Why not ignore Traditionis Custodes?

The approach is tempting, but it wouldn't work

Responding to my prediction that Pope Leo won’t repudiate Traditionis Custodes, several sympathetic readers have suggested that there’s another way to achieve the same result. Without issuing any documents or making any formal statements, the Vatican could simply stop enforcing the restraints on the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM).

Thus if a bishop allows priests to celebrate the TLM in the parishes of his diocese (as in fact some bishops are doing right now), the Vatican would look the other way. Then, my friendly readers suggest, in effect we’d be back to the situation Pope Benedict created with Summorum Pontificum, allowing the TLM to thrive.

There are two problems with this approach.

First, the TLM was not thriving under Summorum Pontificum. On paper every priest was authorized to celebrate the TLM, and any stable community was free to ask for the ancient liturgy. But in practice, bishops hostile to tradition made it known that a priest who dared to schedule the TLM would face adverse consequences. The papal document said that priests did not need special permission for the old liturgy, but many bishops said they did. And the diocesan bishop, unlike the Pope, who could make life miserable for a priest who disregarded him.

If Traditionis Custodes were rescinded tomorrow, the same situation would apply. The TLM could flourish in dioceses where the bishop was favorably disposed. No doubt a greater number of bishops would smile on the ancient liturgy, if they did not fear incurring the wrath of the Holy See. So the “look-the-other-way” approach would have some real benefits in some dioceses. But not all; probably not even most.

Second, a conscious decision to ignore a law undermines not only that law, but all legislation. Traditionis Custodes, together with the draconian “clarification” by Cardinal Roche, is now the formal policy of the Holy See. If Vatican officials refuse to act on violations of that policy, aren’t they inviting challenges to other rules? Keep in mind that Pope Leo XIV is trained in canon law, and his papal leadership to date shows his keen interest in following established norms.

In that respect Pope Leo has shown himself to be quite different from Pope Francis, who frequently issued directives that were in conflict with the Church’s canon law—even though he, as the supreme legislator, had the authority to change canon law when he saw fit. He was ready and willing to “look the other way” when that approach suited his purposes. The universal Church is now paying a price for that insouciance.

Yes, I know that the “ignore the law” approach has enabled liberal Catholics to bring about changes in Church policies. (Think of the formal acceptance of altar girls, or of Communion in the hand, after both had become routinely tolerated despite canonical prohibitions.) But for obvious reasons the approach favors those who want to undermine the teaching authority of the Church, not those who defend it.

Still there is a simple way out of the existing mess. Pope Leo could commission a group of prelates to examine the situation today, and conclude that the conditions that prompted Pope Francis to issue Traditionis Custodes, if they ever existed (which they didn’t, but never mind that), do not exist today, so the document can now be retired.