Diane Montagna has it. HERE
You might remember that part of the justification Francis used for stomping on the TLM (aka the people who wanted it) was a consultation of bishops around the world.
It turns out that what we were told about that justification may not have been entirely on the up and up.
Read all of Montagna’s piece there. However.
EXCLUSIVE: Official Vatican Report Exposes Major Cracks in Foundation of Traditionis Custodes
Previously undisclosed documents raise serious questions about the stated rationale for Pope Francis’ 2021 decree restricting the Traditional Latin Mass.
VATICAN CITY, July 1, 2025 — New evidence has come to light that exposes major cracks in the foundation of Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis’ 2021 decree that restricted the traditional Roman liturgy.
This journalist has obtained the Vatican’s overall assessment of the consultation of bishops that was said to have “prompted” Pope Francis to revoke Summorum Pontificum, Benedict XVI’s 2007 apostolic letter liberalizing the vetus ordo, more commonly known as the “Traditional Latin Mass” and sacraments.
The previously undisclosed text, which forms a crucial part of the official report by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on its 2020 consultation of bishops concerning Summorum Pontificum, reveals that “the majority of bishops who responded to the questionnaire stated that making legislative changes to Summorum Pontificum would cause more harm than good.”
The overall assessment directly contradicts, therefore, the stated rationale for imposing Traditionis Custodes and raises serious questions about its credibility.
[…]
[FRANCIS] told the bishops that he was “constrained” by their “requests” to revoke not only Summorum Pontificum but “all the norms, instructions, permissions and customs” that preceded his new decree.
However, what the Vatican’s overall assessment reveals is that the “gaps”, “divergences”, and “disagreements” stem more from a level of nescience, prejudice and resistance of a minority of bishops to Summorum Pontificum than from any problems originating from adherents to the traditional Roman liturgy.
Conversely, the official CDF report states that “the majority of bishops who responded to the questionnaire, and who have generously and intelligently implemented Summorum Pontificum, ultimately express satisfaction with it.” It adds that “in places where the clergy have closely cooperated with the bishop, the situation has become completely pacified.”
The overall assessment, which can be viewed at the end of this article in the original Italian and in an English translation, also confirms the contention I reported in October 2021: That Traditionis Custodes magnified and projected as a major problem what was merely ancillary in the official CDF report.
Furthermore, the text clearly shows that Traditionis Custodes disregarded and withheld what the report said about the peace Summorum Pontificum had restored, and turned a blind eye to a “constant observation made by the bishops”— that younger people were being drawn into the Catholic Church through this older form of the liturgy.
The overall assessment also predicted, based on the responses of bishops, what would ensue were Summorum Pontificum suppressed — forecasts that turned out to be accurate.
[…]
Montagna describes the genesis and structure of the official report. There is an anecdote about Francis snatching the report from Card. Ladaria’s hand.
Then, in the overall assessment part of the report, it seems that the majority of bishops who implemented Summorum Pontificum were satisfied with it.
Furthermore, the report found that “the bishops most attuned to this matter observe that the older form of the liturgy is a treasure of the Church to be safeguarded and preserved: it constitutes a good to find unity with the past, to know how to advance along a path of coherent development and progress, and to meet, as far as possible, the needs of these faithful.”
According to the report: “The majority of bishops who responded to the questionnaire state that making legislative changes to the MP Summorum Pontificum would cause more harm than good.”
Based on its findings, the report predicted that “weakening or suppressing Summorum Pontificum would seriously damage the life of the Church, as it would recreate the tensions that the document had helped to resolve.”
…
Moreover, “it would delegitimize two Pontiffs—John Paul II and Benedict XVI—who had committed themselves to not abandoning these faithful.”
[…]
Interesting. Isn’t that last point what we saw systematically going on for some 13 years?
You will want to read the whole thing.
Fr. Z kudos to Diana Montagna and a biretta tip…
o{]:¬)
Loading ...
Imagine, a deceased pope, who now is looking down on us from Heaven and whose presence his successor can feel, telling a fib!
Telling a ….”fib”…. a….. “fib”
Don’t you mean a lie…..???
Who said ” let your yes be yes and your no be no, all else comes from the evil one”
I’ve been guilty of raging against Pope Francis…. how is an ordinary mortal supposed to act when you can’t trust the words of a Pope of the Catholic Church…. not even…. “and….. or …. “but”
Parishes are being destroyed right now based on these lies.
Is the Bishop of Charlotte going to continue to destroy parishes based on these lies..??
If he is, you Americans have a phrase….”run out of town on a rail”…
Get your rails out now.
We can cut to the chase: Bergoglio, or whoever wrote TC and its supporting documents on his behalf (I’m looking at you, Andrea Grillo), lied. And it may be a convenient lie for Leo, however, as, if he so chooses, he can use it revoke TC or render it toothless due to an underlying “misunderstanding” of the facts.
You would think Francis was the Chicagoan, not Leo! In semi-related good news, Cupich has had to submit his age-mandated resignation.
What about the Pope being …. “Infallible in matters of faith or morals”…. if he lied.
Lied…..!!!
Robbie: As we know, the infallibility is invoked only when the Supreme Pontiff makes it sufficiently clear that the teaching is infallible or when he is teaching something which has been previously defined as such.
This just shows that the Church’s human part is, like society at large, not immune from incorrect notions. These notions will never “bow” to facts or reality nor admit error. Rather, they insist on forcing the proverbial “square peg” into the “round hole” regardless of the harm it causes.
Tragic, ironic bookends in the history of the Society of Jesus…. A half-millennia ago, the SJs in Elizabethan England resorted to any necessary deception, guile and legerdemain to *preserve* the Latin Mass in a land where it was banned. And then, in the 21st century, the first S.J. pope resorted to deception, guile and legerdemain to *destroy* the Latin Mass.
Run out of town on a rail expresses my sentiments precisely. But something tells me that haters gonna hate, regardless. Praying for Pope Francis, as directed by Our Lord…
Recall that when the odious Traditiones Custodes first came out, the bishops still had the right under Canon Law to decline to enforce it in their diocese. It was only later that Rome issued a ‘clarification’ that in this instance the bishops’ right to do so was now denied.
.
Which decision begs the question: if Francis’ survey of the bishops truly indicated they felt the TLM threatened unity in their dioceses, then why did Francis (and Cardinal Roche) deem it necessary to force compliance?
Why make it mandatory if it was something the survey said the bishops already wanted?
.
The answer of course is that most bishops didn’t want TC and it had to be forced on them by Rome— the same Rome that bleats platitudes about respect for the collegiality of bishops and shepherds who have the smell of their sheep.
.
I don’t see how I can escape concluding that Francis was a liar, served by liars, all of whom despised that TLM-going part of the Church they claimed to serve. I make no claims about knowing the final judgement of the Almighty, but I am confident that history’s assessment of Francis and his underlings will be harsh indeed.
A huge thank you to Diane M. For her dogged pursuit of truth.
At the end of her article is a marvelous statement from former Detroit Archbishop Allen Vigneron.
His replacement needs to read it and re-think his recent actions.
One of the sadder aspects of this are the “good” bishops, like my own, who defended their outrageous restrictions against the TLM by citing this survey. Did they not ever actually see the results of the survey? If they didn’t see it, how horrible to take such drastic and destructive actions based on information one has not actually seen or verified. If they did see it, how horrible to take such drastic and destructive actions based on what they knew to be a lie. And if they hadn’t seen it, why didn’t they demand to see it before taking any actions? I know I asked about the survey in several letters to my bishop, but, of course, never received an answer.
Bishops like this owe public apologies and explanations. They should sincerely humble themselves to begging for forgiveness from the many faithful families and priests they unjustly abused. Certainly, the absolute bare minimum of what they owe their diocese is an immediate and complete revocation of all restrictions against the Traditional Latin Mass.
However, I predict what they will do instead is sit on their hands and just let their despicable restrictions keep on going and do nothing whatsoever, including even acknowledging this report or any hard questions that they receive about the Traditional Latin Mass. And if (God willing it be soon) Pope Leo orders the restrictions to be lifted they’ll gladly do so and then pretend like it’s a great day for everyone and they’re so happy they can once again welcome Latin Mass Catholics (and their wallets) into the diocesan community.
All I can say is I’ll never give another dime to my own diocese, at least not while my current bishop holds his position. I’ll send it to the SSPX, the FSSP, the Clear Creek Monks, the Benedictine Sisters, and other good priests (our Internet Host included) who labor to do the Lord’s Work and to build up the Church.
Hirelings who abandon their sheep to the wolves do not deserve to be paid.
For those who were devastated by TC –
Don’t succumb to bitterness.
Instead – turn to action. Widely disseminate this report . Make sure it reaches your Bishop’s desk. Form a group, then request an audience with said Bishop.
Today was a good day.
I think this is a controlled leak to a well-respected journalist like Diane Montagna. It may have even been done with the approval of Pope Leo XIV. There was a parish in San Angelo, Texas today which received a 2 year extension on celebrating the TLM from the Vatican, something Pope Francis would not have done. I think Pope Leo XIV wants to stop the restrictions on the TLM implemented by his predecessor, but does not want to so obviously oppose his mentor who made him Cardinal. By allowing for this report to be leaked, Pope Leo can now say he is following the will of most bishops instead of rebuking Pope Francis when, hopefully, he eliminates in whole or at least in a major way the provisions of Traditiones Custodes.
We all knew they weren’t being honest with the results. Popesplainers are going to have a difficult time with this one.
I find the timing of this leak to be interesting. Why now? Is something coming which needed this information to be released? We shall see.
I understand about the Pope being human and not impeccable. A lot of average Joe’s like me but maybe not quite as informed expect the Pope to be honest as the day is long.
We could all see Francis was dealing from the bottom of the deck as they say in Vegas. That’s why we all felt a weight lifted from the church when he died.
But now it looks very like he was a lier….
What are the average Joe’s going to make of that.
1. They lied about the justification for the systemic suppression the TLM at nearly every parish & ostracizing worshipers;
2. There is reason to believe that this information was leaked on purpose;
3. Sympathetic bishops now have cause to remove the restrictions.
“HUGE” indeed… but as others have noted it will probably take time for any impact to be felt. Given the type of individuals with whom our late, enigmatic pope surrounded himself, it is at least possible that he was presented with false data crafted to reinforce his suppositions and prejudices. There was a time when Paul VI and John Paul II were told that “the problem of priests and faithful holding to the so-called ‘Tridentine’ rite was almost completely solved.” (Quattuor Abhinc Annos – 1984) but – forty-one years later – we know that blithe assertion was simply false irenicism, and that nobody in the Church really had a global perspective on the “problem”… Back to the present day, I think a lot depends upon who the leaker is: a friend-of-traddies who’s trying to force Leo’s hand, or one of Leo’s men trying to finesse a retreat while saving face…
I would like to think Francis was lied to by those around him.