Pope invokes ‘magisterial authority’ to declare liturgy changes ‘irreversible’
#21
(08-24-2017, 11:08 PM)Paul Wrote:
(08-24-2017, 10:19 PM)maldon Wrote: J Michael's question has me puzzled. The answers have me more puzzled.

Was Quo Primum an ex-cathedra declaration and therefore infallible?

Some say popes declarations are not binding on future popes.

But doesn't this mean that all ex-cathedra declarations can be overturned by future popes?

Or was Quo Primum not ex-cathedra, and if not, why not, as it seems very strongly worded. I would find it hard to find a papal declaration as strongly worded as what we see in Quo Primum.

I would appreciate some insight.

Quo primum was disciplinary, not doctrinal, and every Pope has the same authority as any other in binding and loosing in such matters. Infallibility is meant to preserve the truth of what God's revealed to us, and you can't have one Pope saying Mary was immaculately conceived and another Pope saying she wasn't. Or one Pope saying women can't be ordained because the Sacrament of Holy Orders doesn't work that way. If a later Pope says otherwise, then the previous Pope taught something wrong. But that doesn't apply to discipline, which the Popes can adjust based on the requirements of their times.

The strongest proof, though, that Quo primum doesn't bind future popes is that it was disregarded less than 50 years later by Clement VIII and Urban VIII, who made changes to the Missal - and even more so to the Breviary, which has a similar bull, Quod a nobis, with the same sort of strong wording. And that doesn't even get to Pius X, who completely changed the Psalter, the heart of the Breviary - one could compare it to adding new Eucharistic Prayers instead of the Canon. And he's not only a saint, but the patron saint of the group that started the whole traditional thing.

Popes can and have changed the liturgy, and regardless of what Pope Francis says, the next Pope could completely abolish every bit of the new liturgy. Not that I think that'll happen anytime soon.

Thank you Paul!
"The days have gone down in the West, behind the hills, into shadow." - Theoden, King.
Reply
#22
Here is a longer article with the original text:
Rorate Caeli: Francis ' We can affirm.....

The contradictions between Francis' declaration and 'Quo primum' are frightening. This might just be the most serious threat against the claim of papal infallibility in 2000 years of Catholic history. A Pope shouldn't be able to invoke the authority of the magisterium and proclaim something about which another Pope, also ex cathedra, said the following:

Quote:Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Would anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
"Cor Jesu Rex Et Centrum Omnium Cordium, miserére nobis "

“To pray is to shed blood.” - Silouan the Athonite
Reply
#23
If Quo Primum can be reformable, despite its express language not allowing for such, but the "pastoral" (nice trick) Sacrosanctum Concilium is now deemed irreformable, then these papal claimants are wildly succeeding at undermining any credibility of the Roman Church.  But that is not news to anyone who has been paying attention.

It is my suspicion that this has been exactly the intentions of these Modernists and the other freemasons; to undermine the Church's credibility, slice and dice liturgy and doctrine, devastate the Faith of the layman who is doing intellectual backflips trying to defend the Hierarchical claimants doing the damage, and slowly dissolve the Church institution into a neutralized social club, that no longer is a threat to the NWO and coming Antichrist.  

Either way, even if others do not share my doubts and suspicions of the vatican II papal claimants, it should nonetheless be translucently clear that the idea that the liturgy is the pope's (or a freemasonic liturgical "expert"'s) disciplinary plaything is demonstrably lethal to the well-being of the Church.
[-] The following 1 user Likes BC's post:
  • formerbuddhist
Reply
#24
(08-24-2017, 02:30 PM)Zedta Wrote: Quoting Pope Paul VI, the Argentine pontiff added that this process is still ongoing in part because reforming the liturgical books is not enough to “renew the mentality.”


If only the mentality can be fully "renewed" (when there are only a few people left in the pews) then, then will we finally have the fulfillment of Vatican II..

Destruction is Renewal

Was is Peace

Diversity is Strength
[-] The following 1 user Likes BC's post:
  • Miriam_M
Reply
#25
(08-25-2017, 12:30 PM)BC Wrote:
(08-24-2017, 02:30 PM)Zedta Wrote: Quoting Pope Paul VI, the Argentine pontiff added that this process is still ongoing in part because reforming the liturgical books is not enough to “renew the mentality.”


If only the mentality can be fully "renewed" (when there are only a few people left in the pews) then, then will we finally have the fulfillment of Vatican II..

Destruction is Renewal

Was is Peace

Diversity is Strength

I like your post, but where is it that the quote came from? I don't recall posting that. :huh:

Oh, I found it, it's in the article that I posted, not actually a quote of anything I wrote.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
  
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

All War is Deception
Gen. Sun

You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.
C.S. Lewis

Political Correctness is Fascism pretending to be manners.
George Carlin

“In a time of deceit…truth is a revolutionary act”
George Orwell
Reply
#26
The author of another good article I posted about the abuses of Vatican II has posted a good article that gives his take, rather nicely, on 'pope' Francis and his most recent utterances of his authority.


Link to article


Quote:What does Pope Francis mean by ‘irreversible’ liturgical reform?

By Phil Lawler
(bio - articles - email) | Aug 24, 2017
     
Liturgical reform is “irreversible,” Pope Francis says. If he means that history cannot be undone—we can’t rewind the tape—his point is beyond dispute. But surely he does not mean that we are stuck forever with the status quo.

It is noteworthy that in speaking on the liturgical reform, Pope Francis invoked his magisterial authority: something that he has been reluctant to do when he speaks on doctrinal matters. But it is also profoundly confusing. What does it mean to speak with magisterial authority about a process?

Insofar as he is saying that the Church is committed to the process that began with Vatican II (or actually, as he rightly observes, began much earlier and reached a watershed at the Council), he is only reinforcing what Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI taught us. The only real questions involve whether, and how, the process should continue.

Virtually every Catholic, from the crustiest traditionalist to the most iconoclastic radical, will agree that something should be done to the liturgy. Is there anyone satisfied with the current state of liturgical affairs in the Catholic Church? I doubt it. If you are reasonably happy with the liturgy in your own parish, you need only take a short trip—to another parish, another town, possibly another diocese—to experience something that you find appalling. So the process of reform should continue. But in what direction?

The success of liturgical reform, the Holy Father tells us, requires “time, faithful reception, practical obedience, wise implementation.” Surely by now, 50 years after the Council, we’ve had enough time. But faithful reception and practical obedience have been in short supply, at least in my experience.

Personally I am not a traditionalist. I love the Latin Mass, and attend it occasionally, but I do not seek it out. Ideally I would like to see the Ordinary Form enriched by adding some elements of the older ritual (and vice versa), as Pope Benedict and Cardinal Sarah have recommended. But for now I would be content to worship regularly in a parish where the liturgical norms of the Ordinary Form are followed faithfully, and Mass is celebrated with reverence. Yet in 50 years I have never lived in such a parish. In the healthiest parishes that I have found, some priests show a “practical obedience” to the liturgical norms; others improvise freely. So the norms really aren’t “norms” at all; they are something closer to aspirations.

(Pope Francis also says that the reformed liturgy must be the action of the people—that is should be “popular” rather than “clerical.” So can I safely assume that the Holy Father sympathizes with my plight? Would he agree that priests should not change the liturgy on their own initiative, to suit their own personal preferences?)

Pope Francis urges us to guard against “unfounded and superficial interpretations” of Vatican II teachings and “practices that disfigure” the Council’s vision. So our challenge today is to understand the Council’s teaching, in the light of a process that was already underway before Vatican II was convened.

In his address to Italy’s National Liturgical Week, Pope Francis reminded his audience that movement to reform the liturgy began with a commission created by St. Pius X, and continued with the encyclical Mediator Dei by Pope Pius XII. And that process is “irreversible,” he now definitively states. Those two Pontiffs blazed the trail, and we should still be following it. So if abuses have cropped up—liturgical novelties that “reverse” the direction set by Mediator Dei,” say, or practices that are demonstrably counter to the instructions of Sacrosanctum Concilium, they should be treated as aberrations and rooted out.

Pope Francis is notoriously unsympathetic to calls for the “reform of the reform.” But the logic of his August 24 speech points unavoidably in that direction. If we have not yet achieved the goals of the reform, and those goals were established more than 100 years ago when the process began, we need to examine where, how, and why things have gone awry.



[Image: 6_th.png]Phil Lawler has been a Catholic journalist for more than 30 years. He has edited several Catholic magazines and written eight books. Founder of Catholic World News, he is the news director and lead analyst at CatholicCulture.org. See full bio.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
  
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

All War is Deception
Gen. Sun

You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.
C.S. Lewis

Political Correctness is Fascism pretending to be manners.
George Carlin

“In a time of deceit…truth is a revolutionary act”
George Orwell
Reply
#27
(08-25-2017, 12:09 PM)BC Wrote: If Quo Primum can be reformable, despite its express language not allowing for such, but the "pastoral" (nice trick) Sacrosanctum Concilium is now deemed irreformable, then these papal claimants are wildly succeeding at undermining any credibility of the Roman Church.  But that is not news to anyone who has been paying attention.

It is my suspicion that this has been exactly the intentions of these Modernists and the other freemasons; to undermine the Church's credibility, slice and dice liturgy and doctrine, devastate the Faith of the layman who is doing intellectual backflips trying to defend the Hierarchical claimants doing the damage, and slowly dissolve the Church institution into a neutralized social club, that no longer is a threat to the NWO and coming Antichrist.  

Either way, even if others do not share my doubts and suspicions of the vatican II papal claimants, it should nonetheless be translucently clear that the idea that the liturgy is the pope's (or a freemasonic liturgical "expert"'s) disciplinary plaything is demonstrably lethal to the well-being of the Church.
If I understand things correctly Pius XII in Mediator Dei  actually did put the pope as final arbiter of the liturgy, thereby turning Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi on its head.  

Geoffery Hull in his book"The Banished Heart, and the Rad trad in his blog by the same name go into this.
Walk before God in simplicity, and not in subtleties of the mind. Simplicity brings faith; but subtle and intricate speculations bring conceit; and conceit brings withdrawal from God. -Saint Isaac of Syria, Directions on Spiritual Training


"It is impossible in human terms to exaggerate the importance of being in a church or chapel before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. I very seldom repeat what I say. Let me repeat this sentence. It is impossible in human language to exaggerate the importance of being in a chapel or church before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. That sentence is the talisman of the highest sanctity. "Father John Hardon
Reply
#28
(08-25-2017, 09:20 AM)JosefSilouan Wrote: A Pope shouldn't be able to invoke the authority of the magisterium and proclaim something about which another Pope, also ex cathedra, said the following:

Quote:Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Would anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
As has been pointed out over and over on this forum, and as Paul has pointed out in this very thread, Quo Primum was not, is not, and cannot be 'ex cathedra' or infallible since it is disciplinary. It was disregarded within 50 years of its issuance. The charism of infallibility applies only to matters of Faith and Morals, not disciplinary matters.

If you claim infallibility for disciplinary decrees, it creates all sorts of problems. For instance, one of the early Ecumenical Councils forbade kneeling on Sundays. OOPS!
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • JosefSilouan
Reply
#29
Quote:Pope St Pius V, Quod a nobis:

Omni itaque alio usu quibuslibet, ut dictum est, interdicto, hoc Nostrum Breviarium, ac precandi psallendique formulam in omnibus universi orbis Ecclesiis, Monasteriis, Ordinibus, et locis etiam exemptis, in quibus Officium ex more et ritu dictæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ dici debet, aut consuevit, salva prædicta institutione, vel consuetudine prædictos ducentos annos superante, præcipimus observari: Statuentes Breviarium ipsum nullo umquam tempore vel totum, vel ex parte mutandum, vel ei aliquid addendum, vel omnino detrahendum esse; ac quoscumque, qui Horas Canonicas ex more et ritu ipsius Romanæ Ecclesiæ, jure vel consuetudine dicere vel psallere debent, propositis poenis per Canonicas sanctiones constitutis in eos, qui divínum Officium quotidie non dixerint, ad dicendum et psallendum posthac in perpetuum Horas ipsas diurnas et nocturnas, ex hujus Romani Breviarii præscripto et ratione omnino teneri: neminemque ex iis, quibus hoc dicendi psallendique munus necessario impositum est, nisi hac sola formula satisfacere posse.

And all other use whatsoever, as was said, having been forbidden, We instruct this Our Breviary, and the formula of praying and singing the Psalms, to be observed in all the Churches, Monasteries, Orders, and places of the entire world even exempt, in which the Office must be said from the custom and rite of said Roman Church, or is accustomed to be, saving the aforesaid institution or custom of the aforesaid two hundred years survival: At no time may this Breviary be changed whether in whole or in part, or anything whatsoever added, or altogether removed; and those establishing it impose penalties, through constituted Canonical sanctions, on whomever, who ought to say the Canonical Hours or sing the Psalms by the manner and rite of the same Roman Church, by law or custom, does not say the divine Office daily, prescribed from this Roman Breviary, and whomever must say and sing the Psalms hereafter in perpetuity these diurnal and nocturnal Hours, must entirely keep it by this manner: no one among them, to whom the duty of saying and singing the Psalms is imposed, satisfies it except by this formula alone.

Quote:Pope St Pius V, Quod a nobis:

Nulli ergo omnino hominum liceat hanc paginæm Nostræ ablationis, abolitionis, permissionis, revocationis, jussionis, præcepti, statuti, indulti, mandati, decreti, relaxationis, cohortationis, prohibitionis, innodationis, et voluntatis infringere, vel ei ausu temerario contraire. Si quis autem hoc attentare præsumpserit, indignationem omnipotentis Dei, ac beatorum Petri et Pauli Apostolorum ejus se noverit incursurum.

Therefore it is permitted for no man at all to infringe, or to rashly oppose this notice of our removal, abolition, permission, revocation, command, precept, statute, indult, mandate, decree, relaxation, exhortation, prohibition, imposition, and will. And if anyone shall presume to attack this, let him know he will incur the anger of almighty God, and of Peter and Paul his Apostles.


Quote:Pope St Pius X, Divino afflatu:

Itaque, harum auctoritate litterarum, ante omnia Psalterii ordinem, qualis in Breviario Romano hodie est, abolemus ejusque usum, inde a Kalendis Januariis anni millesimi nongentesimi decimi tertii, omnino interdicimus. Ex ilto autem die in omnibus ecclesiis cleri sæcularis et regularis, in monasteriis, ordinibus, congregationibus, institutisque religiosorum ab omnibus et singulis, qui ex officio aut ex consuetudine Horas canonicas juxta Breviarium Romanum, a S. Pio V editum et a Clemente VIII, Urbano VIII, Leone XIII recognitum, persolvunt, novum Psalterii ordinem, qualem Nos cum suis Regulis et Rubricis approbavimus typisque Vaticanis vulgandum decrevimus, religiose observari jubemus. Simul vero poenas in jure statutas iis denuntiamus, qui suo officio persolvendi quotidie Horas canonicas defuerint; qui quidem sciant se tam gravi non satisfacturos officio, nisi Nostrum hunc Psalterii ordinem adhibeant.

In virtue of this letter, We therefore first of all abolish the order of the Psalter as it now exists in the Roman Breviary. We absolutely forbid its use after the Kalends of January of the year one thousand nine hundred thirteen. From that day forward, in all the churches of the secular and regular clergy, in the monasteries, orders, congregations, and religious institutes, each and every one, who by office or custom recite the canonical hours according to the Roman Breviary issued by Saint Pius V and revised by Clement VIII, Urban VIII and Leo XIII, We command the scrupulous observance of the Psalter according to the form We have approved and decreed to be published by the Vatican Printing Press. At the same time We confirm the penalties prescribed by law against all those who neglect their duty of reciting the canonical hours every day. Let such persons understand that they do not fulfil their serious obligation unless they use Our new arrangement of the Psalter.

Quote:Pope St Pius X, Divino afflatu:

Hæc vero edicimus, declaramus, sancimus, decernentes has Nostras litteras validas et efficaces semper esse ac fore; non obstantibus constitutionibus et ordinationibus apostolicis, generalibus et specialibus, ceterisve quibusvis in contrarium facientibus. Nulli ergo hominum liceat hanc paginam Nostræ abolitionis, revocationis, permissionis, jussionis, præcepti, statuti, indulti, mandati et voluntatis infringere, vel ei ausu temerario contraire. Si quis autem hoc attentare præsumpserit, indignationem omnipotentis Dei, ac beatorum Petri et Pauli, Apostolorum ejus, se noverit incursurum.

We publish, declare, sanction and decree that this Apostolic letter is and always shall he valid and effective, notwithstanding Apostolic constitutions and ordinances, general and special, or anything else to the contrary. Let no one, therefore, contemptuously ignore or boldly oppose Our abolition, revocation, permission, ordinance, precept, statute, indult, mandate and will. If any one does, let him know that he will incur the indignation of Almighty God and His Apostles, the Blessed Peter and Paul.

And both of these were printed in the Breviary from 1911 to 1960.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Paul's post:
  • formerbuddhist
Reply
#30
(08-25-2017, 02:25 AM)JosefSilouan Wrote: I think still no one answered JM's question:

Was Francis' declaration "ex cathedra" in form and content? Was he invoking infallibility?

If the answer is yes, and he is contradicting another infallible declaration, we have an even bigger problem than merely the liturgy. And if he is not contradicting another infallible declaration, his statement would be binding for all Catholics.

It's not an infallible declaration.  Standing up in front of a meeting of liturgists and talking in the manner he did does not meet the criteria of infallibility as understood by the Church.

That said, assuming arguendo that his statement is infallible, it's neither here nor there, as it doesn't say much. 

The pope is reported to have stated, "After this magisterial, and after this long journey, we can assert with certainty and magisterial authority that the liturgical reform is irreversible."

The "liturgical reform" has been going on since day 1 and will continue.  So what?

In the future, a pope could decide to abrogate the Roman missal promulgated in 1969 by Pope Paul VI in the interest of "liturgical reform," and the present pope's statement would be met.

It sounds very much like the 80 year old pope is attempting to bind his successors to something he prefers.  It won't work, any more than Pope Formosus bound Popes Stephen VI and Sergius III.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)