Must Catholics Obey Traditionis Custodes?

Jorge Mario Bergoglio (centre) in Argentina c 1976. Photograph: Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images

Today, in the sharpest reversal and attack on a predecessor, Pope Francis has issued Traditionis Custodes, which seeks to make the celebration of the Tridentine Mass harder. It is in effect a reversal and repudiation of both Pope Benedict XVI and Summorum Pontificum.

For those seeking to understand the issue and its implications, I encourage the following articles: Rorate Caeli: Canon Lawyer's Analysis of the Anti Summorum Pontificum Motu Proprio & Latin Mass Society: Some Comments on the Apostolic Letter 'Traditionis Custodes'.

In good news, reports already are surfacing of diocesan bishops affirming the continued celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass in places ranging from San Francisco to Albany to Arlington. Pittsburgh has affirmed such as well. And the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius in Chicago affirmed that they will continue doing so as well. Of course, this could change at a moment's notice in any of these places or elsewhere. The Diocese of Little Rock, Arkansas has just ended all Diocesan TLM's in the state except for two FSSP locations.

But all of this forces the question: Do Catholics have to obey Traditionis Custodes or any motu proprio? Yes but with two very important exceptions but of which are based on Church law and common sense legal arguments:

1. If the person issuing the statement lacks authority, no law is created.

A law must come from a valid lawgiver. It requires the government to pass laws according to the rules of the Constitution and laws already in place. The one issuing the law must do so in the lawful manner and have the power to do so by the office he holds. Not just anyone can do this. 

In the Church, this requires the Pope generally to issue a law. A man who is truly elected Pope ceases to be the pope and thus a valid lawgiver when he died, abdicates, or loses his office due to heresy. For instance, if Pope Francis was a heretic, he would not possess the authority to rule. And if he lacks the authority, this motu proprio can - and must - be rejected. This is based on developed and established Church teaching as shown, among others, in the following two sources:

X. Wernz, P. Vidal (1943) 

"Through notorious and openly divulged heresy, the Roman Pontiff, should he fall into heresy, by that very fact [ipso facto] is deemed to be deprived of the power of jurisdiction even before any declaratory judgement by the Church.. A pope who falls into public heresy would cease ipso facto to be a member of the Church; therefore, he would also cease to be head of the Church." Ius Canonicum. Rome: Gregorian 1943. 2:453. 

Udalricus Beste (1946) 

"Not a few canonists teach that, outside of death and abdication, the pontifical dignity can also be lost by falling into certain insanity, which is legally equivalent to death, as well as through manifest and notorious heresy. In the latter case, a pope would automatically fall from his power, and this indeed without the issuance of any sentence, for the first See [i.e., the See of Peter] is judged by no one. 

"The reason is that, by falling into heresy, the pope ceases to be a member of the Church. He who is not a member of a society, obviously, cannot be its head. We can find no example of this in history." Introductio in Codicem. 3rd ed. Collegeville: St. John's Abbey Press 1946. Canon 221.

Thus, a papal document like a motu proprio must come from a valid Pope who has not lost his office. Otherwise, the document is worthless. 

2. If the law is harmful to souls, it must be rejected.

Assuming that the person has authority a law must still be rejected if it is harmful to souls or encourages, promotes, or orders what is sinful. The adage "salus animarum, suprema lex" (the salvation of souls is the supreme law) which is this blog's motto underpins all of this. For this reason, while obedience is to be highly valued, if a superior orders what is sinful, we must disobey his command.

Is the Latin Mass harmful to souls? No. It was and is the Mass of the saints. Are the fruits of the Latin Mass overwhelmingly positive? Yes. And is the fruit of the Novus Ordo evil? Sadly yes. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre famously said, "The Novus Ordo Missae, even when said with piety and respect for the liturgical rules, is impregnated with the spirit of Protestantism...it bears within it a poison harmful to the Faith." He was right and the rotten fruits of fifty years show us this.

One point which Pope Francis seems to make - that there may not be two forms of the Roman Rite- is a position that I have come to believe as well. These "forms" are not the same Rite and not the same religion. Their spirituality and entire orientation are diametrically opposed - one is centered on man and one is centered on God.

Pope Francis stated in this document that the Novus Ordo Mass is the "lex orandi" of the his Church. Well said. If the "lex orandi" of Francis' church is the Novus Ordo, we know that is not the "lex orandi" of the Catholic Church. The Novus Ordo which is impregnated with the spirit of Protestantism is not the "lex orandi" of the Catholic Church. 

As I mentioned some years ago in Should Traditional Catholics Attend the Novus Ordo, the very nature of the Novus Ordo Sacraments, while not necessarily invalid (but questionable in many instances), bear in them the theology of the New Rite and the Post Vatican II Church.  To frequent these Sacraments is to mix the good, true, and beautiful with that which is present in the New Sacraments: novelty.  By receiving the Novus Ordo Sacraments, you profess your Communion in and with the beliefs of the Novus Ordo Church, even those beliefs that are flawed.

Even those who generally follow the current Pope will admit that serious ambiguities exist in this document, raising questions on their legal effects, ramifications, and implementations. 

For those in this line of thinking, perhaps Bishop Schneider said it best when he stated in part: "In disobeying formally such an unheard-of prohibition of an inalienable patrimony of the Roman Church, one in fact obeys the Catholic Church of all ages and all the Popes who diligently celebrated and commanded the preservation of that venerable and canonized form of the Mass."

Conclusion:

All Catholics should affirm either statement 1 or 2 above. As such, Catholics are not required to obey this document and must actually resist it openly. Traditionis Custodes is to be rejected totally and entirely without reservation. Salus animarum, suprema lex. Long live Tradition. Long live the True Catholic Church. Down with the counterfeit Church of the Modernists.

Reject Traditionis Custodes and direct your money to traditionalist orders and priests who do likewise.