At the time, the efforts of King Mieszko and his Christian consort Dobrava Dlugosz, Annalium vestrorum Scriptorum, 2, 94 encouraged the spread of Christianity. Since then pious and devout Poles have continued the faithful practice of their new religion.
Is Quo Primum Merely Disciplinary? Father Kramer's remarks are timely in light of the fact that the current Cardinal Prefect of Quo primum Vatican's Ecclesia Dei earlier this year, admitted that the Tridentine Mass has never been abrogated and is perfectly licit, but the Vatican does not want to say this publicly because it fears reprisals from many of the world's bishops.
We cannot say it publicly. The nine-Cardinal Commission concluded: We have also published Quo primum complete text of Quo Primum with this issue. How do you respond to Catholics who claim that Quo Primum was a disciplinary decree and not infallible?
Therefore, the creation of the Novus Ordo liturgy was permissible.
Answer by Father Kramer: The first thing I would point outaccording to the approach that St. Thomas Aquinas used in his analysis in his various questionsis that the question is not sufficiently formulated. The claim that Quo Primum was a "disciplinary decree" strongly seems to suggest that it was entirely, essentially and merely a disciplinary decree and therefore, not infallible.
First of all, for the sake of argument, let us assume that it was something merely disciplinary.
It would not follow logically, therefore, that the creation of the Novus Ordo was permissible. Because the Church's doctrine regarding liturgy is formulated in many pronouncementsinfallible pronouncementsbefore Quo Primum was ever issued.
It was the Council of Trent that solemnly declared anathemathat is, it is a heresyto say that any pastor in the Church, whosoever he may be, has the power to change the traditional rite into a new rite. This is found in Session 7 Canon 13 on the "Sacraments in General: Then they invoked the wrath of God upon themselves if they should dare to change it or allow anyone to change it.
This is the faith. Therefore, the creation of the Novus Ordo is contrary to the defined dogma of the faith, contrary to the faith solemnly professed in the profession of the Popes, contrary to the Tridentine Profession of Faith.
We cannot say that Quo Primum is merely a disciplinary decree. It is disciplinary, of course, it refers to discipline. But it is a disciplinary decree based on dogma. It is rooted in dogma and therefore, it has a much greater force than something merely disciplinary. It has been perpetually the teaching of the Church that Catholics are bound to their customary rite.
That is why, in the controversy regarding Greek versus Roman rite, which was settled by the Council of Florence under Pope Eugene IV, the Council solemnly defined that the Greeks are to confect the Sacraments of the Eucharist according to their customary rite and therefore, they must use the leavened bread.
In the Roman Church they must follow their customary rite of their ritual church, which is the proper rite of the Roman Church. This is what the faith dictates and decrees.
That is why it has always been regarded as an act of schism if even a Pope were to attempt to change the rites, to alter the ceremonies of the liturgy. The Popes have solemnly professed for so many centuries that this is not within their power.
This is also taught by the official designated theologian of the Council of Basel [which eventually moved to Florence and became the Council of Florence].
This theologian, Cardinal Juan de Torquemada, was the theologian responsible in the formulation of the doctrines that were defined at Florence, as the one I mentioned earlier. Torquemada explains that if the Pope were to change the rites, or attempt to change the rites, he would be committing an act of schism.
Thus, regardless of Quo Primum, it had been a well established teaching of the Catholic Faith that the Roman rite cannot be trashed and replaced with a new rite.
To do so is contrary to the law of God as defined by the infallible Magisterium of the Church. Beyond that, however, when we look at Quo Primum, we see that Pope St.
Pius V refers to the Roman rite as that rite "which has been handed down in the Roman Church. The Tridentine Rite is the Roman Rite.
And just as it would be considered absolutely outrageous for anyone to try to impose a new rite [or even the Roman rite] on the Greek Church, likewise, it is an outrage for anyone to impose a new rite on the Roman Church. Ironically, even the Code of Canon Law upholds the right and the duty of Catholics to adhere to their customary rites.Quo Primum.
You are here: Home; Papal bull of Pope St. Pius V for the promulgation of the reformed and codified Missale Romanum on July 14, A Quo Primum. His Holiness Pope Benedict XIV Encyclical on Judaism in Poland June 14, To the Primate, Archbishops and Bishops, of the Kingdom of Poland.
Quo Primum is a solemn papal decree binding on the Church "in perpetuity" and condemning any whom would depart from it, as the pope indicated. First, in issuing the solemn decree, the pope is carrying out the decrees of a dogmatic council.
Quo Primum has been infallibly declared to be irreformable because the rite of Mass codified (canonized) in the Tridentine Missal is the ‘received and approved rite’ (the rite of Sacred Tradition) [Iniunctum nobis] of the Roman Church that has been ‘handed down by the Holy Roman Church’ (a sacrosancta Romana Ecclesia tradita) [Quo.
Indeed, Quo primum was a codification of around years of the Latin Rite’s customs in worshiping God, which were formulated as a counter-attack against Protestantism. From the time of Trent, almost years passed and enriched that same Tradition. Quo primum (from the first) is the incipit of an Apostolic constitution in the form of a papal bull issued by Pope Pius V on 14 July