Should Cardinal Roche be believed about the Latin Mass?
The question is how much credence one should give to a liturgically inept, soon-to-be outgoing prefect, in a statement about Traditionis Custodes which appears to contradict the current pontificate.
VATICAN CITY (PerMariam) — On Thursday morning, The Tablet published its now widely disseminated interview with Cardinal Arthur Roche, in which the cardinal attested that Pope Leo XIV has no intention to lift any restrictions on the traditional Mass. Now that the initial hype has died down, the key question remains: what weight should we give to Roche’s comment?
To begin with, Roche’s words are themselves very clear. Unlike many curial cardinals who equivocate endlessly, the prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship (DDW) got straight to the point.
“It’s a very important area because the Eucharist is the sacrament of unity: it’s the place where we should all be able to be together to celebrate Mass. So if it begins to divide us, there’s something seriously amiss. No, Pope Leo is not going to change Traditionis Custodes, and he’s not going back to Summorum Pontificum.”
Roche continued:
“It’s interesting. When I meet with groups who want the antecedent liturgy, and I say: ‘Well, the Holy Father has given you that, so what’s the problem?’, they can’t answer. But then they go away and say, ‘We’re still being persecuted’. In what way persecuted? Why is the band still playing a tune that is discordant with the life of the Church?”
Doomsday columnists have jumped on the interview as proof that their fears are confirmed and Leo is essentially Francis II. Liberal outlets which have always lauded Traditionis Custodes have welcomed Roche’s intervention as the words of a wise Vatican official.
But there is a very plausible third option which neither side has considered, a “rogue” theory for lack of a better title, namely that Roche’s interview is in fact just empty words. Some will critique this as endless “cope” but there are many elements about the interview which justify the “rogue” theory.
Leo’s tea leaves
Ever since his election Leo has kept a careful silence on the traditional Mass. Asked about it just once by Crux last summer – in an interview seemingly granted out of courtesy and friendship to old friends – Leo demonstrated himself ignorant of the particulars at hand. He stated:
“I’m not sure where that’s going to go. It’s obviously very complicated. I do know that part of that issue, unfortunately, has become – again, part of a process of polarization – people have used the liturgy as an excuse for advancing other topics. It’s become a political tool, and that’s very unfortunate.”
Apart from that, the Pope has remained silent. But at the same time he has shown himself more open to the traditional Mass than his predecessor. In order to judge what Leo himself thinks about the traditional Mass we must look past the ready externals and delve a little deeper.
Take for example his audiences.
He has met with prominent Latin Mass advocates, such as Cardinals Raymond Burke, Robert Sarah, Gerhard Müller, and Ernest Simoni. Bishop Athanasius Schneider too has been granted an audience, in which he urged Leo to “do a more solemn document, not just a Motu Proprio as Benedict XVI did and then the anti-Motu Proprio of Pope Francis Traditionis Custodes.” With the exception of Schneider in Francis’ final weeks, these were men who found the door to Pope Francis firmly shut in their faces.
Leo has also conducted warm meetings with superiors of the two of the most prominent traditional rite priestly orders – the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest and the Fraternity of Saint Peter – confirming them in their apostolate.
Somewhat linked to this is the permission he gave to Cdl. Burke to celebrate a pontifical Mass inside the Vatican for the annual Ad Petri Sedem pilgrimage last year – permission which was firmly denied in recent years under Francis. The event was made all the more significant due to the celebrant being Cdl. Burke himself, a prelate who was viewed as being at the receiving end of much vitriol from Francis. The optics at the time were seismic in Rome.
Next, one must recall Leo’s instruction to the French episcopate in March. Writing on Leo’s behalf to the bishops at their plenary meeting, Cardinal Pietro Parolin said the Pope was “particularly attentive, in the context of the growth of communities linked to the Vetus Ordo.”
Parolin added that Leo urged the French bishops to heal the “painful wound” attached to the liturgy by being more open to the traditional rite:
“May the Holy Spirit suggest concrete solutions to you that will allow for the generous inclusion of those sincerely attached to the Vetus Ordo, in accordance with the guidelines established by the Second Vatican Council regarding the liturgy.”
Another element to consider is Leo’s letter to the SSPX – sent only on the eve of the episcopal consecrations – in which he stated that:
“The Church recognizes the devotion to liturgical life, commitment to priestly formation, apostolic zeal and desire for fidelity to Tradition that characterize many people and communities connected to your Fraternity.”
Add to this the fact that numerous cardinals and bishops have now called upon Leo to rescind the restrictions imposed by Traditionis Custodes in light of the SSPX’s consecrations. They have warned that should he not do so then he will be encouraging Catholics to attend the SSPX, something which the Vatican wishes to avoid.
One of those individuals, Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, was just named by the pope to join the Apostolic Signatura, signalling that his views are at the very least trusted and respected by Leo. Cordileone has stated that he already told the Vatican that imposing restrictions on the old rite would lead only to division, and renewing that thought this week he added that the old rite’s growth is “unstoppable.”
Leo has attested his papacy is all about unity, both inside and outside the Church. At the moment, he is being warned that keeping restrictions in place on the old rite would undermine that central theme of his reign.
What of Roche?
Next we must turn to Cardinal Roche. Now aged 76, the English cardinal concluded his five-year term as prefect of the DDW in May. Rumors abound that he is soon to be replaced – an important factor in this entire affair.
In many ways the interview Roche gave to The Tablet read like that of an outgoing official. Apart from the striking comments on the liturgy – something the interviewer added into the conversation as an admitted near afterthought – the cardinal said nothing of note. The entire conversation appeared to add nothing of any value to the discourse in the Church, except to present Roche as a friendly old figure who could be anyone’s favourite uncle.
This is odd considering that, as the interviewer notes, it was conducted shortly before Roche left Rome for his summer holidays. Those were busy days indeed. He was due to leave shortly after the June 29 close of the busy consistory, as he told me directly. For the cardinal to squeeze such a vacuous conversation into his busy calendar smacks of an attempt to paint Roche in a positive light rather than anything else.
Would the ever cautious Leo decide to permit Roche to reveal news of his plan for the liturgical future of the Church in such a bizarre and haphazard fashion? It seems very unlikely.
As Abp. Cordileone commented this week: “I don’t know how well he [Roche] knows the mind of the Holy Father.” There are some who suspect that on this matter, Roche only knows his own mind and his own opposition to the old rite.
To this must be added Roche’s record when it comes to expertise on liturgical matters. During the course of the interview, he repeated prior claims about the Novus Ordo offering better access to the Scriptures – something which liturgists have debunked.
He also repeated his prior argument that the Novus Ordo allows the people to join in the priestly sacrifice, whilst the old rite does not – an argument which Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Mediator Dei roundly rejected and which many scholars have highlighted.
In his last interview with The Tablet in 2022, Roche claimed that the resurgence of the traditional Mass “couldn’t be tolerated because the Council had changed the way in which we’re going forward. That’s just a simple matter.” Furthermore, he claimed that bishops told him of their “relief” when Traditionis Custodes was released – something now immensely questionable after the results of the survey upon which TC was based proved the majority did not want any restrictions.
Canonists have also argued that TC itself, which Roche has enforced firmly around the world, is questionable in its liceity due to legal issues. And when Roche told bishops they did not have the authority to exempt their priests from TC, canonists told me that the cardinal’s order violated Canon Law.
In short, the past five years since TC have seen Roche under greater scrutiny than ever before from liturgists and scholars, and he has not emerged from it unscathed. Roche told The Tablet that “I’ve never felt equal to any task I’ve been given,” and many liturgists and canonists would readily agree with him.
The question now is how much credence one should give to a liturgically inept, soon-to-be outgoing prefect, in a statement about Traditionis Custodes which appears to contradict much of the style of the current pontificate. Some might argue the answer is ‘very little.’