Friday, September 20, 2013

Paul Inwood up to his old tricks

For only about the hundredth time, Paul Inwood claims that Summorum Pontificum was a concession  only to those previously attached to the traditional liturgy.

As I have pointed out on this blog before, the claim is fatally undermined not only by the complete lack of support in the text, but the reference in the Letter to Bishops which came with it to 'young people' who appreciate it. This implies a process of spreading and discovery of the traditional Mass - 'proseletyzation' - with which Pope Benedict was completely comfortable.

#22 by Paul Inwood on September 20, 2013 - 4:17 am
I think Francis is right to be worried by the ideologization and exploitation of the Vetus Ordo.
This was never Benedict’s intention — he wanted to make room for those (he described them as a very small group) who still hankered after a particular way of worshipping. In other words the original intent was a pastoral one.
SP allowed those who had previously continued with an older form — existing members of a group — to become “normative” rather than continuing to be subject to indult. It did not give them permission to proselytize, to attempt to draw in new members (that only came later on with Ecclesia Dei), and I think Benedict quite naïvely believed that proselytization would not happen. Allowing them to worship in their own way would be enough. The bishops of France and of England and Wales, who had first-hand experience of the sort of people Benedict was reaching out to, urged him not to promulgate SP because they knew he was wrong about that and foresaw that proselytization and ideologization would follow, as indeed they immediately did.
Francis recognizes Benedict’s pastoral desire for inclusion of the EF folk, and describes it as prudent. From that point of view it was rather like lancing a boil. In the fullness of time, it would die down and heal and disappear. But in expressing concern that the EF is now the subject of ideologization and exploitation he also acknowledges that the boil has instead become a running sore. And the problem he faces is that it is going to be very difficult, perhaps impossible, to turn it back into a boil.

But what's this reference to 'Ecclesia Dei'? This encyclical was promulgated by Bl. Pope John Paul II in 1988 - not 'later' than SP in 2007. It does, of course, give the green light to 'proseletyzation' because it proposes religious orders committed to the ancient liturgy, and therefore a permanent presence of the EF in Catholic life promoted by them.

Or does Mr Inwood mean Universae Ecclesiae, the Instruction issued in 2011? What does that say about proseletiyzation?

The fact is, we need no permission to promote a liturgy in full conformity with the laws of the Church, which Pope Benedict described as a 'treasure' which should be made available to future generations.


  1. Anonymous10:01 pm

    Oh dear. These awful liberals do keep at it, I'm afraid. It was they who in some manner, drove Monseigneur Lefebvre to his terrible end; although I am the Pope's man through and through and through and cannot ever support him; he was not altogether wrong. Although I am sure Pope John XXIII's intentions were the best (I seem to remember Carmel Heenan, God bless him, describing John XXIII, God bless him too, as a dear, gentle, nice old man who loved Fr. Faber's All for Jesus and who almost certainly had never read any of the liberal books) it all got thoroughly out of hand and the liberals got a hold of it.

    I do not really like to be called a running sore. Nor indeed that the traditional Mass will 'die down, heal and disappear'. Oh well, I suppose we must bear it (although thank you very much for refuting it) but I'm afraid such men do still think they have the wind in their sails.

  2. Speaking of lanced boils, its good to hear from old Inners. I do so hope he's enjoying being retired off and not spending too much time festering about all this Latin seeping in to Portsmouth again.

  3. At least know we know where Paul Inwood still stands and that Summorum Pontificum hasn't moved him and his ilk along one inch. A perverse relief, actually. For I'd sooner listen to the unfounded, and easily dismissed, bitterness (and that's what it is) that the likes of Inwood still trumpets than the insidiousness from some of the "wets within" crowd. You know the ones, those "Trad friendlys" who start their sentences with "Don't get me wrong, I really like the EF but, it's just that...(and then insert their own fallacy or hobby horse of choice)". Inwood firing conkers from his toy catapult from without the walls doesn't worry me one bit. It's those within, dangerously trying to scrape away at the mortar that make me nervous.