Archbp. of Cagliari against Summorum Pontificum

In solidarity with our friends at Rorate, and with all Catholics in the region of the Italian Bishops Conference, I bring you this, which you may judge on your own.

The blog Messa in latino reports on the thoughts of H.E. Most Rev. Giuseppe Mani, Archbishop of Cagliari, who has “formally forbidden” [in writing] (formalmente proibito) the holding of the meeting which this Committee had wished to dedicate to the studying and deepening understanding of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.

Again… in the version Rorate made from the Messa in latino post:

Banning even the DISCUSSION of the Motu Proprio?

The language of this article from our Italian brothers is very strong and is not what we in RC would use, but the sheer absurdity of this act of episcopal defiance versus the Holy Father moves me to post this, so that the whole world may know. CAP.

From the blog of Messainlatino:

The tyrannical Archbishop of Cagliari in Sardinia prohibits a meeting on the reform of the Holy Father to be held in the parish of Mandas. And what reason is given? NONE!

Meeting on Summorum Pontificum (Giornate Summorum Pontificum) in MANDAS on August 9-11 2009


We hereby inform you that His Excellency Rev. Mons. Giuseppe Mani, Archbishop of Cagliari, has “formally forbidden” [in writing] (formalmente proibito) the holding of the meeting which this Committee had wished to dedicate to the studying and deepening understanding of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.

We regret to inform you that this will mean that we will not be able to reflect on the Magisterium of the Holy Father, on the beauty of liturgy and on the best way to realize the co-habitation of the two forms of the one and only (Roman) Rite.

We hope that we will be able to meet again in a time not too long in coming and thus make it possible for priests and faithful to get to know the Holy Mass in its extraordinary form, to learn to celebrate it and to participate in it in a fruitful way.

The organization committee

Comment of As the rebellious feudal masters who did not give a damn about the Emperor and the king, this is the situation of the Church in Cagliari – and that is not all. The worst is – and this is something which cries for revenge in the name of God, is that this bishop without any shame did not even bother to find a reason for his arbitrary and hateful ukase. Stat pro ratione voluntas (my pleasure stands for a reason or let the will take the place of reason — CAP): the mere caprice of our Caligula of today is what is behind the completely insane wish to oppose that of the faithful and of the Holy Father. But certain insults against common sense and against justice, even more than insults against the Pope and the People of God (the initiatives of whom, like this meeting, according to the Second Vatican Council are to be encouraged and promoted: great is the consistency of our Bishop in this!), will not go unpunished. He will see one day, and that day will not be long in coming…

Archbp. of Cagliari against Summorum Pontificum
0 votes, 0.00 avg. rating (0% score)
FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Archbp. of Cagliari against Summorum Pontificum

  1. AndyKl says:


    Is this the most egregious action against traditionalists and those dedicated to the EF Mass known to us?

    I can’t think of any American bishops who have gone to the lengths of formally prohibiting anything.

  2. JoeGarcia says:

    I quote Fr. Z:

    Usquequo, Domine? Usquequo?


  3. TJM says:

    It’s got to be a joke. I cannot imagine a bishop pulling a looney stunt like this. It would guarantee a swift ticket to retirement. Tom

  4. lofstrr says:

    IF this is true as presented, how would the Holy See usually respond to such a situation? Would the Holy See have to wait for a formal complaint from someone or could one of the dicasteries act on its own initiative if say someone noticed this on a blog?

  5. lofstrr says:

    You know, it is really a good thing that the Church doesn’t conduct her business via email as with most corporations.

  6. haleype says:

    IMO what we need is a “God Squad” of curial officials empowered by His Holiness to remove recalcitrant bishops on the spot. Imagine the effect this would have on those arrogant, disobedient types that fly in the Holy father’s face. Yah, I know, it’s not going to happen but still what a joy it would be if it did.

  7. Steve K. says:

    Would disobedience to the bishop be licit in this case?

  8. Carolina Geo says:

    Brick-by-brick only works when other people aren’t working with opposite energies wall-by-wall.

  9. Art says:

    It would be interesting to see what the Archbishop said in writing.

    @haleype: It looks like the Anglicans have something along the lines of what you’re looking for.

  10. Childermass says:

    Hmm, perhaps his Excellency is a closet operative for the SSPX. Does he not know that he is doing them a great service?

  11. mibethda says:

    Didn’t this Archbishop (Mani) come out promoting inflatable churches not so awfully long ago?

  12. mibethda says:

    Sorry, that should have been Should have previewed it.

  13. PAUL says:

    Are there any EF Masses said in his diocese??

  14. Jack Hughes says:

    Et Tu Cagliari?

  15. robtbrown says:

    IF this is true as presented, how would the Holy See usually respond to such a situation? Would the Holy See have to wait for a formal complaint from someone or could one of the dicasteries act on its own initiative if say someone noticed this on a blog?
    Comment by lofstr

    The scenario could go something like this (assuming that the subject of SP has already come up at a meeting of the Italian Bishops’ Conference): Another bishop close to Abp Mani could approach him and suggest that his strategy re SP is imprudent. If that didn’t work, then he might be contacted by Cardinal Bagnasco(Pres of the Bishops Conf), urging him to change his views. It might be mentioned to him that if he persisted in his erroneous path, then Rome might consider him to be losing the ability necessary to run his diocese (he is 73). If he still didn’t change, then a different tack might be employed . . . and no, it’s not firing.

    Keep in mind that the pope has the authority to name a coadjutor AND give him whatever authority in the diocese is thought necessary. Thus, the pope could name a coadjutor, giving him complete governing authority–and the present Abp would be little else than a figurehead.

  16. Perhaps a priest in his diocese could be so kind as to simply offer an EF Mass, which the bishop is not allowed to forbid as per SP, and perhaps after the Mass people could informally happen to hang around and discuss the Mass, and perhaps it could accidentally lead into a discussion of SP itself. Certainly that would not be a violation of the Archbishop’s proscription…

  17. Hidden One says:

    Easier than that, AugustinianHeart. The archbishop of Cagliari, if I read this correctly, formally forbid “the meeting”. One meeting, held by such&so, by a particular topic.

    I don’t believe that that forbids all meetings on the topic, even formal ones, held by others. Perhaps the faithful of Cagliari could organize a bunch of other meetings on the subject, preferably with at least some of them scheduled close enough to the point of their announcement that the archbishop would not have time to formally forbid them. Either that, or his office would go nuts with all the paperwork. In addition, the more meetings that he force-cancels, the bigger a story this gets to be.

    Also, is there anything keeping the society from holding a like meeting outside of the archdiocese of Cagliari, where, presumably, the archbishop would not have an authoritative voice in the matter? At this point, provided that they don’t actually run afoul of any genuine and valid (if unreasonable) actions against them from this higher authority, it greatly behooves them to draw down the wrath of the archbishop, because the more of that they do (without getting into genuine trouble), the more likely they are to attract the attention of, say, Antonio Cardinal Cañizares Llovera.

    I wonder, is there a formal process of appeal or somesuch by which the society could at least bring this issue to Rome (it’s not so long a trip) posthaste?

  18. Hidden One says:

    *on a particular topic

  19. patrick_f says:

    The words “anti pope” come to mind, simply because if you defy the Bishop of Rome, which he is clearly doing, then he is establishing himself as having say that is on par with the Holy Father, even more important then his holiness. If one believes that one is Catholic, one (hopefully) believes in the Primacy and authority of Peter. If one denies that, under their own authority, then in my honest opinion, one has set themselves up as a new “pope”. Hense, “Anti-Pope”.

    Second, yes a bishop is the primary teacher in his diocese. However, this isnt teaching. This is on par with the “liberal twist” you get in most colleges, all too often.

    People thought it, I am just saying. I guess the amazing thing is how close this guy is to rome. You would expect this in a foreign area like America.