Pope to Reintroduce Latin into the Novus Ordo and Move the "Sign of Peace"

[Dauphin]

I am trying not to appear ignorant but on this web site in many forums initials are used for various types of forms of the Mass.

When I was a girl (a hundred years ago) we had High Mass and Low Mass; now I see a Mass called “Solemn Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.” Am I correct in assuming that this EF is just what we used to call “High Mass” or is this some new and special Mass?

Also, many people on these forums say that they are from NO churches and/or are raised NO. What does that mean?

Thanks for any enlightenment.

There are two forms of the Roman Rite:

The New Mass, NO (Novus ordo), or OF (ordinary form)

and

The TLM (Traditional or Tridentine Latin Mass), EF (Extraordinary Form), or sometimes Usus Antiquior

The TLM can be a Pontifical High Mass, Solemn High Mass, Missa Cantata, or Low Mass.

If someone says they belong to an NO parish, it means that their parish does not have a regularly scheduled celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass, and celebrates the Novus Ordo exclusively.

 

[pnewton]

Another thread elsewhere use the phrase “weighing changes.” But enough of that. I guess I have no opinion one way or the other. On one hand, I would not understand what was being said, so I would be more likely to phase out and lose focus. On the other hand, I have at least been Catholic long enough so that I know the gist of what is being said. At least I have a priest that was raised with the Latin Mass and can adapt.

One more benefit, it would cut ICEL out of loop for the consecration at least.

 

[I_Believe]

I am trying not to appear ignorant but on this web site in many forums initials are used for various types of forms of the Mass.

When I was a girl (a hundred years ago) we had High Mass and Low Mass; now I see a Mass called “Solemn Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.” Am I correct in assuming that this EF is just what we used to call “High Mass” or is this some new and special Mass?

Also, many people on these forums say that they are from NO churches and/or are raised NO. What does that mean?

Thanks for any enlightenment.

EF = extraordinary form = the mass as prayed according to the 1962 Missal, High, Low, Solemn, etc.

OF = Ordinary Form = NO = Novus Ordo, or, the Pauline Mass or 1969

Here is what the Pope says…
summorumpontificum.net/2007/07/summorum-pontificum-english.html

 

[BSHoop96]

further proof that the novus ordo was a gigantic mistake on the vatican’s part. it breaks with tradition and is a banal fabrication.

why not get rid of it and return to the missal of 62 and start from there.

I would say you just made a HUGE leap there.

 

[BSHoop96]

I’ve been to Mass in other countries and can say that I would absolutely love to have Latin for the Consecration. At least that way I could understand it completely rather than just recalling the words in English in my head because the local vernacular I don’t understand.

Simon

I think that if English is your first language you will probably still “think” the words in your head in English even as you hear and understand them in Latin.

 

[BSHoop96]

I would rather it was at the very beginning of Mass. ill have to admit I dont like regardless of where it is.

I susect some youngin will be a little less young tomorrow.

I’m with you estesbob. I would prefer it at the beginning of Mass too but would gladly accept the talked about change.

 

[japhy]

What many fail to realize, it that the Sunday Mass is pretty much THE interface between the Church and many Catholics. Inserting foreign languages may well drive a wedge for some.

I would hope people wouldn’t choose between obeying the Church (and taking on the challenge of being gasp exposed to Latin) and God, as if the two are mutually exclusive. If they do, then they haven’t got the right idea about the Church, and we need to spend some time educating them.

We wouldn’t be in this predicament of Latin hadn’t been excised from the Mass…

It would seem that most of the Latin proponents are either folks who grew up with it, or others who are VERY deep into their faith… and there is a tendency for them to assume that everyone should be like them.

I don’t know how “deep into [my] faith” others would consider me, but I know that I should be deeper, and – believe it or not – I find that saying some of my prayers in Latin helps deepen that faith and connect me with the traditional spirituality of the Church. Now, I’m not saying that private devotions should be in Latin, since historically, the personal devotions are where the vernacular is most employed. I’m just saying, it helped me, and I think it would be prudent to introduce the Latin (bit by bit) into the Mass, especially if most people don’t have devotions or any other encounter with the Church apart from Mass.

And honestly, everyone should be deeper in their faith than they are. I’m not saying people should be like me, but that we all need to be deeper in our faith. This isn’t elitism, this is humility.

 

[Brendan]

Someone pointed out that switching language to latin just for the institution narrative may give the impression that these are some kind of magic words that has to be spoken in a very precise way in an ancient language in order to be effective. In fact, the expression “hocus pocus” origins from “hoc est”. But the eucharist isn’t magic, it’s worship. So to be consistent, if one part of the Canon should be in latin, everything should, from “Dominus vobiscum” to “Amen”.

Actually, what you just described was precisely what the Vatican II Council intented when it voted on Sacrosanctum Concillium.

The common prayers and the Canon (one Canon) in Latin, with the Readings, Gospel and other daily prayers in the vernacular.

So hopefully we will get back that one day.

But, if some people think that a specific impression is being given, that can easily be answered with correct catechesis.

 

[Image_of_God]

Would the moving of the sign of peace be a break with tradition in the Roman liturgy?

 

[ethelzguy]

Short of a mental incapacity, it’s sheer laziness not to be able to learn the prayers of the Mass in their original and proper language.

Yah, that’s it…if we aren’t enamored with Latin, it’s because we’re all just lazy, mediocre Catholics…

Sheesh

 

[ethelzguy]

And honestly, everyone should be deeper in their faith than they are. I’m not saying people should be like me, but that we all need to be deeper in our faith. This isn’t elitism, this is humility.

For ME to say that I should be deeper in my faith is indeed, humility.

For ME to say that someone else should be deeper in my faith is a different story.

The point I was trying to make was, that for many, Sunday Mass and maybe dropping the kids off at CCD is as far as it goes…good or bad, right or wrong, that’s just the way it is.

Is it more important to keep those on the edge with us, or to lose them for the sake of ourselves?

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

I’m sorry, i was taught that the Holy Spirit didn’t make mistakes. But I guess i have been wrong all along

nowhere does the church teach that things subject to change such as discipline, administration or modifications of the liturgy, are protected from human error by the church.

if the liturgical changes after vii were correct, then why has the B16 been so adamant about changing it? communion in the hand was a huge blunder. ad populum has been as well.

a true organic reform of the liturgy would not require us to preserve the former use of the same rite. we have two forms because the new form has been a disaster.

the idea is to slowly bring the novus ordo back to sound tradition so that we will only have one roman rite liturgy.

 

[Image_of_God]

Would the moving of the sign of peace be a break with tradition in the Roman liturgy?

I figured it out, I think. The Pax was inserted in the Liturgy where it is today by St. Innocent I. Why change it’s place? Why not change the Pax itself?

 

[ethelzguy]

if the liturgical changes after vii were correct, then why has the **B16 been so adamant about changing it? **communion in the hand was a huge blunder. ad populum has been as well.

But has he really been “adamant” as you put it, about changing anything?

He has “released” the TLM from bondage (as some would put it), and made some commentary (spoken, written, and physical), but I haven’t seen anything from him to this point that comes off as “adamant”.

Perhaps it’s wishful thinking? I do sense that the traditional crowd seems to hang on every word and motion, not to mention the “leaks” that come from Rome.

I think a lot of this speculation leads to needless agitation.

 

[Dauphin]

For ME to say that I should be deeper in my faith is indeed, humility.

For ME to say that someone else should be deeper in my faith is a different story.

The point I was trying to make was, that for many, Sunday Mass and maybe dropping the kids off at CCD is as far as it goes…good or bad, right or wrong, that’s just the way it is.

Is it more important to keep those on the edge with us, or to lose them for the sake of ourselves?

The point is to try to get them to heaven.

The Church isn’t some purely social institution set up to make people happy and not to disrupt their precious routines. If this change rocks the boat, then so be it.

 

[CreatioNova]

Would the moving of the sign of peace be a break with tradition in the Roman liturgy?

I wish the sign of peace would be got rid of altogether. I really intensely dislike it.
I find it disrupting and completely unnecessary - and the faffing about that people engage in is outrageous.
Ive seen people walk almost the length of the church diving in and out of pews in an attempt to shake everyones hand that they can get to.

I’d much prefer it was done away with completely.

 

[Image_of_God]

I wish the sign of peace would be got rid of altogether. I really intensely dislike it.
I find it disrupting and completely unnecessary - and the faffing about that people engage in is outrageous.
Ive seen people walk almost the length of the church diving in and out of pews in an attempt to shake everyones hand that they can get to.

I’d much prefer it was done away with completely.

I agree, perhaps it is time to move it out. I am one of those people. I didn’t know it was an abuse and I won’t do it anymore. It is through small changes that the Church develops organically, so this is natural. I just wish he’d either change the content and keep it where it is or just completely remove it. I think St. Innocent I’s intentions when he put it there were completely innocuous.

 

[Cathryn]

For ME to say that I should be deeper in my faith is indeed, humility.

For ME to say that someone else should be deeper in my faith is a different story.

The point I was trying to make was, that for many, Sunday Mass and maybe dropping the kids off at CCD is as far as it goes…good or bad, right or wrong, that’s just the way it is.

Is it more important to keep those on the edge with us, or to lose them for the sake of ourselves?

We all need to be deeper into the one true faith, the Catholic faith. There really isn’t my faith or your faith. There is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. We need to pray and work on being one, with the mind and spirit of Christ.

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

Perhaps it’s wishful thinking? I do sense that the traditional crowd seems to hang on every word and motion, not to mention the “leaks” that come from Rome.

I think a lot of this speculation leads to needless agitation.

you have a point. i’ve read his (B16) books and find him to be very critical of the current mass. but it’s also true he’s done little official to change it.

i agree with what you say but i’m trying to read between the lines and see in his actions a desire to right the wrongs of post vii liturgical reforms.

 

[JReducation]

from another youngin and dont forget the increase in incense use
We should be proud of our history our liturgical heritage and censing things is one of those simple beautiful things that got tossed by the wayside while we have the best smelling incense in the world. .

We had to dispense with the insense in our parish for very practical reasons. The Bishop and the Religious Superior agreed, no incense for our parish.

One of our friars who is also a priest has CP. He is on crutches. It is very dangerous for him to use it. Also, we have five residential communities of senior citizens attached to our parish. Many of them have respiratory problems.

The Bishop sent a letter on the use of incense. The religious in our parish appealed to their superior who then met with the Bishop and they agreed that this was not practical or safe in our case. Thank God.

I can’t imagine a priest on crutches carrying a live piece of charcoal.

JR