Here is an interesting report of the intrepid Andrea Tornielli in my translation (edited):
In the next weeks there will be published a Motu Proprio of Benedict XVI which makes the Commission Ecclesia Dei … an organism of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Pope Ratzinger had already announced this last March, in the letter sent to all the bishops of the world dedicated to the Williamson case and the revocation of the excommunication of the prelates consecrated by Lefebvre. Next 4 July Darìo Card. Castrillòn Hoyos, present President of Ecclesia Dei, will turn 80 years of age and will leave his post for reasons of age. The Commission will then be presided over by the Prefect of the ex-Holy Office, the American William Joseph Card. Levada. The Vice-President Msgr. Perl will remain in his place while there will be named a new Secretary to replace the [recently] deceased Msgr. Mario Marini. Just this morning, the French agency I.Media revealed that in the "feria quarta" meeting the cardinal members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith put together a first platform for the beginning of dialogue with the Lefebvrites. … Meanwhile, as Il Giornale anticipated a few days ago, this Saturday there ought to be announced the nomination of the Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship [Archbp.] Malcom Ranjith Patabendige Don as Archbishop of Colombo. In his place there will be designated the present Undersecretary of the ex-Holy Office the Domincan DiNoia.
Loading ...
Hmmm.
So, the PCED will be under CDF, because the “discussions” with the SSPX are doctrinal in character.
But what about the liturgical regulation of the TLM and the oversight of the worldwide implementation of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum? Those are not doctrinal matters, but matters of Liturgical Law and Liturgical enforcement.
From that perspective, it would make more sense to leave the PCED as a separate Dicastery, perhaps with a change of name and more clearly defined powers; or to restructure it as a Comission under the CDWDS; or to split the current PCED into two dicasteries, one under the CDWDS, charged with the liturgical governance of the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite, and another, perhaps of transitional existance, placed under the CDF, charged with the doctrinal discussions with the SSPX.
Will the PCED retain its competence for liturgical governance under the CDF? Is the Prefect of the CDF, who is going to be PCED’s new President, an expert in liturgical matters?
The Arcbishops of Colombo are usually not made Cardinals.
The current Arcbishop of Colombo isn’t a Cardinal.
That’s why I consider Archbishop Ranjith’s promotion to that Metropolitan See a negative development.
Some have said that, as Archbishop of Colombo, Ranjith would be expected to be made a Cardinal in the next consistory. Given that past Archbishops of Colombo weren’t made Cardinals, we are only left with the hope that Pope Benedict indeed intends to make Ranjith the first Archbishop of Colombo to be created a cardinal.
But we have no assurance, because Colombo is not a traditional “cardinalatial see”. Are there really good indications from vaticanistas to the effect that the Pope intends to make the future Archbishop of Colombo a Cardinal?
Agreed, Prof. Bastro. I’m very worried that not having the PCED “cop on the beat” will result in liberal bishops sneaking in illegal suppressions and other harassments.
We haven’t won yet. Here in Washington, DC, the struggle for the EF is ongoing with the uber-hostile Archbishop Wuerl–and we have it better than many dioceses.
It’s essential that there be some body that the faithful can turn to which has the rights of the traditionalist minority as their highest priority. If the PCED is a) not at the CDWDS, and b) distracted over Jansenism or some such, then we’re left to fend for ourselves.
It’s Ecclesia Dei Adflicta all over again if we’re not careful.
The former archbishop of Colombo,Thomas Cooray O.M.I,now deceased, was created a Cardinal in1965.
“The Arcbishops of Colombo are usually not made Cardinals.”
Are Managua, Nicaragua; Tegucigalpa, Honduras; Durban, South Africa or even Houston, Texas traditional cardinalatial sees??? Yet their respective bishops have been raised to the cardinalatial dignity. I hope we start seeing more and more prelates elevated to the Sacred College by reasons of MERIT and not by default.
For what it’s worth.. is it typical to see the former Dean of the Sacred College, also former Prefect for the Doctrine of the Faith… 2 years shy of his 80th birthday… raised to the Supreme Pontificate?
Things can happen in our Church, extraordinary things… and sometimes traditions can also be broken sometimes. The future Archbishop of Colombo will become a Cardinal at the flick of a pen if the Holy Father so wishes.
In agreement with Rellis’ comment above.. I hope than our archbishop in DC is NOT elevated to Cardinal, as Archbishop Borders was not in Baltimore… I could not bear to see this man, with his reticence to defend the unborn boldly and courageously, be elevated in such a way – and it pains me to write that.
There might not be much history of the Archbishops of Colombo becoming Cardinals, but the fact tha Ranjith is a favourite of the Pope, and most likely will eventually be back in Rome someday, possibly at the head of dicastery of his own. This is a stepping-stone in Ranjith’s career. What worries me is when he’ll be made a Cardinal. Vatican watchers seem to think that the next consistory is full. Fall, 2009 is the date most people think will be the next consistory. Barring any unforeseen incidents, there will be seven spots. Some are sure:
1. Marx, Archbp. of Munich/Freising
2.Romeo, Archbp. of Palermo, who was supposed to get a red hat last time.
3. Bp. Amato, who is head of the Cong. for the Causes of Saints, which usu. has a Cardinal at its head.
4. One spot is probably reserved for an Archbishop heading a major Council or Dicastery. There are several.
5. Archbp. Burke, of course
6. Even though Egan is only turning 78, Dolan stands a good chance of getting a red hat.
7. There is the slightest chance that Vin Nichols will get a red hat despite Murphy-O’Connor being 77, but this is slim, and would be huge snub to the fmr. Archbp. It would also be a lesson: don’t like the hermeneutic of continuity, don’t expect lots of latitude from the Pope.
Ranjith might bump Nichols out of #7, but that would mean England & Wales would probably have no Cardinal of voting age for quite some time.
Who knows, I may be completely wrong, but this is what people have been saying for what it’s worth. I certainly hope Ranjith gets a red hat.
Sadly, in November, Cardinal Ambrozic, Archbishop Emeritus of Toronto (Canada) will be two months shy of eighty… I would like to see his most excellent replacement, Abp. Thomas Christopher Collins, get the red hat at the next consistory.
Father and Prof. Basto,
RORATE CAELI has an interesting post with comments entitled, “New motu proprio merging Ecclesia Dei into CDF”. The comments are quite interesting. I wonder what your thoughts are? One commenter suggests this is excellent news.
D.v.
Colombo is not a “cardinalatial” see, the red hat of Cardinal Cooley notwithstanding, but such things are not hard and fast rules, and as Matthew says, Archbishop Ranjith is not just any candidate for the see. His curial history and close relationship with the Pope suggests that a red hat may be in his future after all.
Time will tell. My money is that he gets one.
David M Cheney of Catholic Hierarchy argues convincingly that the next Red Consistory will be in 2010 because a number of Cardinals will turn 80 by then so that the number of new Cardinazls would be about 14 or so.
In such a case Archbishop Collins of Toronto will certainly get a red hat.
For that matter, Cardinal Ambrozic is, apparently in bad health and there is no guarantee he will reach 80.
There is the fact that a 26-year civil war has just come to an end. The the country needs reconstruction in every sense, and the only social institution with strong presence across the ethnic divide is, you guessed it, the Catholic Church.
is it so difficult for bishops to make sure that both forms of mass are available in all parishes, especially in those parishes which have multiple daily and sunday masses and serve a vast number of people? this should already be the norm, but it is almost nowhere to be found. we do not have access to our rite.
10 June 2009
A new Motu Proprio from Benedict XVI about the PCED
CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULA — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 11:33 am
Here is an interesting report of the intrepid Andrea Tornielli in my translation (edited):
Prof. Basto wrote:
“Hmmm.
So, the PCED will be under CDF, because the “discussions” with the SSPX are doctrinal in character.
But what about the liturgical regulation of the TLM and the oversight of the worldwide implementation of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum? Those are not doctrinal matters, but matters of Liturgical Law and Liturgical enforcement.
From that perspective, it would make more sense to leave the PCED as a separate Dicastery, perhaps with a change of name and more clearly defined powers; or to restructure it as a Comission under the CDWDS; or to split the current PCED into two dicasteries, one under the CDWDS, charged with the liturgical governance of the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite, and another, perhaps of transitional existance, placed under the CDF, charged with the doctrinal discussions with the SSPX.
Will the PCED retain its competence for liturgical governance under the CDF? Is the Prefect of the CDF, who is going to be PCED’s new President, an expert in liturgical matters?”
)(
I agree with Basto’s concerns. What about the enforcement of Summorum Pontificum? It’s been a bit of a yawn thus far. How would PCED’s absorbtion into the CDF affect its effectiveness? How about creating a new dicastery and call it the Pontifical Comission Summorum Pontificum? Now that it is in effect–supposedly–Eccelsia Dei really no longer has any real relevance because SP has superceded it and is much deeper in substance.
Had John Paul been really wholehearted about the SSPX matter, Summorum Pontificum should have been issued then rather than twenty years later. IMO, a whole lot more could have been accomplished by jump-starting things then than now.
Moving on, Archbishop Ranjith should be elevated to Cardinal. The Holy Father can elevate anyone he wants and the traditional whatever of a particular See is merely formality and can be augmented by any Pope.
=====
Rellis wrote:
“Agreed, Prof. Bastro. I’m very worried that not having the PCED ‘cop on the beat’ will result in liberal bishops sneaking in illegal suppressions and other harassments.
We haven’t won yet. Here in Washington, DC, the struggle for the EF is ongoing with the uber-hostile Archbishop Wuerl—and we have it better than many dioceses.
It’s essential that there be somebody that the faithful can turn to which has the rights of the traditionalist minority as their highest priority. If the PCED is a) not at the CDWDS, and b) distracted over Jansenism or some such, then we’re left to fend for ourselves.
It’s Ecclesia Dei Adflicta all over again if we’re not careful.”
)(
This is an on-going concern of mine ever since Summorum Pontificum was issued, and as time has gone on there has been no real enforcement of it. This tells the Faithful SP is merely a gesture rather than a real corrective measure.
=====
EJ wrote:
“Things can happen in our Church, extraordinary things… and sometimes traditions can also be broken sometimes. The future Archbishop of Colombo will become a Cardinal at the flick of a pen if the Holy Father so wishes.”
)(
Yes, EJ, many things, but lately it seems the Holy Father is a bit too thrifty with his ink.
=====
David O’Rourke wrote:
“For that matter, Cardinal Ambrozic is, apparently in bad health and there is no guarantee he will reach 80.”
)(
There is no guarantee any of us will reach 80. ;-)
During his tenure as Archbishop of San Francisco, Cardinal Levada never once allowed the Extraordinary Form of the Mass under the old indult system. I wonder if they could not have found someone a little more friendly to the traditional Mass to head the Commission.