On the rescript...

And rumours of other things.

On Sunday, a number of folks asked me about the rescript issued on Shrove Tuesday by the Dicastery for Divine Worship and what it means for our congregation.

The short answer is nothing.

Here’s the long answer — the rescript essentially said that two items are no longer within the competence of Diocesan Bishops to regulate under Canon 87. The canon states, in part:

Can. 87 §1. A diocesan bishop, whenever he judges that it contributes to their spiritual good, is able to dispense the faithful from universal and particular disciplinary laws issued for his territory or his subjects by the supreme authority of the Church. He is not able to dispense, however, from procedural or penal laws nor from those whose dispensation is specially reserved to the Apostolic See or some other authority.

Some bishops, especially in the U.S., were overriding sections of Traditionis Custodes in their dioceses, and Rome, in direct violation of the Second Vatican Council’s theology of bishops, says that they can no longer do that.

The two items the rescript spoke about were the use of parish churches and the faculties of priests ordained after TC was published. In our case, we are not in a parish church. We are in a mission church attached to the parish of St. Clement’s. Therefore, no permission is required for us to continue to use St. Mary’s; however, it does mean that we won’t be moving anywhere else for the foreseeable future. For example, if we wanted to move our Mass to St. Clement’s, permission would now be needed from Rome directly, and that is not going to happen.

Why do I say it’s not going to happen? Well, that brings us to the second item spoken of by the rescript. TC said that any priest ordained after its publication date must have permission from Rome to celebrate the Traditional Mass, and any bishop who has asked for that permission for one of his priests has been sent a form letter saying “no.” In other words, they are making no exceptions; the answer is and will be “no.”

This brings us to the rumours of another more restrive document that will supposedly be issued on or around April 3rd. If you are plugged into the Traditional Catholic blogosphere, you will no doubt hear, as I have, many different rumours concerning such a document. However, at this point, that is what they remain, rumours. The closest thing anyone has gotten to substantiating their claims is a blogger who knows someone, who knows someone, who knows someone, who knows some bishop who has supposedly seen some draft version.

Thus, I won’t be repeating any rumours I have heard in this space, especially as several of them contradict each other. However, given that we are in the season of Lent, perhaps we should direct some of our Lenten good works for the intention of the preservation of the Traditional Mass. It couldn’t hurt.

It is worth noting that a number of false rumours have come from Rome recently. Some think it’s to try and ferret out press leaks and from which department in the Curia said leaks are originating. Take, for example, the rumour that was spread last year that Pope Francis was going to name a Co-adjutor Bishop of Rome, which is the technical canonical language for appointing his own successor, skipping the conclave process and naming the next pope himself.

This rumour was proved to be completely false after a time.

At this time, it is best to focus on our Lenten observance and not worry about things which are beyond our control but simply fast and pray for those making decisions that will affect millions of Catholics around the world. As St. Francis de Sales famously said, “Anxiety is the greatest evil that can befall a soul, except sin. God commands you to pray, but He forbids you to worry.”