Do you think that High-Church Anglicanism is much more elaborate and ornate than Novus Ordo Catholicism?

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The Dutch Touch Utrecht consecrations in Anglicanism mitigates your statement but the essence of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Catholic understanding we have of the Mass is not there. You’re correct. And I think the OP is not looking so much at the meat of the Mass but the many pious actions, wording, and the lovely ritual that has been lost thanks to Vatican II and modernity. The OP is not saying that the Roman Catholic Mass is lacking the depth of the Eucharist but rather the surrounding ceremonial pomp and dramatic beauty that it had in former years. I would agree. The holding hands during the Our Father, the poor English translation, the strumming guitar ensemble, the communion in the hand, the lack of incense and gestures, no Latin, laid-back sermons, informality, etc. is all a sad change for people like me who envy my forefathers who were fortunate enough to participate in this and yet, being a child born in the 1970’s I’m stuck with only knowing the present. Ignorance is not always bliss!:knight1:

As I stated earlier in this thread, I do not know of this “Novus Ordo Catholicism” that the OP speaks of. Every Ordinary Form of the Mass I have attended in the multiple places that I have done so are very reverent.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

As I stated earlier in this thread, I do not know of this “Novus Ordo Catholicism” that the OP speaks of. Every Ordinary Form of the Mass I have attended in the multiple places that I have done so are very reverent.

My understanding of the OP’s statment of N.O. Catholicism is post-Vatican II liturgy and worship. There most certainly is reverence. The people at my parish are reverent, within the confines of the new Mass. But IMO holding hands during the Our Father, the taking communion in the hand, the strumming guitars playing Spanishy music at an English Mass, the informality of how some priests conduct themselves, and having as many as ten (yes, ten!!) Eucharistic Extraordinary ministers is not very reverent compared to the Tridentine Latin style Mass I’ve read about and watched yet, sadly, never had the pleasure to know since I’m a relatively young guy, 34 years old. The faithful at my Mass try to be reverent I’m sure but the novus ordo environment makes it watered-down and cheesy in many ways.

 

[otjm]

Does anyone have any idea whether the new RC mass will return to some of the beauty of the Tridentine Mass. I am curious as to where that will go.

If one were to read “between the lines” of the letter by Benedict 16 accompanying the expansion of the EF, one would presume that eventually, both the EF and the OF would see some changes. Whether they would be enough to eventually be reduced to one form is another question. And the likelyhood of it occuring soon is minimal at best, as he seems to be very aware that the changes encountered with the introduction of the OF were radical enough that sudden changes simply won’t occur on his watch. As to what might happen under the next Pope, well, speculation there is about as worthwhile as speculation as to whom will be chosen.

One needs to keep in mind that what one sees of the EF now is not necesszrily what one saw most of the time with the EF, prior to Vatican 2. Low Masses, while in Latin, were sorely lacking in pomp and circumstance. And on Sunday in my parish of long ago, there were 5 Masses, and 4 of them were Low Masses.

 

[ProVobis]

Nothing wrong with the Low Masses. They’re actually easier to follow.

 

[otjm]

Nothing wrong with the Low Masses. They’re actually easier to follow.

Um, I wasn’t implying that anything was wrong with Low Masses. There is a great deal of enthusiasm among some of the younger set for the EF; what they are seeing is what we generally referred to as a High Mass, or occasionally a Solemn High Mass. And given their limited experience, there is a tendency to presume that the EF is what is represented by the High (or Solemn High) Mass. It would probably come as a bit of a surprise to find that not all EF Masses are similar to the ones they may experience.

I am not trying to poke holes in anyone’s balloon. But on occasion, a reality check helps to keep things somewhat anchored. Since the discussion centers on Anglican vs. OF, it would seem to make a better deliniation if one were to consider just what part of each we are chatting about.

 

[ProVobis]

Um, I wasn’t implying that anything was wrong with Low Masses. There is a great deal of enthusiasm among some of the younger set for the EF; what they are seeing is what we generally referred to as a High Mass, or occasionally a Solemn High Mass. And given their limited experience, there is a tendency to presume that the EF is what is represented by the High (or Solemn High) Mass. It would probably come as a bit of a surprise to find that not all EF Masses are similar to the ones they may experience.

Very true.

But I’m always baffled by those who are used to guitar music and having everything in English to be suddenly transformed into appreciation of the beauty of the Latin High Mass where the altar prayers are said at the same time the choir is singing something else in prolonged chant. All this while you can’t figure out whether you should sit or stand or kneel during all of it. Which is one supposed to follow? It isn’t easy. I can’t explain it but it happens as you’ve probably found out too.

By the way, I love the High Mass too, but the Low Mass was given us for a reason and one shouldn’t be disappointed if that’s all that’s offered.

I don’t know if the Anglican Mass has an equivalent of a Low Mass.