Posted on 03/06/2025 7:37:17 AM PST by ebb tide
After vigorously implementing Pope Francis restrictions on the traditional Mass, Cardinal Arthur Roche has said there is “nothing wrong” with the Latin Mass but that the Church wished to “move away from what had become an overly elaborate form of celebrating the Mass.”
Prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (DDW) since May 2021, Cardinal Arthur Roche has overseen the radical restrictions imposed on the traditional Latin Mass by Pope Francis since July of that year.
Roche was already known as an opponent of the traditional Mass upon his promotion from secretary to prefect of the DDW.
Speaking to the Catholic Herald recently, the 75-year-old Roche fielded a question about the numbers of young Catholics flocking to the Latin Mass while having to deal with his restrictions on it.
“Of course, it is good that people want to be part of the Church, and there is no reason why they cannot,” he said.
“There is nothing wrong with attending the Mass celebrated with the 1962 missal,” added Roche. “That has been accepted since the time of Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Benedict, and now Pope Francis.”
He continued, arguing that Francis’ restrictions in Traditionis Custodes showed that the Latin Mass “is not the norm.”
“For very good reasons, the Church, through conciliar legislation, decided to move away from what had become an overly elaborate form of celebrating the Mass,” stated Roche.
The English cardinal commented on the numbers of devotees of the traditional Mass as being “in reality, quite small, but some of the groups are quite clamorous. They are more noticeable because they make their voices heard.”
READ: Cardinal Burke: Pope Francis’ Latin Mass restrictions have had ‘exactly the opposite effect’
Roche repeated a much cited – and equally often rebuffed – argument made by critics against the Latin Mass, stating that the new Mass, or Novus Ordo Missae, exposes Catholics to more readings from Scripture over the course of its three-year lectionary cycle. “There is a much lower percentage of scriptural readings in the 1962 missal than there are in the newer missal,” he argued.
Notably, Roche appeared confused about why individuals are annoyed by others offering the Latin Mass, commenting that “what interests me is why people get hot under the collar about others celebrating the Tridentine Mass. I think this has been a mistake. Bishop Wheeler, of the Diocese of Leeds, insisted that a Holy Mass be celebrated in Latin according to the Novus Ordo at least once every Sunday in every deanery. That showed considerable wisdom.”
In his own view, Roche said that “the celebration of the Eucharist, in whichever missal you are using, should be very noble and marked by noble simplicity.”
He also appeared to jokingly rebuff the concerns of devotees of the traditional Mass by quipping that he says Mass in Latin most days in the Vatican:
I often hear people say, “Cardinal Roche is against the Latin Mass.” Well, if they only knew that most days I celebrate Mass in Latin because it is the common language for all of us here. It is the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin. I was trained as an altar boy until the age of 20, serving the Tridentine Form.
Roche’s apparent confusion at people’s frustration with priests offering the Latin Mass comes in direct opposition to his own record on the matter. Along with the Pope’s restrictions on the ancient liturgy, Roche has issued his own restrictions with papal backing, and has been widely documented as rigorously enforcing restrictions on the Latin Mass in dioceses across the world to the detriment of often thriving congregations.
The latest figures show that in 2022, Roche’s office permitted just 60 parishes worldwide to host the traditional Mass, as he has emerged as the most ardent enforcer of a crackdown against the ancient liturgy.
READ: Vatican allowed fewer than 60 parish churches worldwide to offer Latin Mass in 2022
Indeed, former Vatican doctrine prefect Cardinal Gerhard Müller revealed last summer that “a senior representative of Roche’s Dicastery for Divine Worship” was dismayed when he heard of the huge numbers of young pilgrims on the traditional Mass pilgrimage to Chartres. Müller said the official “objected that this was by no means a cause for joy, because Holy Mass was celebrated according to the old Extraordinary Latin rite.”
Roche was also believed to be one of the leading architects of a document containing fresh restrictions on the Latin Mass last year, though following an outpouring of public demonstration from Catholics and non-Catholics – along with direct lobbying of the Pope by a Russian Orthodox man – the document never emerged.
While Roche and his Vatican office have persistently rolled back permission for the Latin Mass, the cardinal previously described devotees of the old rite as more Protestant than Catholic for their adherence to the Latin Mass.
“The theology of the Church has changed,” necessitating a change in liturgy, argued Roche in a public radio broadcast in 2023.
READ: Cardinal Sarah: Plans to ‘abolish’ Latin Mass would be ‘diabolical’
In early 2022, Roche repeated his prior sentiments, calling the remaining provisions of the Latin Mass “a pastoral concession,” and that the growth of the Latin Mass “couldn’t be tolerated because the [Second Vatican] Council had changed the way in which we’re going forward. That’s just a simple matter.”
His comments on the liturgy have been robustly criticized by scholars and journalists, with Roche accused of being ignorant of ecclesial history and liturgy or “shamelessly twisting the truth about the Latin Mass.”
Meanwhile, canon lawyers have argued that some of Roche’s actions violate the Church’s Canon Law and his restrictions have been criticized by his brothers among the College of Cardinals. Cardinal Raymond Burke has described Roche’s Responsa ad dubia as “confused” and “contradictory,” stating that “what the congregation [DDW] pretends is not only contrary to the good order of the Church, but contrary to reason.”
“The theology of the Church has changed,” necessitating a change in liturgy, argued Roche in a public radio broadcast in 2023.
Ping
The CIA told him to get rid of the latin mass because we weren’t buying into the propaganda the abortions, the trans or lbq crap. We were the people who did not wear masks and did not believe the news.
Per the late Fr Groeschel, the enemy hates Latin. Latin is a dead language. No one can change it. It cannot be used for propaganda
Why? My soon-to-be Catholic nephewknlaw loves the Latin mass. How has Catholic theology changed? He is in his 20s. Younger people like the tradition.
I have read that many exorcists have said that Satan and his minions hate Latin. The ones in the Vatican promoting evil are the ones screeching against Latin. Corollary: those screeching against Latin are the ones promoting evil. The more screeching, the more evil. By their screeching we will know them.
After vigorously implementing Anti pope Jorge’s restrictions…”
That piece of evil has never been Pope. Evil is squatting in the seat.
“...Francis’ restrictions in Traditionis Custodes showed that the Latin Mass “is not the norm.””
Wishful thinking.
Fixed it.
Having mass in the vernacular is not intrinsically bad.
The host of other changes such as the priest facing the congregation instead of leading it, not kneeling for communion and informality bordering on disrespect are much worse.
Why all the Catholic posts? Nobody cares about a Latin Mass. Take all this Catholic stuff to a religion blog site. Enough already.
What do you think the religion forum is for?
Comedy?
an overly elaborate form of celebrating the Mass,”
= = =
So the Grace at Meals,
“God is Great, God is Good
“Let us thank Him for our food”
Would be the less elaborate form?
Mostly the Early Church remained unified until the Great Schism of 1054, when the Eastern church and Western church split.
The eastern Christians used archaic Greek as their liturgical language, and did not agree that the Pope was the Supreme and Infalible leader of the Church.
Many Orthodox churches still use Greek in their services. (Not just the "Greek Orthodox").
Given that the version of the Old Testament used by Jesus and the Apostles was in Greek (the Septuagint), and that most of the New Testament was written in Greek, and the all of the first Seven councils of the Early Church were held in Eastern Greek speaking cities (most located in present day Turkey) I think a strong case can be made for Greek as the most ancient church language for Christianity, over Latin..
Christianity grew after the emperor Constantine converted to it in 312 AD. Rome and the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD. Constantinople remained the center of the Eastern Roman empire until the fall of Constantinople to the Ottaman moslems in 1453.
Christianity, the early Church was centered in the East not Rome from the earliest times. Look at the amazing Hagia Sophia, built in 537 AD. The dome on St. Peters was notcompleted in 1590.
I've also read that in 1054 the Churches were roughly the same size in terms of members. This is no longer true, of course. The combination of the rise of Islam in the East, and the activities of the Catholic missionaries as part of the ages of discovery and colonization means that today the church of Rome counts many more members than the Orthodox church of the East. 1.4 bill onlyion Catholics vs. only 260 million Eastern Orthodox. The Oriental Orthodox (Egypt, Syria, Ethiopia) are about 50 million. (They broke away over theological differences in 451 AD, following the Council of Chalcedon, over theological differences)
Historically, the Eastern Orthodox Church has used Greek as its primary liturgical language, stemming from the Byzantine Empire and the early spread of Christianity in the Greek-speaking world. The Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, one of the most widely used liturgies, was originally composed in Greek. In churches of the Greek Orthodox tradition, such as those under the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, Greek is still commonly used.
Its not the language per se, but the name of Christ that is important.
Sure. We wouldn’t want a common language to unite the entire world’s Catholics, would we? Better to divide, right?
No, but the music sucks. We should go back to Palestrina and Pergolesi.
If the so-called objection is that the new mass has more varied readings, why can’t they use the new lectionary with the old mass?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.