Personal Preference

[OldYoungGuy]

I know there is concern about pitting the two forms of the Mass, but it seems very disheartening to me that some of our commitments to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass is reduced to personal preference. I find this a little demeaning. This puts a sort of selfish spin on the sacrifices many of us make to attend the Extraordinary Form. I drive an extra 45 min. every Sunday, which pales in comparison to what some of my fellow parishioners drive. My personal preference would be to be able to go to Mass at the Church just down the road. Does anyone else share this frustration?

 

[JRKH]

I would not take “personal preference” as being demeaning at all. After all it IS the form that you - personally - prefer…and therefore "personal preference’ is a perfectly legitimate term.

Neither would I belittle the efforts that anyone puts into attending mass - any time - anywhere.
Like you I hope for the time when the EF is more widely available.

I personally love both forms and, if I were able, I’d attend the EF on sunday here in town and at least one OF during the week.

Peace
James

 

[TrueLight]

If on a Sunday, I have the choice of attending a TLM or OF, which are in the same time slot, I will always choose the TLM.

However, I’ve said before that I attend two parishes.

First Parish
9 AM Sunday TLM
11 AM Sunday OF (very reverent)
Daily morning OF (very reverent)

Second Parish
10 AM TLM
12 PM Sunday OF (haven’t yet attended it)
Daily 6 PM TLM

When I want to attend mass in the morning, I go to the OF at the first parish. When I want to attend at night, I go to the TLM at the second parish.

I tend to do the 10AM TLM at the second parish because 9 AM is so early. However sometimes I attend the 11 AM OF at the first parish and it is like an EWTN mass but even better.

Now here is the problem as I see it and I am preaching to myself as well.

The form cannot become larger than the mass. If we can’t focus at mass because our minds are wandering as we nostalgically remember the last TLM we attended, well there is a problem there.

What if one day, say 100 years from now, because of religious intolerance the quantity of masses we have available to us are extremely limited? Will we be quibbling over which form to use or will we be happy just to have a mass at all?

 

[Bluegoat]

I don’t know - if someone drives an hour to go to a parish with a really great children’s program, or talented choir, or a beautiful building, is that something more than personal preference?

It kind of sounds like you are wanting some kind of accolade or recognition that you and others are going above the call of duty to go to the TLM, or that you are more spiritually sensitive and so need to go, or some such thing. Now, I can’t imagine you would say those things, but that seems to be where what you are saying is leading.

Maybe one could look at it from a different perspective: if ideally everyone should go to their most local parish, then it could be that your traveling so far to the EF is a concession to your weakness in not being able to ignore the thin liturgy in the OF.

I’m not trying to argue this - I used to travel more than an hour to go to the Anglican equivalent of the EF, when I could have walked to the local service. But this was, I think, a rather mixed issue in every way, with both good and bad elements on a personal level and at the level of the Anglican Church.

 

[corsair]

I know what you mean OYGuy. I have to drive 2 hour + each way for an FSSP Mass. Many of my “friends” think I consider myself an elitist. Hardly the case. If I had 45 minutes to drive I’d think I had died and gone to heaven.

I’d gotten to be sort a recluse trying to avoid snide comments from people but that didn’t work so now I just smile and let them “shoot away”.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Why is personal preference bad? I switched to an Eastern parish because of my personal preference for the Divine Liturgy. We have many forms of Liturgy/Mass so that we can go to one where we feel closer to God. God meant it that way because as humans we are limited and we all cannot appreciate the same thing at the same time. The Apostles knew that when they established Churches. They didn’t force Jewish culture on the Gentiles. Now we have 6 Catholic Rites with a diversity of Liturgical Traditions. Canon Law even supports us making a personal choice. Why would it say that we can fulfill our Sunday Obligation in any Catholic Rite? Why not say, “you must fulfill it in a Mass/Liturgy of your own Rite”? It even allows us to go to confession in any Rite of our own preference.

The Church encourages us to make a choice. The mission of the Church on earth is to deliver the Gospel to all people. There is a diversity in traditions because people themselves are diverse. So we can go to where we hear God the best.

 

[OldYoungGuy]

It kind of sounds like you are wanting some kind of accolade or recognition that you and others are going above the call of duty to go to the TLM, or that you are more spiritually sensitive and so need to go, or some such thing. Now, I can’t imagine you would say those things, but that seems to be where what you are saying is leading.

I thought somebody might take it that way, but I assure that is not my motivation, I think reducing it to personal preference takes away from the conversation and makes it all seem a little relativistic. Many of us feel responsible to worship God in the manner he is due, and this not meant to be an attack on pious Catholics who attend the OF. But the liturgy is not about us, and “you like this form, I like this form” kind of makes it seem that way.

Some false notions

 Many people look upon religion as a source of pleasure for themselves; they even derive gentle entertainment from it. For them it is little more than a pastime, a hobby or a luxury. When they feel like it, they practice it; when they do not, they neglect it. Often they flit about from one religion to another to satisfy their peculiar desire for this type or that of fascination and entertainment.
 But their motive is the obtaining of pleasure for themselves. **This is a perversion.**There are even Catholics who neglect to attend Mass on Sundays because "they get nothing out of it." These people people are not interested in doing their duty to God; they want Him to serve them...

This Is The Faith by Canon Francis Ripley

To be fair this was written mostly about Protestants before there were two forms of the Roman Rite, but I think we can see some of the same attitudes about the Mass today and I think we need to get away from that.

 

[Iotaunum]

Yes its frustrating when people think that those who go out of their way to attend the Mass are doing so becuase they like it better, much the way someone would prefer one type of car to another. The majority of people who attend the Latin Mass and seek it out do so for doctrinal reasons. Those who follow the preference route usually attend an indult once every couple of months. The two reasons couldn’t be more different. I, like yourself, do not travel past about 6 Chapels which say the New Mass on my way to Mass on Sunday simply because I want to see the nice garments or hear latin. I could buy a book or dvd for that. It is the faith that matters and the doctrine. Its up to everyone to decide whether the faith expressed in the New Mass of Paul VI is the same traditional faith expressed in the traditional latin rite. Where faith is concerned, I tend to avoid preferences. I hate to think that there are two options where mass is concerned and preference or nostalgia is the only deciding factor.

 

[laszlo]

1./ We Catholics go to Mass for Jesus Christ, not for our preference of the form

2./ We Catholics believe in the primacy of the pope, which in some way means to accept his preferences. He was clear to ‘prefer’ the 1970 Mass as Ordinary Form, so we cannot say that it is lower value.

3./ I myself drive 30 minute for reverent Mass usualy twice a week. In my case that is on Sunday the new form, on the second time the TLM, both strictly adhering to the rules, and the new form very close to the TLM. I do not feel any self pity doing so.

 

[Bluegoat]

I thought somebody might take it that way, but I assure that is not my motivation, I think reducing it to personal preference takes away from the conversation and makes it all seem a little relativistic. Many of us feel responsible to worship God in the manner he is due, and this not meant to be an attack on pious Catholics who attend the OF. But the liturgy is not about us, and “you like this form, I like this form” kind of makes it seem that way.

To be fair this was written mostly about Protestants before there were two forms of the Roman Rite, but I think we can see some of the same attitudes about the Mass today and I think we need to get away from that.

It’s a bit funny, because I actually think the EF is far more substantial than the OF, and I often rue the fact that Anglicans (my own church) seem to have followed the Catholics in the style of their newer liturgies. Which means I have to pass six Anglican parishes to get to a liturgy I think is theologically and liturgically solid.

However, as an Anglican I’m free to think the Anglican Church was off its rocker with the new liturgies. I’m not sure I could say the same thing if I were a Catholic. That is a subject that has been debated here plenty of times though.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The majority of people who attend the Latin Mass and seek it out do so for doctrinal reasons.

And this is part of the problem as there is nothing doctrinally wrong with the OF. The OF and the EF are two forms of the Mass, neither one is doctinally better than the other though you may prefer one over the other.

This is what the Church teaches.

 

[JRKH]

I thought somebody might take it that way, but I assure that is not my motivation, I think reducing it to personal preference takes away from the conversation and makes it all seem a little relativistic. Many of us feel responsible to worship God in the manner he is due, and this not meant to be an attack on pious Catholics who attend the OF. But the liturgy is not about us, and “you like this form, I like this form” kind of makes it seem that way.

I find the second part of this to be a pretty remarkable statement.
The OF and the EF are both worshipping God, “in the manner he is due”.
The Magisterium of the Catholic church, led by Jesus Christ himself and under the protection and guidance of the Holy Spirit has approved two forms of the mass for the Latin rite. I don’t know how many different forms their might be in the eastern Churches…but even if it is only one that makes three forms of the mass.
Each and every one of the forms worships God in the manner he is due, so long as the participants do.
So - the bottom line is that, since Christ himself has approved the OF and the EF equally - that settles it. And if a person prefers one for over another, that preference is, by definition, “personal”…

I don’t know why you wish to read more into this than is there. I embrace the “personal preference” idea and I am greatful that the Holy Spirit in His Love and mercy has given us the options to excersize our “personal preference”.

Peace
James

 

[laszlo]

I embrace the “personal preference” idea and I am greatful that the Holy Spirit in His Love and mercy has given us the options to excersize our “personal preference”.

Yes. This is one basic difference between the Judaism and Christianity: the Judaism is the religion of the Nation, God called the Nation; in the Christianity God draws the individuals, which means that they can and should exercise their personal preferences.

 

[Iotaunum]

And this is part of the problem as there is nothing doctrinally wrong with the OF. The OF and the EF are two forms of the Mass, neither one is doctinally better than the other though you may prefer one over the other.

This is what the Church teaches.

These are the points on which we differ. I, along with many others, do not simply attend a traditional Mass out of preference. This is the point I was trying to make. If you feel you disagree with me then that is fine, but I was making the point that a lot of people attending traditional Masses, perhaps the majority, believe it to be far superior to the rite of Paul VI in many ways. On whether or not there are doctrinal problems with the New Mass, I will leave that to your own opinion. However, there are many who feel that there are doctrinal issues with the Novus Ordo Missal and it is primarily for this reason that the prelates who objected to its promulgation did so. In fact those priests who refused to say the New Mass were not being stubborn or simply preferred the vestments and Latin - it was because they felt the faith was not expressed as fully and as clearly in the New Rite. This is their opinion, which I happen to agree with after a lot of careful study of both Latin texts. I will not start a debate on the doctrinal issues here -they can be found in many books and articles. It would only cause arguments and would bear no fruit. You are free to disagree with me of course, but this is my position: I feel that by its omissions and changes in the text and rubrics as well as the descriptions of the understanding of the Mass, that the New Mass does not express as clearly as it should the theology of the Sacrifice of the Mass as established by the 22nd session of the Council of Trent.

 

[amsjj]

OldYoungGuy, how interesting you cited from “This Is the Faith”! I found a copy just yesterday (it was going to be thrown away with a huge pile of books!!) and have it in line to read. Where did you get your quote?

Mine the 1954 copy, with the Nihil Obstat by J. Canonicus Morgan, S.T.D. and the Imprimatur by Richardus, Archiepiscopus Liverpolitanus, Liverpolii die 25a Januarii 1951.

---

Yes, the Church has given us a choice of forms, but sometimes I feel sad b/c it seems to me like the EF is ghettoized. As I said in another place:

Now speaking purely selfishly here, I want it to get to the point where I don’t have to drive past various other parishes to attend the Mass in the Extraordinary Form – e.g. the next one over for me is a three hour roundtrip drive. Considering I’m not all that fond of driving, and especially on a day of rest, this would be sad for me, but I’d do it if I had to. So my hope is that each parish would have one EF Mass.

I’ll admit I’m somewhat angry that this past was taken from me. None of the NO Masses have ever struck me as the EF does. Yes, I know in the past there were abuses in it just as we have now with the NO. But the EF for me – well, there is something more here, something beyond words, touching Heaven. Still I figure God has His reasons for putting me here in this time and place. I am thankful to see… it feels like a new beginning.

+++

take care,
amsjj

+++
Jesus, God and man,
imprisoned by love in Thy most holy Sacrament,
have mercy upon us.
– Blessed John Henry Newman, December 22, 1851

Tú y yo sabemos por la fe que oculto en las especies sacramentales está Cristo,
ese Cristo con su Cuerpo, con su Sangre, con su Alma, y con su Divinidad,
prisonero de amor.
– San Josemaria Escriva, 1 junio 1974

 

[Bluegoat]

OldYoungGuy, how interesting you cited from “This Is the Faith”! I found a copy just yesterday (it was going to be thrown away with a huge pile of books!!) and have it in line to read. Where did you get your quote?

Mine the 1954 copy, with the Nihil Obstat by J. Canonicus Morgan, S.T.D. and the Imprimatur by Richardus, Archiepiscopus Liverpolitanus, Liverpolii die 25a Januarii 1951.

---

Yes, the Church has given us a choice of forms, but sometimes I feel sad b/c it seems to me like the EF is ghettoized. As I said in another place:

Now speaking purely selfishly here, I want it to get to the point where I don’t have to drive past various other parishes to attend the Mass in the Extraordinary Form – e.g. the next one over for me is a three hour roundtrip drive. Considering I’m not all that fond of driving, and especially on a day of rest, this would be sad for me, but I’d do it if I had to. So my hope is that each parish would have one EF Mass.

I’ll admit I’m somewhat angry that this past was taken from me. None of the NO Masses have ever struck me as the EF does. Yes, I know in the past there were abuses in it just as we have now with the NO. But the EF for me – well, there is something more here, something beyond words, touching Heaven. Still I figure God has His reasons for putting me here in this time and place. I am thankful to see… it feels like a new beginning.

+++

take care,
amsjj

+++
Jesus, God and man,
imprisoned by love in Thy most holy Sacrament,
have mercy upon us.
– Blessed John Henry Newman, December 22, 1851

Tú y yo sabemos por la fe que oculto en las especies sacramentales está Cristo,
ese Cristo con su Cuerpo, con su Sangre, con su Alma, y con su Divinidad,
prisonero de amor.
– San Josemaria Escriva, 1 junio 1974

One thing I can say from my Anglican experience is that even having the EF in every parish won’t necessarily stop it from being ghettoized. Some Anglican parishes have both the old and new liturgical forms, but often what happens is you get two different congregations appearing for each, and they don’t have a lot to do with each other. Sometimes one is much larger, and so they have music and Sunday school and the most popular time slot, which can lead to hard feelings.

The only places I’ve seen it work well has it so that they used both liturgies and switched off from week to week. But people do not always appreciate having to go to the liturgical form they do not prefer.