A word for the wise (bishop) from Summorum Pontificum

Summorum Pontificum, Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio, applies to the entire Latin Church.  Bishops can’t override it.

Some articles of SP get more attention than others.  Here is one which might not be immediately present in your mind:

Art. 7. Ubi aliquis coetus fidelium laicorum, de quo in art. 5 § 1 petita a parocho non obtinuerit, de re certiorem faciat Episcopum dioecesanum. Episcopus enixe rogatur ut eorum optatum exaudiat. Si ille ad huiusmodi celebrationem providere non vult [previously non potest] res ad Pontificiam Commissionem “Ecclesia Dei” referatur.

Art. 7. Where some group of the lay faithful, mentioned in art. 5 § 1 will not have obtained the things sought from the pastor, let the Diocesan Bishop be informed about the matter. The Bishop is strenuously asked that he graciously grant their desire. If does not want to provide for a celebration of this kind, let the matter be referred to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei“.

Please share!

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

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

8 Responses to A word for the wise (bishop) from Summorum Pontificum

  1. Curley says:

    I’m worried that pope Francis realizes outright rescinding summorum pontificum would create huge blowback and would be difficult while Benedict is still living, so he is quietly urging bishops like rockford’s to pull stunts like this and hope it spreads to bigger dioceses.

  2. Curley says:

    “Reform” by stealth, dishonesty in keeping with the theme

  3. Mike says:

    As is the case with many (if not most) directives of Vatican II and afterward, there are just enough loopholes in Summorum that unfriendly prelates can more or less ignore its positive instructions. But faithful Catholics cannot allow themselves to be distracted while doctors of the law will bandy interpretations of “spontaneously” and “requirements of law.” Unless “never abrogated” means what it says, the whole document is a dead letter, so the faithful should act accordingly by soldiering on and preparing contingency plans for when the liturgy Stasi come a-calling.

  4. Augustine Thompson O.P. says:

    Si ille ad huiusmodi celebrationem providere non vult [previously non potest] res ad Pontificiam Commissionem “Ecclesia Dei” referatur.

    Exactly correct, if the bishop (sadly) does not want to provide for those groups who request the old Rite, he DOES NOT have to provide it. He simply needs to refer the matter to the Commission.

    We may not like this law, but it is the law. Thank you, Father, for making this clear, as I tried to do in an earlier common on a previous post.

    [You sidestepped the most important words.]

  5. Felipe says:

    Are the laity allowed to address the Pontifical Commission on behalf of the Diocese of Rockford, since it is the Bishop himself making these statements?

  6. Fr. Kelly says:

    The laity are always free to submit requests, inquiries, complaints to the PCED in their own name, and even in the name of a coetus in the parish. (Remember well, there is no minimum specified size for a coetus fidelium)
    For my part, I would encourage as many as are willing to write the PCED. Flood them with mail on this matter. But always remember Fr. Z’s rules when considering the tone and content of your letters.
    hagan lio!

    Only the bishop or his representatives could address the commission on behalf of the Diocese.

  7. robtbrown says:

    Fr Augustine,

    Exactly correct, if the bishop (sadly) does not want to provide for those groups who request the old Rite, he DOES NOT have to provide it. He simply needs to refer the matter to the Commission.

    The text is passive: res referatur. In so far as the bishop would have declined the request, it can hardly mean that he would refer the matter. It must, therefore, refer to those who made th e request,

  8. Tom A. says:

    I am sure there are those in the modern church who would love it if all the traditional types would just go over to the SSPX. But then there’s the issue of the collection plate. It cannot be easy being a Bishop trying to juggle the theology and the balance sheet all at once.