Reasons you love the Ordinary Form

[michaeldaniels]

This is kind of a spin off of another thread…I would like to know what things/aspects people love or like about the Ordinary Form of the Mass in comparison to the Traditional Latin Mass…how has it enriched the Liturgy…or has it not enriched the Litrugy…also, if you have dislikes about it compared to the TLM, please share that as well. THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT VALIDITY, since we all know and agree that BOTH forms are valid without question. What say you?

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

Christ is in our midst!

Although I prefer the Byzantine Liturgies and traditions to the Latin ones, I personally love the Ordinary Form of the Roman Mass when celebrated as it was meant to be. I love the increased Scripture readings, the return of the “active and conscious participation of the people,” the beauty and rich theology of Eucharistic prayers II - IV, etc. I do think that there needs to be a return/revival of Gregorian Chant and ad Orientem. Personally I have no problem with the fact that the prayers at the foot of the altar are no longer the “beginning” of Mass. Originally (from what I understand) they were recited by the priest in the sacristy while preparing himself to celebrate the Mass; I think this ought to be restored. I also think incense ought to be required instead of optional (incense has a wonderful symbolic quality that reconnects us with our Old Testament roots). I would also love to see beautiful vestments (not the “fiddle-back”) required/restored. The parish priest at the parish in which I grew up has some amazing vestments that simply enhance the beauty of the Mass. Overall, however, I think what really needs to happen is that people need to be catechized about the inner meaning/purpose of the Liturgy and how even the new Mass is consistent with Tradition. I make no claims to be able to do that, but I do know that it’s possible.

ICXC + NIKA,
Phillip

 

[littlequestion]

In what way is the Scripture increased in the Ordinary Form compared to the readings found in the 1962 Latin Missal?

 

[fabricdragon]

well, i have ONLY been to the Ordinary form, although i hope to go to a Latin Mass someday soon.

i find teh readings interesting, especialy how the readings and the gospel go together so often… i like understanding what the prayers are. and what is “going on” so that i can fully participate.

i only wish they still said the St Michael prayer. but i never heard it said at Mass, i am a recent convert

 

[malphono]

Personally I have no problem with the fact that the prayers at the foot of the altar are no longer the “beginning” of Mass. Originally (from what I understand) they were recited by the priest in the sacristy while preparing himself to celebrate the Mass; I think this ought to be restored.

I don’t quite agree. Psalm 42 (not the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar in their entirety) was originally a sacristy devotion. Further it was never part of the Ambrosian, Dominican, Carthusian, or Carmelite Rites, and was not even always used in the Roman Rite. The Prayers at the Foot of the Altar themselves (variations of which are included in all the aforementioned Rites) are quite analogous to the Byzantine prayers before the Holy Doors.

 

[Moscati]

Hm. Well . . . mostly that I understand. Because I don’t know Latin well, when I go to an EF Mass, I find myself spending more time trying to figure out where we are, or what’s going on now (and doing the wrong things at the wrong time). I stare at the missal a lot instead of actually being fully present in the Mass. It gets better the more I go, though.

Also (and this is just in my parishes), the priest at my regular OF parish is a wonderful homilist. The homilies go with the readings, they’re theologically sound and generally just incredible. The priest at the EF parish generally doesn’t give much of a homily. One time, he just asked people to come to some pro-life event that week. It was more of an announcement than a homily. He’s a very good priest, and does the Latin Mass beautifully, and I’m so glad that he’s here to offer it, but I do wish he would preach a little more (or at all).

 

[JRKH]

This is kind of a spin off of another thread…I would like to know what things/aspects people love or like about the Ordinary Form of the Mass in comparison to the Traditional Latin Mass…how has it enriched the Liturgy…or has it not enriched the Litrugy…also, if you have dislikes about it compared to the TLM, please share that as well. THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT VALIDITY, since we all know and agree that BOTH forms are valid without question. What say you?

What I great Idea for a thread.

I Love both forms of the mass.
I Love the EF for Sunday worship because I enjoy the more contemplative aspects and the beautiful music and chants.
I’m not a big fan of the OF on Sunday simply because I don’t care as much for some of the music etc.
I Love the OF during the week for it’s more inclusivenss and ease of following along without need of a missal.
The EF “low mass” i.e. without the music etc always struck me as kind of dry.
The OF negates this by providing a this wonderful participatory aspect.

The only real “complaint” I have about the OF, is the “sign of peace”. I don’t object to the SOP per se, but I wish it were moved to another spot in the mass. To me it would seem more appropriate during the liturgy of the word than right befroe communion. But that is just my opinion.

As you say in your OP, it is importnat to remember that both forms are valid. Also it is importnatn to remember that both forms can be beautiful and that both forms can be abused.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Yeah…I somewhat agree…I prefer, hands down, the TLM…which is normally only accessible around here on a Sunday, but I also enjoy weekday masses in the OF…I can honestly say though, there is nothing I feel is lacking in the TLM and it is just awesome…there are some dislikes I have in regards to the OF, but in no way does that effect my overall love for it or make me question its validity…is get me hot tempered sometimes at the laity and the occasional priest and Bishop who allows certain liberties to be taken that shouldn’t

What I great Idea for a thread.

I Love both forms of the mass.
I Love the EF for Sunday worship because I enjoy the more contemplative aspects and the beautiful music and chants.
I’m not a big fan of the OF on Sunday simply because I don’t care as much for some of the music etc.
I Love the OF during the week for it’s more inclusivenss and ease of following along without need of a missal.
The EF “low mass” i.e. without the music etc always struck me as kind of dry.
The OF negates this by providing a this wonderful participatory aspect.

The only real “complaint” I have about the OF, is the “sign of peace”. I don’t object to the SOP per se, but I wish it were moved to another spot in the mass. To me it would seem more appropriate during the liturgy of the word than right befroe communion. But that is just my opinion.

As you say in your OP, it is importnat to remember that both forms are valid. Also it is importnatn to remember that both forms can be beautiful and that both forms can be abused.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

In what way is the Scripture increased in the Ordinary Form compared to the readings found in the 1962 Latin Missal?

The readings from Scripture were increased so that for the typical Sunday-going Catholic you would hear the entire Bible read in three years. I believe if you go to daily Mass you would hear the whole Bible in a year. If I’m wrong I welcome correction. The '62 Missal simply doesn’t have nearly as much read directly from Scripture (even though things can be implicit).

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

I don’t quite agree. Psalm 42 (not the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar in their entirety) was originally a sacristy devotion. Further it was never part of the Ambrosian, Dominican, Carthusian, or Carmelite Rites, and was not even always used in the Roman Rite. The Prayers at the Foot of the Altar themselves (variations of which are included in all the aforementioned Rites) are quite analogous to the Byzantine prayers before the Holy Doors.

I was trying to draw out the similarities between the prayers at the foot of the altar and the prayers before the Holy Doors. I guess the reason I figured that it’d be good if they were said by the priest in the sacristy would be to avoid the confusion that they are the beginning of the Mass. But I see your point, and it has introduced a bit of cognitive dissonance.

 

[brotherhrolf]

In what way is the Scripture increased in the Ordinary Form compared to the readings found in the 1962 Latin Missal?

We only had an epistle and a gospel reading back then. Both were an annual cycle such that on “X” Sunday you knew you would hear “X”. The OF offers a three year cycle in which far more of the Bible and Psalms are read. That’s about all of the OF that I like.

Fabricdragon: It is a myth to imply that once could not fully participate in the TLM. I got my “little” missal when I made my First Communion in second grade and my “big” missal when I was confirmed in the sixth grade. I have not been to a TLM since 1975 but I can assure you that I would understand what is going on despite the fact that I don’t speak Latin.

We routinely have Spanish and French speakers at my cathedral parish. It is obvious that they are “only going through the moves” since they don’t understand English. Latin was a unifying force way back when. If one did not understand Latin, one’s Missal told you what those Latin words meant.

 

[whm]

I love the OF because it brings to me the Body and the Blood of Jesus! Of course I can make the exact same statement about the EF. This is something I try to never forget, despite my personal preferences which are way less significant.

Having 9 and 11 year old kids. I have appreciated having the Mass said in English. Now that they are older, understand the different parts of the Mass, and can read, and know some Latin, I will consider taking them to TLM from time to time.

I am also encouraged seeing so many fellow Catholics at different stages of their faith at the OF. EF Masses are usually full of ultra devote traditional Catholics which is great, but you feel like the priest is “preaching to the choir” so to speak.

That being said and all else being equal, I personally prefer TLM, since it helps me to more fully enter into the mystery of the Eucharist.

 

[JRKH]

I love the OF because it brings to me the Body and the Blood of Jesus! Of course I can make the exact same statement about the EF. This is something I try to never forget, despite my personal preferences which are way less significant.

Having 9 and 11 year old kids. I have appreciated having the Mass said in English. Now that they are older, understand the different parts of the Mass, and can read, and know some Latin, I will consider taking them to TLM from time to time.

I am also encouraged seeing so many fellow Catholics at different stages of their faith at the OF. EF Masses are usually full of ultra devote traditional Catholics which is great, but you feel like the priest is “preaching to the choir” so to speak.

That being said and all else being equal, I personally prefer TLM, since it helps me to more fully enter into the mystery of the Eucharist.

I think that as the EF becomes more widely accepted and used, this will change.

I ran a poll many months ago on the “Liturgy Forum” (not the traditional forum) asking how people would react to having their regular mass time changed from the OF to the EF.
The result of the voting showed that this particular mass would actually be more crowded because, a) most people would not change their mass time due to it being the EF, and b) more people would change their standard mass TO the Latin mass than would change AWAY from it.

I look forward to the day when most of our priests are trained in both forms and most parishes have an EF mass.

Peace
James

 

[corsair]

Sorry, but I’m not very positive toward the OF Mass. I fully recognize it is a valid Mass, but I avoid it whenever possible, prefering the TLM (EF).

 

[whm]

Sorry, but I’m not very positive toward the OF Mass. I fully recognize it is a valid Mass, but I avoid it whenever possible, prefering the TLM (EF).

Where do you attend the EF in Washington? Are you on the west or east side of the state?

 

[Robster7]

I respect both forms, prefer TLM when has choir.
Below items assume no anomalies.

1. In a language I understand.
2. Priest and congregation pray together, aloud.
3. Greater use of more scripture.

Problems with TLM as usually celebrated, not in itself. esp. low mass.

1. “Said” quietly and too fast between server and priest as congregation looks on.
   This is not the most reverent way to do it (a million words a minute). It’s not magic, such that regardless of the manner it’s done in, as long as it’s done correctly and completely, it works.

 

[mozier]

There are three things that I do appreciate in the OF, keeping in mind my deep love and personal preference for the EF:

One, the OF has a flexibility about it that the EF doesn’t have. It can be done in contemporary style (still with orthodox teaching and sound rubrics), yet can also be adapted to the way they do it on EWTN’s Daily Mass.

Second, the vernancular language is a good thing, though I am looking forward to the new English translation of the OF and also do appreciate some Latin in the OF.

Third, the addition of a first reading, from the Old Testament, Acts, or Revelation, is appreciated in its complimentary position to the Psalm, Epistle, and Gospel.

 

[ProVobis]

Psalm 42 (not the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar in their entirety) was originally a sacristy devotion.

Does it really matter what they were originally? And why did they remove Psalm 42 altogether unless they wanted no references to the altar or God?

By the way, the priests and servers had their own prayers in the sacristy. It only made sense that Psalm 42 be moved and heard before the congregation.

 

[Onegin]

I don’t mind a reverent OF (thankfully there is one in my city) but despite all of it, I can’t help feeling like I’m driving a Fiesta when I could be driving a Ferarri.

Nevertheless, as the nearest TLM is about 45 minutes away and gas is around $7/gal, I’m happy that there is a reverent OF in my area than the alternative. Also, the people are very nice and they have a good young adults group on Sunday even though I wish they’d lay off the extremely modern interpretation of Ignation spirituality.

 

[FAB]

1. Mass in the venacular
2. Expanded use of scriptual readings
3. Variaty of preface to the Eucharistic prayer
4. options for the Eucharistice prayer
5. Options for responses
   6 Variaty of music avaible to be used and instruments
6. Adapable to groups, childrens mass, teen mass, masses of reconcilaion
7. Adaptable to location
8. Priest facing the congregation for Eucharistic prayer
9. Sense of community with each other and the priest
10. No communion rail, see #10
11. Particiaption of the layity as ministers, lectors, EMHC, including women

Peace,
FAB