Replies

Are you claiming that this document binds all Popes for all generations liturgically?
Nope. I'm just stating that St. Pius said that the codified Mass at his time could not be forbidden in the future to any priest wishing to celebrate it.

Then you are indeed claiming that the document binds all Popes for all generations liturgically. If the Pope can’t forbid the use of a particular liturgy, then he is bound, is he not?

In answer to your question then, I stand with Pope St. Pius V, and with the Popes who followed him, but I most certainly do not stand with you or your incorrect interpretation of his words any more than I stand with a Lutheran and his incorrect interpretation of the Bible.

patent +AMDG

The Pope (this one, JPII) must indeed consider himself "bound" by this, because he has NOT forbidden the Tridentine liturgy and in fact has ordered that it be made available as requested and that priests not be forbidden to celebrate it.

The fact that this is not done is because the Modernist bishops forbid it and, in so doing, are disobeying not only St. Pius but JPII.

but I most certainly do not stand with you or your incorrect interpretation of his words any more than I stand with a Lutheran and his incorrect interpretation of the Bible.

I don't dare interpret St. Pius' Bull. I take it at face value.

Let the Lutherans practice YOPIUS and you neo's go ahead a practice YOPIUT(the "T" is for Tradition).

Oh, but you do stand with the Lutherans. All the time. They have inspired the Novus Ordo Mass which supports their Protestant theological perspective.

As for Quo Primum, it has never been officially abrogated. Priests are nevertheless routinely punished, for daring to say the traditional Mass. This is an injustice of the first order--never rectified by those who rule the present madhouse.

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

<> I'm a little confused here. A Pope Pius could command obedience to a New Rite, but a Pope Paul can't? Doesn't that make the prior Pope more powerful than suceeding Popes and doesn't that render nugatory the Infallible Dogma of the Papal Power?