"Praying" the Mass; Novus Ordo vs. Traditional Latin Mass

[TLM08]

I attend both the Traditional Latin as well as the Novus Ordo Mass at various parishes. At the Novus Ordo, I never really felt like the Mass was a “prayer”, but rather more like a “ceremonial gathering”.

When I started attending the Traditional Latin Mass the whole idea of “praying” this Mass came naturally to me from the first one I attended. Suddenly the phrase “praying the Mass” made perfect sense to me, maybe because I was more focused on the prayers in the missal than trying to pay attention to the words of the priest.

My question is this: Are we supposed to “pray” the Novus Ordo Mass?

 

[Eucharisted]

We pray the Liturgy and both forms of Mass are the same one Liturgy. I don’t understand what some Catholics don’t get about this, especially those who say the NO is evil. For all the piety that the “traditionalist” Catholics I’ve met hold, they have a very small understanding of theology it seems. Pray the Mass, whatever form, but don’t diss it.

 

[jkarp]

We pray the Liturgy and both forms of Mass are the same one Liturgy. I don’t understand what some Catholics don’t get about this, especially those who say the NO is evil. For all the piety that the “traditionalist” Catholics I’ve met hold, they have a very small understanding of theology it seems. Pray the Mass, whatever form, but don’t diss it.

Amen. I certainly don’t appreciate the abuses of the Ordinary Form of the Mass that certain priests seem to be inclined to include every Sunday, but I definitely think that the Ordinary Form is a beautiful Mass (when done properly). At the same time, I appreciate the beauty of the Extraordinary Form as well.

To the OP: I really feel that you will find the Ordinary Form prayerful when it is done properly. For a great example of the proper celebration, I suggest watching a Mass at the Vatican (Chistmas Midnight Mass is chance to catch this - it’s even on next week!)

Pax Christi sit semper tecum (et vobiscum)!

 

[ncjohn]

I guess my experience is exactly the opposite of the OP’s. I grew up with the EF and always just felt like an observer and that what little involvement the people had was just recitation. I tend to doubt that that is the case now since those who attend the EF genuinely want to be there and appreciate its form and beauty for what they are, catching themselves up in the prayer that it is. I’m sure it has recaptured the beauty that was originally contemplated rather than the dry, sterile ones I saw growing up.

For me it is much easier to pray the OF because of it being readily understandable for me what is going on. I’m not having to read along or translate in my head, which allows me to be totally attentive to the words being spoken.

I am thrilled though that both are now more readily available so that our preference in that area can be filled in the way that we feel most called to. It isn’t a matter of “superiority”, as the Pope made clear, and it is truly sad the amount of “my Mass is better than yours” stuff that goes on.

Peace,

 

[ProVobis]

My question is this: Are we supposed to “pray” the Novus Ordo Mass?

I know where you’re coming from. Although the Mass is the Mass, there are those occasions where it is difficult to pray the Mass as you call it. I find it easier to pray the Mass when I can go at my own speed. But prayer is still prayer.

 

[mattwcu]

The difference between praying the with the TLM and praying the OF in my opinion a fundamental one.

In the OF more emphasis is placed on the active (as in: doing things) participation which was not necessarily called for but nevertheless is what happened. And so, if you pray well by doing things then it will suit you.

In the TLM, the prayer is more focused and interior…silent even. I guess we could say the TLM is contemplative in nature. The focus clearly is on God and not us.

The other thing I think some people find disruptive in praying with the OF is the lack of rubrics for the priest. This leads to a number of things.

The differences between each parish can be staggering and all within the realm of acceptable and following the rubrics. This creates a different experience among Catholics at Mass even though each may be perfectly in line with the GIRM.

So one problem here, when I talk about my OF experience as being “prayerful”, yours might not be the same. And part of that is the fault of the nature of the liturgy itself which has lent itself in some places to creativity on the part of priests and “liturgists”. It has disrupted everything and confusion has set in.

 

[jkarp]

The other thing I think some people find disruptive in praying with the OF is the lack of rubrics for the priest.

??? In my liturgical studies courses we discussed rubrics . . .

 

[Joannm]

??? In my liturgical studies courses we discussed rubrics . . .

Yes, I studied rubrics as well. One just needs to open the sacramentary to see all the rubrics. I don’t know where the previous poster gets the idea the Ordinary Form has no rubrics.

 

[jkarp]

Yes, I studied rubrics as well. One just needs to open the sacramentary to see all the rubrics. I don’t know where the previous poster gets the idea the Ordinary Form has no rubrics.

It’s probably from all of the abuses that occur. I think some priests feel that they have carte blanche to change the rubrics when they feel like it. For example, in one parish near where I live, the priest changes the words of the Preface to “Father, all-powerful and ever-loving God . . .”

 

[malphono]

Amen. I certainly don’t appreciate the abuses of the Ordinary Form of the Mass that certain priests seem to be inclined to include every Sunday, but I definitely think that the Ordinary Form is a beautiful Mass (when done properly). At the same time, I appreciate the beauty of the Extraordinary Form as well.

To the OP: I really feel that you will find the Ordinary Form prayerful when it is done properly. For a great example of the proper celebration, I suggest watching a Mass at the Vatican (Chistmas Midnight Mass is chance to catch this - it’s even on next week!)

Pax Christi sit semper tecum (et vobiscum)!

While I am not and never have been a fan of the OF (for a variety of reasons which I will not go into on this forum), I’m not going to argue or “diss” it. It’s valid. At the same time, though, I will say that, while yes, there are a handful of “reform of the reform” churches here and there, in main the problem is that it’s almost impossible to find the OF “properly done.”

 

[jkarp]

While I am not and never have been a fan of the OF (for a variety of reasons which I will not go into on this forum), I’m not going to argue or “diss” it. It’s valid. At the same time, though, I will say that, while yes, there are a handful of “reform of the reform” churches here and there, in main the problem is that it’s almost impossible to find the OF “properly done.”

Bingo.

Coincidently, if you ever have the chance, I’d recommend attending one of the community Masses at St. Benedict’s Abbey in Atchison, KS.

 

[peregrinator_it]

At the Novus Ordo, I never really felt like the Mass was a “prayer”, but rather more like a “ceremonial gathering”. SNIP

Suddenly the phrase “praying the Mass” made perfect sense to me, maybe because I was more focused on the prayers in the missal than trying to pay attention to the words of the priest.

My question is this: Are we supposed to “pray” the Novus Ordo Mass?

The answer I would give your question is a resounding “yes.”

And I would humbly submit that I find my experience of both the Pauline Mass and the TLM (in various forms) to be (like ncjohn’s) rather the opposite of yours.

I should explain that my primary and formative experience of the Pauline Mass has been attendance for most of my life of a chanted Latin Mass (not TLM, ordinary form.) (I understand enough Latin to understand the prayers of the Mass without difficulty.)

The Mass always seemed to me a prayer in dialogue form with both parts proper to both priest and people; I think this is because at the Mass the congregation chanted the responses (something that never happens to the same degree in the TLM.)

I remember thinking vaguely when I was much younger that chanting the responses at Mass was very good and important, but I could never articulate why I thought so. Then, as an adult, I discovered the Divine Office and came to the conclusion that the “call & response” (don’t really know the technical term; I think antiphonal is not quite correct) form of chant is really a form of prayer; and for me a most effective one.

A previous poster commented that he thought the OF was more suited to those who like to pray by doing, while those who are more contemplative will be more at home in the EF: ironically the form of “call & response” chant I encountered in the Pauline Mass has been used to pray the Divine Office most frequently by contemplative religious.

I would not be inclined to give much weight to my personal preference for this form of prayer at Mass (as it is flimisily based on what I like) except that this form of prayer has been approved and used by the Church and in religious houses for centuries. Thus I feel free to openly prefer it.

I imagine that most poster’s will write off this post with the comment “Well, chanted Pauline Masses are really rare.”

I can’t say I understand the relevance of this comment. It’s also extremely rare to find an American religious house that still chants the Office. The rareness does not detract from the worth and beauty of the prayer.

 

[mattwcu]

Yes, I studied rubrics as well. One just needs to open the sacramentary to see all the rubrics. I don’t know where the previous poster gets the idea the Ordinary Form has no rubrics.

Ok to prove my point I will show you probably the most obvious example of what I mean. Instead of “lack of rubrics” I guess I should have said that the* rubrics are lacking,* which would indicate that while they are there, they are in much fewer numbers than previously.

Example:

1962 Rubrics for just after consecrating the Host:
(found on SanctaMissa.org)

**HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM.

When this has been said, the Celebrant, holding the Host between his afore-mentioned thumbs and index fingers upon the Altar, with the remaining fingers of his hands extended, and at the same time joined (and with the Hosts, if more have been consecrated, in the place in which they were placed at the beginning of the Mass, upon the Corporal or in another Chalice), genuflecting, he adores It. Then he arises, and as much as he can comfortably do, elevates the Host in the air, and directing his eyes toward It … etc etc…"**

Ordinary Form (1970 Missal):
Found at Catholicliturgy.org

**hoc est enim Corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur

An acolyte may ring a bell when the host is elevated. If incense is used, an acolyte incenses the host when it is raised. He shows the consecrated host to the people, places it on the paten, and genuflects in adoration. Then he continues: …
**

There is ONE way to raise the Host in 1962 and a myriad post-1970. This is just one example.

 

[I_Believe]

We pray the Liturgy and both forms of Mass are the same one Liturgy. I don’t understand what some Catholics don’t get about this, especially those who say the NO is evil. For all the piety that the “traditionalist” Catholics I’ve met hold, they have a very small understanding of theology it seems. Pray the Mass, whatever form, but don’t diss it.

The stereotype you have inserted there is typical. Actually, it is a very good understanding of the Mass that makes the Gregorian Rite the Liturgy of choice for traditionalists. Trent gives the traditionalist solid ground to stand on.

 

[I_Believe]

I attend both the Traditional Latin as well as the Novus Ordo Mass at various parishes. At the Novus Ordo, I never really felt like the Mass was a “prayer”, but rather more like a “ceremonial gathering”.

When I started attending the Traditional Latin Mass the whole idea of “praying” this Mass came naturally to me from the first one I attended. Suddenly the phrase “praying the Mass” made perfect sense to me, maybe because I was more focused on the prayers in the missal than trying to pay attention to the words of the priest.

My question is this: Are we supposed to “pray” the Novus Ordo Mass?

Yes, you should pray the OF just as you should pray the EF.

What you are noticing is the difference in participating at each.

Here is what Pius X offers. He is of course speaking of the Gregorian Rite (TLM)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[jkarp]

Ok to prove my point I will show you probably the most obvious example of what I mean. Instead of “lack of rubrics” I guess I should have said that the* rubrics are lacking,* which would indicate that while they are there, they are in much fewer numbers than previously.

Example:

1962 Rubrics for just after consecrating the Host:
(found on SanctaMissa.org)

HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM.

When this has been said, the Celebrant, holding the Host between his afore-mentioned thumbs and index fingers upon the Altar, with the remaining fingers of his hands extended, and at the same time joined (and with the Hosts, if more have been consecrated, in the place in which they were placed at the beginning of the Mass, upon the Corporal or in another Chalice), genuflecting, he adores It. Then he arises, and as much as he can comfortably do, elevates the Host in the air, and directing his eyes toward It … etc etc…"

Ordinary Form (1970 Missal):
Found at Catholicliturgy.org

hoc est enim Corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur

An acolyte may ring a bell when the host is elevated. If incense is used, an acolyte incenses the host when it is raised. He shows the consecrated host to the people, places it on the paten, and genuflects in adoration. Then he continues: …

There is ONE way to raise the Host in 1962 and a myriad post-1970. This is just one example.

I’m a little confused, are you saying that because the post-1962 rubric is less verbose than the earlier one, it is somehow less reverent? They both have the exact same three points:

1. Elevation
2. Display
3. Adoration

 

[mattwcu]

We haven’t really touched on reverence. My point, if you connect my posts to the original topic, is that because the rubrics of the OF are lacking sufficient direction, they lend themselves and even require creativity on the part of the celebrant. So when we are talking about the prayerfulness if either form we need to realize that in the OF there can be serious differences that all come under the acceptable tent. That was the point of my response.

So, what this has done is create a situation for us pewsitters that renders a different experience at Mass. Yes the elements remain but that’s it. A big reason so much liturgical disunity exists is because well meaning priests had to fill in the rest as they went along. Perhaps with less instruction it was just assumed for instance that it was understood how to raise the host. But yet how many of us see a one handed raise, a raise with the paten, a slight raise, etc.

I’m not being Illwilled toward the OF here just pointing something out.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m a little confused, are you saying that because the post-1962 rubric is less verbose than the earlier one, it is somehow less reverent? They both have the exact same three points:

1. Elevation
2. Display
3. Adoration

Seems as if I’m even more confused. If there is no advantage to having the Novus Ordo, why have it at all? And if there is an advantage, why bother to have the old at all? Seems as if this dual maintenance of multiple rites is very costly.

 

[mattwcu]

Seems as if I’m even more confused. If there is no advantage to having the Novus Ordo, why have it at all? And if there is an advantage, why bother to have the old at all? Seems as if this dual maintenance of multiple rites is very costly.

Well, for some people it might be an advantage. It is certainly the norm of the Church right now. Personally I think it is a problem that we can even tell the difference between a “new Mass” and an “old Mass”. Anyway…

This is just my own personal meditation on the subject: The Holy Spirit may have led the Church to promote a less sacral liturgy in order to keep his people close to him in a time of upheaval. I believe its by his mercy that he allows people with different charisms to worship in their own style because he knows how weak we and yet stubborn we all are.

…That doesn’t mean I think the OF is necessarily equal in form to the EF… Its just what we have. Every time I find myself criticizing the OF for its lacking I am struck by the reality that I may be questioning the actions of the Holy Spirit should it have been His Will and not the will of men in the Church. Its humbling, and makes me shut up.

Perhaps that time is passing now that more and more people are again waking up. As Pope Benedict has said he would like the old to enrich the new and vice-versa. We need 1 Latin Rite and essentially we have 2 at the moment.

 

[ncjohn]

The Holy Spirit may have led the Church to promote a less sacral liturgy in order to keep his people close to him in a time of upheaval.

---

…That doesn’t mean I think the OF is necessarily equal in form to the EF… Its just what we have.

---

Perhaps that time is passing now that more and more people are again waking up.

Wow, that comes off as totally condescending and totally contrary to what the Pope has stated. Kind of implies that us poor uninformed rubes are just too dumb to know better.

We need 1 Latin Rite and essentially we have 2 at the moment.

I couldn’t disagree more, probably because I so totally disagree with your previous assessment. And I don’t say that in ill will or in denying your right to find the EF superior.

The point is though that the “superior” liturgy is the one in which you will most involve yourself and be most able to see the face of God, whether that be the EF, OF, or one of the various Eastern Liturgies. I can promise you that those preferences aren’t about intelligence (or lack thereof) or higher forms of reverence within the person. They are simply about the fact that different people respond to things in different ways because of their different personalities, upbringing and temperment. I have encountered incredibly holy and intelligent people in both forms, and have encountered their inverses at both forms also.

As I said previously, I find this constant “my Mass is better than your Mass” stuff, and the sniping at fellow Catholics, incredibly sad.

Peace,