![]() This article merely recognizes that the bishop regulates the general liturgical life of the diocese, which encompasses also the use of the pre-conciliar Missale Romanum, and to authorize its use, just as a bishop would authorize the right of any priest to celebrate the liturgy. Paul VI and John Paul II, indicates that they are the “unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.” In the absence of any indication to the contrary, one must conclude that the status of the Extraordinary Form liturgical books remains intact.Īrticle 2 recognizes the diocesan bishop as the “moderator, promoter, and guardian of the whole liturgical life of the particular Church.” This is true and has always been the case. There is a serious lack of clarity in this document which this brief analysis will attempt to address, and it is evident that its ambiguities will be, sadly, taken advantage of by those with less than a genuine love for the Church, her faithful people, and her heritage.Īrticle 1, discussing the liturgical books promulgated by Sts. When read in comparison with the extensive granting of rights conceded by Summorum Pontificum and clarified and expanded by Universae Ecclesiae, when there is no express revocation of these rights indicated by Pope Benedict XVI, one must conclude canonically that they still exist. ![]() There is no indication that the right of a priest to celebrate privately according to the 1962 missal is in any way infringed. No mention is made of the traditional rites of the various religious communities (Dominican, Carmelite, Praemonstratensian, etc.) nor those of the ancient sees (Ambrosian, Lyonnais, etc.). The rights established by Quo Primum, by the theological and liturgical tradition of the Western rites, and immemorial custom remain intact. The traditional Missal remains, as it always was, never abrogated. No express abrogation is made of any notable document concerning the traditional Roman Missal, and such abrogation should not therefore be implied. No mention whatsoever is made of the pre-conciliar Breviarium Romanum, Pontificale Romanum and Rituale Romanum. It is worthwhile to indicate what this motu proprio does not place restrictions upon. As the specified end of the document is the “constant search for ecclesial communion”, it would also appear that hermeneutically, this document should be interpreted in a way which genuinely fosters ecclesiastical communion between the faithful, priests, and bishops, and does not promote negative feeling and ill-will amongst any members of the Christian faithful who are attached to the traditional liturgical forms. Pope Francis indicates in the first paragraph that the bishops constitute the principle of unity of the particular churches and govern them through the proclamation of the Gospel. Interestingly, there is no vacatio legis on the document either. The motu proprio “Traditionis Custodes” was issued by Pope Francis on 16 July 2021, along with an accompanying letter.Īs a restrictive decree, this present motu proprio of Pope Francis should be interpreted strictly, in accord with the legal maxim Regula Juris 15 (odiosa restringenda, favorabilia amplificanda). ![]() This is necessary to have a correct reaction to this Moto proprio which seeks to unjustly supress the Traditional Latin Mass.Īrticle: "Legal Considerations on the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes" - Restrictions demand strict interpretation Pierre Laliberte takes a canonical look at how the recent moto proprio of Pope Francis “Traditionis Custodes” that was issued by him on 16 July 2021, should be understood.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |