Author Topic: Can the Papacy bind itself, Quo Primum  (Read 11600 times)

Offline Counter Revolutionary

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 157
  • Thanked: 176 times
    • Divine and Catholic Faith Blogspot
Re: Can the Papacy bind itself, Quo Primum
« Reply #135 on: August 11, 2019, 08:10:41 PM »
I know this topic is old, but it is interesting. I think the point Stubborn was trying to make is that future popes could have lawfully abrogated Quo Primum and substituted their own liturgical law. However, he was saying that this was not what Paul VI did. Instead Stubborm was saying that Paul VI created a new rite without first abrogating Quo Primum, which he says forbids establishing new rites. Therefore, according to Stubborn, Paul VI broke the law of a previous pope that Paul VI had the power to abrogate but Paul VI did not abrogate. I wish Jayne had responded to this point as it was the key point Stubborn was trying to get across. She stopped responding to his posts at the precise point he made his argument clear. I think the two were talking past each other.

I have my own thoughts and questions on the matter, but will refrain from expressing them in the hopes that either Jayne or Stubborn, if they are still around, will comment. If someone reads this and can contact either of them, please do so. Thank you.

There is a much stronger argument that can and has been made against the liciety of the new rite that makes Stubborn's argument hardly worthy of mention (no offense intended to Stubborn, whom I deeply respect).

Per a dogmatic definition made at Vatican I, we must believe as an article of faith that it is possible to know how God wants to be worshipped through divine revelation:

If anyone says that it is impossible, or not expedient, that human beings should be taught by means of divine revelation about God and the worship that should be shown him: let him be anathema. Vatican I, Third Session, Canon II on Revelation

Pope Leo XIII more than reiterated this truth when he wrote, "...for we are bound absolutely to worship God in that way which He has shown to be His will."

We know from the above statements that liturgy is not entirely a matter of mere Church discipline, for divine revelation correlates with dogma. Popes have the authority to change disciplines imposed by other popes, but no pope has the authority to change dogma, which is immutable by nature. It just so happens that one dogma defined at Trent explicitly forbids the creation of new rites for use in the solemn administration of the sacraments:

If any one shall say that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, accustomed to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be changed to other new ones by any pastor of the churches, whomsoever, let him be anathema. Session VII, Canon XIII on the Sacraments

Before the creation of the Novus Ordo, every single rite of Mass, Eastern and Roman, could be shown to be a development of an apostolic rite. They were all rites received from the apostles. No one could point to any of those rites and give a specific date as to when it was created, because all of the rites were of ancient origin. This is not the case with the Novus Ordo. The new rite was not received from anyone. It was a banal fabrication, an on-the-spot product. We know exactly when it was created and we know that no pastor, whomsoever, had the authority to create it. We know this because God Himself has revealed what rites are acceptable to Him (the received and approved ones) and which rites aren't (any new ones).

“Invincible ignorance is a punishment for sin.” - St. Thomas Aquinas (De Infid. q. x., art. 1.)
The following users thanked this post: Stubborn, Críostóir, Michael Wilson

Offline Stubborn

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1038
  • Thanked: 526 times
Re: Can the Papacy bind itself, Quo Primum
« Reply #136 on: August 13, 2019, 03:38:06 PM »
The thing that most folks do not seem to understand is that Pope St. Pius V did not invent a new rite, PPVI did that - which is clearly against the law of Quo Primum. It seems this should be crystal clear, but if not, all anyone needs to do is to read Quo Primum.

If one studies the liturgy of PPV, they will find that liturgy he codified, or organized into one Missal that he called the Missale Romanum was not a made up liturgy or an entirely "new rite", rather, it is comprised of the traditional prayers which were prayed at Mass since the Church's earliest times, some of these prayers date back to, and are directly from the Apostles.

People need to think of this subject the way it is. What is the way it is? It's like this:

Up until Trent, there was no actual or established Bible. Trent is the Council that decided out of all the possible books, the ones they decided on are the only ones that belong in the Bible - and said: "This is the Bible".

Pope Pius V did the same thing, only instead of the books that comprise the Bible, he did it with the prayers comprising the Liturgy, then said: "This is the Mass." 

But for the sake of unity in worship, belief, and in order to protect this liturgy forever, he even went a step further and put into place a separate law, Quo Primum, that made it a law of the Church that his liturgy, the liturgy he put in the Missale Romanum, is that Mass is to be the only Mass of the Roman Rite - forever. 

Now, can a pope use his supreme, albeit non-infallible authority, to make an entirely new Bible full of books, which btw, largely contradicts the Bible of Trent, impose it's use, and at the same time take steps to eliminate the real Bible from existence? Yes, he certainly can, there is nothing to stop him, nothing at all - but because doing so is clearly against the established law, pope or not, it was illegal for him to do what he did - and as such, the people had every right and even the duty, and should have wholly rejected it.

It works the same with the new mass of PPVI. There was nothing to stop him from inventing a new rite with a new mass, complete with a new, unedifying (to say the least) liturgy, new formulas within it and new doctrines and new, new, new, etc. ad nausem. There's a law against doing that. If all the people would simply have followed the (new) Trads in their wholesale rejection of the new "mass", the devil would have had to concoct some other crisis because the NO would have never even gotten off the ground.

At any rate, that is the way it is. A pope cannot legitimately invent and impose a new mass upon us, any more than he can legitimately invent and impose a new Bible upon us. If people would look at it this way, they would be much closer to  comparing apples to apples instead of whatever the thinking is they use to in an attempt to justify the new "mass" - that's just the way it is as I see it.
Even after a long life of sin, if the Christian receives the Sacrament of the dying with the appropriate dispositions, he will go straight to heaven without having to go to purgatory. - Fr. M. Philipon; This sacrament prepares man for glory immediately, since it is given to those who are departing from this life. - St. Thomas Aquinas; It washes away the sins that remain to be atoned, and the vestiges of sin; it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person, arousing in him a great trust and confidence in the divine mercy. Thus strengthened, he bears the hardships and struggles of his illness more easily and resists the temptation of the devil and the heel of the deceiver more readily; and if it be advantageous to the welfare of his soul, he sometimes regains his bodily health. - Council of Trent