Reasons you love the Ordinary Form

[ProVobis]

The '62 Missal simply doesn’t have nearly as much read directly from Scripture (even though things can be implicit).

I don’t know about that. My St. Andrew’s Missal is very thick and with fine print. About as thick as my Bible actually, which includes a lot of Scripture not in the OF or EF.

But I’ll agree with you on the implicit part.

 

[malphono]

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?

In a way, I believe it does matter. It’s something like the “2nd Confiteor” (before communion and finally suppressed in 1962) that was not integral to the Ordo Missae, but crept in from the rite of communion outside of Mass. But perhaps that’s just my own liturgical sensibility.

Anyway, I was simply replying to something another poster said. But I agree that the removal of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar in their entirety is a another matter which I consider to be a great loss.

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.

Yes, I’m well aware of the sacristy prayers.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

I don’t know about that. My St. Andrew’s Missal is very thick and with fine print. About as thick as my Bible actually, which includes a lot of Scripture not in the OF or EF.

But I’ll agree with you on the implicit part.

Hello ProVobis!

I’ve never seen a St. Andrew’s Missal before, although a Dominican priest/professor/spiritual director/friend of mine, who’s also somewhat of an expert in Liturgy, did say that the St. Andrew’s was the best of its time. I’d love to get my hands on one or a reprint of one some day. I have, however, seen many other EF Missals. From my experience they usually have nearly all the prayers for the Mass written out (variable parts according to season, etc.), all the readings, and some have the chants with music. So it’s understandable that they’d be rather thick and still not include all of Scripture. I was merely speaking about the actual readings at Mass. I may have been a little too ambiguous when I said that people who attend Mass every Sunday here the entire Bible. I’ve heard “entire” and I’ve also heard “almost the entire,” so I’m really not sure which it is. It cannot be denied, however, that more of Scripture is read at the OF than at the EF. I don’t mean that as a commentary on the quality of the Liturgy. As I’m a Melkite Byzantine we don’t have the three-year cycle, and yet you still get an amazing overview of Salvation History through the readings, liturgical chants and prayers, iconography, etc. I’m simply saying that as far as the Mass goes I personally prefer the three-year cycle of readings.

 

[ljubim]

Hmmm… I like receiving the Eucharist!

 

[pnewton]

I have to think that the understanding and easier processing of the vernacular has to be up near the top, along with the expanded amount of Scripture with the three year cycle.

 

[Bbigam]

What I love about the OF as distinct from the EF:
Hearing the Eucharistic Prayer (this is the biggest for me!)
The rubrically-defined participation of the laity in parts of the Mass (Confiteor [when used], Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Angus Dei, etc.)
The expansion of the Lectionary
The restoration of the Prayers of the Faithful
The option to use the vernacular, especially for the propers

I do also very much appreciate the EF, and overall have a preference for the OF celebrated similarly to an EF High Mass (ad orientem, chant, incense, kneel to receive on the tongue, etc.), but with some use of the vernacular.

 

[ProVobis]

Hello ProVobis!
I may have been a little too ambiguous when I said that people who attend Mass every Sunday here the entire Bible.

Do you or anyone else here know how much of the Bible is actually covered in each and both forms? Personally I would like to know that I would be getting a lot more if I attended both the OF and EF every day rather than just one form alone.

 

[ProVobis]

The option to use the vernacular, especially for the propers

You are aware, aren’t you, that the Epistle and Gospel in the EF is allowed to be said in the vernacular? And what’s probably more notable, it doesn’t have to be the ICEL-vernacular. :extrahappy: In fact, the readings at the parish I now attend are pretty much word for word in my St. Andrew’s Missal.

 

[Bbigam]

Do you or anyone else here know how much of the Bible is actually covered in each and both forms? Personally I would like to know that I would be getting a lot more if I attended both the OF and EF every day rather than just one form alone.

I find this site to be very helpful and interesting, on that subject and anything at all to do with the Lectionary:
Main page: catholic-resources.org/Lectionary/
Answer to your specific question: catholic-resources.org/Lectionary/Statistics.htm

(By the way, if anyone knows of a similar site for the Liturgy of the Hours, I’d love to know about it.)

You are aware, aren’t you, that the Epistle and Gospel in the EF is allowed to be said in the vernacular? And what’s probably more notable, it doesn’t have to be the ICEL-vernacular. :extrahappy: In fact, the readings at the parish I now attend are pretty much word for word in my St. Andrew’s Missal.

Hmm, I guess they don’t exercise that option at the FSSP community here in Lexington.

 

[littlequestion]

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.

I use the 1962 Missal when I attend the Latin Mass, and the readings are all Scriptural. There ar psalms, prayers like the Our Father. The Introit, the Gradual, the Offertory, and Communion are all Psalms.

I go to an NO that is close to the Latin form sometimes, but I have had too many unpleasant surprises at some NO Masses to feel inclined to go when I have a choice. I do enjoy the Ordinary Form when it is faithful to the original because it is a little easier to follow.

You are right about the Latin. I think the unifying aspect of Latin is extremely important and we should make sure that at least one parish in every town has a Latin Mass and there should be borrower Missals in a number of languages alongside the Latin available in the foyer. One thing that worries me is what is happening to our vocations. After all, the priests who are retiring now came out of parochial schools that taught Latin and Bishops come out of that priesthood and the Pope comes out of those Bishops. What kind of conclave will there be, 10 or 20 years from now, with the ever-shrinking pool of competent Latin-speaking priests and bishops?

Keeping the Latin Mass alive in all the parishes ensures that the priests will always be fluent in more than their local language.

 

[NeelyAnn]

I really do not like anything about the OF, so I completely avoid it.

 

[ProVobis]

Hmm, I guess they don’t exercise that option at the FSSP community here in Lexington.

It probably is, just before the homily/sermon. Most of the time it’s both Latin and English. Very few times just the English; don’t think I like that.

 

[ProVobis]

I find this site to be very helpful and interesting, on that subject and anything at all to do with the Lectionary:

That’s interesting. Obviously many more readings when you go to all the Daily Masses. I was unaware that in 1951 a lot of the scripture was eliminated from the Mass.

 

[archangel04]

I really do not like anything about the OF, so I completely avoid it.

Too bad:shrug:

 

[kwitz]

I really do not like anything about the OF, so I completely avoid it.

Imagine the hulabulu if I said this about the EF on the equivalent thread on why people love the Mass for All Ages???

 

[ProVobis]

Imagine the hulabulu if I said this about the EF on the equivalent thread on why people love the Mass for All Ages???

This begs the question, Why is this particular thread even on the Traditional Catholicism forum in the first place?

 

[brotherhrolf]

This begs the question, Why is this particular thread even on the Traditional Catholicism forum in the first place?

Perhaps to expose the true intentions of those who post on this forum who are vehemently anti-traditional Catholicism? Better to let them “vent their spleen” on this thread than derail other threads telling us how wrong we are in the beliefs and practices under which we were raised.

 

[Lujack]

Because its what I know. It really comes down to that; its how I went to Mass as a child with my family, and even if I really, really am in awe of the EF when I finally see it in person, it will never surpass the Ordinary Form because that’s what I knew growing up, and its almost impossible to top what I knew growing up in my heart.

 

[bpbasilphx]

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

**To answer your question directly the Sunday readings are on a 3 year cycle, and the Weekday readings are on a 2 year cycle, almost all of the Bible gets read.

More of the Old Testament gets read.

In the EF, there was not a system of ferial weekday readings as such, except for Lent.**

 

[pro_multis]

I

Hmm, I guess they don’t exercise that option at the FSSP community here in Lexington.

What?! Are you saying that they do not read the epistle and gospel in English at the FSSP church in Lexington? That is interesting.