Confused: different Masses, forms, etc

[hansard]

I get hopelessly confused when I read around here about Old Form, Roman Rite, Novus Order and so on–and I’ve probably made mistakes in even naming these.
The only Mass with which I am familiar is the one I grew up with in a country town, NSW, Australia. I’ve never heard a full Latin mass (born in 1968). Yet, some people are quite passionate about this or that form of the Mass.

Is there anywhere I could go (website) to have the differences explained?

 

[Pacbox]

First, try searching the forum for the terms. There is a search feature in the upper right corner of the forum that will let you search this forum for those terms.

Second, if you don’t feel comfortable trying to search, I’ll give you a quick run down.

OF- Ordinary Form, refers to the current form of the Mass in the vernacular. Can be refered to Novus Ordo, which is typically used when someone either doesn’t know the correct term (OF) or intends to disparage the particular form of the Mass. Came into use in the 1960s and 1970 with a corrected translation that will be put into use this coming Advent.

EF- Extraordinary form, refers to the form of the Mass in Latin, also refered to as the Tridentine Latin Mass. Was put into use in the 1500s after the Council of Trent.

Roman Rite- A specific rite in the Church. Also refered to as the Latin Rite. Deals with the Liturgy. If you attend a either the OF or EF, follow the Pope, then you follow the Roman Rite. There are six rites with the Latin Rite the most well known.

 

[hansard]

Thanks for that, Pacbox. That’s a very digestible starting point.
And I also just found out why one is called the “extraordinary form”, while the other is called the “ordinary form”.
Sorry for being so lazy in my scholarship.

 

[CarlosBarrera]

If you attend a either the OF or EF, follow the Pope, then you follow the Roman Rite.

Not only the Romans follow the Pope of Rome. Eastern Catholics such as the Ruthenians, Melkites, Coptics, Ukranians, (basically all considered Byzantine) follow the Pope of Rome.

 

[Pacbox]

Not only the Romans follow the Pope of Rome. Eastern Catholics such as the Ruthenians, Melkites, Coptics, Ukranians, (basically all considered Byzantine) follow the Pope of Rome.

I am aware of that but thanks for posting it for those who don’t know. It tends to get glossed over or ignored that more than just Latin Catholics have the Pope as their head. There are 23 sui iuris Churches following 6 rites (litugies).

I pointed out that the Latin/Roman Rite (which is a particular Liturgy) use either the EF or OF (there is also the Mozabaric, Dominican, and I think a few other Liturgies that are used by Roman Rite Catholics but are not Latin though I am not sure since I know very little about them) and follow the Pope. I didn’t want to add too much and I was clarifying a specific Rite.

 

[Pacbox]

Thanks for that, Pacbox. That’s a very digestible starting point.
And I also just found out why one is called the “extraordinary form”, while the other is called the “ordinary form”.
Sorry for being so lazy in my scholarship.

You’re welcome. Any more questions?

 

[jonpd]

EF- Extraordinary form, refers to the form of the Mass in Latin, also refered to as the Tridentine Latin Mass. Was put into use in the 1500s after the Council of Trent.

While the Council of Trent standardized the Mass at that time, it really goes back farther than that, many parts of it go back 500 to 1000 years earlier. Which is why it is often referred to as the “Mass of the Ages”.

 

[laszlo]

While the Council of Trent standardized the Mass at that time, it really goes back farther than that, many parts of it go back 500 to 1000 years earlier. Which is why it is often referred to as the “Mass of the Ages”.

The Mass all all ages goes back to Jesus Christ, who established that in the Last Supper. This THE MASS the presence of our Lord among us, is called the **Mass of all ages **by the Catechism vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P40.HTM

This mass had and has different clothes though the times, but the essence is the same: Jesus Christ’s presence among us. We gather in his name, learn from his word, offer our unworthy things; He sacrifices himself, feed us, as sends us to his mission.

 

[Cojuanco]

This. The various forms and Rites, of course, share one condition which makes them that: That when the priest says “This is My Body/This is my Blood” it becomes truly the body and blood of the Lord.

 

[bluecake]

Actually, I think there is a big difference between the OF and the Latin Masses.The essence - transubstantiation - is, of course the core of the Mass, but to me the Novus Ordo always seemed to be more about entertaining the people, and involving them- the communal family “meal” etc.
The focus of the EF is towards God; priest and people together ad orientem at the sacrifice of the Mass.
You never hear the word “sacrifice” in the modern churches, it is always a “community celebration”.
In this neck of the woods anyway.
If I can’t get to the Latin Mass - and sometimes I can’t, as it’s a long way from my home - I don’t go at all because the modernity of the local church, the interactive whiteboard hanging from the ceiling instead of missals,the lack of a tabernacle, the guitars and drums instead of voices in harmony all combine to make me terribly stressed.

The Latin Mass sustains me in a way that the OF does not.

 

[Cojuanco]

Actually, I think there is a big difference between the OF and the Latin Masses.The essence - transubstantiation - is, of course the core of the Mass, but to me the Novus Ordo always seemed to be more about entertaining the people, and involving them- the communal family “meal” etc.
The focus of the EF is towards God; priest and people together ad orientem at the sacrifice of the Mass.
You never hear the word “sacrifice” in the modern churches, it is always a “community celebration”.
In this neck of the woods anyway.
If I can’t get to the Latin Mass - and sometimes I can’t, as it’s a long way from my home - I don’t go at all because the modernity of the local church, the interactive whiteboard hanging from the ceiling instead of missals,the lack of a tabernacle, the guitars and drums instead of voices in harmony all combine to make me terribly stressed.

The Latin Mass sustains me in a way that the OF does not.

It’s actually improved in this neck of the woods - they use both terms. Maybe it’s the fact that the parishes I usually attend are either staffed by Dominicans or by Consolatas, but they’re quick to emphasize the Mass as sacrifice.

And you know even a bad parish priest is better than neglecting our Sunday duty. After all, we go there first and foremost to recieve the body and blood, sould and divinity of Christ - even the most ignorant of priests give us that.

 

[Warrenton]

There is a website that compares the Novus Ordo and the Tridentine Right from start to finish. I can’t find the one I would like to send you, which is devoid of “traditional vs progressive” commentary, but this link will at least give you a basic feel for the different sequence of prayers, and how in general they differ.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=88998

Cheers!

 

[MarkThompson]

There is a website that compares the Novus Ordo and the Tridentine Right from start to finish. I can’t find the one I would like to send you, which is devoid of “traditional vs progressive” commentary, but this link will at least give you a basic feel for the different sequence of prayers, and how in general they differ.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=88998

Cheers!

Forum member laszlo has a good side-by-side comparison of the two forms here on his (excellent) divinumofficium.com site.