Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: What does Quo Primum really say?  (Read 1209 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 10305
  • Reputation: +6216/-1742
  • Gender: Male
What does Quo Primum really say?
« on: March 26, 2019, 02:06:06 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • What does Quo Primum really say?  Here is a breakdown of this law, point by point, which shows that not only does the law permit the True Mass to be said "in perpetuity" (see point 2f) but it also commands that ONLY the True Mass be said (points 2a and 2e), under pain of sin (point 2e).

    Most people know of the permissions granted; few understand that this law also commands certain things.  These commands are a key point in condemning the novus ordo and the indult as illicit, and therefore, sinful.  Quo Primum does not allow any changes, modifications or additions to the missal (point 2d), and it forbids any cleric from forcing any catholic to say/attend a different missal (point 2f).  Therefore the indult is illegal because by attendance/use of the indult missal, you are accepting that the novus ordo is ok and legal, which is contrary to Quo Primum (points 2a-2f, all of them).

    If you concentrate on Part 2 below, you will know all you need to know about Quo Primum.  Part 1 is an intro and an explanation of why the law is being created and Part 3 is just the details of how it will be put in place.  Part 2 is the essential law.

    Below is the english Translation of Quo Primum, with my commentary in red.


    QUO PRIMUM
    Apostolic Constitution and Papal Bull

    Pius, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, Ad Perpetuam Rei Memoriam:


    ---Part I : INTRO and REASON for the Law—

    From the very first on Our elevation to the chief Apostleship we willingly set our mind and energies and directed all our thoughts to those matters which concerned the preserving of a pure Church worship and We strove, with God’s help, by every means in our power to accomplish this purpose.

    Translation:   “From the very first” (this is what "Quo Primum" means) moment I became Pope, I have thought about preserving our Liturgy and I have been working to accomplish this.

    Since, besides other decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, we were instructed to revise and re-edit the sacred books: the Catechism, the Missal, and the Breviary. Now that, God willing, the Catechism has been published, for the instruction of the faithful, and the Breviary has been thoroughly revised unto the worthy praise of God, so that Missal and Breviary are in harmony, as is but fitting – (for it is only as it should be that in the Church there be only one proper manner of reciting the Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass). We deemed it necessary to give our immediate attention to what still remained to do, viz., to re-edit the Missal as soon as possible.

    Translation:   The Council of Trent ordered that I revise the Catechism, Breviary and Missal.  I have already published a new Catechism and Breviary.  (For it is right that there only be one way to pray the Breviary and one way to say Mass.)  So I turned my attention to revise the Missal.

    Wherefore, We decided to entrust this work to learned men We selected. These men then very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, incorrupt or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, they consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites and thus have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the Holy Fathers. Now that this work has been gone over repeatedly and emended, We ordered after serious study and reflection the work to be printed and published as soon as possible so that all might derive the benefits of this work that was undertaken, namely, that the priests would understand which prayers to use, which rites and ceremonies they were required to observe in the future celebration of Masses.

    Translation:  I entrusted this work to educated men, who researched docuмents in the Vatican Library and elsewhere.  I reviewed their work and I ordered the Missal to be printed, mainly, so that priests would know the correct prayers to use in saying Mass.


    ---Part 2:  TERMS of the LAW---

    --2a)  What is the law?--

    Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the mother and mistress of the other Churches, and let not Masses be sung or read according to any rite (formula) other than that of the Missal published by Us.

    Translation:  Let everyone, everywhere observe “what has been handed down by Holy Roman Church” and do not use any other missal when saying or singing Mass, except this one.


    --2b)  Who does the law apply to?---

    This applies henceforth for all future time throughout all Provinces of the Christian world to:  all Patriarchates, Cathedral Churches, collegiate and parish churches, secular or religious, both men and of women – even of military orders – and of churches and chapels without a determinate congregation in which Conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the Roman Church.

    Translation:  From now on, my law applies, for all future time to … (all Catholics.  See list above).

    This same Roman Missal is to be used by all, even if the same aforesaid Churches have been authorized, however exempt they might be, by Apostolic indult, custom or privilege, or even if approved under oath or official confirmation by the Holy See, or their rights and faculties guaranteed in any other manner whatsoever.

    Translation:  My new missal is to be used by all, even if that Church (i.e. rite) has any previous exemption, even from the Holy See.


    ---2c)  Exceptions to the Law---

    Only this new rite is to be used, unless in the same Churches from their first institution more than two hundred years ago and confirmation by the Apostolic See, or unless their custom of more than two hundred years’ duration of celebrating Masses in these Churches has been steadily observed – in which cases We in no wise rescind their above-mentioned institute or custom. Accordingly, if this Missal we have seen fit to publish be more agreeable to these latter, We grant them permission to celebrate Masses according to this Missal, with the consent, however, of the Bishop or Prelate or the whole Chapter, everything to the contrary notwithstanding.

    Translation:   You must only use this rite, unless…(here’s an exception to the law):  A) Your Church (i.e. rite) was instituted over 200 years ago and confirmed by the Holy See, …Or B) your Church (i.e. rite) has a liturgical practice of over 200 years – In these cases, I do not force you to use my missal.

    However, if the Churches who have exceptions, like this new missal more than their own, I grant them permission to change if they get consent from their Superiors, despite anything I said above to the contrary.


    ---2d)  How does this law affect previous laws concerning the Missal?---

    All the other above-mentioned Churches, however, are hereby denied the use of the same Missals, which are entirely and absolutely to be discontinued,

    Translation:   All other Churches (without exceptions), cannot use their current missals and they must stop using them absolutely and entirely.


    while by this present constitution, henceforth valid in perpetuity, We order and enjoin that this Our recently published Missal must never be added to, that none of it be omitted, and that none of it be changed under penalty of Our indignation.

    Translation:  For by my new law (i.e. constitution), which is valid forever, I order that my new missal must never be added to, changed or omitted from, under penalty of Papal outrage and wrath.


    ---2e)  By what authority is this law created?---


    (Wherefore) We specifically command each and every Patriarch, Administrator, and all other persons of whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us hereafter to discontinue and completely to discard all other rubrics and rites of other Missals however ancient which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass to presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.

    Translation:  Therefore, I specifically command each and every Bishop (….and Church Superior, etc), and I order them in virtue of holy obedience, to say and sing Mass according to my missal and to stop using and discard all other missals, no matter how long you have been using them.  And you must not, when celebrating Mass, introduce any ceremonies or recite any other prayers, except those in my missal.



    ---2f)  How long does the law last?  Does the law expire?---

    Furthermore, by these presents in virtue of Our Apostolic authority We grant and concede in perpetuity that for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any Church whatsoever, this Missal is to be followed absolutely without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are (any) Superiors, Canons, Chaplains and other secular priests or religious of whatever order or by whatever title designated obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us.

    Translation:  Further, by my Apostolic and Papal Authority, I give permission, for all eternity, that my missal can be said or sung in any Church, it can be used absolutely, without any doubt of conscience or fear of penalty, and it may freely and lawfully be used.  Nor can any cleric be ordered to celebrate Mass in any other way, than as We have commanded.

    We likewise declare and ordain, that no one whatever is to be forced or coerced to alter this Missal and that this present docuмent cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and to retain its full force – notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of Provincial or Synodal Councils and (notwithstanding) the practice and custom of the aforesaid Churches (established long, immemorial prescription, not, however, if of more than two hundred years standing).

    Translation:  I also command that no one can be forced to change this missal and that this law cannot be changed or nullified, but will always remain valid and in force.

    My law overrides previous laws of the Holy See, any local councils, and the old liturgies of all Churches, except if (as mentioned above) such Churches have rites over 200 years old.


    ---Part 3:  WHEN does the LAW go into effect---

    It is Our will, therefore, and by the same authority We decree that after We publish this Constitution and edition of the Missal, the priests of the Roman Curia are, after thirty days, obliged to chant or read the Mass according to this Missal; that those south of the Alps, in three months; and that those beyond the mountains either within six months or whenever the Missal is available for sale.

    Translation:   It is my will, and by the same Papal Authority I command, that after I publish this law and missal edition, the Roman Curia are ordered to use it after 30 days.  Those south of the Alps, have 3 months; Those beyond the mountains either within 6 months or whenever the missal is available.

    In order that (the Missal) be preserved incorrupt in the whole world and kept free of flaws and errors, (the penalty for nonobservance for printers mediately or immediately subject to Our dominion and that of the Holy Roman Church will be the forfeiting of the books and a fine of 100 gold ducats payable ipso facto to the Apostolic Camera.

    Translation:  To keep this missal free from errors, there is a penalty for those who print changes to it.  For those printers who are under my authority in the Roman Church, the fine is 100 gold coins, and forfeiture of the missals.


    (Further), as for those located in other parts of the world, the penalty is excommunication ipso facto incurred and such other penalties as may in Our judgment be imposed; and We decree by these presents that they must not dare or presume either to print or publish or sell or in any way to accept such books without Our approval and consent or without the express consent of the Apostolic Commissary (to be appointed by Us) in the same locality and unless the said printer receive a genuine Missal to be the model of subsequent printings which must be collated with the genuine Missal and agree faithfully with it and in no wise vary from the Roman Missal with the large type.

    Translation:  Further, for those printers located in other parts of the world, the penalty is ‘ipso facto’ excommunication and other penalties that I may judge fit.

    I order that (printers) must not print or publish the Missal without my approval or without the direct consent of the Apostolic Commissary, who I will appoint for your region, and unless the printer receives a genuine Missal to copy from.  The copies you ‘print’ must be compared with the genuine Missal and agree to it faithfully.

    Accordingly, since it would be difficult for this present letter to be sent to all parts of the Christian world and simultaneously come to light everywhere, We direct that it be, as usual, posted and published at the doors of the Basilicas of the prince of the Apostles, also at the Apostolic Chancery, and on the street at Camp Fora; at the same time, We direct that printed copies of this same letter be signed by a notary public and made official by an ecclesiastical dignitary and enjoy the same indubitable validity everywhere in every nation as if Our present writing were there shown.

    Translation:  Because it would be difficult for this letter to be sent to all parts of the world and read at the same time, I order that it be posted at St Peter’s, at the Apostolic Chancery and at Camp Fora.  Also, I direct that copies of this letter be notarized and made official, so that the copies would be trusted everywhere, in every nation, as if my present letter were there itself.


    Therefore, no one whatsoever is permitted to alter this letter or heedlessly dare go contrary to this notice of Our permission, statute, ordination, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he would incur the indignation of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

    Translation:  Therefore, no one is permitted to alter this letter (i.e. this constitution/law) or go against its permission, statute, ordination, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree and prohibition.  Should anyone, however, do so, he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Sts Peter and Paul.

    Given at Rome at St. Peter’s in the year of the Lord Incarnation 1570 on the 19th of July in the 5th year of Our Pontificate, H. cuмin Caesar Glorierius


    Offline 800 Cruiser

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 133
    • Reputation: +53/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #1 on: March 26, 2019, 02:57:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Sincere questions:

    1.  What, precisely, is this missal, and where May I find it?

    2.  Same for the catechism. 

    I am less than one year Catholic, a father and husband...and am trying mightily to discern Truth. I am currently at a loss to put into words what is in my heart and soul to express. 

    Thank you for your assistance. 


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6216/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #2 on: March 26, 2019, 03:29:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The missal of Quo Primum is called the Tridentine Missal because it was ordered to be created by the Council of Trent.  Pope St Pius V was the pope who was alive after the Council of Trent, who had the responsibility for providing a new, edited missal, even though this missal did not have any major or essential changes.  The missal of Quo Primum is not a new rite, but is the same rite that was used by the Apostles and passed down to Pope St Gregory the Great in the 500s.  What Pope St Pius V did, in making the missal uniform, and in ordering that all latin churches use it, (except those 200 years old), was to get rid of the multiples and multiples of variations and small changes in the rubrics which many countries, Orders and dioceses had introduced.  This made the mass different from place to place (even if the changes were minor) and it hurt the Unity of the Faith.  The Council of Trent sought to solve this problem and to return the missal to a proper uniform prayer, by which all Catholics would pray the same.

    Since 1570 when Quo Primum was made law, there have been a number of revisions to the missal.  None of these revisions were large or substantial.  Most revisions concerned the updating of the calendar of saints and other minor additions, like the prayers after Low Mass, which were ordered by Pope Leo XIII.  The current missal of Quo Primum is the missal of 1962, which Pope John XXIII issued as a revision of Pope St Pius X's missal/breviary.

    I think the last catechism which was Traditional was that of Pope St Pius X.  But I'm not sure.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #3 on: March 26, 2019, 03:52:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Sincere questions:

    1.  What, precisely, is this missal, and where May I find it?

    2.  Same for the catechism.

    I am less than one year Catholic, a father and husband...and am trying mightily to discern Truth. I am currently at a loss to put into words what is in my heart and soul to express.

    Thank you for your assistance.
    The Missal is the one on the Altar that the priest uses to celebrate the Mass. From the time the law of Quo Primum was established, until the new missal of V2 did away with it, the Law of Quo Primum was always written at the very beginning of every Altar Missal in the world.

    I'm not sure where to get you a copy of that from, but  it's written 100% in Latin anyway, I attached the catechism (PDF file).
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #4 on: March 26, 2019, 09:39:12 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • A difficulty with some appeals to Quo Primum is that St. Pius V's bull on the breviary, Quod a nobis, is structured similarly. There are some differences, of course, because the breviary concerns some things that don't arise with the missal, but the last paragraph as stated above is practically identical. Nevertheless, St. Pius X made a substantial change to the breviary. (Also, he changed the CORE of the breviary, the psalter, which is relevant to claims sometimes made that Quo Primum allows "non essential" changes like adding saints but not changes to the ordinary.)

    Thus, we should be a little careful how we use Quo Primum.

    I think it is useful to note that every pope who changed the missal wrote a docuмent, which then was printed along with Quo Primum and the other docuмents in the missal. It's as if the popes considered any changes to the missal had to be justified - in writing - and were modifications to Quo Primum.

    That the missal of Paul VI only has the docuмent of Paul VI is an indication it not a revision to the old missal, but something new.


    Offline Markus

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 203
    • Reputation: +100/-36
    • Gender: Male
      • Reign of Mary
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #5 on: March 27, 2019, 12:16:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Is there an equivalent of Quo Primum for the eastern rites of the Catholic Church?

    My understanding of Quo Primum has been: from the moment it was signed, no further changes could be made to the Roman Missal, except of course feasts and rubrics and so on.

    Is there an equivalent rule for the eastern rites, or are those rites still subject to change and development?

    Offline 800 Cruiser

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 133
    • Reputation: +53/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #6 on: March 27, 2019, 01:56:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thank you very much Stubborn. I am hungry for information such as that.  :ready-to-eat:

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #7 on: March 27, 2019, 06:22:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thank you very much Stubborn. I am hungry for information such as that.  :ready-to-eat:
    You're very welcome!

    If you'd like to learn more about Quo Primum from a well spoken traditional priest, then you will definitely want to listen to this priest (Fr. Altenbach) explain Quo Primum in depth, he pulls no punches and speaks in plain English. Feel free to download it to your computer.

    He was one of the many, many priests who was kicked out of his rectory for remaining traditional and condemning the "New Jazz" as he calls it, you may detect a bit of this resentment in his voice lol. He made this recording in 1974 and it is as true today as it was then and will always be. This particular recording of his is pretty much all about Quo Primum, he starts into QP at about the 10 minute mark, but listen to the whole thing if at all possible.

    Back in the day, it is recordings just like this that we listened to as a family on "religion night" to help learn our faith and understand what was going on amidst all the chaos - I've listened to the same many times since then, and I still learn something new each time.  

    This is the type of sermon the SSPX used to preach regularly when they first started here in the USA, it is this kind of preaching that they should have never stopped preaching.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6216/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #8 on: March 27, 2019, 09:22:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    A difficulty with some appeals to Quo Primum is that St. Pius V's bull on the breviary, Quod a nobis, is structured similarly. There are some differences, of course, because the breviary concerns some things that don't arise with the missal, but the last paragraph as stated above is practically identical. Nevertheless, St. Pius X made a substantial change to the breviary. (Also, he changed the CORE of the breviary, the psalter, which is relevant to claims sometimes made that Quo Primum allows "non essential" changes like adding saints but not changes to the ordinary.)
    Pope St Pius X's changes to the breviary were not substantial, they were "non essential" and also of a disciplinary nature.  He changed the order of the prayers, not the prayers themseves.  As this article points out:

    ...it is important to note that Pope St. Pius X, properly speaking, did not change the content of the Breviary, but rather the arrangement of the Psalter. Now, one may wish to argue that doing so was a poor decision, but the reality is that the changes that were made in this case were of a disciplinary nature.

    https://akacatholic.com/blame/

    ----

    In regards to your comment about the last paragraph, you make a good point that many papal docuмents of this time used such language.  Heck, Pope St Pius V issued Quo Primum, said no one could change it without incurring the wrath of Sts Peter and Paul, and then revised HIS OWN MISSAL a few years later.  So, this language does not mean the law is set in stone; it means it cannot be changed substantially, and the authority is from the pope himself.


    Quote
    I think it is useful to note that every pope who changed the missal wrote a docuмent, which then was printed along with Quo Primum and the other docuмents in the missal. It's as if the popes considered any changes to the missal had to be justified - in writing - and were modifications to Quo Primum.
    You are correct.  Every change to Quo Primum since 1570 has been a REVISION (i.e. an edit), not a new missal.  In legal terms, a revision is an edit to an existing law.  An abrogation is the ending of the old law and the beginning of a new law.  No pope since Quo Primum has abrogated (i.e. ended) Quo Primum; all of them have revised Quo Primum's missal and this is why QP is still in force, with all it's permissions, rules and commands.

    Every law since QP references the previous revision and there is a clear, continual, legal trail of revisions.  When Pope John XXIII issued the 1962 missal revisions, he referenced the changes made by Pope St Pius X, who had referenced the previous Pope's editions, etc.  The 1962 missal is the legal missal of QP.  Even +Benedict said that QP had not been abrogated in his "motu" and he also said that the 1962 missal is the lawful missal of QP.

    Quote
    That the missal of Paul VI only has the docuмent of Paul VI is an indication it not a revision to the old missal, but something new.
    If you read the Apostolic Constitution of Paul VI, he only mentions QP at the beginning, as a history lesson of sorts, in which he explained that QP was issued at the request of the Council of Trent.  Then he explained all the different revisions over the years.  The problem is that his argument for introducing the new mass was because V2 ordered it.  He never referenced QP as being abrogated or revised and he never mentioned that he was revising the 1962 missal (which legally, he would have to do, if he were revising it).  So, yes, Paul VI's missal is NOT part of QP; it's not a legal child/revision at all, but is a totally new missal, which he issued, not from his Apostolic Authority but by the authority of the V2 council (which is circular logic, because a council only has authority, in theory, because a pope presides).

    Fast forward to 2007 in the "motu" and Benedict argued that the new mass is not a new missal but a different "usage of the same rite".  This is like his "Hermeneutic of Continuity", in my opinion - modernistic garbage logic.  The reason his logic doesn't work is that QP ONLY allows it's missal to be used, with no changes whatsoever.  So even if the new mass is not a new rite, a priest can't use the missal because QP forbids it; this is why it's illicit.  Even if the new mass is valid, it's illicit.  And no pope since V2 has ever said that any catholic has to attend it (because they could never command such a thing, which is openly contrary to QP).

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6216/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #9 on: March 27, 2019, 09:30:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Is there an equivalent of Quo Primum for the eastern rites of the Catholic Church?

    My understanding of Quo Primum has been: from the moment it was signed, no further changes could be made to the Roman Missal, except of course feasts and rubrics and so on.
    QP applies to the universal church.  St Pius V made an exception for any rites over 200 years old, as of 1570, to keep their old rites.  I would think that the eastern rites would have no authority to change their rites, per QP (and also due to Divine Law, since the eastern rites are from Christ/Apostles, in essence).  But I don't know how the eastern rites are governed, so I presume that their bishops are allowed to make non-essential changes.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #10 on: March 27, 2019, 09:58:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In regards to your comment about the last paragraph, you make a good point that many papal docuмents of this time used such language.  Heck, Pope St Pius V issued Quo Primum, said no one could change it without incurring the wrath of Sts Peter and Paul, and then revised HIS OWN MISSAL a few years later.  So, this language does not mean the law is set in stone; it means it cannot be changed substantially, and the authority is from the pope himself.
    Actually, he said that "no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice...lest he "incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul."

    Which is to say that no one is in any way permitted to alter the law itself. He repeats this same edict a few more times in QP, always referring to the law itself. Nowhere does he forbid future popes from making *incidental* changes, which actually does go without saying, as even he himself made, as did other popes make incidental throughout the ages.

    The law decrees that from then on, the Roman Church is: "to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us....." or "...presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal."

    Incidental changes are those which in no way affect "the rite and manner and norm" of this Mass which he codified, which the hierarchy and faithful should not ever have any issues with.

    Quo Primum wholly and unmistakably condemns the mass of V2.


    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4577/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #11 on: March 27, 2019, 10:39:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • QP applies to the universal church.  St Pius V made an exception for any rites over 200 years old, as of 1570, to keep their old rites.  I would think that the eastern rites would have no authority to change their rites, per QP (and also due to Divine Law, since the eastern rites are from Christ/Apostles, in essence).  But I don't know how the eastern rites are governed, so I presume that their bishops are allowed to make non-essential changes.

    Quo Primum was only applicable to the Western Rite Church; not Universal. It had absolutely no binding power on the Eastern Rite Churches, which were / are exempted. Eastern Rite Bishops and priests are / were not bound to it. This alone proves that Quo Primum is disciplinary; not dogmatic, (as anything pertaining liturgical rites, as long as the substance of the Sacrament is not touched), and as such, does not bind any legitimate successor of St. Peter, because no Pope has an higher authority than another.

    The Divine Liturgies of St. Chrysostom, St. Basil, and St. James used in the Eastern Catholic Churches all have had modifications made to them, in time. It is the Holy See alone however, which can approve of such liturgical reforms occurring in both, Latin and Eastern rites.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #12 on: March 27, 2019, 11:06:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quo Primum was only applicable to the Western Rite Church; not Universal. It had absolutely no binding power on the Eastern Rite Churches, which were / are exempted. Eastern Rite Bishops and priests are / were not bound to it. This alone proves that Quo Primum is disciplinary; not dogmatic, (as anything pertaining liturgical rites, as long as the substance of the Sacrament is not touched), and as such, does not bind any legitimate successor of St. Peter, because no Pope has an higher authority than another.
    If that is so, if we say that the law of Quo Primum is not binding even to popes, then we must admit that the Church has no way of protecting Her own Liturgy.

    Remember, the Law of Quo Primum as written, remains in effect forever. At anytime during the time that the law is in force, anyone that transgresses the law, breaks the law. It is just that simple - it does not matter who breaks it. Even any legitimate successor of St. Peter can break, and has in fact, broke the law.



     
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6216/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #13 on: March 27, 2019, 11:15:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Quo Primum was only applicable to the Western Rite Church; not Universal. It had absolutely no binding power on the Eastern Rite Churches, which were / are exempted. Eastern Rite Bishops and priests are / were not bound to it.
    Thanks.  This makes sense.


    Quote
    This alone proves that Quo Primum is disciplinary; not dogmatic, (as anything pertaining liturgical rites, as long as the substance of the Sacrament is not touched), and as such, does not bind any legitimate successor of St. Peter, because no Pope has an higher authority than another.
    Agree that it's disciplinary mostly, but it is also dogmatic, in the sense that a codification of the mass shows which parts are of Divine origin and which are not.  Most theologians at the time of 1570 had a good knowledge of this, but the introduction of Protestantism was attacking the essence and understanding of the Mass, for many catholics.  Being that QP was ordered by Trent, which dogmatically taught many essential aspects of the mass, then we can also say that QP is dogmatic, in that it codified the mass in accordance with Trent doctrine.

    Yes, any pope can change the law of a previous pope, as long as the change is non-essential.  QP does have aspects which are related to doctrine, which is why all popes post QP did not issue their own missal, but merely revised QP.  This is why many modernists referred to the new mass/V2 as "anti-Trent", because their changes went directly against the True Mass, which was codified in QP at the order of Trent.  Also, since Trent was anti-protestant and the new mass/V2 are pro-protestant, that's another reason.


    Quote
    The Divine Liturgies of St. Chrysostom, St. Basil, and St. James used in the Eastern Catholic Churches all have had modifications made to them, in time. It is the Holy See alone however, which can approve of such liturgical reforms occurring in both, Latin and Eastern rites.

    Good info.

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4577/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: What does Quo Primum really say?
    « Reply #14 on: March 27, 2019, 11:27:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If that is so, if we say that the law of Quo Primum is not binding even to popes, then we must admit that the Church has no way of protecting Her own Liturgy.
    The protection comes from the promises of Our Lord that His Church cannot err in liturgical matters. The Church, as understood here, is the Holy See and the Supreme Authority of St. Peter
    (Authority which extends equally to all his legitimate successors).

    Pope Pius XI, Divini Cultus:

    Quote
    The Church has received from Christ her founder the charge of safeguarding divine worship. It is therefore her duty, while protecting the essence of the Holy Sacrifice and of the sacraments, to prescribe whatever will best control that august and public ministry - ceremonies, rites, texts, prayers, chant - which is properly called liturgy, or sacred action par excellence.

    If the Church erred in giving to the faithful an evil or defective liturgical rite, (for example in promulgating the Novus Ordo) this can only mean that She has failed in her duty to safeguard divine worship. This can only mean that the Church has defected, which is impossible.

    If Paul VI was indeed Pope, then the NOM is not defective, but equally pleasing to God. Just as all the other liturgical rites both western and eastern existing in the Church today, all approved by the Holy See, all equally pleasing to God. The ONLY way the NOM is invalid, evil, inferior, etc., is if Paul VI was not Pope.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.