Priest Actively Discouraging Me From Attending EF Mass

[ChristMyLife]

The reformed Liturgical year and Scriptural cycle of readings of the OF I think has major advantages over that of the EF, but also a few ways it could be improved by bringing back some EF elements.

First and foremost, reinstate a Pentecostal Octave. Pope Francis recently did the Church a favor by making the day after Pentecost Sunday the feast of “Mary, Mother of the Church.” So as it stands now, we essentially have a Pentecostal Triduum. Pentecost Vigil, Feast of Pentecost, Feast of MMOTC. The next 5 days could simply be universally proclaimed to be the Octave of Pentecost. A lot of places, including my Cathedral, mandate that on these days a votive Mass of the Holy Spirit be used - but then there’s a disconnect between the Liturgy of the Mass and the Liturgy of the Hours.

Next, go back to the old naming convention. “Ordinary time” conveys an erroneous meaning, it doesn’t mean “ordinary” as in “unremarkable,” but rather “ordinal” or “ordered/organized time.” But too many people think it means the former. Go back to the old naming convention of “time after Christmas/Pentecost.” Recover the old “named” Sundays - Sexagesima, Gaudete, etc.

Lastly, in the cycle of readings, bring back a few of the readings which were cut short in the OF cycle. I’m thinking specifically of the reading about worthy reception of the Eucharist.

If these small but significant reforms were made to the OF calendar and cycle, I think it would be a MAJOR improvement.

 

[ChristMyLife]

Vatican II never called for a New Mass but the Old Mass was severely being dismantled starting in 1964. This did not help attendance. But the New Mass promulgated in 1970 didn’t help it much either.

Vatican II called for fairly wide ranging Liturgical reform, have you read Sacrosanctum Concilium?

I think that the reforms done to the Divine Office were a lot more sober…

The reforms done to the Mass went a bit too far, IMO, but it’s not a “new” Mass - it’s the same Mass of the Roman Rite, but in a reformed recension.

If the OF Mass was celebrated entirely in Latin and ad Orientem, probably 90% or more of the average parishoners wouldn’t be able to see a difference between that and the EF.

Only liturgical geeks and CAF type Catholics would note the differences.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

When I first became Catholic (in 2004), I talked to quite a few elderly people. One man who was discerning a call to the diaconate told me that he was two weeks away from leaving the Church over the Latin Mass, which he hated with all his heart. He was planning on leaving the Church when he turned 18. He told me that Vatican II and the OF Mass saved his soul!

I find this story very sad. The Eucharist then and now, throughout the history of the Church, is the source and summit of our Catholic faith. That is what the Mass is about. This man (youth since he wasn’t 18 when he was thinking of leaving) apparently did not know what the Mass was because no matter the language he would not have hated it with all of his heart. As some have said, if Catholics really knew what the Mass was they would be beating down the doors to get in.

Also that is definitely not how every one felt at that time or throughout the history of the Church.

I wonder sometimes, if the hierarchy of the Church required that there be an increase of Latin in the Mass, would people leave?

In SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM we read:

Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.

https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/04/20/catholic-church-still-care-latin/

 

[MagdalenaRita]

When I first became Catholic (in 2004), I talked to quite a few elderly people. One man who was discerning a call to the diaconate told me that he was two weeks away from leaving the Church over the Latin Mass, which he hated with all his heart. He was planning on leaving the Church when he turned 18. He told me that Vatican II and the OF Mass saved his soul!

I am a nurse and in the 1980’s I was caring for an eldery woman who was in the hospital dying from cancer. I saw that it said on her records that she was Catholic. I offered to call a priest for her. She replied, “no, the Catholic church I grew up with, knew and loved is gone.” She died not too long after that without the sacrament of extreme unction. Many times I think of her and pray for her soul that God granted her final repentance before she died.

I’m not saying I agree with her because I do not, the Church is not gone, Jesus promised it would remain, but some elderly people felt different about the changes. For some it was a very traumatic time.

 

[twf]

There’s quite a wide spectrum within the existing rubrics as it is. Ad Orientem is always a licit option.
A Novus Ordo Mass celebrated with some Latin, incense, chant, polyphony, etc “feels” much more like an EF High Mass (whatever traditionalist may claim to the contrary) than the typical suburban parish OF Mass.

 

[ChristMyLife]

. Ad Orientem is always a licit option.
A Novus Ordo Mass celebrated with some Latin, incense, chant, polyphony, etc “feels” much more like an EF High Mass (whatever traditionalist may claim to the contrary) than the typical suburban parish OF Mass.

Absolutely.

The OF Mass celebrated in this video always boggles my mind (and makes me envious because I wish I could be there):

(Is my link working?)

 

[twf]

Beautiful.
The 11 AM Sunday “high Mass” (OF) at our cathedral usually features some Latin (often the Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei), chant, incense, a polyphonic choir… and the faithful receive kneeling at the altar rail (or at least have that option - perhaps half do). On most days I’ll take that over the EF itself.

 

[ChristMyLife]

On most days I’ll take that over the EF itself.

I would too.

I’ve said it before: as the EF and OF stand today, I prefer the OF.

However, I also believe there are both strengths and weaknesses in both usages of the Roman Rite, and I believe there are many forms, expressions, symbols and prayers in the EF which could enrich the OF if the OF was reformed.

Hence why I’m a “reform of the reform” person.

I think that’s also the pragmatic position to take. The Church will never abrogate the OF and wholesale return to the EF. It just won’t happen. Just like the Church will never renounce VII. It simply won’t happen, period.

However, it is very possible the Church could see another Liturgical Reform movement, and end up reforming the OF in a way where it recovers much of the traditional Roman Liturgical practice from the EF.

 

[ProVobis]

think the EF could have simply been translated into English, had a few tweaks here and there to a few rubrics and prayers, and been good to go.

You mean like the Anglicans did? Seemed to have worked for a while but it wasn’t universal.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

I find this story very sad. The Eucharist then and now, throughout the history of the Church, is the source and summit of our Catholic faith. That is what the Mass is about. This man (youth since he wasn’t 18 when he was thinking of leaving) apparently did not know what the Mass was because no matter the language he would not have hated it with all of his heart. As some have said, if Catholics really knew what the Mass was they would be beating down the doors to get in.

Understandable, to a degree. Regardless of the presence of Christ, there’s a very deep gap in spiritual connection for me if I don’t understand mass. I’ll still receive the Eucharist and feel very fulfilled when I do, but you must understand that for many people, having a true connection to the words said and prayers prayed is an essential part of their worship.

 

[ProVobis]

ProVobis:

Vatican II never called for a New Mass but the Old Mass was severely being dismantled starting in 1964. This did not help attendance. But the New Mass promulgated in 1970 didn’t help it much either.

Vatican II called for fairly wide ranging Liturgical reform, have you read Sacrosanctum…

Yes but what were they reforming? Seems like the High Mass needed no reforms IMO.

 

[ChristMyLife]

IMO

Well, that’s your opinion.

The Magisterium of the Church had a different opinion. Which I agree with. The EF DID need to be reformed.

As a Catholic, the opinion of the Magisterium holds infinitely more weight to me than the opinion of “provobis from CAF.”

I mean this with all charity.

 

[KAMMYXPXP]

Thank you for clarifying. All this from Vatican II? Was it really meant to go so far?

 

[ChristMyLife]

All this from Vatican II? Was it really meant to go so far?

Scholars and theologians still debate today whether the “post-conciliar Consilium” (the group charged with implementing the reforms called for by VII) were really faithful to the vision which the Council Fathers had in mind for the liturgical renewal.

I’m of the opinion that they DID go too far, and that a modern liturgical reform is needed.

But we also need to be realistic. The people who want the EF to come back and replace the OF are delusional. That will. Not. Happen. Period.

 

[ProVobis]

So what was theologically wrong with the High Mass?

 

[KAMMYXPXP]

Good question.

 

[ChristMyLife]

theologically wrong

Not a single thing.

It needed to be reformed to better fit the pastoral needs of the Church.