CathInfo.com

  There's no "one rule" which can say (or not say) that the NOM is valid or invalid.  That's the problem (and devilish, purposeful cunning of it all).

Each and every novus ordo mass can be valid or invalid depending on 1) if the "priest" is a real priest, 2) if the "priest" uses the proper intention, and 3) if the "priest" uses a valid consecration formula.

What are you facepalming?  I said there's no smoking gun proof of invalidity, and there isn't.  In particular, we can't know the truth with certainty until the Church rules on the matter.  But then with your R&R position, you can claim certainty not only without the authority of the Church but even AGAINST the Church's authority, so given your theology about the Church, your reaction is not surprising.

Absolutely it does.  Same thing is said of the canonization of saints.

100% wrong.  The ruling by (at least) 2 different saint-popes that the roman rite is Apostolic (i.e. therefore, directly from Christ) is infallible.  Thus, the latin rite, as codified by Quo Primum, is infallibly declared as Divine and unchangeable. 

It's not dogmatic per se in that it doesn't entail revealed propositions, and yet it has a dogmatic / doctrinal aspect to it.  cf. St Thomas.  Same thing can be said of Quo Primum, where it's on the border between being doctrinal and purely disciplinary. 

The Mass is of a Divine origin, as it is an act of Christ, both His sacrifice at Holy Thursday and sacrifice on Good Friday.


For you to compare it to a canonization, is ridiculous and totally off-base.  Apples-grapes comparison.

There's a doctrinal aspect to Quo Primum.  It is not purely disciplinary but has a very strong doctrinal aspect to it.  It's not in the same category as, say, changing the duration of the Communion fast.  I view it as being in the same category as a canonization ... infallible and irreversible.  I don't think it would preclude a future pope from introducing a variation of the Rite, or a new Rite, but I don't think it can be abrogated.  When a Pope decrees something to be true "in perpetuity", his intent is clearly not "until the next pope comes along and overturns it".

You're missing the larger picture and you're quite wrong.  A future pope cannot introduce a "new" latin rite, because Pope St Gregory and Pope St Pius V have already said, infallibly, that the current latin rite IS FROM CHRIST.  No future pope can change what is Divine!  The matter is settled. 


If by "variation of the rite" you mean some non-essential changes, then fine.  But a non-essential change isn't really a change, is it?  No, it's not.  So, the principle stands - there is absolutely no way that the latin rite can be changed (in a essential way) ever, at all, now or in the future.  The matter is settled.  That's what TRADITION means.

p.s.  Quo Primum is not binding because St Pius V used the words "in perpetuity" but because he was ruling on a matter of Tradition and Apostolic origin.  He was reiterating that the Latin rite traces its roots to Christ.  That's why it's binding; because it's Divine.