Some are saying that the survey of the bishops played almost no role in Pope Francis issuing Traditionis Custodes (TC) and the accompanying letter. Vatican correspondent, Diane Montagna, continues to investigate and posted additional evidence on her substack forum yesterday:
New Evidence Confirms CDF Report, Erodes Vatican Narrative...
Quoting Francis' own letter indicates that he used the survey to justify his draconian restrictions. As the pope of synodality, it isn't surprising to find him pretending that he acted in union with the bishops. Here's an excerpt from the letter:
“With the passage of thirteen years, I instructed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to circulate a questionnaire to the Bishops regarding the implementation of the Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum. The responses reveal a situation that preoccupies and saddens me, and persuades me of the need to intervene.”
Montagna's article was responding to Vatican spokesman, Matteo Bruni downplaying the survey and claiming other documentation. Undermining that claim is the fact that there's no mention of this in TC or the accompanying letter. Montagna makes a convincing case. If you want to just read her summary, go to the end of the post and read her five points. Here's number five:
Given the gravity of the situation at hand, and its impact on the life and unity of the Church, it is therefore the Vatican spokesman’s burden to prove that the “further documents” and “other confidential reports resulting from additional consultations” either wholly contradict, or at least seriously undermine, what is written in the CDF report’s overall assessment. In other words, the burden of proof is on the Vatican spokesman to demonstrate that these other documents prove the CDF report inaccurately represented the responses of the world’s bishops to the questionnaire, and that Pope Francis in fact had the support of the greater part of the responding bishops in issuing Traditionis Custodes and revoking Summorum Pontificum.And I stand by my opinion that the legacy of Pope Francis is "Liar, liar, pants on fire!"
Did Francis say and write some good things? Of course! Truth and goodness always make error easier to administer. Satan is no fool! I once knew a liberal Carmelite priest who championed homosexuality. He bragged that the faithful would accept everything he said as long as he used holy water and incense.
Actions speak louder than words, however, and many of Francis' actions took a cannon to the barque of Peter. He spoke against abortion but honored an abortionist. He spoke against transgender ideology but affirmed same sex blessings for sodomite couples. He talked endlessly about synodality but deep-sixed bishops for acting like the apostles.
Liars can't be trusted, that's a simple fact. So pray for Pope Francis' soul. That's the only good we can do him now, and if he's beyond help, those prayers will be used by the Blessed Mother for someone they can help. And let's all pray for Pope Leo. Some of his early actions are problematic, but I think of Thomas à Becket, drinking and womanizing companion of King Henry II. Being named Archbishop of Canterbury spurred his conversion and his ultimate sacrifice of his life. Let us pray for Pope Leo as if our lives depended on it. Certainly for some their spiritual lives may. Scandal is a killer of souls!
May Jesus Christ be praised!
Mary, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us.
St. Joseph, Guardian of the Universal Church, pray for us.
I find it hard to believe that Montagna only has this or that piece of the report. Seems to me she only wants to present what serves her interest. If there are so many bishops in the US who are in favor of the TLM surely one could give her the full report especially if it were so damaging to Francis (and fancy she's in Rome so could get it from worldwide bishops). She tries to say "CDF" prepared the report, but read close and it is "section 4" of the CDF which used to be Ecclesia Dei Commission: " The Fourth Section (formerly the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei) was entrusted with the task of studying the responses, processing the data, and producing a synthesis accompanied by an overall assessment of the responses to the questionnaire received by the Dicastery" (which would be biased to spin the survey response in the best light possible).
ReplyDeletehttps://substack.com/home/post/p-167944683
It would not be odd for Francis to request follow up to the comments/responses or report and that is where the "In fact, further documentation was later added to the consultation mentioned, including other confidential reports resulting from additional consultations that were submitted to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith." If it was follow up to the survey responses, then it would be part of the survey documentation. Or maybe because the survey response was so small they surveyed again some of the large dioceses/bishop conferences that didn't respond or weren't represented just to get a better sample.
Regardless I think Montagna is building a house of cards on this one sentence: "the majority of bishops who responded to the questionnaire stated that making legislative changes to Summorum Pontificum would cause more harm than good.”
Francis didn't make legislative changes or amend Summorum Pontificum: he replaced it. Perhaps the request Francis is referring to in the following sentence has nothing to do with changing SP but is the request to make it clear that there are NOT TWO forms of the Latin rite each with equal standing (which in truth BXVI never allowed (priests could say the TLM with no congregation present; bishops could make it available ONLY at the request of the faithful "in certain regions")): "Responding to your requests, I take the firm decision to abrogate all the norms, instructions, permissions and customs that precede the present Motu proprio, and declare that the liturgical books promulgated by the saintly Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, constitute the UNIQUE expression of the Lex Orandi of the Roman Rite."
[And Francis says this while still ordering the bishops to allow the TLM in certain regions just like JPII and BXVI who said about the new mass in SP: "In this way the Popes sought to ensure that “this liturgical edifice, so to speak ... reappears in new splendour in its dignity and harmony.” [4]]
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_ben-xvi_motu-proprio_20070707_summorum-pontificum.html
I challenge Montagna to get ten bishops (ten good men and God won't destroy the city) to disagree with that sentence of Francis. If she can't get ten bishops, I don't know what leg she's standing on. I think she's just trying to string along those who would leave the Novus Ordo to practice the traditional faith in SSPX or other exclusively trad community by pretending the bishops are good, but the pope is bad (it worked so well when they did it in the reverse JPII is good (or BXVI) but the bishops are bad). Obviously she's not trying to get the vatican to change it's mind -- they say she's incorrect, so now she's calling them liars and saying Francis didn't refer to any other documentation (and of course Francis must be telling the truth about that even though he was lying about the bishops' request...round and round spin til your dizzy).
Why couldn’t it have been the large number of bishops who did not see that the Church was being divided over the use of the TLM that persuaded Pope Francis that Traditionis Custodes needed to be issued?
ReplyDeleteClearly Francis's stated reason for TC is false.
ReplyDeleteBut there seems to be a certain contingent of commentators or influencers who think we're the same dumb believers of pre- covid.
If there are unreleased documents that bolster his decision as some claim then in the name of unity let's see them! Why keep such evidence secret if it supports TC? Not that I think additional evidence matters. Francis himself said he relied on the survey.
Margaret, you haven't even seen the full survey report - you just see the part of it Montagna chose to release. She couldn't obtain the full report? Who gave her these little slices of the report?
DeleteWe will know a lot more when the Italian book by liturgist Bux and his co-author is translated into English. I presume that Diane speaks Italian and so may have the "documentation" which we will likely see as time goes on. But the fact is that the majority of the bishops who responded to the survey were mostly positive about the implementation of the TLM in their dioceses. They represent a minority since the TLM is not widely available. But it's growing thanks to the SSPX and others. And I have to agree with someone commenting on an anonymous blog criticizing Montagna, that the author may very well be a paid diocesan employee. Would that be beyond Cupich, Gregory, Tobin, Farrell, Seitz, etc.?
DeleteRorate publishes English translations of the comments and of the summary at the link.
ReplyDeletehttps://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2025/07/journalist-obtains-exclusive-access-to.html
I want to address the "comments" document: "Collection of quotations drawn from the responses received from the dioceses." All the questions were open ended, i.e. not multiple choice and presumably most responders answered each question. The comments aren't organized by the survey questions, but under headings such as (the first) "Negative assessments about the attitude of certain faithful." Since the document is labelled "collection" one doesn't know if these are ALL the negative assessments or just the ones the person preparing the document "collected." Under this heading there are only eight comments.
In terms of the actual survey questions this is how the "collected" comments break down. Q.1 What is the situation in your diocese with respect to the EF? One (1) comment. Q2.If the EF is practiced there, does it respond to a true pastoral need or is it promoted by a single priest? One (1) comment. Q3 In your opinion, are there positive or negative aspects of the use of the EF? 26 comments. Q4 Are the norms and conditions established by SP respected? One (1) comment. Q5 Does it occur to you that, in your diocese, the OF has adopted elements of the EF? Six (6) comments. Q6. For the celebration of the Mass, do you use the Missal promulgated by J23 in 1962? Zero (0) comments. Q7 Besides the celebration of the Mass in the EF, are there other celebrations (for example Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, Penance, Unction of the sick, Ordination, Divine Office, Easter Triduum, funeral rites) according to the liturgical books prior to VC2? Zero (0) comments Q8 Has SP had an influence on the life of seminaries (the seminary of diocese) and other formation houses? Two (2) comments. Q9 13 years after SP what is your advice about the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite? 25 comments.
Q3 & Q9 have the same number of comments so you would think it's the same dioceses, but for Q3 Westminster, Eng; Baltimore; San Francisco; Plymouth, Eng; Tarbes et Lourdes, Fr (2x: "Neg Ass about Attitude of Faithful" & "Whom EF Attracts" so these comments are not necessarily the full response but a sentence or two picked out)); Steubenville; Livorno, Italy; Savannah; Sens Auxerre, Fr; Vannes, Fr (2x under same heading "On the isolation of communities"); Digione, Fr; Lingayen, Phil; Des Moines; Brooklyn, Di Saint Die, Fr; Aix & Arles, Fr; Miami; Dallas; Perpignan-Eine, Fr; Tyler; Knoxville; Great Falls-Billings; Pittsburgh; Novaliches, Philippines.
Q9: Lake Charles; TARBES ET LOURDES, FR(2x "On those whom EF Attracts" (Comments under this for 3 & 9) and "Proposals and/or perspectives for the future") ; Rockville Center; PLYMOUTH, ENG; La Rochelle, Fr; WESTMINSTER, ENG; Albany; New Orleans; Cambrai, Fr; Liege, Belgium; Hexham & New Castle, Eng; Ft Wayne South Bend; German Bishops Conf Joint Rept; LINGAYEN, PHIL; East Anglia, Eng; Portland; SAN FRANCISCO (2 one under the other) ; Montauban, Fr; Aosta, Italy; Arlington; Cremona, Italy; Milan; Pitigliano, Italy; Pescia, Italy.
So out of 43 dioceses we see comments for both questions from only five. No comments for: Kansas City (isn't SSPX big there?), Chicago, New York, Boston, Los Angeles. I know SSPV has church and school in Cincinnati and also Minneapolis St Paul as well as a chapel in Cleveland (surprised to see nothing from Ohio dioceses). There is one comment referencing a report rec'd from Mexico (last comment). Nothing from Ireland, Latin America, Africa, Asia (except Philippines) Australia, Canada, Spain, Portugal. If I were Pope Francis and rec'd this "report" (if this was the full documentation he rec'd) I would request the actual surveys to read them myself.
https://sspx.org/en/list-sspx-chapels
https://www.cmri.org/pdfs/traditional-latin-mass-directory-usa-map-2025.pdf
https://congregationofstpiusv.com/locations/
https://www.sspv.org/index.php/locations