"No One Wanted a War" against the Traditional Latin Mass

Msgr. Nicola Bux

The article below (Google translation from Italian) includes an interview with respected liturgist Don Nicola Bux, co-author of the recently released book (in Italian),  The Liturgy Is Not a Show: The Questionnaire to Bishops on the Old Rite — A Weapon of Mass Destruction?  

THE INTERVIEW / MGR. NICOLA BUX
War on the ancient rite, it was not the bishops who started it 

It was not the world episcopate that asked to "cage" the Mass in the ancient rite, as Pope Francis instead claimed, declaring that the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes was the response to a specific request from the bishops consulted on the matter. A scoop by journalist Diane Montagna instead shows, with documents in hand, a very different reality on that consultation: no one asked for the total abolition of Benedict XVI's Summorum Pontificum (which had opened those doors then abruptly closed by Francis), nor even the total disappearance of the ancient liturgy (the explicit objective of Traditionis Custodes ). Also shedding light on the documentation are Msgr. Nicola Bux and Saverio Gaeta, co-authors of the volume The liturgy is not a spectacle. The questionnaire to the bishops on the ancient rite, a weapon of destruction of the Mass (Fede&Cultura, Verona 2025). Monsignor Bux, interviewed by La Bussola, places the controversial genesis and repercussions of Traditionis Custodes in the broad horizon of the “liturgical peace” hoped for in his time by Benedict XVI and dramatically interrupted in 2021.

Monsignor Bux, so it wasn't the majority of bishops who were pushing to “do away” with the traditional Mass?
The first to be surprised was Pope Benedict, as we know from Monsignor Gänswein's book, Nothing but the Truth. But it was also surprising for many others that the bishops of the world had such a negative position towards an act – Summorum Pontificum – which had effectively restored a liturgical peace, hoped for by Benedict XVI himself, and at the same time had done justice to a precious and millenary heritage. Among other things, it is not clear why tradition is being rediscovered everywhere, even in the gastronomic field (“traditional cuisine”), but this should not apply to the liturgy. Let us not even talk about the great heritage of the Eastern rites, recently underlined by Leo XIV.

The measures of Tradizionis Custodes have also been justified by leveraging alleged anti-ecclesial attitudes. Yet, reading the bishops' responses, one gets the impression that these are limited cases and not such as to call for the abolition of Summorum Pontificum ...
It is always difficult to analyze the sense of the Church and of the faith of the people. One could then also do an analysis of all the people who attend ordinary Mass: if they have a sense of the Church, if they feel together with the Church on the truths of faith and morals. We know well that this is not the case. Therefore, to attribute to the extraordinary rite a sensus Ecclesiaedistorted is not correct. There have been disagreements from all sides, even in progressive circles (think of the Dutch Catechism) but it is not a good reason to keep people out of the Church.

In the questionnaire some bishops take note of the positive effects of the ancient rite even for those who celebrate the new. But then would prohibit it be a loss for everyone, not just for this or that group?
Certainly. If the ordinary form or Novus Ordo – which its supporters present as a development of the ancient – ​​​​has known, as we know, «deformations to the limit of the bearable» (Benedict XVI, 7 July 2007) evidently it means that it needed that restoration of the sense of mystery that is very present in Eastern liturgies (as Pope Leo recalled) and that is equally present in the ancient rite. Even the Orthodox who sometimes participate in the so-called extraordinary rite or Vetus Ordo are struck by it. As a scholar of Byzantine liturgy I can say that if there is a rite very similar to the Byzantine rite it is the ancient Roman rite. So why sever a relationship that, among other things, is also very beneficial for the encounter with Eastern Christians? I just want to point out that when the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum was published, the then Patriarch of Moscow, Alexis II, complimented Pope Benedict because he said that only by recovering common roots, traditions and liturgies will Christians become closer again.

What have been the effects of Tradizionis Custodes to date?
I believe that overall the effect has not been that impressive. Of course, that obedience that must characterize bishops and priests has obviously slowed down the celebration of the ancient Roman rite but it will hardly be able to stop it. The reality of betrayal is like the water of the river that grows richer as it flows. But if we reject this richness of faith, prayer, and liturgy that we have received, how do we expect the new generations to be able to become closer to the Catholic Church? Let us instead look at the young people who participate in traditional pilgrimages, such as Paris-Chartres or Covadonga in Spain, and others who are announced. The hope is that the ideology that tends to stick to ecclesiology and liturgy will be abandoned once and for all, because the Church is always a reality that comes from above, the heavenly Jerusalem that descends among us, not something that is “done”. Pope Benedict has insisted a lot on this: the liturgy is not the fruit of our will as priests or bishops, nor even of the Pope and the Apostolic See. Because even the Pope is subject to the Word of God and therefore to the tradition that this Word has brought to the current generation over two millennia.

This is why the volume opens with aexcursus on the Mass over the centuries?
Exactly, it is to demonstrate – with a necessarily synthetic excursus – that what we profess comes from the apostolic tradition, not from the inventiveness of someone. In the book we wanted to set the question of the evaluations of the questionnaire within its proper context and then conclude with recent events, from Summorum Pontificum to Traditionis Custodes and then make an appeal to the Pope.

It is too early to say how Leo XIV will move, but what can we hope for the future of “liturgical peace”?
We need to return to the path of the “reform of the reform”, in the sense in which Benedict XVI intended it, starting from the observation that the liturgical reform has not really taken off, or has flown very low, to the point that it has been able to allow deformations, arbitrariness, Masses on the mat and so on. This is because it has not been “shielded” by canonical norms and sanctions, even though Sacrosanctum Concilium was very clear on the matter, warning that no one “even if he is a priest, dares, on his own initiative, add, remove or change anything in liturgical matters” (22,3). Let us ask ourselves what has happened instead in these sixty years and let us start studying how it went. I make a proposal directly to the Pope and to the Prefect of Divine Worship: have the courage to study the documents of the Consilium instituted by Paul VI for the execution of the liturgical reform, or the Memoires of Louis Bouyer, one of the great experts who participated in it... have the courage to make the truth. And therefore to recover, not through imposition but with the patience of charity, what has remained on the ground, to graft back the severed branches, to use an Augustinian image.
This is the work that I would call “reform of the reform”, without ideological pretensions but as a fact, a respectful comparison, which certainly cannot happen overnight. In the meantime, let us “ferment” the two ritual forms – as most of the bishops said in answering the questionnaire and as hoped for by Summorum Pontificum.
If Jesus speaks of the wise scribe who draws from his treasure nova et vetera , new things and old things, it is not clear why we should not be able to do so for the great traditional heritage of the liturgy. 

What have been the effects of Tradizionis Custodes to date?
I believe that overall the effect has not been that impressive. Of course, that obedience that must characterize bishops and priests has obviously slowed down the celebration of the ancient Roman rite but it will hardly be able to stop it. The reality of betrayal is like the water of the river that grows richer as it flows. But if we reject this richness of faith, prayer, and liturgy that we have received, how do we expect the new generations to be able to become closer to the Catholic Church? Let us instead look at the young people who participate in traditional pilgrimages, such as Paris-Chartres or Covadonga in Spain, and others who are announced. The hope is that the ideology that tends to stick to ecclesiology and liturgy will be abandoned once and for all, because the Church is always a reality that comes from above, the heavenly Jerusalem that descends among us, not something that is “done”. Pope Benedict has insisted a lot on this: the liturgy is not the fruit of our will as priests or bishops, nor even of the Pope and the Apostolic See. Because even the Pope is subject to the Word of God and therefore to the tradition that this Word has brought to the current generation over two millennia.