This morning I got another confirmation from one of my spies that Bp. Rino Fisichella is being considered for the post of Secretary of the CDF.
That would mean that the Rector position at the Lateran University would open up. It is said that Enrico Dal Covolo, SDB, would go to the Lateran. I am fairly sure that Dal Covolo has been helping with the Holy Father’s Wednesday Audiences.
It would also mean that Archbp. Amato would be heading elsewhere, probably as Prefect of Congregation. The possibilities are Saints, Education and, I suppose Divine Worship.
I am hoping that Pope Benedict will keep Archbp. Ranjith at Worship as Prefect.
Loading ...
So, the question I still have is: if Amato would become prefect of Liturgy, and his place in Doctrine would be taken by Fisichella, then it seems Ranjith would stay as secretary of Liturgy. Is it so?
On the other hand, there was talk about the status of the Ecclesia Dei Commission to be strengthened – could there be a solution? Ranjith following Castrillon?
I am so happy with all mons. Ranjith is saying!
How is Amato toward the Extraordinary form??
I think the Congregation for Divine Worship needs Ranjith more then Ecclesia Dei. You don’t send one of your best physicians off to tend to a healthy household, you send him to care for a sick one.
And what curial appointment is Fr. Zuhlsdorf being considered for?
If I might inquire of anyone better versed in the Curial political situation than I: several people have mentioned the post of Prefect of Catholic Education as a possible destination for Archbishop Amato. Since Cardinal Grocholewski is not near retirement age, are we to understand that he may be destined for another post?
CDF? And where, pray, would Levada land? He’s only 72.
Let’s hope it’s not 5th Avenue.
Jon: SECRETARY… not Prefect!
Phew! Sorry about that Father. Was up before the crack of dawn to take the sons out for the first day of trout season. Afraid I’m not the sharpest hook in the tackle box this morning!
Why not Antonio Livi for the Lateran; after all he’s already there and evidently quite a fellow.
For Fr Livi see this from Sando Magister:
And Antonio Livi agrees with him [Enrico Radaelli] in his introduction to the book. He asserts the author´s absolute right to dissent from the Church´s modern teachings on ecumenism. This is because these teachings, he says, are by their own admission “pastoral, not dogmatic,” and therefore subject to dispute, while infallible dogma is to be found in the Great Tradition – that of the apostles and of the fathers of the Church – which Radaelli invokes on every page of his book.
And Livi is no small figure. He is a priest of Opus Dei and a regular professor and dean of the faculty of philosophy at the Pontifical Lateran University, whose chancellor is Camillo Cardinal Ruini.
Fr Livi also favorably introduced anther Radaelli book, as some may recall, signalling the “rehabilitation” of Romano Amerio.
The danger is that Ranjith will go to Ceylon as Archbishop of Colombo to replace Abp. Gomis. (More interesting, for a trivia buff such as I, is that the jurisdiction includes the entire independent state of Maldives, with its mostly Muslim population.)
On Quietus’s speculations, the rumour from over a year ago was that the P.C.E.D. would be promoted into a Pontifical Council. I think that Darío Cardinal Castrilló Hoyos still has a little work to complete: probably the securing of the lifting of the declarations of excommunication and an agreement under which the S.S.P.X would take at least a provisional structure and to enter into discussions (let’s avoid that idiotic term ‘dialogue’) about doctrine.
But once those discussions begin, there will be a need for a panel of experts and, at the same time, a promotion of the P.C.E.D. into a Council. I can imagine Castrillón retiring by then (he is nearing 79 now) and being replaced by Ranjith. But this is only one possibility. I’d certainly rather see Ranjith as Prefect of Liturgy, with Amato as Prefect for Doctrine.
I would also watch for possible promotions of the Pope’s two good friends from the past: Cardinal Oulette of Québec and Cardinal Schönborn of Vienna. Oulette is affable and very bright and, being a Canadian, he is superior to others, certainly superior to a mere American such as Levada.
P.K.T.P.
Victoria, B.C., Canada
On my last post, sorry for misspelling Ouellet. I’m not sure how that happened. Our typing spelling seems to have a life of its own.
P.K.T.P.
Peter Karl T. Perkins: A “mere” American? Okay, I can understand how Cardinals Oulette or Schonborn would be good candidates for Prefect of CDF someday, but I take exception to your referring to anyone (whether pro or con) as a “mere” American. Are Fr. Z. or Archbishop Burke “mere” Americans as well?
PKTP: a mere American
I think I don’t like that comment very much and will await your explanation.
Do be gracious to Mr. Perkins, he is only a mere Canadian!
Blessings,
Melody Vito,
A mere American
I think PKTP was just trying to be funny. I don’t think there was any intent to offend.
And perhaps he’ll find it interesting, if he didn’t know it already, that the Maldives has the reputation of being the fourth worst place to be a Christian
Has anyone thought that our Holy Father might continue his reform of the Roman Curia by uniting the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei with the Congregation of Divine Worship and make Card. Castrillion its prefect? This might be far from reality but a nice thought. It would send the message home of one Roman Rite with two forms.
As an ex-Canadian, now a mere American myself, I can attest that PKTP was simply making a Canadian joke, exhibiting a bit of Canadian pride in Canadian accomplishments in the face of the giant U.S. of A.
Fr. Steve: Yes, this is a definite consideration. It seems reasonable that one day the PCED would have to be merged into the CDWDS. That can’t happen yet, of course. The PCED also does some of the work that would pertain to the Congregation for Religious and also for Clergy. For now, I don’t think there is any chance that the PCED would lose autonomy.
Of course I was trying to be humorous, but it only shows how Americans take themselves so seriously. Good grief! I love Americans but I don’t like people who have no sense of humour! (And that’s with the u, for us superior Canadians).
P.K.T.P.
P.K.T.P. – \”it only shows how Americans take themselves so seriously.\”
No, I think it shows that written communication has its limitations. So many of your posts here have been less than sweetness and light, shall we say?, that your attempt at humor fell completely flat.
PTKP: Although simply a mere American, believe it or not, I actually chuckled at your remark. Some good posting recently.
And here’s to hoping that the MP does indeed by gravitational and common sense force also pull in its necessary accessory elements. If not, results could easily be far worse than the recent Good Friday prayer change.
James Bodnar wrote: “If not, results could easily be far worse than the recent Good Friday prayer change.”
Did anybody hear of any roofs collapsing or any “walls come tumbling down” in any of the churches this past Good Friday where the new prayer for the Jewish people was prayed? Just wondering.
P.K.T.P.: Though I really admire Cardinal Shoenborn I think that both he and Cardinal Ouellet have huge tasks in their very own backyards, i.e., the great abandonment of Catholicism in both Austria and Canada, especially Quebec, the original heart of Canadian Catholicism.
Beth,
Former Canadian, presently a mere American
TNCath: I do not know why you asked this question about the prayer change as I did not liken the prayer change as to “walls tumbling down”, etc. But yes, if the NO liturgical practices, come into the TLM, in my opinion, those changes are worse than the Good Friday prayer change; the reasons are obvious, to me anyway. It’s just my opinion of course. But no, it won’t be the worst thing that has happened in the church, even in the least 40 years, so I can promise wthout reservation I will not go sede if it happens.
James Bodnar wrote: “But yes, if the NO liturgical practices, come into the TLM, in my opinion, those changes are worse than the Good Friday prayer change; the reasons are obvious, to me anyway.”
Do you mean the ABUSES that often occur in Novus Ordo liturgies, perhaps? If so then I would certainly agree with you. The Holy Father himself in his “Letter to the Bishops “that accompanied Summorum Pontificum, points out that “in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear.”
The reason I ask is because our Holy Father goes on to say the following:
“For that matter, the two Forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually
enriching: new Saints and some of the new Prefaces can and should be inserted in the
old Missal… The celebration of the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI will be
able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality
which attracts many people to the former usage. The most sure guarantee that the
Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its
being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives.
This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this
Missal.”
That said, would the insertion of new Saints canonized since 1962 and some of the new Prefaces from the Novus Ordo into the Extraordinary Form be “worse than the Good Friday prayer change”?
By the way, I asked about the Good Friday prayer change because it suddenly occurred to me that we really hadn’t heard much more about it since Holy Week.
My opinion is that any such changes as you just quoted to the TLM at this time would be ill-advised for pastoral reasons and but it would depend on the change as to whether it was worse than GF prayer change. I was thinking more along the lines of extraordinary ministers of communion, communion in hand etc; I don’t see these as enriching the TLM and I hope they will be prohibited, I wish I could be optimistic they will be. People who believe those practices enhance the Eucharistic mystery can go to the NO already. St Padre Pio? Preface written by Fr Z? More sequences? I am sure those would be great, but please let’s wait. There has been too much change in the liturgy for 40 years. Right now energy and time needs to be on making the TLM more easily available, not tinkering with it. But so what, it’s just my opinion and it obviously will not matter to those who make those decisions and I won’t fomenting rebellion if they happen.
PKTP,
Americans can be thick — can we not?
Answer them with the twisty: “I was only serious.”
I guess we need some smileys :-() here.
How does one replace a Rottweiler with a mere chijuajua?
The danger is that Ranjith will go to Ceylon as Archbishop of Colombo to replace Abp. Gomis. (More interesting, for a trivia buff such as I, is that the jurisdiction includes the entire independent state of Maldives, with its mostly Muslim population.)
That doesn’t make a lot of sense. Why would the pope bring Abp Ranjith to Rome to be an important player in the reform of the liturgy, then send him Ceylon?
But once those discussions begin, there will be a need for a panel of experts and, at the same time, a promotion of the P.C.E.D. into a Council. I can imagine Castrillón retiring by then (he is nearing 79 now) and being replaced by Ranjith. But this is only one possibility. I’d certainly rather see Ranjith as Prefect of Liturgy, with Amato as Prefect for Doctrine.
You must remember that the permission and encouragement of the use of the 1962 Missal is part of BXVI’s reform of all the liturgy–Abp Ranjith is needed at the SCDW.
But once those discussions begin, there will be a need for a panel of experts and, at the same time, a promotion of the P.C.E.D. into a Council. I can imagine Castrillón retiring by then (he is nearing 79 now) and being replaced by Ranjith. But this is only one possibility. I’d certainly rather see Ranjith as Prefect of Liturgy, with Amato as Prefect for Doctrine.
I would also watch for possible promotions of the Pope’s two good friends from the past: Cardinal Oulette of Québec and Cardinal Schönborn of Vienna. Oulette is affable and very bright and, being a Canadian, he is superior to others, certainly superior to a mere American such as Levada.
P.K.T.P.
Victoria, B.C., Canada
Comment by Peter Karl T. Perkins
A Cardinal leaving his see and becoming a Prefect isn’t necessarily a promotion. They usually come to Rome for two reasons: The pope knows and trusts them and is in need of their ability, or national representation is needed in the Curia.
Certainly Amato (for reasons of age and seniority) has to be considered ahead of Ranjith in line for a Prefect’s slot.The Presidency of Ecclesia Dei is historically a role taken by a former Prefect and held past retirement age,so Castrillon is unlikely to take on any other curial job.
It’s hard to say how long a Prefect/President will stay past age 75 (except that at Ecclesia Dei they have all retired after turning 80),but besides Arinze,dicastery heads already past 75 include
Saraiva Martins (Causes of Saints)
Stafford (Penitentiary)
Kasper(Christian Unity)
Martino(Iustitia et Pax,Migrants & Itinerants)
Lozano Barragan(Pastoral Care of Health Care Workers)
Sebastiani(Economic Affairs of the Holy See)
Turning 75 this year or next are
Farina(Librarian/Archivist)
Bertone(Secretary of State/Camerlengo)
Re(Bishops)
Hummes(Clergy)
Rode(Institutes & Societies)
Cordes(Cor Unum)
Of course there is also the Quinquennium issue,but that seems more honored in the breach despite the intentions of Paul VI.