Consider a few points, in no particular order.
- Traditionis custodes and the Dubious Dubia (TC&DD) are an incoherent mess.
- TC&DD are founded on faulty theological grounds: that Vatican II is the lens through which all doctrine and discipline of the past must be reinterpreted.
- TC&DD are excused with a lie: that the bishops of the world thought that Summorum Pontificum had created problems of unity.
- A law that cannot be enforced in no law at all.
- This is not 1982, when there was no alternatives in Catholic media. Now we have the internet, etc.
- Even though conservative priests have a strong inclination to obedience, priests with whom I have had contact have said that they will continue to use the older Missale Romanum and Rituale Romanum no matter what.
At Catholic World Report there is a piece by Fr. Peter Stravinskas which helps to identity the status quaestionis regarding the long-term viability of Traditionis custodes, Francis’ “Plessy v. Ferguson” legacy document.
Stravinskas makes a point that we all know only too well. It bears repeating, however, especially in this present context of the pogrom against the Catholic faithful who desire traditional doctrine and worship (liturgy is doctrine). The point is: While conservatives tend to obey, and then get the stuffing kicked out of them, liberals disobey and defy and wind up getting their way, being rewarded for their bad behavior.
Let’s pick up in the CWR piece…
[A]n Irish witticism: “The willing horse gets flogged the most.”
Where am I going with all this?
Yes, the prelates in question have made a presumption, based on the theological convictions of their intended audience. That is, that “conservatives” obey. However, “conservatives” are not ahistorical; they have witnessed for more than half a century that “liberals” have never obeyed any liturgical authority, and have done so with impunity. Actually, more to the point, “liberal” disobedience and disregard for liturgical norms most often resulted, not only in no punishment, but in having their disobedience enshrined in law!
Let but a few examples suffice.
He goes on to list several practices that were obtained through flagrant disobedience, such as Communion in the hand, multiplication of “extraordinary” ministers, female service at the altar, etc.
Now, Francis and Roche and Cupich, etc., are flogging the willing horse.
I would observe that the ‘buck’ starts here.
I do not think that they are going to win, in the end. There are too many people who want traditional worship and too many young priests and seminarians who want it as well.
This time, I think the proper distinctions will lead more and more people to conclude that the suppression of tradition is quite simply appalling and harmful for the Church. Reasonable people who don’t even care to attend the TLM can see how dreadful this is, how ideologically twisted.