Quo Primum and Vatican II

  • Thread starter Thread starter Crimson_Silence
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Crimson_Silence

Guest
So how was Quo Primum reconciled with Vatican II teaching? Or put away or made a-new or whathave you? I know Quo Primum said that no clergy below Pope can make alterations to the Mass (I imagine clergy did this to accomodate respective peoples in the Middle Ages), but then I noticed this phrase in Quo Primum:

“We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or 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 and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.”

So does Quo Primum not mean clergy below the Pope or is it also talking about the Pope as well? If it meant the Pope as well, then why did Pope Clement VIII revise it 30 years later? And Pope Urban VIII 30 thirty years after Clement?
 
One Pope can not bind another Pope as long as we aren’t talking about doctrine.
 
You don’t even have to go forward to later revisions of the Roman Missal. The Roman Church did retain the use of other ancient uses and rites (e.g. the Dominican mass or the Ambrosian liturgy).
 
Quo Primum was binding and perpetual; that’s why the EF mass is still said today and always has been since it was issued. However, a Pope is an absolute monarch and whatever he says goes; so now there are two valid forms of the Roman rite.

The ‘new’ “Tridentine” mass was really just the old mass cleaned up of extra prayers that had made their way into the mass over the years. It has many of the same prayers going back to the earliest days of Christianity. Because of this I’ll continue going to EF masses.
 
Crimson_Silence said:
So how was Quo Primum reconciled with Vatican II teaching? Or put away or made a-new or whathave you? I know Quo Primum said that no clergy below Pope can make alterations to the Mass (I imagine clergy did this to accomodate respective peoples in the Middle Ages), but then I noticed this phrase in Quo Primum:

“We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or 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 and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.”

So does Quo Primum not mean clergy below the Pope or is it also talking about the Pope as well? If it meant the Pope as well, then why did Pope Clement VIII revise it 30 years later? And Pope Urban VIII 30 thirty years after Clement?
Click to expand...
I go over the whole document and analyze that very question HERE:

QUO PRIMUM, CAN THE MISSAL NEVER BE CHANGED?

Basically, Pius V had neither the intention nor the power to prevent future popes from making changes to the Mass, he was binding only lesser authorities from doing so.
 
Crimson_Silence said:
So does Quo Primum not mean clergy below the Pope or is it also talking about the Pope as well? If it meant the Pope as well, then why did Pope Clement VIII revise it 30 years later? And Pope Urban VIII 30 thirty years after Clement?
Click to expand...
I guess one can make a case where Quo Primum had the authority of the Council of Trent, which spanned 17 years under three Popes. One of the documents explicitly stated that received and approved rites not be contemned or formed into new rites. Quo Primum clarified this to mean no new rites formed after 1370 A.D. Revisions to Missals can’t be avoided in perpetuity, speaking from a realistic standpoint.
 
There was a post by a member (that looks like has been removed, I cannot find the original post) that stated some similar thoughts on the Novus Ordo and the Traditional Latin Mass. I found the website, latinritemass.org and I have been reading the documents and I must say that it sure seems interesting. The most striking part is that Pope Paul VI never abrogated the old Mass. This part just blows me away!

At the same time I had been working on a blog post on the Catholic Church in America statistics and the correlation between the two have got me really thinking.

In Christ
 
ProVobis said:
I guess one can make a case where Quo Primum had the authority of the Council of Trent, which spanned 17 years under three Popes. One of the documents explicitly stated that received and approved rites not be contemned or formed into new rites.
Click to expand...
That referenced those doing so without the authority of the Church. The Council of Trent declared that the power of changing rites or instituting new ones is always in the Church.
Council of Trent:
It furthermore declares, that this power has ever been in the Church, that, in the dispensation of the sacraments, their substance being untouched, it may ordain,–or change, what things soever it may judge most expedient, for the profit of those who receive, or for the veneration of the said sacraments, according to the difference of circumstances, times, and places.

history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct21.html
Click to expand...
St. Pius V would be contradicting this principle expressed at Trent were he to have declared that the Church no longer has this power after Quo Primum.

Pius XII clarified that this power resides ultimately with the Pope:
Mediator Dei:
  1. It follows from this that the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.
vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20111947_mediator-dei_en.html
Click to expand...
Just to add, a few hundred years before Trent a similar controversy took place where certain rebel Franciscans claimed Pope John XXII did not have the authority to revoke certain decisions that Pope Nicholas III had bound the Church to concerning the Franciscan Rule. They also asserted John’s dogmatic definitions concerning absolute poverty were contrary to those past decisions. In the context of this controvery, John XXII, in the letter, Quia quorundam, discussed the difference between dogmatic definitions which were irreformable by future Popes, and legislative decisions which were reformable.

papalencyclicals.net/John22/qquor-e.htm
 
Genesis315 said:
That referenced those doing so without the authority of the Church. The Council of Trent declared that the power of changing rites or instituting new ones is always in the Church.
Click to expand...
I was referring to this one from Session 7;
Canon XIII.—Si quis dixerit, receptos et approbates Ecclesiæ Catholicæ ritus, in solemni sacramentorum administratione adhiberi consuetos, aut contemni, aut sine peccato a ministris pro libito omitti, aut in novos alios per quemcumque ecclesiarum pastorem mutari posse: anathema sit.
Click to expand...
Canon XIII.—If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by any pastor whomsoever of the churches, into other new ones: let him be anathema.
Click to expand...
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds2.v.i.i.v.html

It appears the anathema is a discipline, so it can be removed, I suppose, though it appears on the same page as some of the dogmatic decrees set by the Council.
Pius XII clarified that this power resides ultimately with the Pope:
Click to expand...
Yes he did, in 1947. AFAIK, Mass reforms began in 1948, if not before.

But ultimately it was ruled that the liturgical rite received and approved by Trent was never abrogated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top