There is rumors of curial changes afoot. Check the blog of Andrea Tornielli:
The change of the guard foreseen at the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the Vatican’s "liturgy ministry": Nigerian Cardinal Francis Arinze (who turned 75 last November) could soon leave his post, and in his post could arrive (and the conditional is important) the Salesian Archbishop Angelo Amato, 70 next June, presently Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The later’s post would be freed up for Bishop Rino Fisichella, the well-regarded Rector of the Lateran University. For a while it has been known that Amato, who took the place left by Bertone in 2003, was a candidate for a post usually filled by a Cardinal. But his arrival at Worship would be a surprise, given that until today his name has been bandied about for the Congregation for Causes of Saints or Catholic Education. Many, in fact, hold that the "natural" candidate to succeed Arinze would be the present Secretary of the Congregation, the Sri Lankan Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith Patabendige don, who was already in the Roman Curia as the number two to Cardinal Sepe at Propaganda Fide, and who was then sent to Indonesia as Apostolic Nuncio, and was then recalled to Rome by Benedict XVI who named him to Divine Worship, a ket discastery in Papa Ratzinger’s vision. Ranjith has never kept his ideas a mystery: about the Motu Proprio which derestricted the Tridentine Mass, about dialogue with Lefevbrites, about litrugical abuses which must be combatted. It is also true that in the usual curial practice only in rare cases does the number two man become Prefect of the same dicastery and that Ranjith has just turned 60. If this hypothesis winds up happening, Fisichella could be the successor of Amato as number two in the ex-Holy Office. A crucial and high-profile role.
Some of this stuff has been floating around for a while.
I mentioned some of it last October (… one of the best "insider blogs", remember?).
WDTPRS profoundly hopes that Archbp. Ranjith becomes the Prefect.
Loading ...
My fear is that because Archbishop Ranjith “has never kept his ideas a mystery: about the Motu Proprio which derestricted the Tridentine Mass, about dialogue with Lefevbrites, about liturgical abuses which must be combatted,” these may be the very reasons why he is not chosen as head of CDW. Since Cardinal Bertone is also a Salesian, I’m sure Amato is his first choice.
Fisichella definitely deserves to be promoted. He recently gave an address here in Houston and I very impressed! Despite being sick, he answered questions for about 45 minutes and then stayed around and talked with interested students for another half an hour or so. He seemed intelligent and engaging.
I definitely second the hope that Archbishop Ranjith will succeed Cardinal Arinze.
I have always found Arinze, while an outspoken defender of correct liturgical practice, to be rather accommodating to apologists for official liturgical reform. A successor with a bit more “teeth” to his delivery (such as Ranjith) would seem to me a logical step if Pope Benedict’s vision for the liturgy is to mean anything.
At least that’s how it looks from a distance.
What would this mean if Salesian Archbishop Angelo Amato was to take over the position as indicated here? Is he a friend, foe, or indifferenct regarding the Moto Proprio? What do we know that is relevant to the discussion about the Archbishop?
TNCath,
I’m not sure I get your concern. I don’t see how his being outspoken on behalf of the Holy Father’s reforms would somehow lead to the Holy Father disregarding his own defender. It’s not as if Archbishop Ranjith would have to be a “stealth candidate” under a less sympathetic or bold Pope.
It would seem to me that ArchbishopRanjith could succeed Cardinal Hoyos (Castrillon) if the Holy Father plans to beef up Ecclesia Dei.Then he could be a Cardinal.
While I certainly agree that Ranjith would be the preferable choice for me, Amato is not exactly a liturgical progressive either! From what I’ve read of his speeches and various pronouncements, he seems very much in line with Ranjith and with Benedict. Am I mistaken on this, or is it just that Ranjith’s demeanor would be better suited to the position?
Thomas wrote: “I’m not sure I get your concern. I don’t see how his being outspoken on behalf of the Holy Father’s reforms would somehow lead to the Holy Father disregarding his own defender. It’s not as if Archbishop Ranjith would have to be a “stealth candidate” under a less sympathetic or bold Pope.”
I said what I said for the following reasons:
1. Yes, Archbishop Ranjith has been outspoken because as the secretary and not the prefect of the CDW he does not have to be as political as a prefect. You’ll notice that while Cardinal Arinze has been quite the champion for authentic liturgy as prefect, he is not as opinionated nor as direct as Archbishop Ranjith has been.
2. As the perceived “vice-Pope,” Cardinal Bertone will likely have input in the choice for this position. As a fellow Salesian, Archbishop Amato would likely be of the same heart and mind of Cardinal Bertone, one of this Pope’s most trusted advisors who seems to be the field commander of the Pope’s “Marshall Plan.”
3. While Archbishop Ranjith is probably the most qualified and most logical choice for the position, this makes it all the less likely that he will get it. It’s not logical, but I have historically found this to be true not only for Church appointments but for secular positions as well.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d be very happy if Archbishop Ranjith got the job, and I hope and pray he does. Perhaps I’m a pessimist, but too many times have I been disappointed by “curve ball appointments” for crucial positions.
The last time I was completely (but very happily) surprised was when Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope. I hope and pray I’m surprised again soon!
My fear is that because Archbishop Ranjith “has never kept his ideas a mystery: about the Motu Proprio which derestricted the Tridentine Mass, about dialogue with Lefevbrites, about liturgical abuses which must be combatted,” these may be the very reasons why he is not chosen as head of CDW. Since Cardinal Bertone is also a Salesian, I’m sure Amato is his first choice.
Comment by TNCath
Cardinal Bertone’s preference is probably not all that relevant.
1. Both Amato and Bertone worked for Papa Ratzinger when he was Prefect of the SCDF. He knows both.
2. A Sec of a Congregation has a lot of power (esp when he’s the pope’s man). And so normally, it wouldn’t hurt to keep Ranjith in his present post and put someone like Amato at the Prefect.
BUT:
3. BXVI is 81. If Amato, who is 70, would take charge there, there is the possibility that Ranjith never would become a Cardinal, at least at the SCDW. I think it’s important that he stay in the same Congregation and become a Cardinal.
4. Age? Ranjith is 60; Cardinal Ratzinger was 54 when he headed up the SCDF.
5. One question is who would replace Ranjith if he became prefect. He would likely have a say in who that would be.
6. There are two Curial posts primed for replacement: Education and Worship. Education is important because it has authority over seminaries–and the re-introduction of Latin study.
7. My guess is that any talk about Ranjith not succeeding Arinze is coming from those who are opposed to BXVI’s program for liturgical reform.
The definition of “nerve-wracking”: Cardinal Arinze will be visiting the University of Dallas in April. The university chaplain has asked me to be the M.C. for the good cardinal’s Mass. So, I am charged with being the “liturgical expert” for a Mass celebrated by the head of the congregation that oversees the Church’s liturgy….(faints)…pray for me. Fr. Philip, OP
1. . You’ll notice that while Cardinal Arinze has been quite the champion for authentic liturgy as prefect . . .
I must have missed that–it must have happened while I was out playing tennis.
You might remember that he was know for his opposition to SP.
2. As the perceived “vice-Pope,” Cardinal Bertone will likely have input in the choice for this position. As a fellow Salesian, Archbishop Amato would likely be of the same heart and mind of Cardinal Bertone, one of this Pope’s most trusted advisors who seems to be the field commander of the Pope’s “Marshall Plan.”
I would say the field commander is the Sostituto, not the Sec of State.
3. While Archbishop Ranjith is probably the most qualified and most logical choice for the position, this makes it all the less likely that he will get it. It’s not logical, but I have historically found this to be true not only for Church appointments but for secular positions as well.
Comment by TNCath
????????????
Fr. Philip, LOL! I will pray for you.
RBrown: While you were out playing tennis, Cardinal Arinze was busy implementing Liturgiam Authenticam, a very important document about the liturgy that got the ball rolling regarding new translations of the Mass. He has consistently spoken out against abuses in the liturgy and has publicly stated that the “do it yourself Mass is over,” when referring to priest celebrants who do not follow the prescribed rubrics and that “Reverend Showman” (priests who ad lib and like to “perform” at Mass) has no place in liturgy. I am aware that it was perceived that he was not overly supportive of the widespread usage of the Extraordinary Form, but I am not aware that he has not publicly spoken out against it since it’s implementation. We must also keep in mind that Summorum Pontificum isn’t the only liturgical issue out there needing attention. Overall, from all that I have read over the years, Cardinal Arinze has done much good as Prefect.
As for Cardinal Bertone’s influence, I respectfully disagree. I think Bertone has a hand in just about everything the Pope is doing.
Again, I may be wrong about the appointment, and if I am you can certainly say, “I told you so.” Nonetheless, I will be very (pleasantly) surprised if Archbishop Ranjith is appointed head of CDW.
For what it’s worth, I know what Archbishop Ranjith is about. Liturgically I know nothing about Amato. It is said that Arinze was not in favour of Summorum Pontificum. If Amato gets the job I hope he is not the same as arinze.
TNCath wrote:
“My fear is that because Archbishop Ranjith “has never kept his ideas a mystery: about the Motu Proprio which derestricted the Tridentine Mass, about dialogue with Lefevbrites, about liturgical abuses which must be combatted,” these may be the very reasons why he is not chosen as head of CDW. Since Cardinal Bertone is also a Salesian, I’m sure Amato is his first choice.”
)(
“Stato” doesn’t choose the successor, the Pope does.
==========
David O’Rourke wrote:
“For what it’s worth, I know what Archbishop Ranjith is about. Liturgically I know nothing about Amato. It is said that Arinze was not in favour of Summorum Pontificum. If Amato gets the job I hope he is not the same as Arinze.”
)(
This is true. In the beginning when the Indult was a just a rumor, Arinze came out against the proposal, chest-thumping about Vat2 and the Novus Ordo. It was even documented in news reports about the issue and with his quotes. This is why I suddenly began to distrust him and still don’t. Now that he’s on his way out, Ranjith is the most likely–and logical–successor to the position. If the Holy Father doesn’t promote Ranjith, it will mean he will have cut off one of legs of his Marshall Plan. That’s an administrative fact. Secondly, it will mean one of two things, if not both: the Holy will have listened to the wrong people in not promoting Ranjith, or he is not really serious about implementing his own Motu Proprio. Could Robert Ludlum have written a better plot?
Pray and pray!!
Just an idea: Mons. Ranjit could become next Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops. The now prefect Card. Re will turn 75 next year.
And as we seem, the Church and the Pope need, and much more, better chosen bishops than good documents that few read and many deliberately ignore.
While you were out playing tennis, Cardinal Arinze was busy implementing Liturgiam Authenticam, a very important document about the liturgy that got the ball rolling regarding new translations of the Mass.
He has consistently spoken out against abuses in the liturgy and has publicly stated that the “do it yourself Mass is over,” when referring to priest celebrants who do not follow the prescribed rubrics and that “Reverend Showman” (priests who ad lib and like to “perform” at Mass) has no place in liturgy. I am aware that it was perceived that he was not overly supportive of the widespread usage of the Extraordinary Form, but I am not aware that he has not publicly spoken out against it since it’s implementation. We must also keep in mind that Summorum Pontificum isn’t the only liturgical issue out there needing attention. Overall, from all that I have read over the years, Cardinal Arinze has done much good as Prefect.
Over the years? He wasn’t moved to the SDCF until 2002, and then just to keep the seat warm because JPII was failing. Liturgiam Authenticam was produced under Cardinal Medina Estevez, whom BXVI has known for years.
And it’s nice to have documents on translations, but until the Latin is restored as the architectonic liturgical language, attempts to revise those translations is a lot like trying to nail currant jelly to a wall.
As for Cardinal Bertone’s influence, I respectfully disagree. I think Bertone has a hand in just about everything the Pope is doing.
BXVI named Ranjith to his post at the SCDW almost a year before Cardinal Bertone was named Sec of State.
And having a hand in what the pope is doing is not the same as influencing what he is doing. Cardinal Bertone will certainly be consulted, but as I noted above, the pope had direct experience with Amato when he was Sec to the SCDF. If memory serves, Amato, Fisichella, and Bertone were all once consultori to the Congregation.
Besides which, I would think that Cardinal Ruini, who is much more experienced in the ways of the Vatican than Cardinal Bertone, would have more input.
“He wasn’t moved to the SDCF until 2002,”
Should be: “SCDW”.
RBrown wrote: “Liturgiam Authenticam was produced under Cardinal Medina Estevez, whom BXVI has known for years…And it’s nice to have documents on translations, but until the Latin is restored as the architectonic liturgical language, attempts to revise those translations is a lot like trying to nail currant jelly to a wall.”
Cardinal Medina Estevez did produce it, but Arinze has been implementing it the past 6 years. He has done more than “keep the seat warm.” He has been all over the world speaking on behalf of the faithful celebration of the Mass. He has spoken boldly against politicians who claim to be Catholic who support abortion receiving Communion. Okay, so he may not have been in favor of Summorum Pontificum before it was promulgated. So what? He did have a valid point that many people who wanted to return to the TLM did so because of the abuses taking place in the Novus Ordo, which the Pope himself mentions in his “Letter to the Bishops” which accompanied “Summorum Pontificum.”
Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican
Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to
recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above
all because 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. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period
with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of
the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the
Church.
I believed this before the Pope said it and I believe it now. Regardless, we have the Motu Proprio now and Arinze is certainly not going to oppose it now that it has been implemented. He’s on his way out anyway, so why not focus on the greater good he has done as Prefect than the fact he did not favor Summorum Pontificum? As for the translations of the Mass, I think Fr. Z. has certainly done a magnificent job of “nailing currant jelly to a wall” in this blog and in his column for The Wanderer!
I’m growing a bit weary of these ad hominem attacks on Cardinal Arinze whom I saw celebrate the Novus Ordo, in Latin, ad orientem, at St. John Cantius in Chicago. He was a marvelous celebrant and an excellent homilist. I think the overwhelming number of us would be thrilled beyond belief if we had this type of liturgical celebration in our own parishes,even if it isn’t the TLM. The way some of you carry on about Cardinal Arinze, one would think we were discussing “tie-dye, glass cup, dancing girls, Roger Mahony.” Please, let’s move away from this counterproductive harping about Cardinal Arinze. Tom
Thanks, TJM. I too have been present at Masses where Cardinal Arinze was celebrant. I have also had occasion to chat with him several times in Rome. I have found him to be a very insightful and personable man who has been very supportive of the authentic celebration of the liturgy and ad orientem worship.
I love Card Arinze. He may not believe that the Extraordinary Form is the answer to the Church’s liturgical crisis, but there’s no denying that he believes there is a crisis, and his solution is or more reverent and classical celebrations of the Ordinary Form. This is a perfectly acceptable and orthodox opinion – much like the opinion of other orthodox priests like Fr Jay Scott Newman, etc. Essentially he’s a true ‘reform of the reform’ man.
Let’s also remember that Archbishop Amato is no liberal – he’s cut from pretty much the same cloth as our beloved Pope as far as I am aware. Think Dominus Iesus – the impact of which we are still seeing today. The tag team of Amato and Ranjith at Divine Worship??! Seriously, seriously appealing. Then of course in time Ranjith can be moved to the Congregation of Bishops – and then we see both Amato and Ranjith elected to the Sacred Purple.
Let’s not forget that with our Holy Father an octogenarian (Long may he reign!), he needs to think about the next conclave as well. The College of Cardinals need to be filled with men like Amato and Ranjith.
Justin wrote: “Then of course in time Ranjith can be moved to the Congregation of Bishops…”
The Congregation for Bishops is as crucial a post as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Congregation for Divine Worship. Either Amato or Ranjith would be excellent choices for these positions. Rajinth certainly wouldn’t mince words wherever he is placed! I am very hopeful that whoever is chosen will definitely continue the “Marshall Plan” of our Holy Father.
TNCath – let’s also not forget about the promotion of Fisichella to Curial Secretary. In due course to, he would be very suitable to take over from Levada as CDF prefect, or at least his public profile raised enough to lead another discastery. The Benedict era cannot last forever, much as we pray for his long reign. The Pope has to prepare for his succession – to elevate holy and intelligent men poised to lead the Church of Christ when he himself has departed from this life. Men like Amato, Ranjith, Fisichella.
Yes, I think we will be seeing a lot of Bishop Fisichella in the years to come as well. We do have some very exciting times ahead, don’t we?
The next Pope will be Italian?
Cardinal Medina Estevez did produce it, but Arinze has been implementing it the past 6 years. He has done more than “keep the seat warm.” He has been all over the world speaking on behalf of the faithful celebration of the Mass. He has spoken boldly against politicians who claim to be Catholic who support abortion receiving Communion. Okay, so he may not have been in favor of Summorum Pontificum before it was promulgated. So what? He did have a valid point that many people who wanted to return to the TLM did so because of the abuses taking place in the Novus Ordo, which the Pope himself mentions in his “Letter to the Bishops” which accompanied “Summorum Pontificum.”
So where are the results? The liturgy at the masses I attend locally is as shallow as ever, when the pastor actually says mass (last week there was none–so much for the Easter Octave). Have pro abortion politicians stopped taking Communion?
Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them.
But Cardinal Ratzinger on many occasions has pointed out that the liturgical reform (which includes the Missal) was not faithful to the Council.
This occurred above all because 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.
Disagree. I don’t think there was any misunderstanding about authorizing or requiring creativity. There are various reasons for the behavior of the clergy and laity, among which:
1. The almost universal use of the vernacular combined with celebration versus populum, the lack of rubrics (which leaves celebrants to make up their own), and the various options in the mass (incl innumerable Eucharistic prayers).
2. There are various places in the instructions in the GIRM when the celebrant is given latitude to express himself informally.
3. The use of the quasi-liturgical Bidding Prayers.
4. The redefinition of the phrase “liturgical song” so that it includes songs whose words are not part of the liturgy.
5. The various texts in Sacrosanctum Concilium that endorse adaptation, i.e., liturgical inculturation.
I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.
I saw confusion, not hope. The situation was such that in 1972 three friends and I had to go to France to find a monastery with Gregorian Chant.
I believed this before the Pope said it and I believe it now. Regardless, we have the Motu Proprio now and Arinze is certainly not going to oppose it now that it has been implemented. He’s on his way out anyway, so why not focus on the greater good he has done as Prefect than the fact he did not favor Summorum Pontificum?
Because I’m focused on the greatest Arinze good–his retirement.
Besides which, I am aware of some of his liturgical comments before he was at the SCDW.
As for the translations of the Mass, I think Fr. Z. has certainly done a magnificent job of “nailing currant jelly to a wall” in this blog and in his column for The Wanderer!
Incorrect comparison. Fr Z is not the Prefect for the SCDW, nor does he have a similar post.
Pointing out the inadequacies of the translations implicitly indicates the inadequacy of the use of the vernacular.
RBrown: “So where are the results? The liturgy at the masses I attend locally is as shallow as ever, when the pastor actually says mass (last week there was none—so much for the Easter Octave). Have pro abortion politicians stopped taking Communion?”
Cardinal Arinze nor the Pope can micromanage. It takes strong bishops to enforce directives.
RBrown: “Disagree. I don’t think there was any misunderstanding about authorizing or requiring creativity.”
I think that depends on the individual circumstance. Nonetheless, overall I agree with the Pope, which I believe carries more weight than our individual experiences.
RBrown: “Pointing out the inadequacies of the translations implicitly indicates the inadequacy of the use of the vernacular.”
The glass is certainly half empty, isn’t it?
Your posts sadden me. I detect a lot of bitterness. While I can sympathize and identify with your frustration and discontent with the way things have been in the Church the last 40 years, I think things are light years better than they were 10, 20, or 30 years ago. While things seem to be turning around, “brick by brick” as Fr. Z says, I’m not sure you are ever going to find what you are looking for in the Church. I pray that some day you at least be at peace.
Correction to previous post: Cardinal Arinze nor the Pope CANNOT micromanage
Hello,
form several sources I heard the following changes:
Amato will succeed Arinze
Fisichella as coadjutor to Milan
Vallini will succeed Ruini
Grocholewski will succeed Vallini
Levada could succeed Egan
Archbishop Bruno Forte will succeed Amato or Levada
So Ranjith could succeed Grocholeski or Levada, if you all think that Ranjith should become a Cardinal.
Let’s wait
Andy, Germany