Diane Montagna has a Substack (I still haven’t figured that out yet) about the extremely dodgy excuses for the cruel “Traditionis custodes”. She had published the summary of the survey of bishops. She asked about it during a presser. She got a slippery answer. Msgr. Nicola Bux coincidently issued a short book about the same topic.
Diane’s Substack piece is HERE, if you can read it. If not, here is a summary.
Montagna’s article at Substack provides evidence challenging the Vatican’s non-“explanation” for restricting the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) through Taurina cacata…. Traditionis custodes. She documents that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), tasked with surveying bishops globally in 2020 about the implementation of Summorum Pontificum (Benedict XVI’s decree liberalizing the TLM), produced a final report stating most bishops did not support legislative changes.
This final report, protocol number N. 03/2020-ED and dated 22 February 2021, included a comprehensive assessment, regional summaries, statistical analysis, and a florilegium of bishops’ quotations. Montagna published parts of this report on 1 July: the majority of bishops believed restricting the TLM would cause more harm than good.
In TC and the accompanying letter, Francis explicitly stated that this 2020 CDF consultation convinced him to impose new limits on the TLM. However, after Montagna’s publication, Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni claimed her excerpts were “partial and incomplete” and that “other confidential reports” were also used in making the decision. None of these were cited in the decree or disclosed to the public.
Montagna writes that this new claim contradicts the Francis claim, which referred solely to the CDF survey as the basis for the decision. She states that if additional documents were decisive, they should be presented openly. I think that would be a matter of justice to the people who were harmed by what seems to have been done on the basis of a falsehood.
Further, she explains that the introduction to the CDF report’s Second Part explicitly confirms it was the Congregation’s official synthesis prepared at Francis’ request. The report was compiled by the Fourth Section (formerly the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei“).
Montagna contends that unless the Vatican produces credible evidence proving the CDF’s conclusions misrepresented bishops’ views, the claim of widespread episcopal support for restrictions collapses. She concludes that this inconsistency undermines confidence in the Vatican’s transparency and decision-making and calls for disclosure of the purported “confidential” evidence.
Loading ...
Or as Sir Humphrey might have put it: “The precise correlation between the information the Dicastery communicated and the facts, insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated, is such as to cause epistemological problems of sufficient magnitude as to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English, Italian, and/or Latin languages a heavier burden then they can reasonably be expected to bear.”
You know what Pope Leo could do to restore trust in the institutional Church? Simply be transparent. No more secret deals. No more gaslighting. No more lying. Just simple transparency.
Diane Montagna is quickly becoming the greatest Vatican reporter on duty right now. Absolutely terrific work.
Kudos to whomever prepared your new Tracer Bullet cover!!! All it needs is a price of 35¢ within a circle and a cardinal [bird] sitting above the circle à la
https://www.abebooks.com/first-edition/Long-Goodbye-Philip-Marlowe-Pocket-Book/31726913859/bd
Cheers!
— Guy
in other words, Synodality!
Great work Diane! One has to wonder than if Bergoglio purposely went against the results because he couldn’t be bothered to read the results himself or if he was led a pack of lies by Kissy T
While this indicates that a change to TC is warranted, unfortunately I do not see it happening anytime soon. I hope I will be proved wrong though.
I don’t think it is the responsibility of Pope Leo to explain the reasons behind the “motu proprio” of pope Francis. Everybody knew, those in favour and those against, that it was his own decision, his “motu proprio,” and that the survey was not a referendum.
Perhaps it is another example of the difference between Latino thinking and Anglo-Saxon thinking: we all understood the meaning of the wording in TC, even if literally seems to be saying something different. To me it is a bit naive to expect an explanation or an apology after these Montagna revelations. We knew, we know, that’s it.
But remember guys, Cardinal Cupich said that “TC is a gift”, lol.
Traditionis Custodes is doomed. It and not the CDF report is what, to quote Andrea Grillo, will be judged “worthy of the dustbin.”
@kurtmasr
Sinon said the same thing about that big wooden horse.
Fr Reader,
You may be right that Pope Leo owes no explanation for a predecessor’s document.
Nonetheless, for his own soul, he must react to the demands of Justice and Charity.
@montrance
Yes
The way I see it, TC was issued with the condition that such a restriction would be warranted with “at least a weighty or deeply negative response” coming from the survey. Or that the survey was just a front for the ultimate move (so that no one would just complain at the surface level) to cancel TLM for good.
I suspect that the survey convinced Pope Francis that he needed to take action against the TLM precisely because so many bishops were for it (or at least not against it, many bishops did not respond to the survey). He, most definitely, was against it.