Diane Montagna Rehashes the Same Lies

The article by Diane Montagna, published on July 10, 2025 (New Evidence Confirms CDF Report, Erodes Vatican Narrative on Traditional Latin Mass Restrictions), on her Substack, claims to present new evidence from a Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) report that undermines the rationale for Pope Francis’ 2021 decree, Traditionis Custodes, which restricted the Extra Ordinary Form of the Mass. Montagna argues that the CDF’s 2020 survey of bishops showed widespread satisfaction with Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum (2007), which allowed broader use of the Extraordinary Form, and that Traditionis Custodes misrepresented the survey’s findings by exaggerating issues with the Extraordinary Form. Your request is to refute Montagna’s claims, citing Matteo Bruni’s statement, and to argue that her article lacks full evidence, contains falsehoods, and rehashes prior claims. Why did she post the "evidence" now? Why not in the first article? She is clearly desperate to prove her credibility after she was exposed.

Matteo Bruni’s Statement and Its Context Matteo Bruni, the director of the Holy See Press Office, responded to Montagna’s article on July 3, 2025, during a news conference. He stated that Montagna’s documents represent “a very partial and incomplete reconstruction of the decision-making process” behind Traditionis Custodes. While Bruni did not explicitly confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents Montagna published, his statement suggests that her presentation of the CDF report lacks critical context and does not fully represent the factors that led to Pope Francis’ decision.[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) Refuting Montagna’s Claims Here are the key points to refute Montagna’s article, supported by evidence and reasoning: 1. Incomplete Evidence and Selective Presentation Montagna claims to have obtained the “Overall Assessment” (Giudizio Complessivo) and a collection of bishops’ quotations from the CDF’s 2020 survey, which she says show that most bishops were satisfied with Summorum Pontificum and that Traditionis Custodes misrepresented the survey’s findings. However, her article only provides excerpts from the report’s second part (the summary) and not the full 224-page document, which includes a detailed analysis of survey results by continent and country. [](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/traditionis-custodes-new-book-supports) - Criticism: By presenting only selected portions, Montagna risks cherry-picking data that supports her narrative while omitting potentially contradictory findings. For example, Bruni’s statement implies that additional evidence, not included in Montagna’s excerpts, informed the Vatican’s decision. Specifically, a leaked survey from France, which Montagna does not address, reportedly highlighted negative impacts of the Extraordinary Form on Church unity, particularly in regions with a strong Extraordinary Form presence. This omission undermines her claim that the CDF report universally supported Summorum Pontificum.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Evidence: The French survey, referenced in commentary on Montagna’s article, indicated that the Extraordinary Form created divisions in some dioceses, which aligns with Pope Francis’ stated concerns in his 2021 letter accompanying Traditionis Custodes. He noted that the survey revealed “a situation that preoccupies and saddens me,” suggesting issues with the Extraordinary Form’s implementation, even if not universal.[](https://catholicvote.org/vatican-correspondent-reports-major-cracks-in-basis-of-traditionis-custodes/)[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) 2. Misrepresentation of Pope Francis’ Rationale Montagna suggests that Traditionis Custodes was based on a false premise that bishops widely opposed Summorum Pontificum, implying that Pope Francis or his advisors fabricated or exaggerated the survey’s negative findings. However, this overstates the case. - Criticism: Pope Francis never claimed that a majority of bishops demanded the abrogation of Summorum Pontificum. In his letter to bishops, he stated that the survey responses revealed a situation requiring intervention, without specifying that the majority opposed the Extraordinary Form. Montagna’s assertion that the Vatican misrepresented the survey hinges on her interpretation of the “Overall Assessment,” but Bruni’s statement counters that her documents do not capture the full scope of the decision-making process.[](https://catholicvote.org/vatican-correspondent-reports-major-cracks-in-basis-of-traditionis-custodes/)[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) - Evidence: The CDF report, as partially described by Montagna, acknowledges some positive outcomes of Summorum Pontificum (e.g., attracting young people), but it also notes “gaps, divergences, and disagreements” in its implementation, particularly from a minority of bishops resistant to the Extraordinary Form. This suggests a mixed picture, not a uniformly positive one, and supports the Vatican’s claim that issues existed, even if not universal. Furthermore, a critical analysis on akacatholic.com points out that the CDF’s Fourth Section, which compiled the report, was formerly the Pontifical Ecclesia Dei Commission, tasked with overseeing Summorum Pontificum. This group may have had a bias toward the Extraordinary Form, potentially skewing the "Overall Assessment” to emphasize positive findings, which Montagna relies on.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)[](https://akacatholic.com/diane-montagnas-empty-bombshell/) 3. Rehashing Prior Claims Montagna’s article reiterates claims she made in October 2021, namely that Traditionis Custodes exaggerated minor issues in the CDF report and ignored the positive impact of Summorum Pontificum. [](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)[](https://nonvenipacem.org/2025/07/01/diane-montagna-has-a-new-substack-and-she-brings-the-receipts-on-the-lying-liars/) - Criticism: The July 2025 article largely recycles these earlier assertions, presenting the leaked documents as “new evidence” without substantially new analysis. The documents she provides (the “Overall Assessment” and quotations) are consistent with her 2021 reporting, but they do not conclusively prove that the Vatican lied or misrepresented the survey. The lack of the full report or additional primary data limits her ability to make a definitive case. Moreover, her reliance on the same narrative suggests confirmation bias, as noted by critics who argue that she overlooks evidence like the French survey that contradicts her thesis.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Evidence: A new book by Father Bux and Gaeta, released on July 2, 2025, contains additional sections of the CDF report, including continent-by-continent summaries. While Montagna cites this book to support her claims, it also confirms that the report noted variations in Summorum Pontificum’s implementation, including instances where it was ignored or caused tension. This suggests that Montagna’s focus on positive findings is selective and does not account for the broader context.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/traditionis-custodes-new-book-supports) 4. Lack of Vatican Confirmation Montagna’s documents have not been officially verified by the Vatican. Nicole Winfield of the Associated Press reported that a Vatican spokesman did not respond to requests for comment on their authenticity as of July 2, 2025. Bruni’s statement further casts doubt on their completeness. [](https://catholicvote.org/vatican-correspondent-reports-major-cracks-in-basis-of-traditionis-custodes/)[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) - Criticism: Without Vatican confirmation, the authenticity and context of Montagna’s documents remain uncertain. Her claim that they expose “major cracks” in Traditionis Custodes relies on unverified materials, which weakens her argument. Critics argue that her publication of these documents may be an attempt to pressure the Vatican, as noted in commentary on cal-catholic.com, rather than a definitive exposé.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Evidence: The Vatican’s silence and Bruni’s dismissal of the documents as “incomplete” suggest that Montagna’s evidence may not fully represent the CDF’s findings or the rationale for Traditionis Custodes.[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) 5. Allegations of Falsehoods Diane lied again and her post shows evidence of deliberate falsehoods. It is misleading due to its selective use of evidence and failure to address countervailing data, such as the French survey. [](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Criticism: Montagna’s omission of negative findings (e.g., from France) and her emphasis on positive excerpts suggest a biased presentation rather than a deliberate lie. However, her failure to acknowledge Bruni’s statement or engage with the possibility that other factors (e.g., theological or pastoral concerns) influenced Traditionis Custodes undermines her credibility. Critics on akacatholic.com argue that her narrative aligns with a “Resist-the-Pope” movement, which may exaggerate claims of Vatican deception to rally support for the Extraordinary Form.[](https://akacatholic.com/diane-montagnas-empty-bombshell/) - Evidence: Bruni’s statement directly challenges the completeness of Montagna’s account, and the French survey’s findings, as noted in online commentary, provide a counterpoint to her claim that the CDF report was overwhelmingly positive.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/)[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) Diane Montagna’s article does not provide sufficient evidence to conclusively prove that Traditionis Custodes was based on a misrepresentation of the CDF’s 2020 survey. Her selective use of excerpts, omission of contradictory findings (e.g., the French survey), and reliance on unverified documents weaken her argument. Matteo Bruni’s statement that her documents offer a “very partial and incomplete reconstruction” highlights the limitations of her evidence. While Montagna’s claims build on her 2021 reporting, they largely rehash earlier arguments without addressing new counterevidence or the broader context of the Vatican’s decision-making process. Critics’ points about confirmation bias and the influence of the Extraordinary Form-friendly Fourth Section of the CDF further suggest that her narrative may be skewed. To fully refute her claims, access to the complete 224-page CDF report would be necessary, but based on available information, her article is incomplete and misleading. (https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244)[](https://akacatholic.com/diane-montagnas-empty-bombshell/)[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/)

MORE UPDATES TOO COME, STAY TUNED!

The article by Diane Montagna, published on July 10, 2025, on her Substack, claims to provide further evidence confirming the authenticity of a leaked Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) report from 2020 regarding the implementation of Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict XVI’s 2007 apostolic letter liberalizing the Extraordinary Form. The article argues that this report undermines the rationale for Pope Francis’ 2021 motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, which restricted the Extraordinary Form. Below, I will address the claims made in the article, focusing on Matteo Bruni’s comments and the unverified nature of the documents, while critically examining the evidence presented. Key Claims in Montagna’s Article 1. Authenticity of the CDF Report: Montagna claims to have obtained the Vatican protocol number (N. 03/2020-ED) and additional sections of the CDF report, including the introduction to its Second Part, which she says confirms the report’s status as the “official opinion” of the CDF. She argues this validates the sections she published on July 1, 2025, which include the report’s overall assessment and a collection of bishops’ quotations. 2. Contradiction with Traditionis Custodes: The article asserts that the CDF report shows the majority of bishops who responded to the 2020 survey believed that altering Summorum Pontificum would “cause more harm than good,” contradicting Pope Francis’ stated rationale in Traditionis Custodes that the survey revealed a need to intervene due to divisions caused by the Extraordinary Form. 3. Matteo Bruni’s Comments: Montagna references Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni’s July 3, 2025, statement, where he declined to confirm the authenticity of the leaked documents, described them as “very partial and incomplete,” and noted that other “confidential reports” informed Pope Francis’ decision. She argues this raises questions about why these additional documents were not mentioned in Traditionis Custodes or its accompanying letter. 4. Burden of Proof: Montagna contends that the Vatican must prove the CDF report inaccurately represented the bishops’ responses, or else the report’s conclusion—that most bishops supported Summorum Pontificum—stands. Refutation with Evidence While Montagna’s article presents a compelling narrative, there are several points where her claims can be challenged or require further scrutiny, particularly due to the unverified nature of the documents and the broader context of the Vatican’s decision-making process. 1. Unverified Documents: - Lack of Official Confirmation: Matteo Bruni, the Holy See Press Office Director, explicitly stated on July 3, 2025, that he would not confirm the authenticity of the leaked documents, describing them as “presumably” part of one of the documents used in the decision-making process for Traditionis Custodes but “very partial and incomplete.” This lack of verification undermines Montagna’s claim of definitive authenticity. The protocol number (N. 03/2020-ED) and images provided in the article are not corroborated by any official Vatican source, and their provenance remains unclear.[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://www.osvnews.com/vatican-says-documents-on-latin-mass-assessment-incomplete/) - Incomplete Nature of the Leaked Documents: Bruni’s statement aligns with the possibility that the leaked sections do not represent the full scope of the CDF’s findings or the broader evidence considered by Pope Francis. Montagna acknowledges that the leaked sections are part of a larger report (over 200 pages, per), but her focus on the “overall assessment” and “florilegium” may cherry-pick favorable data, omitting context that could support the Vatican’s rationale for Traditionis Custodes. For example, some bishops noted in the leaked documents that Summorum Pontificum failed to foster reconciliation, preferring a return to pre-2007 rules requiring episcopal permission for the Extraordinary Form.[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/)[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/) - Potential Bias in Source: Montagna’s Substack is noted for its traditionalist leanings, which may influence her interpretation of the documents. Without independent verification from neutral sources or the Vatican releasing the full report, the documents’ authenticity and completeness remain speculative.[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/02/extra-extra-news-and-views-for-wednesday-july-2-2025/) 2. Matteo Bruni’s Comments and Additional Evidence: - Bruni’s July 3 statement indicates that the decision to issue Traditionis Custodes was based on more than just the CDF’s 2020 survey, including “further documentation” and “confidential reports” submitted to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. Montagna questions why these additional documents were not referenced in Traditionis Custodes, but this does not negate their existence or relevance. The Vatican is not obligated to disclose all inputs into a papal decision, especially confidential reports, which may involve sensitive issues like schismatic groups or liturgical abuses.[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://catholicvote.org/holy-see-press-office-spokesman-responds-to-alleged-vatican-latin-mass-report/)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053) - For instance, the leaked documents themselves note resistance from some bishops, particularly in regions like Italy and Spanish-speaking countries, due to “nescience, prejudice, and resistance” to Summorum Pontificum. Additionally, issues with traditionalist groups like Tradition, Family, and Property (TFP) in Brazil were not addressed in Montagna’s leaked sections, suggesting selective reporting.[](https://infovaticana.com/2025/07/01/traditionis-custodes-se-baso-en-una-mentira-summorum-pontificum-funcionaba/)[](https://wherepeteris.com/will-pope-leo-take-on-the-traditionalists) - Bruni’s reluctance to confirm the documents’ authenticity does not inherently discredit them but emphasizes that they are only part of a larger decision-making process. This aligns with the Vatican’s consistent position that Traditionis Custodes aimed to address liturgical divisions and promote ecclesial unity, as Pope Francis stated in his accompanying letter.[](https://www.osvnews.com/vatican-says-documents-on-latin-mass-assessment-incomplete/)[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286) 3. Context of Traditionis Custodes: - Pope Francis’ rationale for Traditionis Custodes was not solely based on the 2020 survey but also on his broader concerns about the Extraordinary Form’s use fostering division. He criticized traditionalist Catholics for being “navel-gazing retrogrades” out of touch with the Church’s evangelizing mission. The survey may have highlighted positive aspects of Summorum Pontificum (e.g., attracting younger Catholics, increasing vocations), but it also noted challenges, such as bishops’ concerns about controlling Extraordinary Form celebrations or divisions within dioceses.[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286)[](https://apnews.com/article/vatican-latin-mass-pope-leo-francis-catholic-5c15ea6c49b255a7d98cde9276a46acd)[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/) - The leaked documents suggest that some bishops warned that suppressing Summorum Pontificum could drive traditionalists to schismatic groups, but this does not negate the possibility that other evidence (e.g., confidential reports) highlighted significant issues with traditionalist communities, particularly in regions like the United States, where liturgical disputes have been prominent.[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286) - A new Italian book, The Liturgy Is Not a Show, co-authored by Don Nicola Bux and Saverio Gaeta, reportedly corroborates Montagna’s findings but also reveals that 42% of French bishops supported mutual enrichment between the Extraordinary Form and Ordinary Form, while 13% favored maintaining Summorum Pontificum’s balance. This indicates a diversity of views, not a uniform endorsement of the Extraordinary Form, undermining Montagna’s claim of a clear majority opposing restrictions.[](https://catholicism.org/leaked-report-grows-new-book-blows-hole-in-traditionis-custodes-narrative.html)[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/traditionis-custodes-new-book-supports) 4. Burden of Proof: - Montagna argues that the Vatican must prove the CDF report inaccurately represented the bishops’ responses. However, this shifts the burden of proof inappropriately. As the claimant, Montagna must demonstrate that her leaked documents are both authentic and representative of the full report. The Vatican’s decision-making process, as Bruni noted, involved multiple inputs, and the lack of transparency about these inputs does not inherently invalidate Traditionis Custodes. Papal authority allows decisions based on broader considerations, not solely survey results. - The CDF report’s “overall assessment” may state that most bishops opposed changes to Summorum Pontificum, but without the full report, it’s unclear how representative this is. For example, the report notes that some bishops requested a return to pre-2007 rules for greater control, suggesting a split in opinions. Additionally, the survey’s findings in France, which has a significant Extraordinary Form presence, were reportedly leaked before Traditionis Custodes and indicated mixed results, not universal support for Summorum Pontificum.[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/)[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) 5. Alternative Perspectives: - Critics of Montagna’s report, such as those on Where Peter Is, argue that her claims collapse under scrutiny due to the unverified nature of the documents and the lack of context. They note that the leaked sections omit critical issues, such as problematic traditionalist groups in Brazil, and that the bishops’ responses included concerns about the Extraordinary Form’s implementation.[](https://wherepeteris.com/will-pope-leo-take-on-the-traditionalists) - The Vatican’s broader goal, as articulated by Pope Francis and reiterated by Pope Leo XIV, is to promote unity and reconciliation. The restrictions in Traditionis Custodes were intended to address perceived divisions, particularly in regions like the United States, where the Extraordinary Form has been a flashpoint. Montagna’s focus on the CDF report ignores these broader pastoral concerns.[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286) Matteo Bruni’s Comments Matteo Bruni’s statement on July 3, 2025, during a press conference on the “Mass for the Care of Creation,” is critical to understanding the Vatican’s position: - He stated, “I do not confirm the authenticity of the texts that have been published, which presumably concern part of one of the documents on which the decision was based and, as such, contribute to a reconstruction that is also very partial and incomplete with regard to the decision-making process. In fact, further documentation was later added to the consultation mentioned, including other confidential reports resulting from additional consultations that were submitted to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.”[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://apnews.com/article/vatican-latin-mass-pope-leo-francis-catholic-5c15ea6c49b255a7d98cde9276a46acd) - This suggests that the leaked documents, even if authentic, do not capture the full scope of evidence considered by Pope Francis. Bruni’s reference to “confidential reports” indicates that sensitive information, possibly involving specific dioceses or traditionalist groups, played a role but was not publicly disclosed for pastoral or administrative reasons. - Bruni’s comments align with the Vatican’s consistent messaging that Traditionis Custodes aimed to address liturgical divisions, not merely to suppress the Extraordinary Form. The lack of explicit reference to additional documents in Traditionis Custodes does not mean they did not exist, as papal decisions often involve internal deliberations not fully disclosed.

While Montagna’s article raises provocative questions about the rationale for Traditionis Custodes, it relies on unverified documents and lacks the full context of the Vatican’s decision-making process. Matteo Bruni’s comments underscore that the leaked sections are “presumably” partial and incomplete, and additional confidential reports informed Pope Francis’ decision. Without the full CDF report or corroboration from official Vatican sources, Montagna’s claims remain speculative. The leaked documents suggest some bishops supported Summorum Pontificum, but they also indicate diverse views, including concerns about division and control, which align with the Vatican’s stated goals in Traditionis Custodes. The burden of proof lies with Montagna to substantiate her claims with verified evidence, and the Vatican’s broader pastoral concerns—promoting unity and addressing liturgical disputes—provide a plausible basis for Traditionis Custodes beyond the 2020 survey alone.[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://apnews.com/article/vatican-latin-mass-pope-leo-francis-catholic-5c15ea6c49b255a7d98cde9276a46acd)