[Catholic Caucus] The Enormous Loophole in Traditionis Custodes

Canon Law Made Easy ^ | July 29, 2021 | Cathy Caridi

[ebb tide]

Q:  My fellow-parishioners and I are so shocked and hurt by the Holy Father’s deliberate destruction of the Traditional Latin Mass [in Traditionis custodes, his new motu proprio]….  Everyone agrees it’s so badly written, there are many internet articles explaining the document’s inconsistencies as I’m sure you’re aware.  We’re wondering if somehow this can be said to render the document unworkable, because it’s so unclear.  Or maybe there’s a loophole that somehow we can use….  –Ciara

A:  Ciara is on to something here!  It’s certainly true that many thousands of words have been written about this motu proprio in numerous languages, by Catholics who are not only completely flabbergasted by the message, but also confused about what the wording of the document even means.  If an award existed for the most confusing and poorly written Vatican document ever issued, Traditionis custodes (Tc) would probably win hands-down.  It contains more than one internal contradiction (more on those in a moment), and is chock-full of imprecision from start to finish.

Fortunately for us, the Code of Canon Law contains a canon that is perfectly clear and directly applicable to this situation—and when it’s applied correctly, it quickly becomes evident that there is indeed an enormous loophole in this document, which renders much of it entirely meaningless.  Let’s first take a look at that canon, and then examine what the text of Tc actually says.

Of relevance to us here is canon 18, which says that laws which establish a penalty, restrict the free exercise of rights, or contain exception from the law are subject to strict interpretation.  Tc definitely involves “the restriction of the free exercise of rights,” because it limits the freedom of Catholic priests to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass.  Thus canon 18 is directly pertinent to this situation.

[ebb tide]

On the contrary, Tc gives the distinct impression that it was composed by only a single individual who (to be perfectly frank) didn’t know what he was writing about, and didn’t bother even to check the internet to make sure he got the historical facts straight—and then failed to seek the comments/input of officials in the appropriate Vatican offices (in this case the Congregation for Divine Worship, as well as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, particularly its section comprising the former Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei). In short, it looks to be the work of someone writing in a hurry, someone who isn’t accustomed to writing with precision. We can only wonder what the history of this document really is.

[ebb tide]

Ping

[DuncanWaring]

In short, it looks to be the work of someone writing in a hurry, someone who isn’t accustomed to writing with precision.

---

In short, Jorge Bergoglio may very well be the author.

[nickcarraway]

I doubt he is the author. Are there any other texts written by him to compare it with? There is even software That can match text with author. The writer has a very unusual writing styles so I think it may be somewhat recognizable.

[Marchmain]

Someone likes to herself talk. This is rambling preaching to the choir. No realistic attempt to address the problem at all.

[ebb tide]

I highly doubt you’re in the choir of canon lawyers.

When will you knock that chronic sarcastic chip off your shoulder?

[fortes fortuna juvat]

When will you knock that chronic sarcastic chip off your shoulder?
.....................................
I think marchmain has accurately portrayed the author of that sloppily written and doctrinally deficient screed.

[ebb tide]

I really don’t care what the two of you “think”.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

I really don’t care what the two of you “think”.
..........................................
Now that really hurts my feelings because I was really hoping that you would care.

[ebb tide]

I'd much rather hear what you and marchmain think about that “sloppily written and doctrinally deficient screed”, Traditionis Custodes and Bergoglio’s accompanying letter.

But so far, just crickets.

[Marchmain]

LOL.

[Marchmain]

I would say, yes, Bergoglio is definitely doctrinally deficient. I also hear he’s a sloppy dresser, to the dismay of those responsible for putting him together each day.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

But so far, just crickets.
..........................................
Cathy Caridi does an adequate job of expressing what I think about that anti-Catholic crap our faux pope supposedly wrote!