Was Quo Primum Ever Abrogated?

[ZoomerVince]

Was Quo Primum Ever Abrogated? If not, wouldn’t that mean that it still applies?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Quo Primum disallows changes by most clergy, but popes are exempt. So yes, it is still in effect, so changes are not allowed by lesser clergy to fit an individual parish.

 

[adamhovey1988]

If you don’t mind, could you explain what it is? This is not my area of expertise.

 

[ZoomerVince]

So if it is still in effect then that means the following would be in effect:

“[L]et Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us.”

 

[Jbrady]

“[L]et Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us.”

Are you aware of any Masses that are being said according to a formula not published by a pope?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

So if it is still in effect then that means the following would be in effect:

“[L]et Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us.”

Except the changes to the mass have not been done by just any clergy, but have instead been instituted by Popes.

In fact, the publisher of Quo Primum, Pope Pius V, added to the Missal the Feast of Our Lady of Victory following the Battle of Lepanto. Changes to the Roman Missal may only be done by Popes themselves. That’s what Quo Primum is meant to be read as.

No, the OF is not in violation of the papal bull, since that’s what you’re getting at.

 

[ZoomerVince]

Yes, I’ve been to some sadly. And Quo Primum is specifically referencing the Tridentine Missal.

 

[ZoomerVince]

The New Mass was not a change to the Roman Missal. It was a new missal, it was literally published as the ‘New Order of the Mass.’

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

So you aren’t here with an anti-VII agenda? Cool! A rare sight these days.

 

[Jbrady]

The New Mass was not a change to the Roman Missal. It was a new missal, it was literally published as the ‘New Order of the Mass.

And it was published by a Pope. You keep forgetting that part.

 

[Niblo]

The Bull Quo Primum Tempore

The Perpetual Indult of St. Pope Pius V

14 July 1570

Pius: Bishop Servant of the Servants of God For an Everlasting Memorial

From the very first, upon Our elevation to the chief Apostleship, We gladly turned our mind and energies and directed all our thoughts to those matters which concerned the preservation of a pure liturgy, and We strove with God’s help, by every means in our power, to accomplish this purpose. For, besides other decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, there were stipulations for Us to revise and re-edit the sacred books: the Catechism, the Missal and the Breviary. With the Catechism published for the instruction of the faithful, by God’s help, and the Breviary thoroughly revised for the worthy praise of God, in order that the Missal and Breviary may be in perfect harmony, as fitting and proper - for its most becoming that there be in the Church only one appropriate 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 be done, viz, the re-editing of the Missal as soon as possible.

Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies they were required to observe from now on in the celebration of Masses.

 

[Niblo]

Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world, to all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and parish churches, be they secular or religious, both of men and of women - even of military orders - and of churches or chapels without a specific congregation in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the Roman Church. This Missal is to be used by all churches, even by those which in their authorization are made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner whatsoever.

This new rite alone is to be used unless approval of the practice of saying Mass differently was given at the very time of the institution and confirmation of the church by Apostolic See at least 200 years ago, or unless there has prevailed a custom of a similar kind which has been continuously followed for a period of not less than 200 years, in which most cases We in no wise rescind their above-mentioned prerogative or custom. However, if this Missal, which we have seen fit to publish, be more agreeable to these latter, We grant them permission to celebrate Mass according to its rite, provided they have the consent of their bishop or prelate or of their whole Chapter, everything else to the contrary notwithstanding.

All other of the churches referred to above, however, are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas, by this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.

 

[Niblo]

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.

There’s more, but can’t post!

 

[Fauken]

If not, wouldn’t that mean that it still applies?

Short of a new dogma being proclaimed, a Pope cannot bind another Pope. Not to mention that there have been numerous charges to the Mass since the 1500’s, so the Mass celebrated in 1962 was not the Mass promulgated by Quo Primium.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

My “takeaway” from QP is that it was intended to consolidate many small changes and accretions that had taken place organically over time, a “standardization”, if you will, in the face of Mass having hitherto been celebrated in many different ways. It also contains, if I’m not mistaken, a guarantee that a priest will henceforth, and forever, have the prerogative of celebrating Mass according to the Tridentine missal of 1570. If I’m understanding correctly, Pope Benedict XVI clarified that, indeed, it is always a priest’s prerogative to use this missal, and thus QP had, indeed, never been “abrogated”.

I don’t know how that percolates down to the hypothetical scenario of a recalcitrant diocesan priest who attempts to play this trump card, and tell his bishop, “no, I’m not celebrating the OF, when I say Mass, it will always be the EF”. Just using my mother wit and sensus catholicus (such as it is), I would say that the obedience to his bishop, which he promised at the time of his ordination, would take priority — “yes, Father, that is true, you may always say the EF, but your ‘marching orders’ are, unless specified otherwise, where you have a congregation, to say the OF, because that’s what we do in this diocese, it’s part of your ‘job description’, so to speak”.

And let’s not forget that the missal, whether OF or EF, is always being “revised” to incorporate new propers and other prayers for newly canonized saints, as well as other changes to the liturgical calendar. Protocols for the EF were recently revised to accommodate new saints, to address the situation of the EF missal having been basically “frozen in 1962”.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

As @fauken rightly points out, the disciplines instituted by one pope are not binding on another. This is because subsequent popes are equals to their predecessors - with equal “binding and loosing” authority. Theoretically a future pope could completely abrogate the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite and replace it with the Extraordinary Form.

Another thing to consider is the authority of the document itself. Papal Bulls rank fairly low, authoritatively, among papal documents. If memory serves me correctly, they’re typically used to comment on disciplinary matters. Encyclicals, by contrast, are typically used to comment on dogmatic matters, or to speak in a more authoritative way on current events.

Finally, there’s the point of history. As others have mentioned, the Extraordinary Form of today isn’t the “Tridentine Mass” of the 1570s. There have been numerous changes, revisions, removals, and the like in the Extraordinary Form since its missal was first abrogated.

 

[pnewton]

Was Quo Primum Ever Abrogated? If not, wouldn’t that mean that it still applies?

No, it does not mean it still applies. Disciplines that a pope gives in his life time do not have to be formally abrogated. No pope can bind a subsequent pope in matters of discipline.

 

[ZoomerVince]

I asked if it would still apply because I’ve been told that it was never abrogated. If it isn’t abrogated, then therefore it is still in effect. I’m presume for the sake of the argument that a Pope cannot bind another Pope (which I don’t even necessarily believe, but that’s not what I’m talking about). The Roman Missal has undergone changes since Quo Primum, I’m not denying that, but per Quo Primum, a new missal cannot be instituted.

 

[ZoomerVince]

If Quo Primum hadn’t ever been abrogated, then it would still be in place. Correct? That’s the question I’m asking.

I don’t know how that percolates down to the hypothetical scenario of a recalcitrant diocesan priest who attempts to play this trump card, and tell his bishop, “no, I’m not celebrating the OF, when I say Mass, it will always be the EF”. Just using my mother wit and sensus catholicus (such as it is), I would say that the obedience to his bishop, which he promised at the time of his ordination, would take priority — “yes, Father, that is true, you may always say the EF, but your ‘marching orders’ are, unless specified otherwise, where you have a congregation, to say the OF, because that’s what we do in this diocese, it’s part of your ‘job description’, so to speak”.

After Summorum Pontificum, all priests can say the Traditional Latin Mass, with or without approval of their bishop. So your understanding of even that is flawed, unless I’m misreading what you’re saying.

And let’s not forget that the missal, whether OF or EF, is always being “revised” to incorporate new propers and other prayers for newly canonized saints, as well as other changes to the liturgical calendar. Protocols for the EF were recently revised to accommodate new saints, to address the situation of the EF missal having been basically “frozen in 1962”.

There is a difference between revising a missal and instituting a new one.

 

[ZoomerVince]

As @fauken rightly points out, the disciplines instituted by one pope are not binding on another. This is because subsequent popes are equals to their predecessors - with equal “binding and loosing” authority. Theoretically a future pope could completely abrogate the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite and replace it with the Extraordinary Form.

I am presuming that a Pope has such authority. I’m asking if Quo Primum ever was abrogated in the first place. And if not, wouldn’t that mean that it is still in effect?

Finally, there’s the point of history. As others have mentioned, the Extraordinary Form of today isn’t the “Tridentine Mass” of the 1570s. There have been numerous changes, revisions, removals, and the like in the Extraordinary Form since its missal was first abrogated.

There is a difference between revising a Roman Missal and making a new one. And the 1962 Missal was never abrogated:

" It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy" (Pope Benedict XVI, Summorum Pontificum, 2007).