M
maryjk
Guest
Rather than take the thread off topic, I started another thread.
It seems that some believe that there are two different rites, the EF and the OF. Does anyone else believe this? Or has anyone else come across this?
- Status
It seems that some believe that there are two different rites, the EF and the OF. Does anyone else believe this? Or has anyone else come across this?
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
Meh, I feel this is a non-issue. Of course there are no two different Rites, but this is rather insignificant, I think, except for perhaps the liturgy geeks. But then again, I am a liturgy geek…
J
jbarbaretta
Guest
Well, only among the SSPX folks. Does it “feel” different. Yeah, sure. so?? I don’t see how that makes it a different rite. I love both forms. I think the OF adds a sense of understanding for the average Catholic, that may be lost in the EF and the EF adds a transcendent sense of beauty that is not available in the OF. However, they are forms not rites.
I think the OP found him/herself around like-minded people while attending the EF and is treating it like it is a completely separate “rite” because he/she didn’t have the same comfort level when attending the OF.
One of the problems with treating it like a separate rite is that you can slip easily into schism.
M
maryjk
Guest
When someone says, "I am not a “novus ordo Catholic,” I see that as a problem.
J
jbarbaretta
Guest
I absolutely agree. I was just being more long-winded abut saying that.
T
thewanderer
Guest
Does the same problem exist in saying they are a TLM Catholic? There’s nothin wrong with prefeing one form, but it can lead people to disdain whichever form it is that they do not prefer, which is a problem.
T
Theophorus
Guest
If one rite with two forms is a good enough explination for the Holy Father it’s good enough for me. Its this whole rupture mentality the the mad trads have in common with the like of Hans Küng, that the church either started or stopped in the 1960’s depending on your views. The reality being that VII is only the most recent in a long line of Councils.
C
Corki
Guest
I haven’t had the opportunity to attend many EF Masses. But when I have they were Masses that were scheduled as one of the options of a parishes regular Sunday schedule. A parish might have 2 OF Masses in English, 1 OF Mass in Spanish and one EF Mass. (One parish also adds an OF Mass in Latin, but I digress)
Even if someone attends only the EF Mass, he/she would be part of the same parish as someone who attends the OF English or Spanish Masses. Their kids would be in the same CCE clasess, the men would belong to the same KofC Council, the teens would do the same service projects, etc.
I like it that way. But I can understand how some people who attend the EF Mass at a parish that **only **has the EF Mass might experience more of a difference beyond the Mass itself.
Even if someone attends only the EF Mass, he/she would be part of the same parish as someone who attends the OF English or Spanish Masses. Their kids would be in the same CCE clasess, the men would belong to the same KofC Council, the teens would do the same service projects, etc.
I like it that way. But I can understand how some people who attend the EF Mass at a parish that **only **has the EF Mass might experience more of a difference beyond the Mass itself.
T
tee_eff_em
Guest
I am not a novus ordo Catholic.
I do not see that as a problematic statement. I see it as a tautological statement. There is no such thing as a novus ordo Catholic. And the use of “novus ordo” to describe the most recently promulgated Roman Missal is both :twocents: incorrect and makes people sound stoopid :twocents:.
I am not a novus ordo Catholic.
tee
C
Corki
Guest
S
SingaporeanGirl
Guest
The Catholic Church has many rites. There is even the Carmelite rite and Dominican rite besides the syro malabar etc. I really don’t see how one can slip into schism just by seeing it as a separate rite. Furthermore, I cannot see how the NO is of the latin rite when more often than not you get it in the vernacular. To further aggravate the difference some feel, many attending the NO in vernacular are actually quite hostile to the really Latin peeps. Since it is of the same rite, shouldn’t the NO peeps be more accepting of the EF? I agree that it is Roman, but to call it Latin is a bit strange. Maybe they should term it Roman Rite and not Latin Rite. There would be less confusion then?
M
maryjk
Guest
Right. No one is a novus ordo Catholic. Those that attend the OF, are generally Latin Rite as are these that attend the EF. The EF is not a different rite, regardless of how different the Mass may seem.
S
SingaporeanGirl
Guest
Actually, it would be very helpful if priests should say the NO Mass ad orientem. After all, its allowed. I would think it would benefit the souls of the priest and of the people. How many times have a priest not grown conscious that he is being watched and then he feel he needs to try to tailor his style of saying Mass to suit the people? Isn’t that very much a performance? If a priest would face ad orientem, he would not be reminded constantly that he may be watched, and have his actions and expressions looked on so intently. So that the people could instead focus on the mystery of the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, and on the Perfect Oblation Himself. And the priest of course, removed from distractions of this sort, may offer well the Perfect Oblation offered by the High Priest, Christ Himself.
And perhaps, to give back the NO Mass its identity by having it in Latin more often than in the vernacular. with the infusion of protestant songs, I so hope that there will not stem forth from the NO an ‘MO’ (modern form). I will shriek will horror. I will be driven to my grave. And the angels will weep for more poor souls. =P
And perhaps, to give back the NO Mass its identity by having it in Latin more often than in the vernacular. with the infusion of protestant songs, I so hope that there will not stem forth from the NO an ‘MO’ (modern form). I will shriek will horror. I will be driven to my grave. And the angels will weep for more poor souls. =P
J
Jegudiel
Guest
Your use of “NO” is downright ugly. Highly offensive.
That said you had better learn the difference between a Carmelite or Dominican Mass and a sui juris church like the Syro Malabar. Two completely different things.
You suggest that many who attend the OF Mass are “hostile” to those who attend the EF Mass. While that sounds like malarkey for the most lart, I suspect I might be hostile to someone like you if you actually talked the same way you write.
J
Jegudiel
Guest
I think it might be good to celebrate the EF Mass* versus populum* as they did for many centuries at St. Peter’s Basilica.
C
curlycool89
Guest
C
Corki
Guest
No, it would be more confusing. Latin is the official language of the Church. Both the EF and OF Masses are promulgated in Latin. The OF also has numerous approved translations. The EF has translations too, they just aren’t officially approved.
The Latin rite is only one of many Roman Catholic Masses. To call it the Roman Rite would be to diminish the other Masses.
S
SingaporeanGirl
Guest
That being said, thats how many people are towards people who feel at home with the TLM. It is typical of your tone. Well, I’ve heard it before.
S
SingaporeanGirl
Guest
My friend, was I even near talking about the NO per se? Was I not speaking of the behaviour of people from my observations, which would no doubt differ from yours because you do not come from where I come from. With the EF, I have not met anyone who is against the pope. With the NO, I keep hearing how those people disagree with the pope.
J
Jegudiel
Guest
You mean the EF Mass?
In any event your comments are offensive. In essence you’re clearly trying to trigger a certain response with your comments so you can play the martyr. No thanks.
- Status