And now the first steps……

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350567?eng=y

The use of the Traditional mass prohibited to the Friars of the Immaculate Conception….by Rome.

UPDATE:

We should add a few words as to why this action has such exceptional significance. Here in Connecticut supporters of the Latin Mass first may have encountered the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (“FFI”) as frequent visitors to the services of the Saint Gregory Society as far back as fifteen years ago. With the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum the friars began to adopt the EF in some of their liturgies at their center in Griswold. But it was on a very limited basis – one mass during the week and (apparently) on certain holidays. The friars’ 2013 Holy Week Triduum was, however, in the EF. But a local observer would not necessarily have associated the FFI with the vanguard of Catholic traditionalism.

Things appear to have been very different outside the United States though – especially in Italy. The founders of the FFI were there well known and respected spiritual leaders. After SP the traditional mass enjoyed growing use among the FFI, which became bi-ritual, even predominantly traditionalist.

In Rome, the FFI conducted several very prominent Traditional Mass apostolates. Cardinals have conducted ordinations of friars in the Extraordinary Form. And the order was spreading wildly. In contrast to the more exclusively traditionalist groups, the FFI had a large number of associated women’s communities. I suspect the above facts may be among main reasons for the actions just taken by the Vatican.

It seems that forces in the FFI unhappy with the order’s growing traditionalism, both in liturgy and theology, took their concerns to Rome. Now the Vatican has taken action, deposing the FFI’s respected superior, appointing an administrator from outside the order and, above all, requiring each member of the FFI to say the Novus Ordo mass – the traditional mass may be used by permission of superiors. In other words, SP has been abolished for the FFI and the previous Indult regime of 1988 reinstated.

As is usual in the Catholic Church, all this is made known by leaks to the secular press and blogs. No explanation is given except by comments – after the leaks – from various unofficial and sometimes anonymous “spokesmen.” None of the “facts” I have seen alleged by these “sources” – much of which are contradictory – would justify the draconian abolition of SP. Undoubtedly more facts – and more disinformation – will trickle out over the next days and weeks.

What can we say about this?

It is very telling that the “insiders” of Traditionalism who had such a grand time at the recent Sacra Liturgia conference in Rome seem to have been totally unaware of the conflict within the FFI and the drastic actions being prepared.

The authors of the decree don’t care that traditional churches exist administered by the FFI, that friars have been ordained exclusively to the EF, that there are Traditional communities of women for which the FFI provides chaplains.

We should reflect on the fact these actions have been taken against an order that was flourishing and which enjoyed an admirable reputation for austerity and piety. In contrast, the Vatican has been unable or unwilling to take any action against the American female religious orders and the LCWR, which have an entirely different profile. Indeed, Pope Francis in his recent conversation with the representatives of the Latin American religious was widely viewed as endorsing the LCWR’s stance – an impression the bishop of Rome has done nothing to dispel.

Not that these actions are unexpected. Pope Francis is outspoken and clear in his opposition to Catholic Traditionalism. But as Luc Perrin points out, it is surprising that he would move so quickly to start to disassemble one of the few accomplishments of his predecessor – while the latter is still alive!

For let us have no illusions regarding the alleged limited nature of this action. At a very minimum it sends a signal to every hierarchy and order in the world that SP can – and should – be restrictively interpreted. It insinuates that those supporting the Traditional liturgy are somehow not “thinking with Church.” More broadly it may be the precursor of similar actions. There are some purely Traditionalist groups much more conflicted than the FFI – think of the IBP. Bishops in Italy and Germany have publicly called for action restricting the availability of the Traditional Mass. And dissenters opposing the use of the Traditional liturgy in the orders and parishes where it is celebrated can be readily found.

It is clear that the reign of Francis will be an increasingly trying time for the Traditional Catholic – who knows, perhaps even ending in a return to the ghetto existence under Paul VI. We need prayer – but we also need greater communication, transparency and honesty. In the face of such actions, “one can no longer remain silent.” (http://chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.com/2013/07/francescani-dellimmacolata-e-la-crisi.html)