Refusal the Extraordinary Form could break unity with the Pope

Our friends at Rorate (happy anniversary to them) posted about a conference on traditional forms of liturgical worship held in France.

The great Msgr. Nichola Bux spoke.

I have written of Msgr. Bux before.  He is a liturgical scholar who, among other things, serves as a consultant for the Office of Pontifical Ceremonies and other dicasteries.  You may recall the BUX PROTOCOL.

Msgr. Bux …

… began his intervention by saying that the French bishops, who like to interact with non-Christians, ought also to dialogue with Catholics and that they must not be afraid of the sheep of their own flock! They should confront reality and not the perception that they have of it. He recalled that the Extraordinary Form is for all of the People of God, and not just a minority, and that it ought to serve as a training for the better celebration of the Ordinary Form. He indicated that, in Italy, the implementation of the Motu proprio is done through priests. He therefore admonished priests to be courageous in the implementation of this text. Finally, he added that the refusal of the Extraordinary Form could be considered as a rupture of communion with the Pope.

Get that?

“Refusal of the Extraordinary Form could be considered as a rupture of communion with the Pope.”

Technorati Tags:

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The Drill and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Refusal the Extraordinary Form could break unity with the Pope

  1. KevinSymonds says:

    Well, it makes sense. The Pope has spoken and we ought to obey. Don’t and disobedience is the risk one takes.

    -KJS

  2. ipadre says:

    Ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia!

  3. Subdeacon Joseph says:

    This is completely logical. While I am Orthodox, and am in no way an expert on Latin Rite ecclesiological discipline, it seems certain Latin Rite bishops are in disobedience to the Bishop of Rome. However, disobedience is not a heresy, and thus if a group were to break communion with their bishop they must tread lightly. H.H. Benedict should go into France, like the good German Shepherd he is, and lay down the Law. May God continue to bless and protect those courageous priests who will bring back the TLM! I have often said, and will say again, we Orthodox Christians can see a part of ourselves in the TLM. In fact, the rest of the Catholic Church in her various rites can see a part of Herself in the TLM. The NO just sticks out like a Protestant/ Lutheran sore thumb. Whoever would of thought that after VII Martin Luther would finally have his way.

  4. Winfield says:

    Would that a courageous American cardinal make the same observation. It would be carried by at least some domestic media (we know the liberal Catholic press would be apoplectic) and could force the hands of recalcitrant bishops.

  5. Nathan says:

    I am encouraged by Msgr. Bux’s statement, and would really like it to be applied across the Latin Rite of the Church. One question, though–given the state of the liturgical politics between Rome and bishops, wouldn’t a statement such as this have to come from the Holy Father himself in order to require obedience or to have enough gravitas to begin to make a serious difference?

    Still, brick by brick…

    In Christ,

  6. JMody says:

    Hip-hip — HOORAY!!
    Hip-hip — HOORAY!!
    Hip-hip — HOORAY!!

    It’s about time that we restored to words their basic meaning, and this is certainly a step in the right direction. How many folks who ask for alternate, reverent “pastoral solutions” — from Abp Lefebvre down to people just asking that the piano sound a little less like lounge music — end up denounced and ridiculed as “schismatics”, whereas those who blatantly defy papal instruction about anything and everything are allowed to proceed apace? The ‘discontinuity’ crowd had made serious inroads into the correct use and meaning of words like “rupture” and “schism”, and this sets the balance back closer to neutral.

    When you defy clear, simple instructions, that’s a problem, all around. Ruptured communion, as we all know, is very, very bad, worse than insisting on property rights for the Church and not quite as bad as schism or terrorist sacking of a cathedral during Mass. So three cheers to Msgr Bux for calling these people (French episcopacy) out in plain language.

  7. Shadow says:

    Finally a Msgr who speaks plainly! YES!

  8. TJerome says:

    Msgr. Bux is dead on in his analysis. After all, a Roman Pontiff has decreed that the EF and the OF are two forms of the same Rite. For a bishop to reject that, would be to place himself above the Holy Father. For the life of me, I cannot understand why a bishop, who likely was trained to celebrate the EF, would be so hostile to this form of the Latin Rite. It’s kind of sick.

  9. irishgirl says:

    Kudos to Msgr. Bux! Not afraid to ‘call out’ the French Bishops!

  10. doanli says:

    Wow! Love it!

    My pastor is having the Extraordinary Form said for the 11am Christmas Day Mass—I consider it a terrific Christmas gift from him. Even my Anglican husband may go. (He liked the last one–pray for him, please!)

  11. luiz says:

    It is rupture not only with the Pope, but with Church’s Tradition.

  12. St. Louis IX says:

    @doanli Praying..
    We are Blessed to have a Sung High Mass 1962 TLM at Midnight, Christmas Eve/Day and another TLM at noon Christmas day.

  13. Jon says:

    “Refusal of the Extraordinary Form could be considered as a rupture of communion with the Pope.”

    Now, if only the Pope himself would say it…

  14. Young Canadian RC Male says:

    Way to go for this Monsignior!!!!! That’s the kind of fighting spirit we need in the Church!!!

    However, our Holy father should take it a step further and He should actually announce this, saying that any bishop who refuses the requests of parishoners to want a TLM along with those diocesian priests, or bishops who outright say they will not have it in their dioceses (by any form of communication including verbal), would incur excommunication on the basis of disobedience to the Holy Father.
    Then summorum pontificum would grow up from a striped tiger kitty and become a snarling lion . a.k.a. it would have more impact in the Church than currently.

  15. Geoffrey says:

    “Refusal of the Extraordinary Form could be considered as a rupture of communion with the Pope.”

    This reminds me of the old days of “Ecclesia Dei”, when bishops were asked and encouraged, and yet ignored the requests of the Pope. I mean, if the Vicar of Christ on Earth personally asked you to do something, wouldn’t you do it? I would! Oh well. Now it’s law. Deo gratias.

  16. priests wife says:

    “Refusal of the Extraordinary Form could be considered as a rupture of communion with the Pope.”

    above it was rightly stated the The EF and OF are 2 forms in the same rite- to refuse one is to refuse the universality of the Church- and also, to refuse the other rites of the Church as less (they are less in numbers, of course) valid and even less important should be seen as a rupture of communion with the Pope as he is head of the universal Church

  17. Henry Edwards says:

    He therefore admonished priests to be courageous in the implementation of this text.

    Most of us don’t have to face a choice between doing what’s right and keeping our pension. Should priests and saints?

  18. M.D.R. says:

    The Rorate Caeli blog/website is now officially associated with the SSPX via its association with the Angelus Press. Will WDTPRS also be joining up with the SSPX anytime soon? [You should have thought about that for a while before posting.]

  19. Henry Edwards says:

    Jon: Now, if only the Pope himself would say it…

    I wonder why your comment brought immediately to mind the following words of a loyal and faithful priest who celebrates Holy Mass daily in both forms of the Roman rite with wonderful precision and reverence:

    “I fear history will show the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries as an age of pious and studious popes who sat at desks writing books while the Wolf, working through corrupt priests, ravaged the flock. The pen may be mightier than the sword in virtuous times, but when the enemy attacks, one wants soldiers, not poets, on the front lines.”

  20. M.D.R. says:

    Fr. Z wrote, “You should have thought about that for awhile before posting.”

    Does this mean that the answer is…”No?”

  21. robtbrown says:

    M.D.R. says:

    The Rorate Caeli blog/website is now officially associated with the SSPX via its association with the Angelus Press.

    In what way is it “officially associated with the SSPX and the Angelus Press”?

  22. Torkay says:

    The Rorate Caeli blog/website is now officially associated with the SSPX via its association with the Angelus Press.

    More evidence of the false and calumnious accusations of “schism” that fly around amongst the ignorant and those trapped in false obedience. Any Catholic should consider it an honor and a privilege to be associated with a Society which has fought with all its might, heart and soul against the Freemasonic makeover of the Roman Catholic Church accomplished by Vatican II. [By doing a little self-editing before posting, you;ll be able to make comments here longer! o{]:¬) ]

  23. robtbrown says:

    I think Msgr Bux missed a great opportunity to label those bishops and priests resisting Summorum Pontificum as “divisive”.

    What goes around comes around.