Ask a Question - or - Return to the Faith and Spirituality Forum Index

Question Title Posted By Question Date
Quo Primum joseph Friday, January 4, 2008

Question:

hello bro. ignatius.

i have a question bout the Quo Primum of pope pius v.

there are words written there like this "This ordinance applies henceforth, now and forevr.."

and that was about the Tridentine Mass...

he also wrote/decreed that no changes be made there in that Missal...etc

and i guess these words are often quoted by those schismatics who doesn't like and doesn't follow the vatican ii..

so how are we supposed to interpret these words in faithfulness to the teachings of pope pius v and of the vatican ii?

thank you in advance.



Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM

Dear Joseph:

When I was a young boy my father bought me a wrist watch. Within 24 hours I had broken it. He bought me another watch. Within a couple days it was knocked off my wrist when playing on the playground at school. It broke. My father said, "I am NEVER going to buy you a watch again."

Did he really mean "never". Would my father today, who is 77 not buy his 52 year old son a watch because he said NEVER 45 years ago?

We have all used hyperbole in our speech to make a point. Such hyperbole is not reserved for spontaneous verbal utterances, but is also used to make a point in formal writing.

The common language conventions of 500 years ago used hyperbole all the time. Jesus used hyperbole, the Apostles used hyperbole, and Saints have used hyperbole. Nearly everyone has used hyperbole to make a point.

The words of Pope Pius such as, "This ordinance applies henceforth, now and forever..." or that no changes are to be made in the Missal are hyperboles. Anyone with two brain cells in their head can understand this. Ultra-Traditionalist and schismatics do not understand.

There are three ways in which we KNOW that Pope Pius was exaggerating to make a point:

1) The Pope was facing the pressures of the Protestant revolution and the heresies it espoused. He was also having to deal with the scrupulous Ultra-Traditionalists of his time who were rebelling against the idea of promulgating the famous Tridentine Mass. To them the Tridentine Mass was a liberalization. Thus, it was important for the Pope to use the strongest language he could muster to make the point that, "Okay, kids, this is the way it is going to be, period. Case closed."

2) The use of hyperbole in the time of Pope Pius was VERY common and its use would be expected in a situation like this.

3) It is IMPOSSIBLE for Pope Pius to actually mean that the Mass and Missal could never change. The only thing that cannot change is infallible doctrine. The Tridentine Mass is NOT infallible doctrine no matter how much the idiot Ultra-traditionalist want to believe that it is.

The Mass can be, and has been, changed whenever the Church decides to change it. If it was true that liturgy can never change then we would be using Aramaic in our Masses and NOT Latin.

In order for something to be considered unchangeable it must be considered infallible. In order for something to be considered infallible it must meet ALL THREE of the following criteria...

1) be a matter of faith or morals

2) must apply to the WHOLE Church and not just to a part of it

3) must be declared specifically by (a) the "extraordinary Magisterium" (which means by the Pope, ex cathedra, or be specifically declared by the Bishops in ecumenical council with the ratification of the Pope) or )b) be a teaching continually affirmed throughout the ages by the ordinary Magisterium.


The Tridentine Mass fails this criteria. Even if we can say that the Tridentine Mass meets criteria 1, even if somehow the Pope or Bishops are idiots and try to assert criteria 3, the Tridentine Mass would still fail criteria 2. Why? Because the Tridentine Mass applies to the Latin Rite of the Church ONLY. It does not apply to any of the other 20 something Rites within the Church.

Since the Tridentine Mass does not apply to the WHOLE church it CANNOT, CANNOT, CANNOT be infallible and irreformable.

I often say to these people, "What part of the word CANNOT do you not understand?"

Bottomline: No liturgy is infallible and irreformable because no liturgy applies to the whole church. That being the case, it is not even eligible, by definition, to be considered as infallible and irreformable.

The Ultra-Traditionalist and schismatics suffer from three problems:

1) a personality disorder called Compulsive-Obsessive Personality Disorder (the religious version of this is called "scrupulosity")

2) lack of faith

3) profound spiritual immaturity and pride which leads them to disobedience (the primary marker of pride and the primary marker of someone who is NOT traditional -- The oldest TRADITION of the Church is OBEDIENCE).

In short, they need to see a psychiatrist, develop faith, and grow-up.

"The more we see failure in obedience, the stronger should be our suspicion of temptation." -- St. Teresa of Avila

"Lord, those are your best servants who wish to shape their life on Your answers rather than to shape your answers on their wishes." --St. Augustine

I hope this helps to understand the issues when you deal with those who claim to be "traditional" but are actually disobedient to the Church.

 

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary

 

 


Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below:
Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum.
Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum
Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum
Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum
Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum