different masses?

[Jatin]

i have been reading a few threads in this forum and people are debating over EF, OF, norvus ordo, and tridentine masses… what exactly are the differences in these?

 

[LilyM]

For one thing there are only two forms of Mass for us Latin Catholics at least.

The first is the EF (Extraordinary Form). Which is the same thing as the Tridentine or TLM (Tridentine Latin Mass). This is Mass in the same form as it was said before the Vatican 2 council - all in Latin, with the priest facing the tabernacle and not the congregation, communion always at a communion rail and only distributed on the tongue and so on.

The OF (Ordinary Form) is the same thing as the Novus Ordo. This is the new form of the Mass that was developed a few years after the Vatican 2 Council, and is by far the most common form of Mass said today - where the priest faces the congregation, says the prayers in vernacular (local) languages, communion given in the hand and while we are standing etc.

There are differences in the prayers between the two - some feel the prayers in the TLM are more Catholic, more reverent and so on. Others don’t.

 

[Brian_Millar]

I too just discovered this and was alarmed in the process. Apparantly the Latin Mass has been conveyed to me as the true mass and that the other is not at all. I’m now seeking out the Latin Mass in order to remain true and now I’m at the stage of questioning if I ever have attended a true Catholic mass before in my life since I have never attended a Latin mass.

Can you please elaborate along the differences? If the only language spoken is Latin, how can we understand what’s being said, how can we honestly be part of it? Do I now have to learn Latin just to properly attend mass?

 

[LilyM]

I too just discovered this and was alarmed in the process. Apparantly the Latin Mass has been conveyed to me as the true mass and that the other is not at all. I’m now seeking out the Latin Mass in order to remain true and now I’m at the stage of questioning if I ever have attended a true Catholic mass before in my life since I have never attended a Latin mass.

Can you please elaborate along the differences? If the only language spoken is Latin, how can we understand what’s being said, how can we honestly be part of it? Do I now have to learn Latin just to properly attend mass?

No, the Latin Mass is NOT the only true Mass.

No matter who may have said so to you, our Holy Father Benedict XVI, who is the final arbiter on liturgy, has said in Summorum Pontificum that BOTH forms of the Mass, in whatever language it is said, are perfectly valid and licit and true Masses in every sense.

“Art 1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI [the NO, which is said in vernacular languages and sometimes in Latin as well] is the ordinary expression of the ‘Lex orandi’ (Law of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. Nonetheless, the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and reissued by Bl. John XXIII [the TLM] is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of that same ‘Lex orandi,’ and must be given due honour for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s Lex orandi will in no any way lead to a division in the Church’s ‘Lex credendi’ (Law of belief). They are, in fact two usages of the one Roman rite.” (my emphases and annotations)

We may trust His Holiness’ teaching on this matter.

Having said that, you can get Missals for TLMs which have the prayers and instructions in Latin on one page with the same prayers and instructions in English on the opposite page. With a bit of practice, it’s easy enough to follow along with the Latin Mass.

 

[PrayforMallory]

I too just discovered this and was alarmed in the process. Apparantly the Latin Mass has been conveyed to me as the true mass and that the other is not at all. I’m now seeking out the Latin Mass in order to remain true and now I’m at the stage of questioning if I ever have attended a true Catholic mass before in my life since I have never attended a Latin mass.

Can you please elaborate along the differences? If the only language spoken is Latin, how can we understand what’s being said, how can we honestly be part of it? Do I now have to learn Latin just to properly attend mass?

Don’t worry. You’ve been going to valid Masses. Not everyone has the opportunity to go to the Gregorian Mass (yet).

I prefer the Gregorian Mass because of its beauty, mystery, deep spirituality, etc. I also like the people at the traditional parish I go to.

At my parish, they produce little missalettes that have English translations. You can also get a Missal online and follow along, though it’s not really a good thing to do your first time (you need time to soak it in, in my opinion). There are parts of the Mass that never change, and eventually you learn all the prayers by heart, and can pray and participate just like Catholics from centuries ago. Also, it’s not necessary to know everything that’s being said to fully participate. If you go to a solemn High Mass 5 or 6 times though, you’ll eventually feel right at home.

If you’re curious, go check it out. TLM Churches are usually really beautiful. You have to go several times to really get something out of it.

If you prefer the English Mass, that’s ok too.

 

[Brian_Millar]

Thanks for the advice and (name removed by moderator)ut, believe me, it’s something that has been bugging me since I first heard of it this morning., it’s hard when someone tells you something like that. I don’t want to quote him, but now I’m at a new dilema so I have to, just so you can see what I’ve been told:

“what you experience was not a Catholic liturgy but a Protestant service with a Catholic label”

How am I supposed to tell this person who happens to be my friend of many years that both are valid if this is his stance? He is a Priest BTW. If this stance is nothing unusual, clearly we do have division within the church over it.

I will likely attend both, yet the Latin ones that are closest to me are not exactly a short distance at all compared to the one that is local which is going to make it more difficult to attend.

 

[Brian_Millar]

I’m reading more about it, I’m quoting the web page that explains it:

“Because of this Protestant teaching, those who promoted ecumenism and unity with non-Catholics at any price set about to purge the Mass of any specific references to the Mass as a sacrifice offered up for the living and the dead, and to blur other Catholic doctrines which Protestants found offensive. A Vatican commission was formed to change the Mass, and among the participants were six Protestants: Dr. George, Canon Jaspar, Dr. Shepherd, Dr. Konneth, Rev. Eugene Brand and Max Thurian. They represented the World Council of Churches, the Anglicans, the Presbyterian Community of Taize, and other Protestant bodies. On June 27, 1967, Bishop (later Cardinal) William Baum told The Detroit News that “they [were] not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participated fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal. It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed.” The result of the work of this Vatican commission was the introduction of the New Mass in 1969.”

 

[LilyM]

I’m reading more about it, I’m quoting the web page that explains it:

“Because of this Protestant teaching, those who promoted ecumenism and unity with non-Catholics at any price set about to purge the Mass of any specific references to the Mass as a sacrifice offered up for the living and the dead, and to blur other Catholic doctrines which Protestants found offensive. A Vatican commission was formed to change the Mass, and among the participants were six Protestants: Dr. George, Canon Jaspar, Dr. Shepherd, Dr. Konneth, Rev. Eugene Brand and Max Thurian. They represented the World Council of Churches, the Anglicans, the Presbyterian Community of Taize, and other Protestant bodies. On June 27, 1967, Bishop (later Cardinal) William Baum told The Detroit News that “they [were] not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participated fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal. It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed.” The result of the work of this Vatican commission was the introduction of the New Mass in 1969.”

Your priest is teaching contrary to the Canons of the Council of Trent, which are dogmatic and infallible. In its 22nd session the Council ruled:

“CANON VII.–If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema.”

So it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Church to propose an improper rite of the Mass, not even one that can be an incentive to impiety let alone actually wrong or in error in any way. Always assuming it’s properly celebrated and its rubrics aren’t abused, of course.

Does your priest belong to any particular religious organisation or fraternity? What’s the address of the webpage? There are some, such as the Society of Saint Pius X, that have placed themselves outside of proper communion with Rome and the Pope and whose teachings on this matter cannot be trusted. Neither can everything you read on the internet be trusted either. Some stuff is either completely and utterly made up or seriously misquoted.

 

[PrayforMallory]

Brian, don’t worry about what your friend is saying. The polemics about the Mass are never-ending and bitter no matter what your position is.

The two opposing viewpoints, well, neither side completely disproved the other in my view. Both sides have legitimate points. Just try the TLM (more than once hopefully) and then go where you feel most comfortable. The Pope has given us a choice on it.

 

[PrayforMallory]

I’m reading more about it, I’m quoting the web page that explains it:

“Because of this Protestant teaching, those who promoted ecumenism and unity with non-Catholics at any price set about to purge the Mass of any specific references to the Mass as a sacrifice offered up for the living and the dead, and to blur other Catholic doctrines which Protestants found offensive. A Vatican commission was formed to change the Mass, and among the participants were six Protestants: Dr. George, Canon Jaspar, Dr. Shepherd, Dr. Konneth, Rev. Eugene Brand and Max Thurian. They represented the World Council of Churches, the Anglicans, the Presbyterian Community of Taize, and other Protestant bodies. On June 27, 1967, Bishop (later Cardinal) William Baum told The Detroit News that “they [were] not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participated fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal. It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed.” The result of the work of this Vatican commission was the introduction of the New Mass in 1969.”

Historically speaking, the above quote has some truth in my opinion, but that has nothing to do with why I prefer the TLM.

If the TLM is a bit of a drive, and you end up liking it, go when you can, and go to your regular parish when you can’t, or if you don’t like it, just stay where you are. It’s a win-win.

 

[LilyM]

Brian, don’t worry about what your friend is saying. The polemics about the Mass are never-ending and bitter no matter what your position is.

The two opposing viewpoints, well, neither side completely disproved the other in my view. Both sides have legitimate points. Just try the TLM (more than once hopefully) and then go where you feel most comfortable. The Pope has given us a choice on it.

So you’re willing to go so far as anathematising yourself by saying the Church in face DOES use a ceremony (namely the NO) in its celebration of Mass that lead the faithful to impiety? Because if you’re suggesting it’s been influenced for the worse by Protestant liturgy that’s what you’re saying.

 

[PrayforMallory]

So you’re willing to go so far as anathematising yourself by saying the Church in face DOES use a ceremony (namely the NO) in its celebration of Mass that lead the faithful to impiety? Because if you’re suggesting it’s been influenced for the worse by Protestant liturgy that’s what you’re saying.

Don’t excommunicate me yet!

I didn’t say it led to impiety or was wrong or anything. I just said there was “some truth” to that quote. The six prot advisers were there and asked their opinions. Whether or not it was for the best, can’t say.

I don’t really enjoy arguing bout the Mass anymore. It was interesting and a little fun at first, but, I say to each his own, cause I’m nobody’s spiritual guide.

I just love the TLM.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

You know, not all websites are accurate. Go to EWTN or Catholic Answers ask the apologist forum to find out the truth about Catholic teaching.

It’s too bad your old friend who is a priest told you what he did. Maybe he was very fond of the Tridentine (extraordinary form) mass and doesn’t like some of the changes. He is permitted to celebrate the older form of the mass but the ordinary form of the mass is also the same sacrament and sacrifice of Jesus as the extraordinary form. Both forms are equally valid. What he told you was only his opinion. The changes took place about 40 years and he’s still complaining?

I went to daily mass before the changes (which were back in the 1960’s). I continued to go when the mass was changed to English. It was hard to get used to the changes at first but I knew that it was OK if the pope said so and I came to appreciate them. I really liked being able to see and hear what was going on.

You asked: **How am I supposed to tell this person who happens to be my friend of many years that both are valid if this is his stance? He is a Priest BTW. If this stance is nothing unusual, clearly we do have division within the church over it. **

Maybe he didn’t really mean the OF is invalid. Maybe he just meant he disapproves of what he sees as ‘protestant’ elements like the use of English, different kinds of hymns, etc. It is OK for him to have this opinion. But if he really means it’s not valid, well, he’s not in agreement with the last several popes and that’s not a good thing. If that’s what he means, continue to be his friend and respect him as a priest but don’t believe him about this.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I too just discovered this and was alarmed in the process. Apparantly the Latin Mass has been conveyed to me as the true mass and that the other is not at all. I’m now seeking out the Latin Mass in order to remain true and now I’m at the stage of questioning if I ever have attended a true Catholic mass before in my life since I have never attended a Latin mass.

**You can always remove all doubt by attending an Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy!

Seriously, don’t let the schismatics fool you. The Pauline Missal of 1970 (aka NO or OF), celebrated within the norms of the GIRM, is a true Eucharistic Sacrifice.**

 

[PrayforMallory]

I too just discovered this and was alarmed in the process. Apparantly the Latin Mass has been conveyed to me as the true mass and that the other is not at all. I’m now seeking out the Latin Mass in order to remain true and now I’m at the stage of questioning if I ever have attended a true Catholic mass before in my life since I have never attended a Latin mass.

**You can always remove all doubt by attending an Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy!

Seriously, don’t let the schismatics fool you. The Pauline Missal of 1970 (aka NO or OF), celebrated within the norms of the GIRM, is a true Eucharistic Sacrifice.**

Hey. There’s a saturday Eastern Divine Liturgy here and I was thinking about going, since there’s no TLM on Saturday night. Are Latin Rite Catholics allowed to go?

Also, I saw that your profile stated you were Orthodox?

 

[PrayforMallory]

i have been reading a few threads in this forum and people are debating over EF, OF, norvus ordo, and tridentine masses… what exactly are the differences in these?

There’s a blog that can get you well-acquainted with the new movement for the Traditional Mass.

www.wdtprs.com/blog

 

[Cat]

I realize that the OP did not receive his faulty information from CAF. But this whole thread makes me shiver because I’ve read what he was taught (the anti-NO teachings) on CAF many times in various posts, especially in this Tradition Section, but also in other Sections.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again and I hope that the Moderators of Catholic Forums will consider what I say:

To new Catholics and other Catholics who are a little shaky in their faith, it is extremely confusing and frightening to read some of the stuff on these forums about the TLM vs. the NO Mass.

I believe that CAF ought to consider some kind of restriction on the Tradition Section; e.g., perhaps a person should be a member for at least a year before being allowed to access the Traditional Section. Or perhaps a person should be required to pass a “Catholic Basics” quiz before being allowed to access the Traditional Section.

I have said many times that the Moderators should be vigilant in seeking out these confusing posts (posts that condemn the NO Mass as “non-Catholic” or “not a true Mass” or “inferior” or “Protestant” etc.) and DELETE these posts, and in their place, post a bold assurance, preferably from various authoritative Catholic documents, that the NO Mass is totally and complete approved by the Catholic Church.

IMO, the spirit of divisiveness which is sometimes manifested by various posters is possibly of the devil and certainly not of Christ. It is dangerous and should be dealt with sternly by CAF.

It is admirable that we want to encourage peaceful discussion and debate of various aspects of Catholicism, including the two Mass forms. But I believe that a no tolerance policy should be adopted when it comes to any posts that label the NO Mass as false and the TLM as true. These posts should be deleted. We are not allowed to post unsubstantiated rumors on CAF, or slander, even about a movie star (over in the Popular Media section). Why are people allowed to slander the NO Mass?

 

[ethelzguy]

I prefer the Gregorian Mass because of its beauty, mystery, deep spirituality, etc. I also like the people at the traditional parish I go to.

If you’re curious, go check it out. TLM Churches are usually really beautiful. You have to go several times to really get something out of it.

Also, be aware that the TLM of today may be slightly different than what we were used to back then. Today’s TLM by most accounts is probably MORE reverent and deliberate than what us old codgers grew up with. More of a romanticized version, so to speak.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Hey. There’s a saturday Eastern Divine Liturgy here and I was thinking about going, since there’s no TLM on Saturday night. Are Latin Rite Catholics allowed to go?

**Of course you are, and (I’m assuming it’s Eastern Catholic) you can fulfill your Sunday obligation and receive Communion.

BUT don’t expect the Eastern Catholic Churches to be the last refuge of pre-V2 Latin Catholicism. Take them on their own terms.**

 

[consumedconvert]

Hey. There’s a saturday Eastern Divine Liturgy here and I was thinking about going, since there’s no TLM on Saturday night. Are Latin Rite Catholics allowed to go?

**Of course you are, and (I’m assuming it’s Eastern Catholic) you can fulfill your Sunday obligation and receive Communion.

BUT** don’t expect the Eastern Catholic Churches to be the last refuge of pre-V2 Latin Catholicism. Take them on their own terms.

I have a great respect for the Divine Liturgy. It’s absolutely beautiful, and I feel all Latin Rite Catholics ought to attend one at least once, and offer it up as a prayer for the sufferings of so many of our Eastern Brethren.

CC