Decalogue Check Failed: Documents Reveal Deliberate Lies from the Vatican

The news has sent shockwaves through Catholic circles attached to Church tradition: documents reveal that the Vatican deliberately lied in order to implement a reform drastically restricting access to the traditional Mass and thus stigmatising thousands of faithful around the world. The uncovering of the manipulation behind this offensive will certainly not be without consequences.

These revelations are credited to journalist and Vatican expert Diane Montagna, who, through her contacts in high places, was able to obtain information about the content of the preparatory documents for the July 2021 publication of the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes. Through it, Pope Francis launched an unprecedented attack on the Mass that has been in force in the Roman Catholic Church since the Council of Trent and is known as the ‘Mass of St. Pius V’ or ‘Traditional Latin Mass.’

At the time the motu proprio was being prepared, the Vatican’s entire official argument was based on a survey of bishops, whose conclusions were, it seemed, final: communities attached to the traditional Mass were the source of numerous doctrinal and disciplinary problems and were endangering the unity of the Church. The bishops therefore asked the ecclesiastical hierarchy to intervene to restore order. The obvious conclusion was therefore that it was urgent to restrict access to the traditional Mass with the aim of bringing about its disappearance—in the more or less short term.

The results of this famous survey had not yet been revealed at the time. They have now been published, and the documents are available on Diane Montagna’s website. However, what they contain is exactly the opposite of what the Vatican has communicated. 

The vast majority of bishops did not report any massive “problems” with traditional communities. On the contrary, they considered themselves very satisfied with the balance in the management of these communities made possible by the decisions of the previous pontiff, Pope Benedict XVI, who in his motu proprio Summorum Pontificum had established the conditions for peaceful coexistence between the traditional rite and that born of the Second Vatican Council. Finally, the bishops testified to the enthusiasm of the younger generations for the traditional liturgy, which, for many, constitutes a privileged path back to the faith when it has not been transmitted in families. One recommendation from the bishops even went so far as to suggest training young seminarians in both rites in order to meet the demand. 

In short, “the majority of bishops who responded to the questionnaire stated that making legislative changes to Summorum Pontificum would cause more harm than good.” The Vatican chose to do the opposite. Twisting the facts, Pope Francis told the bishops that he was “prompted” by their requests to revoke Summorum Pontificum. He therefore, unsurprisingly, caused much “more harm than good.”

Pope Francis knew the contents of this report. Montagna echoes a direct account of a scene that attests to this: during an audience, he literally “snatched” a copy from the hands of Cardinal Ladaria, who was in charge of the investigation, telling him that he wanted it immediately because he was curious to read it.

Pope Francis therefore chose to deliberately ignore the report’s conclusions. This is ironic for a pope who made himself an advocate of dialogue and ‘synodality.’ For what reasons? We would be tempted to say, either by action or omission, in the words of the Catholic prayer Confiteor. Either Pope Francis was stuck in his ways of thinking, with a fundamental inability to take into account a reality that did not fit into his own analytical framework—and a total misunderstanding of the traditional ‘phenomenon,’ especially among young people, preventing him from drawing adequate conclusions from the bishops’ report. Or he was perfectly aware and deliberately lied and concealed these conclusions in order to achieve his ends because of a fundamental hostility to traditional sensibilities. 

It is not for us to decide between these two options, especially since Pope Francis has now passed into the next world, and it is no longer to us that he must give account. But it is certain that harm has been done and accepted at the highest level, with dramatic consequences for many believers who have been prevented from practising their faith, from accessing the sacraments, and who have been singled out as quasi-outlaws, with extremely harsh words about the liturgy that has been practiced by the Catholic Church for centuries and has led so many faithful on the path to holiness.

The other question bound to arise is that of the origins of the revelation. Why is this preliminary investigation being unveiled now, and to what end? The person behind the revelations about the bishops’ report certainly knows what they are doing. Perhaps Pope Leo XIV himself is aware of it. The unveiling of the operation of lies and manipulation orchestrated by Pope Francis and his direct collaborator in the drafting of the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, Cardinal Arthur Roche, hurts. For many faithful attached to the traditional liturgy, these revelations are not really a surprise, but rather an official confirmation of what they intuitively sensed. 

It is now a matter of drawing practical conclusions. It is difficult to see how, in the weeks and months to come, the Vatican will not take the wise decision to retract a text that has caused scandal and hurt many believers, all based on an objective lie. All this may take some time. The Church of Christ does not count the passing of time. But one thing is certain: it cannot allow itself to become entangled in a path so objectively paved with lies.