pachamama could be adored in a church, we owe it to Dignitatis Humanae. If we have a liturgy that is Protestantized and at times even paganized, we owe it to the revolutionary action of Msgr. Annibale Bugnini and to the post-conciliar reforms. If the Abu Dhabi Declaration was signed, we owe it to Nostra Aetate,” said Viganò.

Even among the clergy who accept or embrace the Second Vatican Council, there are a great number who insist that the Council does not and cannot mean a repudiation of traditional Church teaching and practice.

Cardinal Joseph Zen, who sees Vatican II as an important milestone in the Church, maintains that changes in the Church cannot undo the past. “The Holy Spirit of today doesn’t contradict the Holy Spirit of yesterday,” he wrote in a blog post last year.

He addressed what he calls an “anti-Tridentine Complex,” writing, “The Tridentine theology mainly in Latin saved the faith of the Church of the [laity], and the Tridentine liturgy in Latin with the Gregorian chant (including the ‘dies irae’) nourished the piety of generations and sustained the courage of innumerable martyrs.”

“It sounds blasphemous to say that Vatican II had to clean the Church of the Tridentine ‘dirt,’” he added.

The words and actions of prelates like Braz de Aviz, and the new Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Archbishop Arthur Roche, indicate that cleansing the Church of traditional doctrine and liturgy is indeed part of their agenda. For example, Roche penned a letter last year to the bishops of the world attacking the traditional Mass and praising the Second Vatican Council’s paradigm shift in its view of the Church.

Some argue that it is Braz de Aviz’s aversion to tradition that led to his “ruthless” dismantling of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (FFI), a community celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass, albeit not exclusively, as well as of the Little Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Redeemer. In 2018, he sent the sisters an ultimatum requiring them to accept Sr. Geneviève Médevielle as their authority “without reserve” or face dismissal from the Institute. Médevielle does not wear a habit and defended the controversial postsynodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia. The great majority of the sisters were relieved of their vows as a result.

In both cases, the communities were not given any specific reason for the imposition of commissioners that preceded their disbanding, except vague hints that they were too “traditional” for the tastes of the Vatican authorities, including, presumably, Pope Francis, who in the case of the FFI, had refused to accept appeals from the orders’ members.

[Stone]

Archbishop Minnerath, the prelate responsible for kicking the FSSP out of his diocese in Dijon, France for not concelebrating the Novus Ordo, had this to say a few days ago about the rumors of an imminent revision of Summorum Pontificum:

"... the decision to remove the FSSP was related to the revision by Pope Francis of the Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum that will be made public “in a few days or weeks.” “The Pope will speak. I know what he will say,” he told the shocked assembly."