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

Author Topic: Did anyone challenge Quo primum before Vatican II?  (Read 2055 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Did anyone challenge Quo primum before Vatican II?
« on: August 31, 2023, 12:03:26 PM »
There are actually two parts to this question:

First, did anyone, in the period from 1570 to 1962, ever challenge Pope St Pius V's right to establish the Tridentine missal for all time?  Did anyone ever say "this is all well and good, but you can't bind your successors in such a fashion, you can't establish one particular missal forever"?

Second, when the missal was changed, did anyone (aside from Fr Gommar de Pauw and Archbishop Lefebvre) address the issue of Quo primum, was it just taken for granted that PSPV could not bind his successors, or was it more a case of "shhh, we can just slip this by, and nobody will ever notice"?

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Did anyone challenge Quo primum before Vatican II?
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2023, 01:06:18 PM »
By 1971 or so, Fr. Wathen dedicated his book, The Great Sacrilege: "To Pope Saint Pius V Guardian of the True Mass"
wherein he wrote extensively on the evils of the new mass utilizing Quo Primum as a reference often.

In 1974 Father Altenbach was another. One of his "True Mass tapes" was on Quo Primum.



Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Did anyone challenge Quo primum before Vatican II?
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2023, 01:21:07 PM »
In 1974 Father Altenbach was another. One of his "True Mass tapes" was on Quo Primum.
Here is a link to the tape on Quo Primum for those who might like to hear what he says, and how he says it, from 1974.

Offline ElwinRansom1970

  • Supporter
Re: Did anyone challenge Quo primum before Vatican II?
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2023, 02:34:34 PM »
St. Pius V did NOT establish the 1570 Roman Missal for all time. He would have neither that power nor authority since any action of the Roman Pontiff in liturgical matters can only extend to the Latin Church. (Antipope Bergoglio is currently treading into dangerous territory by involving himself in the liturgical matters of the Syro-Malabar Church, where he lacks competency and authority even if his opinon in this instance is accidentally correct.) A permanently binding act of a Roman Pontiff must pertain to doctrine and morals addressed to the universal Church. Liturgy is outside this domain.

Quo Primum, in fact, mandated missals older than 200 years, not merely permitted their continued use. The bull was an exercise of papal disciplinary power to eliminate the use of liturgical rites of questionable orthodoxy or orthopraxis that had emerged in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

Quo Primum guarantees the use of the 1570 missal, but A new missal could introduced. In fact, half a dozen revised typical editions of the Roman Missal followed the of 1570. Each was clearly presenting Mass according to the received Roman Rite with nearly identical Ordo Missæ, but each had distinct rubrics and calendars.

The great problem with the Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI in 1969 is that it is NOT the liturgy of the Roman Rite nor is it a distinct usage thereof. The Novus Ordo is in whole and in part an artificial and synthetic liturgy distinct from the Roman Rite yet masquerading as the Roman liturgy.

Too many trads over the past 50 years had had mistaken notions of the nature and authority of Quo Primum. Puts V guarantees the use of the classical Roman Missal as it had evolved down to the sixteenth century, but he does not nor cannot forbid something new and in continuity with the older form for the future.

Re: Did anyone challenge Quo primum before Vatican II?
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2023, 02:38:37 PM »
There are actually two parts to this question:

First, did anyone, in the period from 1570 to 1962, ever challenge Pope St Pius V's right to establish the Tridentine missal for all time?  Did anyone ever say "this is all well and good, but you can't bind your successors in such a fashion, you can't establish one particular missal forever"?

Second, when the missal was changed, did anyone (aside from Fr Gommar de Pauw and Archbishop Lefebvre) address the issue of Quo primum, was it just taken for granted that PSPV could not bind his successors, or was it more a case of "shhh, we can just slip this by, and nobody will ever notice"?
Irrelevant. Did anyone challenge the perpetual suppression of the Jesuits?

Edit: I realized the succinctness made me sound rude so I'll add I meant the answer doesn't constitute proof for or against the power to bind in such a way.