
The Perpetual Authority
of the Latin Mass

Revisiting the Apostolic Constitution
Quo Primum
What part of
the word “Forever”
do we no longer understand?
On
the third day of April 1969
the temporal concept of “forever” was astonishingly and
arbitrarily quantified by Pope Paul VI — much to the perplexity
of historians and physicists — as 399 years —or to be precise,
399 years, 9 months, and 11 days.
On that day Pope Paul tampered with time and eternity by
expurgating or otherwise expunging the ancient Latin rite of the
Mass known as Quo Primum — which unambiguously states that
“this present Constitution … will be valid henceforth, now,
and forever” — and replacing it, by a tour de force,
with his own Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, otherwise
known as the Novus Ordo, or “The New Mass.”
This does not mean, of course, that Pope Paul VI explicitly
stated that:
“Henceforth the word and the concept of “forever” — now — as of
this
third day of April 1969 — only means 399 years, 9 months, and 11
days.”
However — and this is vital to understand — it is the inescapable
logical consequence of replacing the Roman Missal of the
Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum (Missale Romanum ex
decreto Sacrosancti Concilii Tridentini restitutum) of 1570
with the Novus Ordo Missae (New Order Mass) on April 3, 1969
— for the Missale Romanum unambiguously and repeatedly states
that the Latin Mass (as we have come to call it) is, and always
will be, the only valid Mass, and as such irreformable, incapable
of being altered, modified, or changed in any way by any person
whomsoever — “henceforth, now, and forever”.
Pretty clear, yes?
But this unalterable Mass had, in fact, been
superseded by the Novus Ordo Missae (New Order Mass)
following Vatican II, despite the fact that Quo Primum was
to be in force “forever” and in no way “altered.” What was decreed
to remain both unalterable and forever … was neither,
following Vatican II.
We were left asking ourselves what, in fact, the word “forever”
had suddenly come to mean, together with all the ramifications of
this re-definition of a clearly understood concept. In other words,
if “forever” does not mean “for all time and into eternity” … what,
precisely does it mean?
If what is held to be “forever” is abrogated in its intension by
the introduction of something that re-defines it in such a way that
it is nullified. Why is that? Simply put, anything “other
than” our understanding of the intensionality of “forever”
eo ipso nullifies it, for it must be less and
cannot be greater than “forever” as we had always understood
the concept “forever”— and what is less is already understood
in other temporal terms, in which case the re-definition
of “forever” becomes merely redundant of other and already existing
temporal concepts such as “now,” “past,” “present,” and “future.”
In other words, if “forever” is in any way abbreviated to something
less, then it is determinate and if it is determinate, it is quantifiable.
In the present case it is reduced to 399 years, 9 months, and 11
days, or the period between Quo Primum (the Latin Mass) in
1570 and its being superseded by Missale Romanum (Mass in
the vernacular) in 1969. What was deemed as binding “forever” in
1570 and the following 400 years was breached by something new (novus)
and different in 1969. But how is this possible if what was binding
“now, henceforth, and forever” in 1570 was replaced in 1969? How
could “forever” come to mean, “only in force for 400 years — after
which it is susceptible to being abrogated”? Logically such a breach
cannot occur without somehow re-defining the concept of “forever”.
But this is fraught with inconsistencies and contradictions that
make any effort of the sort possible.
Consider the following verse: “I am the living bread that came down
out of Heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he shall live forever”
(St. John 6.51) What do we understand by this? That those who “eat
of this bread” shall live for 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days?
Of course not. We understand that they shall live forever,
which is to say, for all time into eternity. The word “forever”
or “for ever” occurs 472 times in Holy Scripture and it is always
spoken of or understood in terms of limitless perpetuity, e.g. “for
his mercy endureth forever.” (Ps. 135.20) By what possible
warrant can we understand God’s mercy as enduring for a finite quantum
of time, say, 160 years, 6 months and two days? In other words,
how do we quantify forever? We cannot. It is not a quantifiable
sum.
When Saint Paul says of Christ: “Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today;
and the same forever”, how are we to hold “yesterday” as meaning,
“the day before this present day”, and “today” as “this present
day” — but “forever” as meaning “399 years, 9 months, and 11 days”?
After that limited duration of time does Christ become something
different? Why did Saint Paul not say “Jesus Christ, yesterday,
and today; and for 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days”?
In other words, does the word “forever” in Sacred Scripture,
and in ordinary discourse, mean something different than it
meant in Quo Primum, and if it does, why just Quo Primum?
If we re-define the concept of “forever” it must apply to
each and every iteration of it, wherever it occurs, sacred
or profane. Are we prepared to do this? Is it even logically possible?
In a word, no.
Moreover, we must then ask, what then is the periodicity
of the concept “forever” once it acquires a terminus, an end — and
what is more, and of far greater importance, what lies beyond
it? If it is merely the most extensive temporal concept
in an array of other lesser, but equally determinate temporal concepts,
then its durability is finite — notwithstanding that the notion
of time itself is indefinite (for being discretely,
and however arbitrarily enumerated, it is at least conceptually
infinite by mere addition).
As Saint Augustine pointed out in broaching the concept of eternity
(in which there is no time as we understand it) it is pointless
to ask “what preceded eternity?” for the notion of precedence
is itself a temporal notion, and to ask “what preceded eternity?”
(in which there is no time) is to ask “what preceded time before
there was no time.” We are now asking, “what succeeds forever
when “forever” as a determinate time frame expires?” What do we
call it? Can we concatenate a series of “forevers” indefinitely?
And if we do, what shall we call it? Forever? We cannot — for “forever”,
as we had said, has become a determinate time frame following
the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum of Vatican II.
Perhaps you begin to see the inconsistency, the absurdity really,
of tampering with the notion of “forever”.
Even if we argue that the Pope has the authority and the ability
to re-define and abbreviate the notion of “forever”
by invoking Christ’s pronouncement to Saint Peter: “Whatever you
bind on earth is bound in Heaven” (St. Mat. 18.18), we still
have not circumvented the problem. Heaven itself is the paradigm
par excellence of “forever” (and so, too, is Hell). Time
and logic are not in the arena of “Faith and Morals” in which alone
the Pope is competent and infallible. (Nor, incidentally is economics).
Even if a pope repeals a former pope’s Apostolic Constitution,
he cannot repeal logic nor re-define the intensionality of a concept,
in this case “forever”. To say that St. Pius V did not “intend”
to use “forever” in the way we, and all our predecessors understood
it, is absolutely without warrant or justification.
1 He meant that The Apostolic Constitution
Quo Primum would be binding forever. If not, why the
severest admonition at the end of Quo Primum:
“Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of
Our permission, statute, ordinance, command,
precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition.
Should anyone dare to contravene it, know
that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed
Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Consider the
Force, Extent, Clarity, and Emphasis
on absolute Perpetuity in the following twelve excerpts
from Quo Primum:
-
“It is most becoming that there
be in the Church only one appropriate manner of reciting the
Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass”
-
“This ordinance applies henceforth,
now, and forever”
-
“This new rite alone is to be
used”
-
“This Missal is to be used by
all churches, even by those which in their authorization are
made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege,
or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See,
or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any
other manner whatsoever.”
-
“This present Constitution, which
will be valid henceforth, now, and forever”
-
“Nothing must be added to Our
recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything
whatsoever be changed within it”
-
“We order them in virtue of holy
obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite
and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us”
-
“They must not in celebrating
Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers
other than those contained in this Missal”
-
“This Missal is hereafter to be
followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear
of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely
and lawfully be used.”
-
“This present document cannot
be revoked or modified, but remains always valid and retain
its full force”
-
“The Missal [must] be preserved
incorrupt throughout the whole world and kept free of flaws
and errors”
-
“Therefore, no one whosoever is
permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance,
command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree,
and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, know that
he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles
Peter and Paul.”
Since Vatican II, however, “forever,” it appears, has a terminus
after all ... and does not mean ... well ... forever … at least
in the reinterpreted and novel concept of time enunciated by Pope
Paul VI in his Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum — which
abolished, or more properly expurgated the notion of “forever”
to accommodate changes that could not be reconciled with that concept.
Quo Primum leaves absolutely no room for ambiguity as you
will see in the document itself which accompanies this article.
If the proposal on the table is in open conflict with the concept
of “forever,” then one must go: the proposal or “forever.”
Paul VI opted for the latter. It must either be redefined or abolished.
He did both.
From a purely philosophical point of view, this quantification of
the temporal category that we understand as “forever” poses not
simply significant, but insuperable problems in any discussion concerning
the nature of any conceivable temporal discourse. Let us look at
a few instances.
If “forever” does not mean "uninterrupted continuity without end",
then by that same logic it simultaneously and necessarily abrogates
every other temporal permutation:
-
“Never” does not mean “at no time” — either in the past, the
present or the future.
-
“Now” does not mean “at this moment or in this present time”
-
“Before” no longer means “preceding or anteceding the present”
-
“Past”
we no longer understand as “what had preceded the present”
Altering the connotation or intension of any of these five categories
(forever, never, now, before, past — but especially “forever”),
not simply alters, but abolishes the connotation or meaning of each
and all of them.
Consider the following diametric concepts pertaining to time
which — if “forever no longer means “absolute perpetuity”
— no longer connote, or mean, what we had erstwhile understood
them to mean in the temporal ordering of any state of affairs:
-
Forever / never (periodicity)
-
Now / before or after
-
Present / past, future, soon
-
Early / late
-
Old / new
-
Modern / ancient
-
First / last, second, third, etc. (i.e. a series) — also, minute,
hour, day, week, month, year, decade, century, millennium, etc.
-
Eternal / temporal
As we see, quite a bit follows from “forever” no longer being understood
as forever but rather, as 399 years at which time “forever” expires.
We must understand that the term “forever” subsumes all the temporal
categories and inflections under it, all of which are determinate
and finite extensions of time relative only to “forever” (for all
time and into eternity) which had erstwhile been understood as indefinite
and indeterminate — as so many parts, or segments, if you will,
of an infinitely extensive concept (forever) that is indeterminate
by definition.
In a word, if “forever” is arbitrarily determined as a finite quantum,
all that it subsumed beneath it and understood relative to it is
also susceptible to arbitrary determination and we can no longer
coherently enter into temporal discourse of any kind that presumes
to bind any state of affairs to a determinate referent in time.
A week, or month, for example, is only what we arbitrarily understand
it to be according to our purpose at hand.
The implications of “implicitly” redefining the temporal
concept of “forever” are enormous. Think of it. They pertain, according
to the canons of reason, not only to the simplest geometric concept
of a line (“A line has only one dimension: length. It continues
forever in two directions.”), but to the trajectory, and ultimately,
the destiny of the human soul according to the most fundamental
notions of Christian doctrine: the eternity of God and the immortality
of the soul.
“Now” as 3-minutes-27-seconds
Let us look
at this more closely. If, by a pure fiat, we are no longer to understand
“now" as “the present moment", but a duration of “3 minutes and
27 seconds” — what follows? Indeed, can we even ask the question,
“what follows?” since “following” is a temporal concept
meaning “occurring after the present moment, or “now.”
What happened in the intervening “3-minutes-27-seconds”?
How do we understand that 3-minutes-27-seconds vacuum? We cannot
say that it did not exist, or that what occurred within it did not
occur — nor is it possible that nothing occurred within it.
Such an assertion accords with neither reason nor experience. In
the 3-minutes-27-seconds that intervenes between the present now
and the next now (3-minutes-27-seconds later) what do we say of
what we did or what had happened in that time frame?
Whatever it was, it did not occur in a “now", but in the hiatus
between 2 successive 3-minute-27-seconds “nows”.
When then did it occur? We do not have the apparatus to determine
this, for we have created a false and illogical time narrative that
involves not just inconsistencies but contradictions. By interjecting
3-minutes-27-seconds between successive “nows” we have superseded
the model of time and, of course, of the notion of a clock which
was ticking between, and enumerating those 3-minutes-27-second
“nows”.
“Before”
as 2-minutes-17-seconds
What logically
holds true for the concept “now” equally holds true for every other
category of re-interpreted time. If, for example, we reinterpret
“before” as preceding “now” by 2-minutes-17-seconds, we face the
same conundrum. It devolves through every other permutation of
re-interpreted time until we can have no coherent discourse
or discussion involving temporal characteristics. This is to say
that we cannot have a discussion in which anything is spoken, for
“spoken” is the past tense of the present tense “speak”.
In a word, all discourse is inescapably temporal: it occurs or
had occurred or will occur.
We cannot say a lot in 2-minutes-17-seconds which, by this reasoning,
would qualify it as speaking “now”. Moreover, when the 2-minutes-17-seconds
are up, how are they differentiated from the “following” or “previous”
2-minutes-17-seconds? Is there a hiatus between the “previous” 2-minutes-17-seconds
and the “following” 2-minutes-17-seconds? What is its duration?
And what can — for something must — occur within it? How then, shall
we speak of it?
Once specific determinacy is predicated of temporal concepts,
they lose all coherence.
You may say, “Well, a clock enumerates 60 seconds for each minute
and 60 minutes for each hour, and so on — so there is a specific
and determinate time frame.” Yes … for atomic clocks and the like
(which are arbitrarily and artificially divided to begin with —
why, for example, 60 seconds for a minute and not 136, and what
is the specific duration of a second that is not
already arbitrarily based on the present caesium model:
“The ‘second’ is the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation
corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels
of the ground state of the Caesium-133 atom.”
2
Would the
same numeric values hold true if the model were based on barium?
In other words, this may hold true for certain atomic clocks, but
not for concepts.
Quo Primum
and the indefeasible Concept of “Forever”
All this
has been a rather long and roundabout way of demonstrating the most
important fact that pertains to Catholics: that “forever” as it
pertains to time is not a finite quantum, but means, as it has always
meant, and will always be understood to mean: “uninterrupted continuity
without end.” This pertains to Heaven and it pertains to Hell. Therefore,
it intrinsically pertains to Christian Doctrine. If either Heaven
or Hell are merely 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days, the question
naturally arises: what happens after that? As we see, we cannot
escape the notion of “forever” without logical inconsistency — and
if Quo Primum states “forever” concerning the way
we celebrate Mass, it was a definitive, unambiguous, and unimpeachable
statement that clarified, once and for all, the manner in which
the Mass was, is, and always will be celebrated — forever.
Even popes cannot change the nature of time and the consistency
of logic. Quo Primum and the traditional Latin Mass prior
to its enervation (or evisceration: you choose, for both apply)
following Vatican II, remains binding upon all Catholics
(read Quo primum which follows) — forever. It is inescapable.
Pope Saint Pius V forever bound every successor
to the Chair of Peter to it, together with every Catholic.
The extremely frightening question that follows is ineluctable:
what does this mean concerning the validity of virtually every Mass
“celebrated” since Vatican II? If we can prescind from an
authentic Apostolic Constitution that binds us forever
to the Mass as it was celebrated prior to 1962, from what else
are we prepared to illicitly dispense with in the way of the Deposit
of the Faith and authentic historical Catholic dogma? We
already see it unfolding before us, especially under the papacy
of Francis among those who deplore a “throw away culture” but appear
to embrace a “throw away” Church.
Somewhere in every part of the world the authentic Latin Mass is
being celebrated; many under conditions similar to the underground
Church in China, and the only difference is that those who police
and brutally suppress these recalcitrant congregations outside of
atheistic China are the heavy-handed bishops of the Church itself
— many of whom appear to have lost the Faith — but not the comfort
and perquisites of their office.
____________________________
1
Despite the purely conjectural assertion by apologists such as Likoudis
and Whitehead that, "Quo Primum [was] … not attempting to fix one
particular version of the Roman Missal for all time.” And that “the
‘Tridentine Mass’ and the ‘New Order of the Mass’ constitute different
versions of the same Missal” — they do not even upon the most cursory
reading of both. The Pope, the Council, and the Mass: Answers
to Questions the Traditionalists Have Asked, 1981 and 2006, Emmaus
Road Publishing
2
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-does-one-arrive-at-th/
“The second is the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation
corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels
of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom.”
Geoffrey
K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
What
“FOREVER”
really means:
The Apostolic Constitution
“Quo Primum”

“From
the very first, upon
Our elevation to the chief Apostleship, We gladly turned our
mind and energies and directed all out thoughts to those matters
which concerned the preservation of a pure liturgy, and We strove
with God's help, by every means in our power, to accomplish
this purpose. For, besides other decrees of the sacred Council
of Trent, there were stipulations for Us to revise and re-edit
the sacred books: the Catechism, the Missal and the Breviary.
With the Catechism published for the instruction of the faithful,
by God's help, and the Breviary thoroughly revised for the worthy
praise of God, in order that the Missal and Breviary may be
in perfect harmony, as fitting and proper —
for it is most becoming
that there be in the Church only one appropriate manner of reciting
the Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass
— We deemed it necessary
to give our immediate attention to what still remained to be
done, viz, the re-editing of the Missal as soon as possible.
Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of
our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with
the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable,
preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these
men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning
the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal
itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers.
When this work has been gone over numerous times and further
emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that
the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible,
so that all might enjoy the fruits of this labor; and thus,
priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and
ceremonies they were required to observe from now on in the
celebration of Masses.
Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed
down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the
other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according
to any other formula than that of this Missal published
by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and
forever,
throughout all the provinces of the Christian world, to
all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and parish churches,
be they secular or religious, both of men and of women — even
of military orders — and of churches or chapels without a specific
congregation in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir
or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the
Roman Church. This Missal is to be used by all churches,
even by those which in their authorization are made exempt,
whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if
by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their
rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner
whatsoever.
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.
We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator,
and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they
may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or
possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order
them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass
according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down
by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard
all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient,
which they have customarily followed; and they must not in
celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite
any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.
Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of
Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity
that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church
whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely,
without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty,
judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used.
Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other
secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated,
obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by
Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is
forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that
this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remains
always valid and retain its full force
notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the
Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or
edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding
the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established
by long and immemorial prescription — except, however, if more
than two hundred years’ standing.
It is Our will, therefore, and by the same authority, We
decree that, after We publish this constitution and the edition
of the Missal, the priests of the Roman Curia are, after thirty
days, obliged to chant or read the Mass according to it; all
others south of the Alps, after three months; and those beyond
the Alps either within six months or whenever the Missal is
available for sale. Wherefore, in order that the Missal be
preserved incorrupt throughout the whole world and kept free
of flaws and errors, the penalty for nonobservance for printers,
whether mediately or immediately subject to Our dominion, and
that of the Holy Roman Church, will be the forfeiting of their
books and a fine of one hundred gold ducats, payable ipso facto
to the Apostolic Treasury. Further, as for those located in
other parts of the world, the penalty is excommunication
latae sententiae, and such other penalties as may in Our
judgment be imposed; and We decree by this law that they must
not dare or presume either to print or to publish or to sell,
or in any way to accept books of this nature without Our approval
and consent, or without the express consent of the Apostolic
Commissaries of those places, who will be appointed by Us. Said
printer must receive a standard Missal and agree faithfully
with it and in no wise vary from the Roman Missal of the large
type (secundum magnum impressionem).
Accordingly, since it would be difficult for this present
pronouncement to be sent to all parts of the Christian world
and simultaneously come to light everywhere, We direct that
it be, as usual, posted and published at the doors of the Basilica
of the Prince of the Apostles, also at the Apostolic Chancery,
and on the street at Campo Flora; furthermore, We direct that
printed copies of this same edict signed by a notary public
and made official by an ecclesiastical dignitary possess the
same indubitable validity everywhere and in every nation, as
if Our manuscript were shown there.
Therefore,
no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission,
statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration,
will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene
it, know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of
the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Pope Pius V
Pius
Episcopus
Servant of the Servants of God
Ad Perpetuam Rei Memoriam *
Given at St. Peter’s in the year of the Lord’s Incarnation,
1570, on the 14th of July of the Fifth year of Our Pontificate.
________________________
* Ad Perpetuam
Rei Memoriam: The document is a trustworthy and permanent
record of fact to be kept in everlasting remembrance.
Printable PDF Version

Totally
Faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith
entrusted to the Holy See in Rome
“Scio
opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti
verbum Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum”
“I
know your works ... that you have but little power,
and yet you have kept My word, and have not denied My
Name.”
(Apocalypse 3.8)
Copyright © 2004 - 2025
Boston Catholic Journal. All rights reserved. Unless
otherwise stated, permission is granted by the Boston
Catholic Journal for the copying and distribution of
the articles and audio files under the following conditions:
No additions, deletions, or changes are to be made to
the text or audio files in any way, and the copies may
not be sold for a profit. In the reproduction, in any
format of any image, graphic, text, or audio file, attribution
must be given to the Boston Catholic Journal.
|
|