Modernists seeking to destroy the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter
Cathcon note: I disagree with almost, indeed everything that is said here. They are the words of an intellectual who has forgotten that he is dealing with the depths of spirituality of human beings.
---
Inconsistent special rules for the Fraternity of St. Peter:
Questions about a new Papal decree
Pope Francis issues a decree relating to the Priestly Fraternity
of St Peter - but in doing so he is counter-acting the Motu Proprio,
"Traditionis custodes". Liturgical
scholar, Martin Klöckener sees this as an "inconsistency of the first
order" - with consequences for Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
With a Decree of 11 February 2022, Pope Francis has allowed
the Fraternity of St Peter to continue to celebrate the Tridentine liturgy in
full and without any restriction according to the liturgical books that were in
force in 1962, that is, before the Second Vatican Council: for the Mass, the
Missale Romanum (1962 version), for the celebrations of the sacraments
performed by a priest, certain blessings, etc., the Rituale Romanum (1953
version), the Rituale Romanum (1952),
for the episcopal liturgy and certain celebrations under the direction of a
higher prelate, the Pontificale Romanum (1961/62), for the Liturgy of the Hours,
the Breviarium Romanum (1962). This decision was apparently preceded by an
audience of two superiors of the Fraternity of St. Peter with the Pope.
Contradictory treatment under "Traditionis custodes”
The decree goes on to say that any and all members of the
Fraternity may make use of this power in their own churches and oratories, but
elsewhere only with the consent of the local Ordinary. The privately-celebrated Mass according to the
1962 Missal, on the other hand, is permitted to members of the Fraternity
everywhere. The Pope also recommends
that the provisions of the Motu Proprio Traditionis custodes be observed,
although he has dispensed with this in the same decree.
On 16 July 2021, Pope Francis, through this very motu
proprio Traditionis custodes, with great consistency and for motives which he
had explained in detail in a lengthy accompanying letter to the bishops,
effectively revoked the re-admission of the Tridentine liturgy in the last
pre-conciliar version, which had taken place under Benedict XVI in 2007, and
allowed only a few strictly circumscribed exceptions to continue, for which the
respective bishops, and in some cases even the Apostolic See, had to grant an
exemption.
It was expected that the Petrine Brotherhood would have to
re-orient itself
On 4 December 2021, the Congregation for Divine Worship and
the Discipline of the Sacraments had published additional interpretations of
the Papal decree in its Responsa ad dubia, which had been expressly approved by
the Pope, underlining the restrictive line and issuing even stricter
regulations in some points where Pope Francis had left certain ambiguities. Against this background, one now wonders about
the extraordinarily generous special regulation for the Priestly Fraternity of
St. Peter.
It is apparently justified by the fact that the use of the
Tridentine liturgy is anchored in the Constitutions of the Fraternity, which
was founded in 1988, and is thus a constitutive element for its existence. While this is correct, it does not dispel the
contradictory nature of the Papal pronouncements. Rather, in view of the great importance for
the life of the Church that the Pope attached to this fundamental question in
his Motu Proprio of July 2021, one would have expected that the Priestly Fraternity
of St Peter would have to reorient itself. We need only point out a few particularly glaring
contradictions.
A serious pastoral problem
The Papal Motu Proprio was largely based on the feedback
from a survey of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith among the Bishops'
Conferences and individual bishops in 2020. Although the results of the survey have not
yet been published, the various statements made in this regard clearly show the
serious pastoral problems that the co-existence of the two forms of the Roman
rite entailed. Does this no longer apply
to the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter?
How is Article 1 of the Motu Proprio now to be understood,
in which Pope Francis had written with great determination: "The
liturgical books promulgated by the Holy Popes Paul VI and John Paul II in
accordance with the decrees of the Second Vatican Council are the sole
expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite"?
The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter is concerned with
public presence
If a society of apostolic life like the Priestly Fraternity
of St. Peter is allowed the Tridentine liturgy in its full scope and in all its
facets, this is not compatible with the statement of the "only form of
expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite". There are simply two recognised forms of
expression again.
In this case, it is also not possible to argue with a
proprium, such as many orders have; for such propria recognise certain special
texts and rites as well as calendrical additions for the Orders; but they stand
on the basis of the same version of the Roman Rite. That is not the case here;
rather, the permission for the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter is about the
complete version of the Roman Rite superseded by a Council.
What is the validity of the statement in the papal letter
accompanying the Motu Proprio and the Responsa ad dubia that the co-existence
of two forms of the Roman rite introduces division into the liturgy which is
incompatible with the theological claim of the celebration of the Eucharist? As is well known, the Priestly Fraternity of
St. Peter is not characterised by discreet activity in the background, but
always seeks to be present in public. The
danger of schism that emanates from this remains fully present.
Latin reading instead of a standard translation
Nothing more is said about the requirement of the Motu Proprio
that at Mass according to the 1962 Missal the readings are in any case to be
recited in the mother tongue according to a Bible edition published by the
respective bishops' conference (in the German-speaking area this would be the
Einheitsübersetzung of 2016). Apparently,
the Latin reading from the pre-conciliar Missale Romanum is sufficient.
The Responsa ad dubia of the Congregation for Divine Worship
had specified that as sacrament celebrations the pre-conciliar Rituale Romanum
and Pontificale Romanum were fundamentally excluded. Only in canonically-established personal
parishes was the diocesan bishop authorised "at his discretion to grant
permission to use the Rituale Romanum ... - but not the Pontificale Romanum
before the liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council." If it already
seemed problematic to allow the Rituale Romanum - even if only in a very
limited way - it is even more incomprehensible when the Priestly Fraternity of
St Peter is again granted the use of the Pontificale Romanum.
Not to be reconciled with decisions of the Second Vatican
Council.
This means, among other things, that the sacramental words
for Confirmation amended by Paul VI do not apply to the Priestly Fraternity of
St Peter, that the whole series of Orders is re-enacted for them, that the
Chrism Mass can be celebrated according to the Old Rite, that in principle
there is no proclamation of Holy Scripture in the episcopal liturgy outside the
celebration of Mass, and so on.
Anyone who has studied the rites of the pre-conciliar
Pontificale Romanum will find in it a high-ranking testimony to the history of
liturgy and may be inspired by some interesting rites of earlier generations,
but will often be confronted with theological, ecclesiological,
official-theological positions that can no longer be reconciled with the
decisions of the Second Vatican Council, the subsequent ecclesiastical
documents and today's theological knowledge.
Chrism Mass in Vaduz according to the pre-conciliar rite?
And a Bishop who may have forbidden a priest of his diocese
to celebrate Mass privately in observance of the Motu Proprio of 2021 or
allowed another to do so with narrow conditions according to the 1962 Missal,
will find himself contradicted if any priest of the Fraternity of St Peter in
the same church at the same altar can do so without restriction.
Incidentally, without my having any information on this, the
Decree could mean for the beleaguered Archdiocese of Vaduz that the Chrism Mass
will continue to be celebrated according to the pre-conciliar rite, because the
permission of the local Ordinary to celebrate Mass in this form in the
cathedral will certainly be obtained by the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter.
"Why the Pope decides otherwise here remains a mystery
to me".
According to the two documents of the Apostolic See of July
and December 2021, the new Papal decree is an inconsistency of the first order
and - with all due respect to Pope Francis - completely incomprehensible in
substance. For most dioceses and regions,
it will have no particular impact, but the southern German location of
Wigratzbad reaches far into Switzerland and Liechtenstein; nor is it the only
location of the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter.
According to the Motu Proprio Traditionis custodes, Art. 6
and 7, it would have been the task of the Apostolic See that the two competent
dicasteries "watch over the observance of these provisions" (Art. 7).
This would have required a reorientation
of the self-understanding of the Petrine fraternity within the framework of the
remaining liturgical possibilities. Why
the Pope decides otherwise here remains a mystery to me.
* Martin Klöckener (66) is Professor of Liturgical Studies
at the University of Freiburg. In 2020,
he supported a petition of around 200 theologians protesting against changes to
regulations on the Tridentine Mass.
.jpeg)
Comments