The article by Diane Montagna, published on July 1, 2025, claims that a Vatican report, based on a 2020 survey of bishops conducted by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), undermines the rationale for Pope Francis’ 2021 motu proprio *Traditionis Custodes*, which restricted the use of the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite (commonly known as the Traditional Latin Mass).
Montagna argues that the survey showed most bishops viewed Pope Benedict XVI’s *Summorum Pontificum* (2007), which liberalized access to the Extraordinary Form, as successful and fostering liturgical peace, thus questioning the stated need for *Traditionis Custodes*. Below, I will address the article’s claims, focusing on the survey of bishops and the question of demand for the Extraordinary Form, and provide a critical refutation using available evidence and reasoning.
EXCLUSIVE: Official Vatican Report Exposes Major Cracks in Foundation of Traditionis Custodes.
— Diane Montagna (@dianemontagna) July 1, 2025
Previously undisclosed text raises serious questions about the stated rationale for Pope Francis’ decree restricting the TLM. My inaugural article on Substack: https://t.co/em3E9IVpJj pic.twitter.com/ua0DG4S3K1
Overview of Montagna’s Claims
Montagna’s article asserts:
1. The CDF’s 2020 survey of bishops worldwide showed that the majority supported *Summorum Pontificum* and found it effective in promoting ecclesial peace and liturgical integration.
2. The survey results contradict Pope Francis’ rationale in *Traditionis Custodes*, which claimed the Extraordinary Form was being used to foster division and reject the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite (post-Vatican II Mass).
3. The Vatican withheld the survey’s findings, particularly the positive assessments of *Summorum Pontificum*, to justify restricting the Extraordinary Form.
4. The article cites specific responses, such as that of Archbishop Allen Vigneron, who praised *Summorum Pontificum* for resolving contention and enriching the Church without threatening the Ordinary Form.
Refutation of the Article’s Claims
1. **The Survey’s Scope and Interpretation**
Montagna’s article suggests that the 2020 survey overwhelmingly supported the continuation of *Summorum Pontificum* and showed no significant demand for restricting the Extraordinary Form. However, this claim oversimplifies the survey’s purpose and findings. The survey, sent by Cardinal Luis Ladaria to bishops in spring 2020, was intended to assess the implementation of *Summorum Pontificum* thirteen years after its promulgation, not to determine whether it should be abrogated or restricted. Questions included whether bishops personally used the 1962 Missal, the influence of the Extraordinary Form on seminaries, and whether it met a “true pastoral need” or was driven by individual priests.[](https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/44335/vatican-sends-extraordinary-form-mass-survey-to-worlds-bishops)[](https://adoremus.org/2020/07/vatican-sends-extraordinary-form-mass-survey-to-worlds-bishops/)
While Montagna cites positive responses, such as Archbishop Vigneron’s, her article selectively highlights comments that favor the Extraordinary Form. The survey’s full dataset has not been publicly released, so her claim that “the majority of bishops” supported *Summorum Pontificum* without reservation lacks verification. Partial leaks, such as those Montagna published in October 2021, show a range of responses, with some bishops noting positive effects (e.g., attracting younger Catholics) but others expressing concerns about division or the marginalization of the Ordinary Form. For example, Pope Francis’ accompanying letter to *Traditionis Custodes* states that the survey revealed a “situation that preoccupies and saddens me and persuades me of the need to intervene,” suggesting that some responses highlighted issues with the Extraordinary Form’s implementation, such as its use to challenge the legitimacy of the Ordinary Form.[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)
**Refutation**: Montagna’s claim that the survey uniformly supported *Summorum Pontificum* is misleading due to selective quotation. Without the full report, it’s impossible to confirm her assertion about the “majority” of bishops. Pope Francis’ decision to issue *Traditionis Custodes* was informed by the CDF’s analysis, which likely included concerns about liturgical disunity, even if some bishops praised the Extraordinary Form. The lack of public access to the survey limits the ability to independently verify Montagna’s interpretation.[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)
2. **Demand for the Extraordinary Form**
Montagna’s article implies that the Extraordinary Form enjoys widespread and growing demand, particularly among younger Catholics and families, and that suppressing it ignores this pastoral need. She cites the survey’s findings that younger people were drawn to the Church through the Extraordinary Form and that it fostered vocations and family life.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)
However, the demand for the Extraordinary Form must be contextualized. While it has a dedicated following, the Ordinary Form remains the normative liturgy for the vast majority of Catholics worldwide. A 2020 statement by Joseph Shaw of the International Una Voce Federation noted growth in Extraordinary Form communities but acknowledged that they represent a small fraction of Catholic liturgical practice, with 364 dioceses in 52 countries reporting appreciation for the Extraordinary Form. In contrast, the Ordinary Form is celebrated in thousands of parishes globally, indicating significantly broader usage. Furthermore, a 2023 survey by Catholic Laity and Clergy for Renewal found that most U.S. Catholics attend the Ordinary Form and are either unaware of or neutral toward Vatican II’s liturgical reforms, suggesting that the Ordinary Form meets the pastoral needs of the majority.[](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1411669215304634369.html)[](https://whatweneednow.substack.com/p/have-american-catholics-rejected)
Additionally, Pope Francis’ letter accompanying *Traditionis Custodes* argues that the Extraordinary Form was being “exploited to widen the gaps” and “encourage disagreements that injure the Church,” indicating that some bishops reported its use as a point of division rather than unity. This aligns with comments from Archbishop Augustine Di Noia, who clarified that *Traditionis Custodes* was “occasioned” by the survey but not solely based on it, suggesting other pastoral and theological concerns, such as the rejection of Vatican II’s liturgical reforms by some Extraordinary Form communities.[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)
**Refutation**: The demand for the Extraordinary Form, while notable in specific communities, is not as widespread as Montagna suggests. The Ordinary Form remains the primary liturgical expression for Catholics globally, and the survey likely highlighted concerns about the Extraordinary Form’s role in fostering division, which Montagna’s article downplays. The claim of “growing popularity” lacks quantitative evidence to compare with the Ordinary Form’s dominance.
#### 3. **Alleged Suppression of Survey Results**
Montagna argues that the Vatican withheld the survey’s positive findings to justify *Traditionis Custodes*, citing the CDF’s “overall assessment” that legislative changes to *Summorum Pontificum* would cause more harm than good. She suggests this secrecy undermines the credibility of *Traditionis Custodes*.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)
However, the Vatican’s decision not to publish the full survey is consistent with its handling of internal consultations. The CDF’s role was to provide a confidential analysis to the Pope, not to release raw data publicly. The partial leaks Montagna obtained, while informative, do not constitute the full report, and her interpretation may exaggerate the extent of positive feedback. Moreover, Pope Francis’ letter indicates that the survey revealed issues serious enough to warrant action, supported by the CDF’s expertise in liturgical matters through its Fourth Section (formerly the Pontifical Ecclesia's Dei Commission). The decision to issue *Traditionis Custodes* likely reflected a broader assessment of liturgical unity, not a deliberate suppression of favorable opinions.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)
**Refutation**: Montagna’s claim of deliberate suppression is speculative and lacks evidence beyond her partial access to the survey. The Vatican’s confidentiality is standard for such reports, and Pope Francis’ actions suggest he acted on the CDF’s recommendations, which likely included concerns about the Extraordinary Form’s impact on Church unity, not solely its positive effects.
4. **Archbishop Vigneron’s Response and Representativeness**
Montagna highlights Archbishop Vigneron’s response as emblematic of the survey’s findings, quoting his praise for *Summorum Pontificum* as a “remarkably successful approach” that restored ecclesial peace without threatening the Ordinary Form. While his response is significant, it is not necessarily representative of all bishops. The survey included responses from bishops worldwide, and regional differences likely influenced perspectives. For instance, bishops in areas with strong traditionalist communities (e.g., parts of the U.S. or Europe) may have reported positively, while others in regions where the Ordinary Form predominates may have seen less need for the Extraordinary Form or noted its divisive potential.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)
**Refutation**: Vigneron’s response, while compelling, is one voice among many. Montagna’s reliance on it risks cherry-picking to support her narrative. Without comprehensive data, it’s unclear whether his view reflects the majority or a vocal minority.
Broader Context and Critical Analysis
The debate over *Traditionis Custodes* and the Extraordinary Form is deeply tied to differing visions of the Church’s liturgical life post-Vatican II. Montagna’s article aligns with traditionalist perspectives that view *Summorum Pontificum* as a necessary corrective to liturgical abuses and a source of spiritual renewal. However, this overlooks the Ordinary Form’s role as the Church’s primary liturgical expression, designed to enhance participation and accessibility. The survey likely revealed a spectrum of experiences, with some bishops noting the Extraordinary Form’s benefits and others its challenges, particularly when used to question the Ordinary Form’s legitimacy.[](https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/44335/vatican-sends-extraordinary-form-mass-survey-to-worlds-bishops)
Pope Francis’ decision to restrict the Extraordinary Form was not solely based on the survey but also on broader pastoral concerns, including the risk of schism and the need to affirm Vatican II’s reforms. Montagna’s article does not engage with these concerns, focusing instead on a narrative of Vatican overreach. Her sources, while valuable, are incomplete, and her conclusions rely on assumptions about the survey’s overall findings.[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)
Diane Montagna’s article overstates the survey’s support for *Summorum Pontificum* and underplays evidence of concerns about the Extraordinary Form’s impact on Church unity. The claim that *Traditionis Custodes* lacks justification ignores Pope Francis’ stated rationale, supported by the CDF’s analysis, that the Extraordinary Form was being used to foster division. The demand for the Extraordinary Form, while significant in certain communities, is not comparable to the Ordinary Form’s widespread use. The Vatican’s confidentiality regarding the survey is standard practice, not evidence of suppression. Without the full survey, Montagna’s conclusions remain speculative and biased toward a traditionalist perspective.
**References**:
- Diane Montagna, “EXCLUSIVE: Official Vatican Report Exposes Major Cracks in Foundation of Traditionis Custodes,” Substack, July 1, 2025.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)
- “Vatican reporter finds Traditionis Custodes not based on bishops’ input, as Pope Francis claimed,” LifeSiteNews, October 8, 2021.[](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/)
- Thread by @dianemontagna, Thread Reader App, July 5, 2021.[](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1411669215304634369.html)
- “Vatican sends extraordinary form Mass survey to world’s bishops,” Catholic News Agency, April 27, 2020.[](https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/44335/vatican-sends-extraordinary-form-mass-survey-to-worlds-bishops)
- Jayd Henricks, “Have American Catholics Rejected Vatican II?” Substack, September 26, 2023.[](https://whatweneednow.substack.com/p/have-american-catholics-rejected)
- “Vatican Sends Extraordinary Form Mass Survey to World’s Bishops,” Adoremus, July 20, 2020.[](https://adoremus.org/2020/07/vatican-sends-extraordinary-form-mass-survey-to-worlds-bishops/)
