H
henrikhank
Guest
what’s the difference between a homily at a tridentine mass and a homily at a novus ordo mass? I mean, those of you who attend the tridentine mass do you do it only for the mass or also for the homily?
- Status
J
JimmytheButcher
Guest
There is no difference in the homily. There might be some rubrical difference. That I do not know about. However, there are some tendencies that I do notice.
The homilies at the Extraordinary Forms that I have been to tend to be more downright Theological, plain and simple. And, at the Ordinary Forms I have been to the tone of the homilies come across as more moralistic. At my typical Sunday Mass I cannot remember the last time I heard anything but a historical criticism on the time and place, etc. of some event being read about in the Gospel account. (Perhaps this particular monsignor is very gifted in his understanding of way-back when). This is of course by no means absolute but only my experience. And, perhaps there is a reason for this. One could imagine that a Catholic priest discussing the Blessed Virgin at an Extraordinary Form can safely do so without alienating persons who are threatened by Her inviolate nature. I have heard listened to many Extraordinary Form homilies that come across quite literally as Philosophical tracts. And, I busy reading a homily that is quite literally chaning my life. It is some 45 or 50 pages in length and expounds upon the title ‘Mary Mediatrix of all-Graces’ and ‘The Immaculate Conception’. Granted this one is written by a Cardinal who is a 15th-century English saint (John Fisher). It all depends on the man. At the moment I can’t possibly imagine anyone other than my pious uncle preaching on the ‘True Devotion to Mary’ (Louis de Montfort). The same good and elderly uncle of mine will talk about various linguistic devices like aspirations and lenitions when detailing the various names of obscure saints and blesseds from centuries past, but the polyglot fluent in Bibical Greek and every Romance language, on top of the Slavic languages, that he is lends the man to this. He is a good man to travel with.
I recently was alienated by a Extraordianary Form homiliy that began with a trite and crass joke. Any recollection I had was lost and had to be re-gained. (More than likely my fault for being sensitive in my pride to gossip and common speech – All I ask is that a truth about God be explained to me in a reverent and succint manner… I digress.)
A big mistake I think that is made is that too many homilies regardless of the rites performed are just not up to par. It seems to me but most folks like to be challenged by a sermon of appropriate length that really whacks them over their heads and their souls. (Realise that I am an advocate for the Extraordinary Form (especially due to the meter/rhythym at which it is prayed) but I make it a matter of principal to attend the Ordinary Form nearly exclusively. I do however try to make it a practice to hear several homilies per day via the Internet and there are priests who regular expound homilies, at Ordinary Forms, phenomenonally Theological in content.)
Now on to something fun:
In both the Ordinary and the Extraordinary Form the holy Mass is paused during the homily. This is signified by the priest removing his manipule. The holy Mass is continued when he replaces his manipule on his arm (or so I have come to understand).
A manipule is to be worn at an Extraordinary Form and is seen as optional at the Ordinary Form. From what I understand deacons may also wear manipules along with their dalmatics. (Correct me if I am wrong.)
The homilies at the Extraordinary Forms that I have been to tend to be more downright Theological, plain and simple. And, at the Ordinary Forms I have been to the tone of the homilies come across as more moralistic. At my typical Sunday Mass I cannot remember the last time I heard anything but a historical criticism on the time and place, etc. of some event being read about in the Gospel account. (Perhaps this particular monsignor is very gifted in his understanding of way-back when). This is of course by no means absolute but only my experience. And, perhaps there is a reason for this. One could imagine that a Catholic priest discussing the Blessed Virgin at an Extraordinary Form can safely do so without alienating persons who are threatened by Her inviolate nature. I have heard listened to many Extraordinary Form homilies that come across quite literally as Philosophical tracts. And, I busy reading a homily that is quite literally chaning my life. It is some 45 or 50 pages in length and expounds upon the title ‘Mary Mediatrix of all-Graces’ and ‘The Immaculate Conception’. Granted this one is written by a Cardinal who is a 15th-century English saint (John Fisher). It all depends on the man. At the moment I can’t possibly imagine anyone other than my pious uncle preaching on the ‘True Devotion to Mary’ (Louis de Montfort). The same good and elderly uncle of mine will talk about various linguistic devices like aspirations and lenitions when detailing the various names of obscure saints and blesseds from centuries past, but the polyglot fluent in Bibical Greek and every Romance language, on top of the Slavic languages, that he is lends the man to this. He is a good man to travel with.
I recently was alienated by a Extraordianary Form homiliy that began with a trite and crass joke. Any recollection I had was lost and had to be re-gained. (More than likely my fault for being sensitive in my pride to gossip and common speech – All I ask is that a truth about God be explained to me in a reverent and succint manner… I digress.)
A big mistake I think that is made is that too many homilies regardless of the rites performed are just not up to par. It seems to me but most folks like to be challenged by a sermon of appropriate length that really whacks them over their heads and their souls. (Realise that I am an advocate for the Extraordinary Form (especially due to the meter/rhythym at which it is prayed) but I make it a matter of principal to attend the Ordinary Form nearly exclusively. I do however try to make it a practice to hear several homilies per day via the Internet and there are priests who regular expound homilies, at Ordinary Forms, phenomenonally Theological in content.)
Now on to something fun:
In both the Ordinary and the Extraordinary Form the holy Mass is paused during the homily. This is signified by the priest removing his manipule. The holy Mass is continued when he replaces his manipule on his arm (or so I have come to understand).
A manipule is to be worn at an Extraordinary Form and is seen as optional at the Ordinary Form. From what I understand deacons may also wear manipules along with their dalmatics. (Correct me if I am wrong.)
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
Big confusion…
J
jonbhorton
Guest
Well, I only attend two parishes, one OF (will be saying “later” after confirmation), one EF (Will be totally full time after confirmation). I can say that the homilies at the OF are short, sweet, moralistic, vague, and to what point- I am still trying to grasp. They’re more like the “children’s time” my pastor had growing up in the Methodist church. One Sunday I heard more jokes and uncomfortable scenarios being played out than I care to remember; granted, from a younger priest, but his style aside, the material was totally out of place in Mass.
The homilies at the EF actually challenge me to think, be a warrior for Christ, and give me a sense that my Priest at the Latin Mass actually wants us to be educated and not given over to, as C.S. Lewis described Protestantism when it goes bad, “vague ethical platitudes”.
The homilies at the EF actually challenge me to think, be a warrior for Christ, and give me a sense that my Priest at the Latin Mass actually wants us to be educated and not given over to, as C.S. Lewis described Protestantism when it goes bad, “vague ethical platitudes”.
H
henrikhank
Guest
maybe you’re right. This is also my experience.I think Novus Ordo sermons/homilies may be more like “let’s lean something about Christianity” and the Tridentine sermons/homilies are more “let’s learn somethig about Catholicism”.
I think a Priest who celebrates both (a more conservative) Novus Ordo Mass and the Tridentine Mass may actually give Tridentine sermons/homilies all the time. That’s what I experienced.
B
Big_Feet
Guest
Does one ever think that there are 2 different humans giving each of these homilies, each with their own style and preferences? Dont you think that these two priests, if put in the opposite situation (OF vs EF mass) would still give a similar homily to what they gave at the other form of mass??
I think it is more the person giving the homily, not the cause of the form of mass used.
F
Filii_Dei
Guest
I’ll state this quite simply: there is no difference in the homily. 
The “rubrics” of the homily are essentially the same across both forms: the priest walks up to the pulpit to speak to the faithful. That is all there is to it. Anything after that all depends on the individual priest.
I fear we may be reading too deeply into the whole issue. There are good and bad homilies from priests of either OF or EF background, and it depends on their charisma and their knowledge of both scripture and tradition. Trying to draw distinctions between “OF priests” and “EF priests” in terms of something that is not related to liturgy is bound to result in a lot of sweeping statements and unfair generalizations, based upon our own limited experiences with a limited number of priests.
The “rubrics” of the homily are essentially the same across both forms: the priest walks up to the pulpit to speak to the faithful. That is all there is to it. Anything after that all depends on the individual priest.
I fear we may be reading too deeply into the whole issue. There are good and bad homilies from priests of either OF or EF background, and it depends on their charisma and their knowledge of both scripture and tradition. Trying to draw distinctions between “OF priests” and “EF priests” in terms of something that is not related to liturgy is bound to result in a lot of sweeping statements and unfair generalizations, based upon our own limited experiences with a limited number of priests.
M
Mrs_Sally
Guest
Amen.I’ll state this quite simply: there is no difference in the homily.
The “rubrics” of the homily are essentially the same across both forms: the priest walks up to the pulpit to speak to the faithful. That is all there is to it. Anything after that all depends on the individual priest.
I fear we may be reading too deeply into the whole issue. There are good and bad homilies from priests of either OF or EF background, and it depends on their charisma and their knowledge of both scripture and tradition. Trying to draw distinctions between “OF priests” and “EF priests” in terms of something that is not related to liturgy is bound to result in a lot of sweeping statements and unfair generalizations, based upon our own limited experiences with a limited number of priests.
- Status