- Feb 5, 2002
- 167,601
- 56,844
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
In Archaeologism Part I, I demonstrated that Popes from 1786 to 1947 condemned the heretics projecting Protestant notions of liturgy onto the early Church under pretext of “archeology” or “Church history.” This modernist fad is also called “antiquarianism.” Realize first that Pope Pius XII basically warned the faithful not to believe the Holy Spirit was less active in guiding the Church of the Middle Ages than the Church of the Primitive Ages. Secondly, he wanted us to realize the Holy Spirit does not change His directives in liturgy or doctrine.
But on top of this, I personally believe the modernists executing “archaeologism” (saying the early Church had no complex rites, no complex rituals and no complex liturgies) really finds little to no support in Church history. Truly, those obsessed with “archaeologism” are not doing real archaeology. This article will help prove that.
First, an article at Voice of the Familyreveals that “the Tridentine Mass” was not really Tridentine in its genesis at all. In other words, it is much older than the 16th century. The “Tridentine Mass” was truly the Mass of the early Church in Rome. Of course, there were tiny additions every century from the first century until 1954. But there was never a generalized overhauling to the Roman Mass before the 1960s. In that article, you will see that the Novus Ordo is not like the early Roman Mass, but rather the Pistoiacization (see previous article of mine) of the Roman Rite. Keep in mind that it is the official history of Vatican II that the Novus Ordo was written by Bugnini (a freemason) who employed Protestants to help write it. (The Protestant influence on the new Mass is part of the public history of the Council.)
Continued below.
www.padreperegrino.org
But on top of this, I personally believe the modernists executing “archaeologism” (saying the early Church had no complex rites, no complex rituals and no complex liturgies) really finds little to no support in Church history. Truly, those obsessed with “archaeologism” are not doing real archaeology. This article will help prove that.
First, an article at Voice of the Familyreveals that “the Tridentine Mass” was not really Tridentine in its genesis at all. In other words, it is much older than the 16th century. The “Tridentine Mass” was truly the Mass of the early Church in Rome. Of course, there were tiny additions every century from the first century until 1954. But there was never a generalized overhauling to the Roman Mass before the 1960s. In that article, you will see that the Novus Ordo is not like the early Roman Mass, but rather the Pistoiacization (see previous article of mine) of the Roman Rite. Keep in mind that it is the official history of Vatican II that the Novus Ordo was written by Bugnini (a freemason) who employed Protestants to help write it. (The Protestant influence on the new Mass is part of the public history of the Council.)
Continued below.
Archaeologism Part II: Not Real Archeology
In Archaeologism Part I, I demonstrated that Popes from 1786 to 1947 condemned the heretics projecting Protestant notions of liturgy onto the early Church under pretext of "archeology" or "Church history." This modernist fad is also called "antiquarianism." Realize first that Pope Pius XII...
www.padreperegrino.org
