At the National Catholic Register, Ed Pentin has an interview with Archbp. Roche, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship.
Roche’s responses are typical, in that they are replete with buzz words and jargon and the usual specious premises. These premises will be repeated ad nauseum by the powers that be and subsequently parroted by their camp followers until people surrender under the sheer weight of B as in B, S as in S. Roche’s bottom line in the responses to Pentin’s questions is basically: We have power. You don’t. We are imposing our will on you. Merry Christmas and shut up.
Without the Merry Christmas part.
Some highlights.
When Pentin brought up the fact that canonists have disputed the legitimacy and coherence of both TC and the DD, as well as the obviously central can. 18 (about interpretation of laws) and can. 87 (about the ability of diocesan bishops to dispense from universal disciplinary laws), Roche simply played the canned message: “We have the power now. We are the law now.” That’s the normal language version. What he said was, “The responses to the various dubia are evidently legitimate and fully compliant with Canon Law in their elaboration by this Congregation whose authority in this matter is undisputed.”
“Evidently!” In other words, “Shut up,” he explained.
When Pentin brought up the issue of people being marginalized, Roche emitted a smoke screen. “…using the Missale Romanum of 1962 is by way of concession and is therefore not the normal provision of the Church’s liturgy as foreseen by the Second Vatican Council.”
Sorry, but the NOVUS ORDO was not foreseen by the Second Vatican Council! The Novus Ordo is out of step with what the Council Fathers approved in Sacrosanctum Concilium. Read the document and then think about the Novus Ordo.
Then he added some gas with the smoke: “The Roman Missal of the saintly Popes, Paul VI and John Paul II, is witness to an unaltered faith and uninterrupted and living tradition.” Never mind that saintly Paul VI and John Paul II, along with the still living Pope Benedict XVI, all issued documents allowing the use of the 1962 Missale. Three Popes. And they knew/know more about the the Council meant than these present potentates will ever know.
When Pentin pointed out that a lot of people feel discriminated against and they have not been treated in a way consistent will all the blabbing about synodality (“walking together”), Roche replied, basically, “THERE’S NO DISCRIMINATION!”, and then mischaracterizes what John Paul II and Benedict XVI intended for the Vetus Ordo, including literally the word “generous” from the former. According to Roche it was not the intention of Benedict that use of the 1962 Missale should expand, and he cherry picks a comment made to journalists in 2008, ignoring other things he said, as well as the FACT of the provisions in Summorum Pontificum which were preciously granted so that the use of that Missale could expand.
Then comes a real whopper. Hillary Clinton couldn’t have done a better job of expressing her true feeling about those whom her actions affected:
As for your point on consultation, the Holy Father has listened very attentively to bishops and, more recently, the Congregation has responded to matters raised by them and various others.
What is important to realize now is that the Holy Father has spoken; the liturgical possibilities are in place; the challenge is to get on with it without licking one’s wounds when no one has been injured. As for your point on synodality, the word means “walking together,” which is the precise purpose of the Motu Proprio expressing the direction in which the Church is to walk in its prayer.
One gets a sense of why he was not liked in England. “Get on with it without licking your wounds! We’re WALKING TOGETHER now, DAMN IT!”
When Pentin asks about why the Roman Rite is being singled out, Roche dodges the issue by pedantically correcting Pentin’s terminology.
“No one has been injured.” Uh huh.
The whole thing makes you feel like you need to wash your hands, use an eye wash, anything to get the residue off.
TC and the DD were massive blunders. This house of cards they are trying to set up will inevitably fall. They know this, I’m sure, which is why they are pushing it.
The callous responses of the Prefect reveal the true ideological, not pastoral, motive behind all of it as well as showing us their characters.
In your kindness please pray for the repose of the soul of a priest friend who died one year ago, today, Christmas Day.
