From:
- Tribune Chrétienne
- 2025 Association La Petite Voie via Google Translation
At a conference in London, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke revealed that he had already discussed the issue of the Latin Mass with Pope Leo XIV. He hopes for a clear change of direction.
At the conference organized by the @latinmassuk account in London, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke stated that he had "already spoken to Pope Leo XIV about the future of the Latin Mass." This announcement was expected, as many faithful attached to the traditional liturgy hope for a new direction after the restrictions imposed under the previous pontificate.
The former Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura expressed an unambiguous expectation:
"It is my hope that he will put an end to the persecution of the faithful in the Church who desire to worship God according to the more ancient use of the Roman Rite, this persecution coming from within the Church."
No official statement from the Vatican has yet confirmed the outcome of this exchange.
17 comments:
Deo Gratias! Now Pope Leo needs to tell the Archbishop of Detroit, fix it or no pallium for you!!
Conversely, you can't make this stuff up.
https://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2025/06/bishops-see-reverent-novus-ordo-as.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawK6upBleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHpjEWLxusxKku9ZeTePtk_jtNIIbrc0BOuEhOwhj5BAvAgWOxHs0iCc4QHX2_aem_b7ybyp3xV6r_SbZpf3-6Jg&m=1
Cardinal is my hope that he will put an end to the persecution of the faithful in the Church who desire to worship God according to the more ancient use of the Roman Rite, this persecution coming from within the Church."
Cardinal Burke said..."It is my hope that he will put an end to the persecution of the faithful in the Church who desire to worship God according to the more ancient use of the Roman Rite, this persecution coming from within the Church."
=======
Cardinal Burke declared that the SSPX has been "in schism since the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre ordained four bishops without the mandate of the Roman Pontiff."
"And so it is not legitimate to attend Mass or to receive the sacraments in a church that’s under the direction of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X."
Does that persecute Catholics attached to the SSPX? Does the above persecute Catholics, not attached to the SSPX, but wish to assist at TLMs offered by the SSPX?
Has Cardinal Burke persecuted Catholics who, in line with Pope Francis' teaching, desire to receive the Holy Sacrament of Penance from priests of the SSPX?
=======
It is interesting that Cardinal Burke is free to insist upon restricting access to the TLM.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
I have presented that exact argument here, ByzRus. The NO is not stable within its own liturgical structure and allows competing messages to compete with the lesson.
Endless "permutations". I like that descriptor. Fr.'s "balkanization" descriptor is also on point. As an Easterner, it seems beyond repair relative to our liturgical discipline.
MT,
I would say it’s interesting that you draw yet another false equivalency, but your (il)logic is so de rigeur as to have lost any interest it might once have generated.
Nick
The Novus Ordo is a veritable smorgasbord where the priest picks and chooses according to his personal tastes, hardly a recipe for "unity." Yet the bishops keep gaslighting us about it.
"It is. my hope..."
Those words don't excite me very much. Especially when we consider that he COULD have said:
"I think we have good hope..."
"The pope has given us hope..."
""We have good reason to hope..."
"Now, more than ever, we have reason to hope..."
The good cardinal COULD have said those things, but he didn't. He just hopes.
That doesn't sound very hopeful.
If Cardinal Burke is serious in regard to his having warned that the SSPX embraced schism...
..."And so it is not legitimate to attend Mass or to receive the sacraments in a church that’s under the direction of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X."
Then I hope that he exhorted Pope Leo XIV to warn the Faithful about that.
Pope Leo XIV, if Cardinal Burke's declaration in question is taken seriously, has the grave responsibility to take serious action against the SSPX. His Holiness, in turn, must warn the Faithful to shun the SSPX/SSPX chapels.
If Cardinal Burke has declared accurately in regard to the SSPX, then, in turn, the TLM Movement has a major problem as the SSPX is a key player within said Movement.
Actually, to more than a few "traditionalists," the SSPX is not just a key player within the TLM Movement...the SSPX is...IS...the TLM Movement.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Many high clerics have said the SSPX are in schism. However, while there are clearly signs of schism, the one act of importance that has yet to take place is for a pope to declare it to be so. From St.John Paul II to Pope Leo XIV, no pope has yet declared that. Thus they are not in schism but in a canonically irregular relationship with the pope. Schism is breaking with the pope. Pope Benedict tried to reconciled the SSPX with the papacy and lifted excommunications of their bishops. Pope Francis did not change that. He recognizes as valid all their sacraments, especially marriage. He encourage Catholics to go to Confession to include SSPX priests. Their sacraments are valid. All of them. And they pray for the Pope in the Roman Canon. The SSPX are in more full communion with the Church than Eastern Orthodoxy and certainly Protestantism.
It is correct that Rome has not declared that the SSPX is in schism. I accept that fact.
The point is, however, that Cardinal Burke has embraced the following double standard: He has recognized that the principle of restricting access to the TLM is legitimate.
Cardinal Burke has, for example, determined that it is right and just to restrict access to then TLM when offered by a priest of the SSPX.
However, Cardinal Burke has accused the "previous Pontificate" of having "persecuted" the Faithful via the application of the principle that he has recognized as valid.
That is, it is fine and dandy for Cardinal Burke to determine when to restrict access to the TLM.
However, it smacked of cruelty and "persecution" supposedly when the "previous Pontificate" had determined Magisterially that there were circumstances that had warranted restriction to the TLM.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Canonically, I suspect the SSPX are in schism and that burke’s canonical expertise would recommend to any pope they are. But no pope, perhaps for pastoral reasons has gone so far as to name a declaration of schism.
Aren't the heterodox German bishops perilously close to schism? The bishop of Charlotte wants to invite a heterodox priest to evangelize initiated Catholics outside of the traditional Church setting. Is this heterodox squared?
Why does the RC continue fixating on the SSPX, yet these other groups and individuals are unchecked?
Much of the German Church is clearly in schism, but no action is taken.
I know this young Franciscan priest. He isn’t heterodox. He served in Macon where I was pastor. He makes people think, especially the young.
With Father McDonald's permission:
Certain folks for years have questioned why the Church spends time and energy upon the TLM movement? Why focus, for example, upon the SSPX when...
-- Speaking relatively, the TLM Movement/SSPX consists of a microscopic amount of Catholics.
-- The Church has far more important issues with which to concern Herself.
=======
Popes Saint Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, as well as Francis, cared about all their spiritual children.
As Pope Benedict XVI, in 2009 A.D., had explained, for example, in regard to the SSPX:
"Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness...I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their interior attitudes;
"I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole.
"Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful?
"Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church?
"Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them?"
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Post a Comment