Vatican City, Jul 3, 2025 / 09:15 am (CNA).
A Vatican spokesman has played down the significance of recently leaked Vatican documents that appear to cast doubt on Pope Francis’ rationale for restricting the Latin Mass, calling the documents “partial and incomplete.”
The documents appear to show that bishops had a more favorable outlook on the Traditional Latin Mass than Pope Francis suggested when he issued controversial restrictions on its celebration in 2021.
Vatican journalist Diane Montagna published two excerpts from an internal Vatican report on the global consultation of bishops in a Substack newsletter July 1. The publication of the texts has sparked renewed controversy over Francis’ decision to restrict the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass at a time when some liturgical traditionalists are voicing hopes that Pope Leo will reverse or moderate his predecessor’s action.
Matteo Bruni, director of the Holy See Press Office, said July 3 the leaked information “presumably concerns part of one of the documents on which the decision [to restrict the Latin Mass] is based.”
Answering a question from CNA during a press conference on another topic, Bruni called published reports “a very partial and incomplete reconstruction of the decision-making process.” At the same time, he refused to confirm the documents’ authenticity.
The spokesman added that “other documentation, other reports, also the result of further consultations” were also taken into consideration with regard to restrictions on the Latin Mass.
An official at the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the department responsible for the application of Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis’ July 2021 decree restricting the Mass, told CNA on July 3 that the dicastery “has nothing further to add” to Bruni’s response.
The leaked texts, which summarize consultation results and selected quotations from bishops, have been hailed by critics of Traditionis Custodes as evidence that Pope Francis was misleading when stating his reasons for placing strict restrictions on the celebration of the Latin Mass.
Francis’ decree revoked the permissions granted by Pope Benedict XVI in his 2007 decree Summorum Pontificum.
“The claim that a majority of bishops around the world wanted restrictions on the ancient Mass [Traditional Latin Mass] was always dubious, but this document shows for all to see that it is completely false,” Joseph Shaw, president of the Latin Mass federation Una Voce International, wrote in a newsletter on July 2.
Shaw said the leaked documents show “only the views of the minority of bishops who really disliked the TLM were being acted upon. The majority view was ignored.”
Traditionis Custodes placed significant restrictions on the celebration of the Mass according to missals from before the liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council. In the decree, Pope Francis said he had taken into consideration “the wishes expressed by the episcopate” and “the opinion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”
Pope Francis explained in a letter accompanying the decree that in 2020 he had asked the now-Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith to carry out a survey of bishops around the world about the results of the implementation of the 2007 norms on the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass.
“The responses reveal a situation that preoccupies and saddens me, and persuades me of the need to intervene,” Francis wrote in the letter. He added that the intention of his predecessors, to foster unity among Catholics with diverse liturgical sensibilities, “has often been seriously disregarded” and the opportunity “exploited to widen the gaps, reinforce the divergences, and encourage disagreements that injure the Church, block her path, and expose her to the peril of division.”
According to one of the leaked documents, a five-page “overall assessment” that according to Montagna was part of a never-published report more than 200 pages long on the results of the 2020 questionnaire, the consultation found “the majority of bishops who responded … and who have generously and intelligently implemented the MP [motu proprio] Summorum Pontificum, ultimately express satisfaction with it.” But “some bishops state that the MP Summorum Pontificum has failed in its aim of fostering reconciliation and therefore request its suppression.”
The leaked assessment said some bishops stated they would prefer to return to the pre-2007 rules for the Traditional Latin Mass, when its celebration required permission from the local bishop, “in order to have greater control and management of the situation.”
“However,” the text continued, “the majority of bishops who responded to the questionnaire state that making legislative changes to the MP Summorum Pontificum would cause more harm than good.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Ofcourse the Franciscan-Vatican-spokepeople would like to find a place to hide to keep quiet. That’s exactly what happens when Truth is revealed to previously have been made a lie. Liars will squirm, worm, and slither within their swamp, where it remains perpetually dark. God have mercy.
You nailed it.
I’ll add this only makes Bergoglio look worse. If that’s possible.
The trads are making a full-court press to try to coerce Pope Leo into giving them back their TLM. I think they should just go to the SSPX. If they won’t accept the reformed liturgy, we don’t need nor want them. There have to be standards and limits. The TLM definitely is related to anti-Vatican 2 sentiment. That’s what motivated Lefebvre. If he hadn’t seceded from the Church to continue celebrating the TLM, we wouldn’t be having this conversation; the TLM wouldn’t exist anywhere. The TLM is now inherently separatist and isolationist, and it foments an anti-Vatican 2 mindset.
So much falsehood in Donald’s statements. I know a HUGE number of people, many associated with the John Paul II Institutes and MANY other places, that accept and study the documents of Vatican II yet also love the Latin Mass. Some people think there are only two groups – the post Vatican II people who think an entirely new Church came into being in the 1960s, or those who wish us to be frozen in the 16th century. There are SO MANY theologians, living and dead, such as John Paul II, Benedict XVI, David Schindler, Tracey Roland, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Larry Chapp, and scores and scores more who accept Vatican II, development of doctrine, understand the hermeneutic of continuity, etc. They understand that as Aquinas had to deal with Aristotle, so the current Church had to deal with Heidegger etc. We have NO INTEREST AT ALL in schism. People really embarrass themselves by not acknowledging these theologians, saints, popes, etc. As for “we don’t want them”, who are you to kick people out of the Church? Do you feel the same way about devotees of OTHER older rites, such as the Maronite or Dominican (I went to one of their masses a few weeks ago), or newer but different ones like the Anglican Ordinariate? Who gets to decide that the Mass attended by everyone who went to Vatican II, every day, and all the great saints and theologians throughout history, should now be thrown into the dustbin of history? What foments division are those who throw hatred at the Mass of the Ages. There is no reason for it; there are many forms of the Roman Rite and this hatred is obscene.
“There have to be standards and limits.” You attend the Novus Ordo and can actually say this? That is hilarious.
His standards and limits.
As for me, I grew up in the Latin Mass till 17. I was so happy to see it go and not have to depend on my Missal for translation despite having a year of church Latin. I like watching the priest’s face to know the extent of his personal passion for Christ especially at the moment after communion when he is cleaning the fragments of Host. Is it a labor of love or a nuisance? These nuances bleed through the priest’s countenance.
I like taking non-Catholics to Mass to dispel their crazy notions of Catholicism. Can’t do it successfully if the Mass is in Latin.
“I like watching the priest’s face”
It’s not about you.
“know the extent of his personal passion for Christ especially at the moment after communion when he is cleaning the fragments of Host”
This is an astounding absurd take. What if that priest just received bad news day before-that a family member was seriously ill or dying? What if he’s in pain from some chronic ailment?
We shouldn’t be conducting the Mass to provide for the rash judgments of the Rebozos in the pews.
Are you aware that Scott Hahn, one of the greatest living lay evangelists and a Protestant convert himself, attends the Traditional Latin Mass? I see him there almost every week (unless I am attending a Byzantine Divine Liturgy, which I do from time to time). I also grew up with the TLM, and everything you have said about it here is malarkey.
Donald: A friend of mine once had a favored expression. It went like this: “Hate destroys the hater.”
“If they won’t accept the reformed liturgy, we don’t need nor want them.”
Who are you trying to say is “we?” Sounds like Donald thinks he is the arbitrator of the Mass.
So, I guess what Pope Benedict XVI wrote in his letter accompanying the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum: “What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.” means nothing to you? 🤦♂️
Your point of view on those who worship using the TLM under Summorum Pontificum separates yourself from the judgement of the Synod of Bishops.
How can a Mass that is more reverent, possibly be considered divisive?
“What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.” Certainly does ring True.
Not all of a sudden entirely forbidden, but step by step gradually and entirely phased out because it has been supplanted by a reformed version of the Mass by order of Vatican II and decree of Pope Paul VI.
There is a schism which is vertical: the refusal of union with the Holy Father. Most people attached to the TLM do not do this. Some do.
There is also a schism which is horizontal: the refusal of union with others who are united with the Holy Father. Those who refuse union with those attached to the TLM do this.
This a bizarre comment. If you were in Tim Kaine’s Virginia parish, where the staunchly pro-abortion, pro-LGBTQ+ “catholic” politician received a standing ovation from parishioners, would you even WANT to be in “horizontal communion” with all the people around you? I don’t have any doubt that the statistical studies are accurate: 70% of those who attend the Novus Ordo do not even believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. I can assure you that would NOT be the result of any polling in a TLM parish.
Vatican Press Office secretary Bruni speaks for Cdl Arthur Roche, prefect Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. That assures it was run by the Cardinal, who has full knowledge of Traditionis Custodes because it was issued from his office likely written at least in part perhaps with assistance from Cdl Victor Fernandez prefect DDF. A typical snow job to protect themselves and the originator Pope Francis.
Can we reasonably presume this brief write off was not brought to Pope Leo’s attention? He’s the one who has ultimate say on how to deal with, not simply the authenticity of Diane Montagna’s collage of excerpts – rather with the crux of the matter. How does Pope Leo wish to address this in context of Cdl Burke’s request? Sadly, the entire snow job write off scenario apparently answers the question.
meiron, you said it best so all I can do is repeat what you’ve written, “Ofcourse the Franciscan-Vatican-spokepeople would like to find a place to hide to keep quiet. That’s exactly what happens when Truth is revealed to previously have been made a lie. Liars will squirm, worm, and slither within their swamp, where it remains perpetually dark. God have mercy.”
In fairness to Pope Leo perhaps he had no choice, assuming he was consulted except to agree to the Press Office secretary’s dismissive explanation. He may on his own time frame an address to the matter more favorably toward the TLM. An indication may be the recent announcement that the Rupnik case judges have been selected.
If that were the case, why didn’t Hagen-Leo just tell his Vatican flacks to stand down and be silent? Instead, it is Hagen-Leo who is silent while his flacks deploy clouds of Bergoglian blather to cover their posteriors as they “squirm, worm, and slither within their swamp.”
That’s been running through my mind too indicated in my initial comment.
Indeed, when a pope, or one who purports to be, is discovered in the act of dissembling, it is not merely a personal failing, or a private stumble in the moral dark. No, it is a cataclysm. I fear for the fledgling soul, barely past the threshold of belief, such a revelation is often a crushing blow. How can one trust in the divine, when its earthly shepherd proves himself a charlatan? The tender shoots of nascent faith, so carefully nurtured, are not merely bruised; they are torn from the very soil of conviction. The young believer, once perhaps drawn by the promise of steadfastness and truth, is left with a gaping wound where his faith once resided, a wound that festers with cynicism and doubt.
Nor are the faithful veterans immune, those seasoned followers who have weathered many a storm of doubt and celebrated countless triumphs of the spirit. For them, the lie from a leader is not a sudden, fatal strike, but rather a slow, insidious erosion. It is akin to a crack appearing in the very foundation of a grand cathedral they have long revered. Each falsehood, each twisting of the truth, however small, drips like acid upon the stone of their enduring faith, weakening its integrity, making them question the very edifice they have spent decades defending. The bedrock of their conviction, once seemingly unshakeable, begins to crumble, and with it, the quiet confidence that once sustained them. For if the very stewards of truth cannot be trusted, then what truth remains? It is a question that gnaws at the soul, a bitter fruit born of betrayal.
So let it be known, and let it be stated with the utmost clarity: the lie, from the mouth of a pope, is not a minor transgression. It is a betrayal of the highest order, an act that not only defiles the speaker but, far more grievously, wounds the very heart of the faithful, both old and new. It is a deed that, far from building the Kingdom, actively dismantles it, brick by painstaking brick.
Brilliant and even poetic analysis, Michael B. Thank you.
Alas , we find that a pope is merely a man after all. It’s like pulling back the curtain and finding the true wizard of Oz. Is it relief or disappointment? Are we so uncomfortable because he looks too much like us?
Popes have “looked like us” since St.Peter. Plus ca change.
If Pope Leo XIV allows the war against the Vetus Ordo Mass to continue, then that would reveal a lot of very bad things about his turn as Pontiff.
“Matteo Bruni…said…the leaked information ‘presumably concerns part of one of the documents on which the decision [to restrict the Latin Mass] is based.’”
So we are led to believe that there were other documents—presumably with more compelling reasons to restrict the Latin Mass—which we are not privy to. Sure! So where are these other documents!?
Oh what a tangled web we weave– when first we begin to deceive!!
Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we “practice” to deceive.
– Sir Walter Scott –
The irony of the whole matter is that the very people who decry the Church becoming more democratic are now
complaining that it not more so! 🤭
The irony of the whole matter is that the very people who proclaim the Church to be a listening, “synodal” Church, reaching out to those on the “margins,” now show themselves to be malevolent totalitarians demanding conformity. There. I fixed it for you.
Nicely done, Stephan. You’re absolutely right.
Synodal schmynodal.
Stephan Williams has decisively answered “Br. Jaques” and his observations about irony.
Oh what a tangled weave they will continue to weave; as we speak, The True Church Of Jesus The Christ is illuminating the darkness of the counterfeit magisterium, which cannot overcome The Way, The Truth, and The Light (Life) of Perfect Divine Eternal Love Incarnate, Our Savior, Jesus The Christ, although it will continue to do some serious damage , if this counterfeit magisterium is not charitably anathema for The Salvation of Souls. Division is not of The Holy Ghost, nor is the counterfeit magisterium of The Holy Ghost, as it serves to accommodate those who deny The Sanctity and Dignity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and The Sanctity and Dignity of human life from the moment of conception to natural death. Without the use of The Charitable Anathema, Instituted by Christ for The Salvation of Souls, this counterfeit magisterium will continue to deny The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, and is thus anti Filioque and anti Pope.
“You cannot be My Disciples if you do not Abide In My Word.” – The Charitable Anathema of Jesus The Christ.
https://www.catechism.cc/articles/Pope-Paul-IV-Ex-Apostolatus-Officio.htm
Is it possible to have a copy of the Holy Mass in latin. I sudied in school where we daly Mass and must answer in latin. Now I have forgoten many parts of them and I will appreciate very much to get a copy. Regards.
Jorge, you can order a Latin Missae on Amazon.
Traditional Latin Mass (red booklet)
Latin/English for $12.60
If you’re OK with an online version: https://extraordinaryform.org/index.html
Mateo Bruni is speaking falsely, whatever his “intentions” might be.
Dianne Montagna has disclosed the conclusion of the majority of Bishops: Summorum Pontificicum was ‘a success,’ and waging a new-liturgy-war against the Vetus Ordo “would cause more harm than good.”
Link:
https://substack.com/inbox/post/167259174?utm_campaign=posts-open-in-app&triedRedirect=true
Therefore, the Pontiff Francis and His Eminence Roche are caught in their lie.
Reject “the ideological lie,” and liberate tradition, or continue to decay unto death.
Only those who are disordered are going to sacrifice themselves for a lie…
Is it true that only 14 pages were leaked out of some 220? Where are the other 200 pages? What do they say?
The 14 pages includes the summary (“Overall Assessment”)of the survey report, similar to an executive summary, along with a collection of quotations from tne survey respondents. (Not just 14 random pages). The Vatican has not released the full report, but the Overall Assessment should contain all of the key points. If the full report says something different, that would be unusual, but the ball is in the Vatican’s court. They can release the full report whenever they want to..
You can read the Overall Assessment on Diane Montagna’s Substack, in the links at the bottom of her first article (there’s a followup). I just searched for “Diane Montagna Substack” and found it quickly. I always like to read these documents, when they are available, rather than relying on bits and pieces in articles and posts.
As in the Paul Newman movie “Cool Hand Luke” (1967): “What we have here is a failure to communicate!”
Back in the 1960s and 1970s, liturgical innovations poisoned the well on the legitimate reform of THE Liturgy. Clown masses and masses of clowns. In the eyes of many and in many locales, the Novus Ordo today still reminds of such early experimentation.
Three questions:
FIRST, is the symmetrical comparison no longer between TLM and Novus Ordo, but rather between the Altar and now the synodal Roundtable? Why are we even reminded that another symmetrical comparison is not between the Bible and the Qur’an, but between the incarnate Jesus Christ (“the Word made flesh”) and the Qur’an (“the word made Book”)?
SECOND, might another symmetrical comparison be between early mismanagement of the liturgical reform (1963) and more recent mismanagement of the sexual abuse crisis? What did Sacrosanctum Concilium actually say about liturgical reform? How about this:
n. 40 (1) “The competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, must, in this matter, carefully and prudently consider which elements from the traditions and culture of individual peoples might appropriately be admitted into divine worship. Adaptations which are judged to be useful or necessary should then be submitted to the Apostolic See, by whose consent they may be introduced [!].” https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html Can’t remember much about submittals and consents!
THIRD, today, how for the Church to leaven itself ever more as communio and the “ecclesial assembly” around and then beyond the Altar? Instead of as a Roundtable too much replacing Altar—the sacramental Real Presence (CCC 1374)?
SUMMARY: Councils and Synods are what the Church DOES, not what the Church IS.
Perhaps Pope Francis felt a need or saw a need to emphasize and promote a human virtue of getting along with others -as that seemed to him and certain others; however it would still make no sense to enjoin human virtues or any particular human virtue in a synodalism?
Synodalism corrupts the Church’s sacred character, consecrated and lay, cloistered and parochial, active and passive, teaching and apostolic.
My experience with people who lie is that it’s unwise to trust anything they say. The best predictor of future behavior is one’s past actions.
According to Francisca Javiera del Valle in her tome About the Holy Spirit, Christ on the Cross was mediating with the Father to win the Holy Spirit for us, at some moment purely as man when he was moved to cry out about his abandonment. The Father gave answer and it was only then that Christ would admit -surrender,- “It is consummated”, the work upon the Sacrifice.
Well now, just what are some of these priests talking about, sometimes!
In Bible study I was told that Christ was speaking the first verses of Psalm 22. You need to read the entire psalm to see how it applies to Christ’s Crucifixion. I was also told that the Last Supper was an incomplete Passover Seder. Four cups of wine are consumed during the Passover Seder. The third cup, the Cup of Blessing, was used when the Institution of the Eucharist was enacted. The Last Supper then ended before Christ drank the fourth cup. The common wine vinegar that Christ was given on a sponge when He said “I thirst” was the fourth cup. I’ve heard it called the Cup Of Consummation. The Last Supper and Christ’s Passion and Death were one continuous event. This was Christ’s hour.
That’s in keeping with Scott Hahn’s take on the Passover.
But Jesus gave us the New Covenant of the One Cup of His Blood.
It’s possible to suffer through many “cups” more than “4” or “5” and still be in the Communion. Also to suffer a mere “2 cups” yet have the fullness of Communion. Or suffer an inexplicable sudden death with no “cup”.
Many “cups” can vie but Christ focused us on the One.
GregB, a guy could have 40, 50 even 80 cups of suffering and it would account for nothing beyond the One Cup of Salvation shared in Our Lord Jesus Christ.
I believe we should be helping Hahn get away from the Spectral Tru_k-Lo_d of Cups that is stalking him around everywhere. At CWR I have made some entries about that already. See my comments in the first 2 links below; in particular the first one on St. Jerome, Elias Galy October 2, 2024 at 3:10 pm.
In another place in CWR I mentioned that following on the Christ Event, Judaism tried adapting experiences from during that time, into its own ways, to try to overtake it. This would be to maintain interest for the Jews but also “outshine” and diminish and refute the Christ Event and secure “Jewish supremacy”.
See my comment in the third link on Valtorta, Elias Galy September 23, 2021 at 6:36 am, first two paragraphs.
Protestants are reacting to Hahn’s “4 cups” in their own instincts, see the third link Hahn’s Hersey: The Four Cups? at THIRD MILL . ORG. In this example of objections they accuse Hahn of heresy over necessity of Eucharist, which of course is quite wrong; however they raise a number of other reasonable points. Among the points coming up is a reference to evidence that “four cups” only appeared in Passover tradition from the 2nd Century A.D.
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/09/30/about-that-brilliant-and-difficult-saint-jerome-of-stridon/
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/04/18/when-was-the-last-supper/
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2021/09/14/a-monument-to-pseudo-religiosity-a-case-against-the-poem-of-the-man-god/
https://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/file/45629
I was an altar boy in the 1940’s. We said the Confiteor (I Confess) in Latin at the start of Mass. We knew the words in English.
It was a good start (I Confess) at the start of Mass.
The words were changed in Vatican 11 and the Mass then encountered
many changes (not for the better). Some charlatans and others raised
havoc with the Mass.
It is time (2025) for rebirth of the original Mass.
Look, when you have people like Peter Kwasniewski publishing books and articles and making speeches that the novus ordo Mass needs to be abolished and the church return to celebrating only the TLM (as it was before 1955, no less), then trad world has a big problem with the modern church. That’s the root of their love of the TLM and their hatred of the novus ordo and of Pope Francis: they don’t like modernity and want to go back in time.
Mr. Wright if an individual expresses those views they speak for themselves. They do not speak for everyone who attends the TLM. Nor for someone like me who visits it.
Seems, Mr. Wright, that you have insight into the inner workings and motivations of just about everyone who thinks differently than you. Question: Do you spend much time examining your own mind and heart?
These days many aee inclined to weigh the merits of the men who have most recently occupied the Chair of Peter. I have a challenge to all of us. Think of the recent Popes in terms of which ones would have made a good husband to a wife and a good father to his children. I would assert that only a man who would have made a good husband and father is worthy to be Pope (Abba, Father). As a corollary to this challenge, think of whichcrecent Popes you would have liked to have had as YOUR biological father. I’d suggest applying the same standard to your bishop and your pastor.