PLEASE READ PARTS I AND II BELOW BEFORE THIS ONE.
Pages 8 through 11 of the Report give syntheses of answers from contibuting members to the following 10 questions. I recommend you print them off and match against future papagraphs. This will save my having to make constant back-reference. In future they will be referenced by the number of the question. Here they are:
1. Has there been an improvement since 14th September 2007?
2. Have you had more access to (EF) Masses and in different places?
3. Which bishops have responded positively to Pope Benedict's Motu Proprio?
4. Which bishops have refused to respond charitably and have prevented their
priests from celebrating Mass in the EF?
5. Can you furnish letters 'ad clerum' or letters from bishops to their faithful on
the Summorum Pontificum?
6. Can you furnish the names of priests who have particularly cooperated with
members of the Una Voce International Federation and parishioners for the
celebration of the EF?
7. Have you had an increase in demand from the Laity for teaching on the Motu
Proprio and for information about your Society or Group?
8. What responses have you had from people who have assisted at an EF Mass?
9. Have you received requests from priests seeking inormation to help them to
celebrate the EF of the Mass?
10. Have you organised Formation courses in the EF for priests. servers or choirs?
(Three cheers for the LMS. Sorry who said that?!!!)
On the subject of LMS, several months ago, I tried to convince Damian Thompson on Holy Smoke that the LMS would be reporting to Rome on the situation and was dismissed. Clearly the LMS HAVE reported through Una Voce. I am happy to rest that particular case.
The ten questions are to be answered as dating from 'The Exaltation of the Cross' last September, clearly a deliberate choice of our beloved Holy Father. Clearly also, Una Voce has been gathering the evidence for several months. And I would be surprised if His Holiness has been not been waiting for them to deliver the report before taking further action about the matter and its relevance to other things, including the appointment to Westminster. One should bear in mind that UV and LMS have been influential before, notably in 2002 (see Documents on LMS website) Surely Cardinal Ratzinger would have obvserved their initiativesand will be quite well of their networks.(in literal as well as WWW senses However, 'Revenons a nos moutons!' (An appropriate imperative, considering the context.)
How many hours were spent formulating those questions? How considered and yet daring they are. I wanted to demonstrate this before giving the answers. I'm not deliberately holding out on you. It's a cliche, but true as cliches often are: If a thing's worth doing, then it's worth doing properly.
The main method by which Una Voce sends its message to Pope Benedict is by what it does NOT say. As an example, in the synthesis of answers to Qu.1 the report lists by name the member countries (11, including England and Wales, France and the USA) who say there has been an improvement,and then in the final paragraph of that section says:
" Sadly, in many other places, perhaps the majority, there is a refusal to engage with the document (the Motu) which expresses itself in an apparent episcopal conspiracy of silence, or worse by a strategy which seemingly ignores the legitimate demands coming from the laity and which imposes tough restricions on their priests.. Consequently, the situation has not improved in some countries...."
Wisely, charitably and discreetly Una Voce does not name names in this section of the report, but does state elsewhere that if such be required by Ecclesia Dei, the Federation has those names and will supply them to that Commission. Indeed this hard evidence of names and incidences is contined in Section III of the report and wisely Una Voce has not made that section public. His Holiness will appreciate this discretion as he continues to to carry the burden of decision making. In the 2002 inervention by UV/LMS, actual names WERE again sent to Rome but were not published . It is hard to believe that Cardinal Ratzinger did not have sight of that document, or that he has not retained in his gargantuan memory,the names and incidents it idetified. Moreover, he could not have been at the CDF all those years, without forming an assessment of most of the dramatis personae in the present 'drama'. But if he has POST_MOTU EVIDENCE of recalitrance....well then, we may see some changes made. I said to my husband about the time of Cardinal Castrillon's visit to London in June, that I thought the Westminster decision was being delayed because the Holy Father wanted to assess how the E & W Conference reacted to the Motu.
Enough for now. So much for 1am. It's 2am! D.V., will be with you again tomorrow afternoon.
Keep praying for our Holy Father and for the bishops. AND PLEASE DON'T FORGET THE ALL SOUL'S SPIRITUAL BOUQUET PARTIC. IN VIEW OF ALL THE ABOVE.
God bless all here,
ICPP
No comments:
Post a Comment