Convergance of OF and EF

[BennyBoy89]

I’m not sure if I’m in the right place to ask this, but I figured I’d go ahead.

Has there ever been any serious discussion of a “convergance” so to speak between the OF and EF of the Mass?

Is this wishful thinking?

 

[thistle]

I’m not sure if I’m in the right place to ask this, but I figured I’d go ahead.

Has there ever been any serious discussion of a “convergance” so to speak between the OF and EF of the Mass?

Is this wishful thinking?

What is OF and EF?

 

[BenFischer]

I’m not sure if I’m in the right place to ask this, but I figured I’d go ahead.

Has there ever been any serious discussion of a “convergance” so to speak between the OF and EF of the Mass?

Is this wishful thinking?

I can see a wider use of Latin in the Ordinary Form, and possibly some ad orientum worship, but I think the biggest issue would be the calendars. I don’t see the Ordinary form going to a 1 year cycle of readings, nor do I see the Extraordinary form going to a 3 year cycle and adding an Old Testament reading.

I wouldn’t mind a return of the bells and incense, and a few Latin prayers might add to the mystery and solemnity, but I can’t imagine much more than that. Maybe updating the calendars with some common feast days, like Divine Mercy Sunday and so on (which our EF mass has already done).

 

[StatCrux]

The coordination of liturgical calendars shouldn’t be viewed as an insurmountable obstacle. In regards to that:

wdtprs.com/blog/2008/04/uk-coordination-of-liturgical-calendars/

 

[StatCrux]

Interesting question. Recently, I have been thinking the same thing. I don’t think that the Pope released his Motu Proprio to foster reconciliation between the SSPX or for mutual enrichment of both forms even though that’s what he said. The SSPX is divided by more than just the form of the Mass (and the Pope knows this) and the amount of permissible mutual enrichment is limited (and the Pope knows this).

I think the Pope’s “endgame” is more grand. I think he envisions a new missal to replace both the Novus Ordo and the TLM, one that can satisfy the needs of those who prefer the Novus Ordo and the TLM.

In order for a drafting of a new missal to be fruitful, Benedict realized that most priests have zero contact with the EF. Without any of this contact how can they be expected to foster true reconciliation between the EF and OF?

In 10 years (15? 20?) a vast majority of priests will have experienced the EF either indirectly or directly. In 10 years whatever mutual enrichment that could be provided by the presence of both forms will be completed. Priests, bishops, and the laity will be very aware of the differences, benefits, and limitations that each form provides. Consequently, when the call is finally made to put Bugnini’s Mass behind us, true organic growth of the liturgy can be more fully realized.

Just my :twocents: (or conspiracy theory).

-SC

 

[ethelzguy]

Why is there a need to “reconcile” the Ordinary Form with the Extraordinary?

I sat in Mass this morning, pondering much of what I read here. I well remember the “old school days”, when I would attend Mass, surrounded by women in scarves, praying their rosaries, while the priest faced away from us, and the altar boys read the prayers.

Today, I am able to truly appreciate and participate in the sacrifice of the Mass. I am a part of the Mass, and not just an observer. We pray out loud, we sing out loud, we worship together.

What is there to reconcile?

TBL

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please remember everyone that denigration of any rite of the Catholic Church is not allowed on CAF.

 

[StatCrux]

Why is there a need to “reconcile” the Ordinary Form with the Extraordinary?

I sat in Mass this morning, pondering much of what I read here. I well remember the “old school days”, when I would attend Mass, surrounded by women in scarves, praying their rosaries, while the priest faced away from us, [or the priest joined the congregation and faced the Lord present in the tabernacle. He faced the One whom he is addressing in the prayers of the Mass. He faced East- the direction of a new day, of hope, of Christ’s second coming] and the altar boys read the prayers.

Today, I am able to truly appreciate and participate **[there is so much more than speaking prayers to participating in the Mass. The participation of speaking should lead into interior particpation of united your own prayers with the priest] **in the sacrifice of the Mass. I am a part of the Mass, and not just an observer. We pray out loud, we sing out loud, we worship together [in the EF people pray and sing out loud too].

What is there to reconcile?

TBL

Fair enough let me offer what I think needs to be reconciled by speaking of the strengths of each form.

• In the NO all of the “participation” of the congregation is an improvement. The role of the congregation takes its proper more involved place in the prayers of the NO.
• A Low Mass is very contemplative. It offers a lot of space to reflect, meditate, and contemplate on the Sacrifice.
• A High Mass reflects the beauty and dignity of the Sacrifice that is being celebrated.

What needs to be reconciled are the contemplative, solemn, and corporate natures highlighted in each of these forms of the Mass.

The Novus Ordo does the corporate thing well but it fails (most of the time) on the other two. Christ is miraculously manifesting himself before us under the appearance of bread and wine. God is becoming present before us! Let’s not hold back. Let’s go all out and sing quality songs, light candles, burn incense, make everything the best it can be not for us but for HIM. This lacking is evident right down to the very translations of the Latin into English (which thankfully are in the process of being changed). Many prayers were just cut out of the Novus Ordo that were in the EF. What a shame! They were some of the most beautiful. With even just the slightest modifications they could have been incorporated into the Novus Ordo. Instead they were just thrown out. Let’s strive to preserve the *richness *of faith in the Mass.

Some more evidence: How many minutes of silence would you say you have during Mass to pray? I mean when the entire congregation does nothing but be silent. Three? Four? Five? Yikes. That doesn’t seem like very much time at all. There seems to be a fear of silence in the Church, but it is precisely what we need to do to recognize, give thanks, and appreciate the great gift being offered to us by Him. The constant “chatter” can lull us into thinking that we just have to say the responses to participate in the Mass.

So yes, I think there needs to be a reconciliation between contemplative, corporate, and solemn natures of the Mass. They are not mutually exclusive; it is not a “Zero Sum” game. We should strive for their unity and this is a very obtainable goal. After all, we have the Holy Spirit on our side.

-SC

 

[preV2tradcath]

What is OF and EF?

OF is the ordinary form of Mass or the current Mass issued by Pope Paul VI and in use in most churches today. EF is the extraordinary form of Mass or the Traditional Latin Mass. These are the names given to them by Pope Benedict XVI in his motu proprio Summorum Pontificum.

 

[peregrinus_WA]

I think the Pope’s “endgame” is more grand. I think he envisions a new missal to replace both the Novus Ordo and the TLM, one that can satisfy the needs of those who prefer the Novus Ordo and the TLM.

In order for a drafting of a new missal to be fruitful, Benedict realized that most priests have zero contact with the EF. Without any of this contact how can they be expected to foster true reconciliation between the EF and OF?

In 10 years (15? 20?) a vast majority of priests will have experienced the EF either indirectly or directly. In 10 years whatever mutual enrichment that could be provided by the presence of both forms will be completed. Priests, bishops, and the laity will be very aware of the differences, benefits, and limitations that each form provides. Consequently, when the call is finally made to put Bugnini’s Mass behind us, true organic growth of the liturgy can be more fully realized.

I would truly like to see this happen. However, both extremes are so entrenched in their myopia on the Mass that I see a lot of dissension if this happens.

In my opinion, I would like to the OF Mass would have to move closer to the EF Mass. Keep the readings and the active participation from the OF Mass, but use much of the structure and prayers of the EF Mass.

Now, if you do not mind, I think I better put on my asbestos suit before I get flamed on this one.

 

[James0235]

I would truly like to see this happen. However, both extremes are so entrenched in their myopia on the Mass that I see a lot of dissension if this happens.

In my opinion, I would like to the OF Mass would have to move closer to the EF Mass. Keep the readings and the active participation from the OF Mass, but use much of the structure and prayers of the EF Mass.

Now, if you do not mind, I think I better put on my asbestos suit before I get flamed on this one.

Sounds very much like what the 2nd Vatican Council was calling for.

James

 

[brigid12]

“reconciliation between contemplative, corporate, and solemn natures of the Mass”

Tall order and will have a number of political obstacles (political in the sense of the power factions within the church - those wanting the Mass as a meal and those who value false ecumenism vs. those wanting recognition of the Mass as a sacrifice), but very worthy!!! I only hope it happens within my earthly lifetime.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

“reconciliation between contemplative, corporate, and solemn natures of the Mass”

Tall order and will have a number of political obstacles (political in the sense of the power factions within the church - those wanting the Mass as a meal and those who value false ecumenism vs. those wanting recognition of the Mass as a sacrifice), but very worthy!!! I only hope it happens within my earthly lifetime.

Your characterization of those who appreciate the OF is unfair. I’m an old timer who loved the old mass and likes the OF even better. What I don’t appreciate is what I perceive as a lack of reverence in the noisy behavior of many of the congregation before and after mass. It seems to me to indicate a lack of recognition and appreciation of Jesus’ presence in the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle. My pastor disagrees with me but I trace this to a failure in catechesis of priests and people in the 25 or so years following Vatican II.

 

[brockmac]

My fear is that if a hybrid of the EF and the OF is introduced by Holy Mother Church, those who are attached to the EF will insist on its continued presence, and many people will insist on the continued practice of the OF, so then we will have 3 Latin Rite masses (not to mention the Anglican Use Latin Rite Liturgy). This would further fragment the Church. Perhaps if over time, subtle changes were introduced to the OF to make it look and feel more like the EF, this could help. Certain things like maybe recquiring that the Kyrie be chanted in Greek and the Sanctus and Angus Dei in Latin. Many parishes already do this. Maybe later they could insist on Eucharistic Prayer I (eliminate the others from allowed use). Perhaps even replace the Communion Rail. But I definitely think that the three readings should be kept, as should the 3 year cycle as this exposes the faithful to much more of the Sacred Scriptures. I think that the vernacular should be maintained in most of the liturgy as there is so much cathecesis in the liturgy that it is important that the faithful hear it week in and week out. One thing I definitely miss from my days as an alter server is the use of pattens. That really drove home for me the reality of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist.

 

[brigid12]

Your characterization of those who appreciate the OF is unfair. I’m an old timer who loved the old mass and likes the OF even better. What I don’t appreciate is what I perceive as a lack of reverence in the noisy behavior of many of the congregation before and after mass. It seems to me to indicate a lack of recognition and appreciation of Jesus’ presence in the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle. My pastor disagrees with me but I trace this to a failure in catechesis of priests and people in the 25 or so years following Vatican II.

I’m so sorry for posting in the unfair manner that I did. Although I didn’t mean the way it came out (I also like much of the OF, when done correctly of course!) I did post it and I very much apologize! Yes, I agree that the lack of reverence, including the unnecessary, noisy behavior before and after Mass is one of the bigger problems. I agree that this is probably due, in large part, to the poor catechesis of priests and people since VII.

 

[peregrinus_WA]

My fear is that if a hybrid of the EF and the OF is introduced by Holy Mother Church, those who are attached to the EF will insist on its continued presence, and many people will insist on the continued practice of the OF, so then we will have 3 Latin Rite masses (not to mention the Anglican Use Latin Rite Liturgy). This would further fragment the Church. Perhaps if over time, subtle changes were introduced to the OF to make it look and feel more like the EF, this could help. Certain things like maybe recquiring that the Kyrie be chanted in Greek and the Sanctus and Angus Dei in Latin. Many parishes already do this. Maybe later they could insist on Eucharistic Prayer I (eliminate the others from allowed use). Perhaps even replace the Communion Rail. But I definitely think that the three readings should be kept, as should the 3 year cycle as this exposes the faithful to much more of the Sacred Scriptures. I think that the vernacular should be maintained in most of the liturgy as there is so much cathecesis in the liturgy that it is important that the faithful hear it week in and week out. One thing I definitely miss from my days as an alter server is the use of pattens. That really drove home for me the reality of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist.

I am looking for replacement of the Ordinary Form with the “Hybrid”. The parish I attend does the OF Mass Ad Orientum and uses the Communion Rail. We also use Chant at most Masses and Latin is used based on the priest (If Fr. W does the Mass, expect everything in Latin).

 

[THurifer2]

Why is there a need to “reconcile” the Ordinary Form with the Extraordinary?

I sat in Mass this morning, pondering much of what I read here. I well remember the “old school days”, when I would attend Mass, surrounded by women in scarves, praying their rosaries, while the priest faced away from us, and the altar boys read the prayers.

Today, I am able to truly appreciate and participate in the sacrifice of the Mass. I am a part of the Mass, and not just an observer. We pray out loud, we sing out loud, we worship together.

What is there to reconcile?

TBL

The preist facing away from you? Or the priest facing the same direction as you…towards God?

Funny how wording can be used to denigrate.

 

[ethelzguy]

The preist facing away from you? Or the priest facing the same direction as you…towards God?

Funny how wording can be used to denigrate.

No intention to denigrate, just a personal observation and opinion. If I am going to share anything with someone, I like to see who I am sharing with.

As to the facing East thing. What if that particular church would not have the priest facing east while saying Mass ad orientem? What if the front of the church faces east?

 

[StatCrux]

My fear is that if a hybrid of the EF and the OF is introduced by Holy Mother Church, those who are attached to the EF will insist on its continued presence, and many people will insist on the continued practice of the OF, so then we will have 3 Latin Rite masses (not to mention the Anglican Use Latin Rite Liturgy). This would further fragment the Church.

I think this is a legitimate fear if the new Missal is ineffective in capturing the positive elements of the EF. That is why Summorum Pontificum is so important in acclimating the priesthood to the EF and making them aware of the benefits of the EF.

If the new missal is done correctly, the biggest “rift” would be how much of the Mass is said in Latin rather than arguing about reverence and other issues. I think the language is a much smaller issue and would not divide the faithful as it currently does. There could be primarily Latin services for those who prefer Latin or primarily vernacular for those who prefer that.

I don’t think the Novus Ordo will be allowed to continue after the new missal is published. Traditional Orders will still probably use the EF, but the demand will decrease overtime. This would create a natural convergence.

I hope this occurs during my earthly life too, but only God knows!

-SC

 

[THurifer2]

As to the facing East thing. What if that particular church would not have the priest facing east while saying Mass ad orientem? What if the front of the church faces east?

Liturgical east is Godward…the altar of sacrifice. It is not refering towards a geographical direction. There are thousands of churches built with the altar in a direction other than east.

The difference is understanding what Liturgical east is.