I have a hypothetical question for you related to Summorum Pontificum and the Bishop’s obligation to make certain those who wish to have the TLM can do so by supplying a priest as it relates to priest shortages and whiney traditionalists.
Hypothetical Scenario: [Why do I have the feeling that isn't so very hypothetical?]
Latin Mass Community X has been established for a number of years with a diocesan priest, and despite the really bad priest shortage in the diocese, the Bishop continues to supply one to the detriment of larger NO congregations. Despite ongoing talks with Traditionalist Priest Group B, there are not enough resources to have such a priest serve the Latin Mass Community. Latin Mass Community members don’t really want diocesan priests for petty reasons X, Y, Z and complain about having such priests.
In such circumstance, would a bishop be justified in taking away their diocesan priest and leaving them with no priest, at least until they change their attitudes, or would this be against Summorum Pontificum?
For this one I consulted Magic 8 Ball, which came up with the answer: “It is decidedly so.”
Since this is a hypothetical (surrrre it is!) scenario, I’ll say, yes, hypothetically. On the other hand, maybe not.
Summorum Pontificum does not require the impossible. If there aren’t priests willing/able to celebrate the older form at this time, then there aren’t priests to celebrate the older form. This is not rocket science. The bishop is not Cadmus, after all.
Summorum Pontificum, and the very heart of what Benedict was urging, seek that everything be done cum serena pace… with a spirit of serene peace. If the mix of the priest (we can be real jerks sometimes) and congregation (it’s usually just a few that spoil things) at St. Ipsydipsy is irremediably bellicose then the bishop should pull the priest. If there isn’t another priest available and the people aren’t willing to work with the guy they had… too bad for them. They made their choice.
That said, in charity steps should be taken – by the bishop – to remedy this shortage and, thereby, provide for greater flexibility and more options in the future.
One way to remedy the shortage is to do what the indomitable Bp. Morlino did in Madison: he told all his seminarians – and I heard this with my own ears – that he expected them to learn to say the older form of Mass before he ordained them. HERE
Lay people (the abovementioned “whiney traditionalists”?) can be of great help also by sounding out priests who are willing to learn and then pay for them to go to a workshop at St. John Cantius in Chicago or held by the FSSP.
A note about “whiney traditionalists”.
There’s whiney and then there’s whiney.
If by “whiney” you mean constant snarky moaning about everything, then I have no sympathy.
If, however, you mean persistent, diplomatic, cordial, pressure, that’s another thermos of soup.
When liberals and progressivists and iconoclasts whined for something, they were given all manner of consideration for decades. When traditionalists begged, pled, prayed for their legitimate aspirations (cf. John Paul II’s Ecclesia Dei adflicta) they were ignored, insulted, sent to the back of the bus for decades.
In this era of Summorum Pontificum – Benedict XVI’s Emancipation Proclamation - I am tempted to apply the concept of “affirmative action” (or “positive discrimination”) and say that the Novus Ordo parish should get the short end of the stick.
Have I mixed enough metaphors yet?