"Furthermore, I invite you, dear Brothers, to send to the Holy See an account of your experiences, three years after this Motu Proprio has taken effect. If truly serious difficulties come to light, ways to remedy them can be sought."
Benedict XVI, July 7, 2007

The three-year deadline the Holy Father had set in his letter to the bishops that accompanied the promulgation of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum reestablishing freedom of celebration for the "traditional" mass is fast approaching. Here and there across the globe, therefore, a progress report on these three years is being drawn up.


I – THE FACTS

a) On May 27, the blog Rorate Caeli announced that the first Vatican mailings had reached US dioceses, though without specifying which Curia office had sent them.

b) Two days later Leo Darroch, president of the International Federation Una Voce (fiuv.org ), launched an appeal to his correspondents worldwide, asking them to write up “comprehensive reports and documentation that truly reflects the situation in their countries so that Rome will be in no doubt about the reality of the implementation of the motu proprio,” because “[I]t is no secret that many bishops are against Summorum Pontificum and their reports may well reflect this antipathy.”
Leo Darroch, who already has submitted two yearly reports to the Holy See on the reception of the Moty Proprio at the diocesan level, is convinced that this third report “will be of vital importance in the safeguarding of the traditional Mass and liturgy.” “Despite the lack of episcopal enthusiasm in many parts there is a real growth in interest in the traditional liturgy; the International Federation Una Voce is receiving requests from many parts of the world for information and help, and none more so than in Central and South America--and from young people.” Lastly, the president of Una Voce International concludes his appeal with a remarkable clarification: “Although it is right and proper for the Pope to consult his bishops it is quite clear from the motu proprio that the Holy Father's concern is for priests and the laity. Therefore, it is perfectly in order for the laity to make their feelings known to Rome about how it is being implemented.”

c) In early June the German Catholic agency kathnews in turn published an unambiguous text by one of its regular chroniclers, Michael Gurtner, who also expressed himself in favor of priests drawing up their own report of their experience with the Motu Proprio and sending it to Rome.
After first underscoring the benefits due to the Motu Proprio, the author insists on the fact that henceforth priests "cannot, in principle, be prevented by their superiors from using the 1962 books," at least for their private Masses. Not only do priests, he goes on to explain, "clearly have the law on their side," but they also have the Holy Father's "encouragements."
Michael Gurtner then notes that "the restoration of the ancient liturgy must go hand in hand with the restoration of the deposit of faith and of religious literacy," since "the traditional liturgy alone cannot remedy the loss of faith," and points out that this rediscovery helps a better understanding of the way in which the interior and exterior expressions of the faith are bound together. This is on the condition, of course, that access to the extraordinary form is generously granted and that the faithful are given "the real possibility" of opting for it, especially for the sacraments.
Finally, after noting that the Motu Propio had elicited much good will and joy among younger priests, the writer concludes with a pressing invitation to the priests that they should send their experiences on to the Ecclesia Dei commission. Such individual reports are even, according to him, "more useful and opportune" because they will be "more concrete and direct" than episcopal reviews, and because "the more the accounts sent to the Apostolic See are specific, the more the ancient liturgy will be strengthened, and the better its future progress will be."


II – PAIX LITURGIQUE’S COMMENTS

a) Needless to say, no one today believes that the Motu Proprio is open to question. Those who thought this three-year period would be some sort of ad experimentum delay after which the Pope would decide whether or not to liberalize the traditional Mass have now realized how much they had misunderstood the Pope's text.

b) We are in a position to specify that the mailings that reached the world's dioceses for the purpose of drawing up a review of these three years ordinarily came from the Apostolic Nunciatures. They do not consist of a rigid and detailed questionnaire; they are simply an invitation to make a report on the three years since the extraordinary form was launched according to the spirit that the Holy Father defined in 2007. This spirit is one in which, in case of "serious difficulties," "ways to remedy them can be sought." Total freedom, therefore, is left to the bishops in drawing up what will not be a quantitative, but a qualitative report.

c) The very concurrence between the German article and the very clear stance of the President of Una Voce International calling priests to send to Rome their own report on the actual local application of the Motu Proprio is noteworthy in itself. Indeed these two voices, which have the ear of Rome, are worrying specifically that a report on the extraordinary form would rely solely on the bishops, whose reluctance towards the reintroduction of the 1962 Missal, though somewhat blunted over time, is well known.

d) On blogs run by the faithful attached to the extraordinary form of the Roman rite, comments are rife and very often agree with (or go beyond) the position expressed by Leo Darroch, president of Una Voce International: they go so far as to invoke the "Spirit of Vatican II" to ask that laymen and priests be able to express their sentiment on the application of the MP directly. An American on the internet has asked for the Holy Father to establish an "international juridical structure" for those priests and faithful who wish to benefit from the 1962 missal. This demand is all the more interesting that it corresponds to the projects that had been worked out in the Curia under the last pontificate to give an overarching protective juridical structure to the faithful attached to the traditional Mass; these projects are well known to the man who was Cardinal Ratzinger at the time.

e) Back in France we had already alerted all those who, refusing to take into account the issue of local requests, might feel inclined publish irenic reports. In our French letter dated June 18, we published a diocese-by diocese list of the parishes, deaneries, and towns in which requests had been made to no avail . . . it's now close to 400!

f) Last but not least, there ought to be some word from Rome giving the Motu Proprio a second wind. The most reliable observers reckon that one ought not expect any communication or move on Rome's part before the month of September at least. Indeed, although next July 7 comes three years after the publication of the Motu Proprio, the anniversary of its practical application is on September 14, and it is only after that that the Vatican could say something. It might, for example, publish instructions specifying how to remedy the "serious difficulties" the Pope anticipated in his 2007 letter to the Bishops.