Changes to EF of the Mass?

[OraLabora]

Are we more worried about what people want than what God wants?

Do you claim to know what God wants?

I’m aware or the translation issue, in fact I mentioned it in my post. The translation in French is correct. But my point was, it was specifically mentioned in the missal as being allowed.

 

[CatholicSooner]

I don’t claim to know what God wants. But the switch to facing the people seems to be about what the people want…which is really irrelevant…and yes, I know the irony of me posting about what I want.

 

[OldCAFMember]

OK???

Why does the GIRM talk about turning to face the people when the priest should already be facing the people supposedly?

I don’t understand the need to face the people. Are we more worried about what people want than what God wants?

There’s no need to answer incredulously, with multiple question marks. We are capable of understanding calm, rational discussion. You say that you are not looking to rile anyone up, and still trying to figure out your emotions, so please do control them during the discussion.

No one stated here that the priest must face the people. The question at hand was about when and how Mass facing the people came in. Please understand that I am an experienced MC for the EF Mass, and I believe that the only thing that I consider a bigger mistake than eliminating Latin was Mass versus populum. So I am sympathetic to your perspective. However, that does not blind me to the historical record, or its interpretation.

As has been stated here, beginning in the late 1940s, in Europe there were versus populum celebrations, and these increased very gradually through the fifties and early sixties. There is record of such celebrations in the early Church, and the expressed desire of the liturgical reformers was to return to patristic use. One can debate the frequency and circumstances of the early celebrations in this manner, and how desirable or necessary it is to attempt to repeat them. There was no actual requirement in the Roman Missal that the altar be attached to the wall, or that the priest face the altar, away from the people, but that had become the normal method of celebration over many centuries. But as versus populum celebrations were growing in frequency in Europe and even America, the 1962 missal recognized this by including the diagram above, about incensing a freestanding altar. There certainly was no requirement to do so, but the inclusion was a recognition that it was starting to occur more frequently.

As has been stated, the Instruction on the Sacred Liturgy in 1964 states that is it desirable that new altars be constructed in a free-standing style, so that Mass may be celebrated facing the people. There is still no mandate there, but now this style of altar has been given much greater prominence, even a recommendation, one might say. No where are table altars commanded to be placed in front of old high altars, and no renovations are ordered to obtain freee-standing altars. But again, encouragement was given.

The 1965 interim missal was never intended to be the final word on conciliar liturgical reforms. In fact, when releasing the revised Order of Mass, St. Paul VI specifically stated that the Order was interim, until the entire missal is reformed. However, it is quite true that most people, parish priests included, were quite surprised by the reforms that followed between 1966-1973, especially the Canon of the Mass being said aloud, the release of additional eucharistic prayers, communion standing and eventually in the hand, EMHCs, etc. But the liturgical establishment had been pushing for these for decades, sad to say.

 

[twf]

As others have said, this already exists… there’s a very broad spectrum of licit approaches to the OF Mass.
At our cathedral, at the 11 AM Sunday Mass, there is always Latin, polyphony, chant, incense, beautiful vestments…even reception of communion kneeling at the altar rail (actually this is an option at all Masses at the cathedral - you either process up the centre aisle to receive standing or along either side to receive kneeling). Its up to the priest. You can have as many, or as little, of the “traditional trappings” as you want with the OF Mass.

 

[CatholicSooner]

I found this article to be helpful.
https://sanctamissa.org/en/spirituality/ten-years-of-the-motu-proprio.pdf

I like this quote

An average Christian without specialist liturgical formation would
find it difficult to distinguish between a Mass sung in Latin according
to the old Missal and a sung Latin Mass according to the new Missal.
However, the difference between a liturgy celebrated faithfully
according to the Missal of Paul VI and the reality of a vernacular
liturgy celebrated with all the freedom and creativity that are possible

• that difference can be enormous!

and this

The actual Constitution on the Liturgy does not speak at all about
celebration facing the altar or facing the people. On the subject of
language, it says that Latin should be retained, while giving a greater
place to the vernacular “above all in readings, instructions, and in a
certain number of prayers and chants” (SL 36:2).

 

[CatholicSooner]

CatholicSooner:

OK???

Why does the GIRM talk about turning to face the people when the priest should already be facing the people supposedly?

I don’t understand the need to face the people. Are we more worried about what people want than what God wants?

There’s no need to answer incredulously, with multiple question marks. We are capable of understanding calm, rational discussion. You say that you are not looking to rile anyone up, and still trying to figure out your emotions, so please do control them during the discussion.

yikes.
The question marks are simply to say I do not see your point.
I didn’t realize that three question marks was considered riled up. My apologies

 

[Exegete]

So having said all of that, it seems like there is a middle ground between the OF and EF of the mass. One that keeps the form and reverence and prayers of the EF but uses the vernacular.

The OF Mass is every but as reverent as the EF Mass.

 

[CatholicSooner]

The OF Mass is every but as reverent as the EF Mass.

I highly disagree. It’s not even close

 

[Exegete]

I highly disagree. It’s not even close

That’s your personal opinion.

The Catholic Church does not share it. No where does the Church make the claim that the EF Mass is more reverent than the OF Mass. In a word, that’s absurd.

 

[runningdude]

The EF is not going to be permitted in the vernacular. Any changes to it will be quite minor.

There is no prohibition on very reverent OF masses, you hljust gave you seek them out.

 

[Exegete]

EVERYTHING is structured in the EF mass. Every step and gesture is accounted for. Everything is ordered for a purpose and that purpose is to worship God.

There is a formal Order of the Mass for the OF Mass as well.

With the OF mass, you have a large laity participation in the actual mass.

Thanks be to God.

There are a lot of variables and freedom to the mass.

All which are pre-defined by the celebrant.

The music isn’t as reverent in most parishes.

This has nothing to do with the form of the Mass. Absolutely nothing.

From my brief experience with the EF mass, everybody in attendance is more reverent. From the priest, to the servers, to the congegration.

See above.

 

[CatholicSooner]

Well, I’m glad you like it so much.
When celebrated correctly, it is beautiful.
But most of the time, I find it to be very irreverent.
Maybe I’m just noticing things more with age. But I see EMHC dressed irreverently, priests in sandals, priests making jokes for the homily, priests taking photos with phone during the homily, songs that won’t glorify God, people in shorts and tshirts, talking in the sanctuary like they are unaware of what is in the tabernacle. I could go on and on.

And I would imagine if you took people that had never been to a Catholic mass before to each form and asked them which mass seemed more reverent…there would be a clear winner.

 

[Dovekin]

From my brief experience with the EF mass, everybody in attendance is more reverent. From the priest, to the servers, to the congregation.

This is one of the best results to come out of V2. When I was a child, a mass like the current EF was in no way reverent. People prayed the rosary during liturgical actions, rather than revering those actions. Gregorian chant was rare. I think you could go out for a smoke if you wanted. Prayer was analyzed into bits, so you had to be present at specific moments, but not between, before or after.

IOW reverence has nothing to do with the form of the mass. People can be irreverent anywhere they want, no matter what is going on: that is basically what irreverent means after all, not caring about what is going on.

Having said that, I have to question particular behaviors that seem to accompany the EF. Only because someone mentioned it, look at clapping. It is a way of expressing gratitude, appreciation for the efforts of others. Complaining about clapping, inwardly or outwardly, is an act of irreverence. I want things my way and if anybody does it differently I do not like it!

That critical attitude, where your own choices are better than other people’s, is not good for worship. People come to give thanks, so let them. God has brought them to the service, so let them worship. Even if it is not what you would have done, it probably comes out of their relationship with God.

 

[CatholicSooner]

CatholicSooner:

From my brief experience with the EF mass, everybody in attendance is more reverent. From the priest, to the servers, to the congregation.

This is one of the best results to come out of V2. When I was a child, a mass like the current EF was in no way reverent. People prayed the rosary during liturgical actions, rather than revering those actions. Gregorian chant was rare. I think you could go out for a smoke if you wanted. Prayer was analyzed into bits, so you had to be present at specific moments, but not between, before or after.

IOW reverence has nothing to do with the form of the mass. People can be irreverent anywhere they want, no matter what is going on: that is basically what irreverent means after all, not caring about what is going on.

Having said that, I have to question particular behaviors that seem to accompany the EF. Only because someone mentioned it, look at clapping. It is a way of expressing gratitude, appreciation for the efforts of others. Complaining about clapping, inwardly or outwardly, is an act of irreverence. I want things my way and if anybody does it differently I do not like it!

That critical attitude, where your own choices are better than other people’s, is not good for worship. People come to give thanks, so let them. God has brought them to the service, so let them worship. Even if it is not what you would have done, it probably comes out of their relationship with God.

Question…who is the clapping benefitting? Is it a form of worship? Is it directed at God?
If it isn’t to praise God, it doesn’t belong in the mass

Form does have a lot to do with reverence…atleast for those performing the sacrifice.

I do agree that V2 probably made the EF mass more reverent.

 

[Zach]

You are ok with clapping for the cantor or choir or organist between Communion and Concluding Rites? I have been experiencing this lately. We have just received Christ and our attention is directed away from Christ to applaud parishioners.

 

[OraLabora]

I highly disagree. It’s not even close

Yes it is. It can be celebrated just as reverently as the EF Mass, and I worship in a place where this is definitely the case.

EVERYTHING is structured in the EF mass. Every step and gesture is accounted for. Everything is ordered for a purpose and that purpose is to worship God.

Therein lies the problem with the EF. There is no doubt that if a priest is careless with the OF liturgy, he’d be just as careless with the EF if it suddenly became normative. And there would be far more rubrics to break.

With the OF mass, you have a large laity participation in the actual mass.

As was the case with the pre-Conciliar Dialogue Mass.

There are a lot of variables and freedom to the mass.

True there are licit variations, but none of them need be carried out irreverently.

The music isn’t as reverent in most parishes.

This has nothing to do with the form of the Mass. It has to do with execution. Case in point, the abbey where I attend the OF uses Gregorian chant as music for the Mass. Exclusively.

From my brief experience with the EF mass, everybody in attendance is more reverent. From the priest, to the servers, to the congegration.

That’s because the EF is attended mostly by enthusiasts and represent a small minority of Catholics

but I would disagree b/c anytime you allow the laity to read or distribute communion, it adds irreverence

My spiritual director, who served the Tridentine Mass while in seminary, recounts that he’d still be singing the Sanctus but the priest had already sped through the consecration. I don’t recall the last time I saw someone leaving Mass for a smoke outside. This was common in the '50s.

In theory and design the OF may be as reverent (but I would disagree b/c anytime you allow the laity to read or distribute communion, it adds irreverence

Neither practices are attached to the form of the Mass.

but in practice, it rarely is

And you can say with 100% conviction if the EF was the only form of the Mass, the same priest and faithful in attendance who are irreverent at the OF Mass today would suddenly become reverent if the Tridentine Mass were made normative again? I have some swampland in Florida for sale…

 

[Dovekin]

You are ok with clapping for the cantor or choir or organist between Communion and Concluding Rites? I have been experiencing this lately.

I would have to know a great deal more about it before I could judge if it was ok.

I do not need to know a great deal more to know I would not be ok with judging what others are doing. The Lord has come among us, let us rejoice and be glad!

We have just received Christ and our attention is directed away from Christ to applaud parishioners.

That is not my spirituality. We have just received Christ, whose life was given for all of us. All you holy men and women of God, praise the Lord.