EF a different rite than OF, some say.

[ProVobis]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, pardon me! You mean the typical Mass in the vernacular (usually English) here in the USA. LOL! Sorry about that. “English” had me thinking of the UK and the Anglican-use Mass here in parts of the USA.

My point exactly. Those in the U.S. who use the term OF and gloat about its widespread use over the EF don’t usually take into account the many Spanish OF or Polish OF or even Latin OF Masses that are said as well. Many Anglophones wouldn’t go to them either but they probably wouldn’t criticize them as much as the EF, though I could be wrong.

 

[curlycool89]

I’ve only heard of those two, never been to one, don’t even know where they are.

The “normal” (most used) Mass in the U.S. is the English OF, though, as I said, you don’t see the “OF” on bulletins or Mass times.

That’s because it is ordinarily what is celebrated.

That is of course normal english usage. When you don’t qualify something it is understood that you should not expect something out of the ordinary. That’s why there’s no need to say Ordinary Form of the Mass, because if you say “Mass” it is understood that in the english language you are saying “what is ordinarily the Mass” (and the Vatican has said that the OF is the Ordinary Form of the Mass).

You only need to qualify when something is out of the ordinary, such as the EF or Anglican-Use Masses. That’s normal english usage.

 

[ProVobis]

That’s because it is ordinarily what is celebrated.

The English OF account for only about 5% of all OF Masses. How can that be ordinarily celebrated?

And I haven’t included all the other options of the normative form.

 

[thewanderer]

Do we really need another thread debating the correct way to name each form? As far as I can see it this debate always leads to more division, which really isn’t what we need in our Church right now. The question, asked and answered was whether the OF and EF are different rites, of course they aren’t and people shouldn’t try to pretend that they are.

 

[Jegudiel]

I hope you are not trying something like a personal attack. I know my rights to opinion. And there is much terminology you can dispute over because people use a lot of short form so, thats your choice… there are many things to get angry over but its never worth losing ones peace over them. And those replies were addressed to people who hold genuine conversation. Anyway, Happy Feast of St. Joseph the Worker to all on this thread. I’ve decided that sleep is worth more than this debate. Goodnight.

The deeper you dig-in on this issue, the more it appears you use “NO” as a means to offend others, or as a means to denigrate the OF Mass or to do both.

 

[Jegudiel]

Do we really need another thread debating the correct way to name each form? As far as I can see it this debate always leads to more division, which really isn’t what we need in our Church right now. The question, asked and answered was whether the OF and EF are different rites, of course they aren’t and people shouldn’t try to pretend that they are.

I suspect that is the very intent of some people.

 

[maryjk]

Do we really need another thread debating the correct way to name each form? As far as I can see it this debate always leads to more division, which really isn’t what we need in our Church right now.

As the OP, I totally agree with you.

The question, asked and answered was whether the OF and EF are different rites, of course they aren’t and people shouldn’t try to pretend that they are.

As the OP, it really wasn’t a question. Of course they aren’t different Rites. Most people know that. The problem is that it seems there are many that believe they are different Rites. I find that very sad. Talk about leading to more division.

 

[Cider]

Ah I see. Thank you. But isn’t N.O. commonly used?

Yes it is. I’ve seen it listed as such in more than one parish bulletin and website.

 

[ProVobis]

Do we really need another thread debating the correct way to name each form? As far as I can see it this debate always leads to more division, which really isn’t what we need in our Church right now.

If you ever go to a bi- or tri-lingual parish, you’ll see quite a lot of division there. I don’t think which form used is the issue there.

At St. John Cantius (in Chicago) they have a Latin OF Mass followed immediately by the EF. Many of those attending don’t know which one is which.

 

[curlycool89]

The English OF account for only about 5% of all OF Masses. How can that be ordinarily celebrated?

Ordinary can be a universal and a relative term.

In the US, as in all other countries, the OF is the ordinary form of the Mass. Also, I would expect to find a Mass in the US being done in the most common language in the US, which is english. If I see “Mass” in a US bulletin without qualifications, I assume it means english OF because that’s just how you ordinarily speak with people. If it were the 1940s and saw “Mass” I would expect to see the Tridentine Mass in latin (no idea what year Missal would be used at that point).

If I were in Spain, it’s the same train of thought. The OF is ordinary, and Spanish is expected because it’s the language of the country. If I saw a listing of Masses in Spain, unless otherwise noted I would assume they are spanish OF Masses.

I’m sorry if you’re peeved about it, but people speak informally, not legally. When you speak informally, you leave out unneeded descriptors like “english OF” when you say Mass because statistically speaking (if you’re in the US) there probably upwards of 90% likelihood (probably near 97-98% is my guesstimation) that it’s an english OF Mass.

This also applies to our Easter Catholic brethren in North America. We don’t have to specify Roman Catholic because if we say Catholic people normally think of Roman Catholics, but others may have to specify Ukrainian Catholic because it’s less common. If we were in Ukraine however (or anywhere else with a sizeable Eastern Catholic population), I’d have to say Roman Catholic.

You can see it’s the same thing with forms. If the EF ever got to say 10-20% by proportion of total Masses in the US (unlikely to happen anytime soon), then you’d probably have to start specifying to avoid confusion. Right now we don’t have to; when you say Mass people think “english OF Mass”.

 

[thewanderer]

Jegudial,

of some few, yes, but I can assure you not of everyone who uses it, and ad hominem attacks are not going to help unify those who think differently. It is possible for people to use NO simply because its what they’re ussed to and its what everybdy else they know uses. That actually happens a lot. Also, NO is not the only term that can be used disparagingly… I’ve heard Ordinary Form used to imply that the OF isn’t as good as the Extraordinary Form. The point is that the division comes not from the words used but the attitudes behind them. It would be much more worthwhile to lovingly and charitably try to help change people’s attitudes rather than attack anyone who uses the term ‘NO’. I can only assume you’ve had some really bad experiences with this being used in a negative connotation before, but ttrust me, the majority of people who use this term just use it because its what theyve heard it called and its what they’re used to. Its hardly charitable or unifying to assume that anyone who uses this term intends it to be divisive?

ProVobis,

Yes, there is unfortunately much division in the Church, the point being why invite more division and hurt feelings?

 

[ProVobis]

You can see it’s the same thing with forms. If the EF ever got to say 10-20% by proportion of total Masses in the US (unlikely to happen anytime soon),

Maybe if all OF Masses were to be said using EP1 and in Latin, very few would know the difference so the percentage of 1% or 10% or 90% wouldn’t matter? After all, many people heard the Pope say a Latin Mass using EP1 in England. For those who despise Latin, was it that much of a consolation to know it was the OF?

 

[TrueLight]

I think that trying to differentiate the OF and the EF as two separate rites is just simple ignorance or dishonest choice to thrive on ignorance.

I am amazed at how some resort to namecalling.

I mean seriously any one of us can call others names like “ignorant” if we let the flesh have its way.

 

[malphono]

After all, many people heard the Pope say a Latin Mass using EP1 in England. For those who despise Latin, was it that much of a consolation to know it was the OF?

Love it! 100%

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

The deeper you dig-in on this issue, the more it appears you use “NO” as a means to offend others, or as a means to denigrate the OF Mass or to do both.

Brother, you need to chill out on the issue. You are looking for boogey-men behind every utterance of “novus ordo.” It is a bit ridiculous, in the literal sense of the word. It is hard to take you seriously when you come out with both barrels blazing when someone simply says “novus ordo.” Your reaction is not equal to the perceived slight.

Perhaps, if it bothers you so much, you can fight back by referring to the EF as the “VO” – the “vetus ordo”

• PAX

 

[curlycool89]

Maybe if all OF Masses were to be said using EP1 and in Latin, very few would know the difference so the percentage of 1% or 10% or 90% wouldn’t matter? After all, many people heard the Pope say a Latin Mass using EP1 in England. For those who despise Latin, was it that much of a consolation to know it was the OF?

I don’t really see the problem. The Pope usually celebrates a Latin OF when he goes somewhere where there could be more then 1 common language from what I’ve heard, so that’s what I’d expect if I went to a Mass with the Pope.

On the other hand, the example is irrelevant because Mass with the Pope isn’t ordinary or common (not in our part of the world). It would be nice to to, but if the Pope’s saying Mass I’m expecting anything from an english OF to a Pontifical High EF Mass. In those cases people will tell you anyways that it doesn’t matter so much what the Pope is celebrating so much that the Pope is celebrating.

Also, who cares which EP was used? As long as one from the Missal is being used it’s a valid Mass. I like hearing the other EPs too and I heard EP1 today.

I thought we were discussing why we didn’t need to put “english OF” on a bulletin. What does this have to do with that?

 

[Jegudiel]

Jegudial,

of some few, yes, but I can assure you not of everyone who uses it, and ad hominem attacks are not going to help unify those who think differently. It is possible for people to use NO simply because its what they’re ussed to and its what everybdy else they know uses. That actually happens a lot. Also, NO is not the only term that can be used disparagingly… I’ve heard Ordinary Form used to imply that the OF isn’t as good as the Extraordinary Form. The point is that the division comes not from the words used but the attitudes behind them. It would be much more worthwhile to lovingly and charitably try to help change people’s attitudes rather than attack anyone who uses the term ‘NO’. I can only assume you’ve had some really bad experiences with this being used in a negative connotation before, but ttrust me, the majority of people who use this term just use it because its what theyve heard it called and its what they’re used to. Its hardly charitable or unifying to assume that anyone who uses this term intends it to be divisive?

ProVobis,

Yes, there is unfortunately much division in the Church, the point being why invite more division and hurt feelings?

I’m sorry but I disagree. When someone quite correctly uses “EF” to describe one form of the Mass and then uses “NO” in the same sentence that begs further scrutiny. Why have they adopted the Pope’s nomenclature for one form of the Mass (which they clearly prefer based on their other comments) and not the Ordinary Form of the Mass?

Why do such people typically dig-in when someone charitably explains to them that many view “novus ordo” and particularly “NO” to be pejorative labels? How could they not intuitively realize that “NO Mass” is going to offend many? Why do they invariably further denigrate the OF Mass as they are digging in?

My own opinion is that they do realize that many find such labels offensive. Sadly they use the labels as a quiet way to denigrate the OF Mass and/or to antagonize those that love the OF Mass. Either ways it’s very obvious.

 

[curlycool89]

I’m sorry but I disagree. When someone quite correctly uses “EF” to describe one form of the Mass and then uses “NO” in the same sentence that begs further scrutiny. Why have they adopted the Pope’s nomenclature for one form of the Mass (which they clearly prefer based on their other comments) and not the Ordinary Form of the Mass?

I don’t wan to be calling people out or anything, but I know that some people like to call it the EF because they like to think that “extraordinary” means “better” or “remarkable” or “better than ordinary” when it doesn’t. When the Church says “extraordinary”, it means “that which is not ordinary” as in “not the ordinary form (OF) of the Mass”.

It’s the same type of language as when we say “disordered” (example - same sex attraction is disordered); we mean “not properly ordered” (as in “sexuality is properly ordered toward procreation, therefore same sex attraction is disordered”).

It’s funny, because by using EF you are implicitly acknowledging that it is called the OF, because without an OF you can’t have an EF (you can’t have something extra-ordinary if there’s not something ordinary).

 

[ProVobis]

Yes, there is unfortunately much division in the Church, the point being why invite more division and hurt feelings?

Well, when you have one form which allows the option of two different types of Creeds, four different Canons/Eucharistic Prayers, 500 different vernaculars, and the option of replacing the Offertory with a hymn, how much more division would it cause to keep a form with the same language, one creed, and one canon for everyone? Just saying.

 

[CB_Catholic]

It’s a discussion we constantly have on this forum. Some feel that the term Novus Ordo shouldn’t be used at all. Some say that is what most people use in real life.

Some feel we should always use "Ordinary Form (OF) for the Novus Ordo or Extraordinary Form (EF) for the TLM.

But that’s another topic.

In real life most people just say “the Mass”. It is only on forums such as these that we get into such issues. The average pew Catholic never even says EF or OF. They would call the EF the “old Latin Mass”. For sure. Unless you are in an EF parish, or a parish that offers both forms, most people just say “the Mass”.