Reverent Novus Ordo Masses?

[Duesenberg]

forgot her veil or mantilla to cover her head.

Or they could have had a supply of veils – much like synagogues have supplies of kippahs for men to wear.

I think by and large that veils and mantillas are crowns of sorts for some. I distinctly remember going to Mass where my wife was wearing a very legitimate hat for church. The usher tried to get her to remove it and replace it with a paper towel (not sure if that’s an upgrade or not from a napkin?) He didn’t seem too concerned about compliance with the old C of C. He seemed more intent on making sure what all females had a veil, mantilla or paper towel on their heads.

 

[Indyann]

If that were not so funny, it would be too sad. I actually had to laugh out loud. Thanks for starting my morning with a little merriment.

 

[otjm]

Say it again and say it louder!

 

[GIR]

I like to think of the difference between the EF and OF like Mac (or Linux) vs Windows. If your average Joe goes out with the intention to buy a new computer, they’ll almost certainly get one with Windows, not because they prefer it over the alternatives, but because they don’t really know alternatives exist. If someone goes out and buys a Mac, they’re making a conscious choice to buy a Mac because they prefer it over Windows.

Most people attend the OF without realizing there are alternatives. Unless you’ve grown up in a traditionalist family, you’re making a conscious decision to attend the EF.

 

[Duesenberg]

Most people attend the OF without realizing there are alternatives. Unless you’ve grown up in a traditionalist family, you’re making a conscious decision to attend the EF.

How do you know this? It sounds like an excuse to me. I would attend the EF Mass more if the people were not so incredibly severe in how they treat others. And no, their behavior is not a product of great piety. It’s a reactionary response that gets mighty offensive, mighty quickly.

 

[R_H_Benson]

I would attend the EF Mass more if the people were not so incredibly severe in how they treat others. And no, their behavior is not a product of great piety. It’s a reactionary response that gets mighty offensive, mighty quickly.

If you are being deterred from the Traditional Mass for the reasons you list above, perhaps you should consider this: The severity demonstrated by some who attend the Traditional Mass, while regrettable, does not reflect on the rite itself. Avoid the people who you find to be judgmental and seek out those who are friendly. Not all trads are of the sort you described.

 

[Duesenberg]

If you are being deterred from the EF Mass for the reasons you list above, perhaps you should consider this: The severity demonstrated by some who attend the Traditional Mass, while regrettable, does not reflect on the rite itself. Avoid the people who you find to be judgmental and seek out those who are friendly. Not all trads are of the sort you described.

First, it’s not a separate “rite.” It’s a separate form.

The problem with avoiding people at the local EF Mass who act ridiculously severe is that it’s most of the 70 or so that attend. They have driven everyone else out. It’s a terrible shame – the Mass should be attracting 300+. Instead it draws maybe 70 because of the behavior of those who do attend. Sad to witness.

 

[Debbie_Kono]

The problem with avoiding people at the local EF Mass who act ridiculously severe is that it’s most of the 70 or so that attend. They have driven everyone else out. It’s a terrible shame – the Mass should be attracting 300+. Instead it draws maybe 70 because of the behavior of those who do attend. Sad to witness.

Gosh…this has not been my experience at all. The ICKSP parish I attend does have around 300 (give or take on any given Sunday or HDO) at the Solemn High Mass. There is a reverential silence before and after Mass, but that was the same at the conservative OF parish I started out in. Perhaps you belong to a parish like the one I took my mother to in Florida? I was there for 5 months last year taking care of her and she would only go to the nearest parish. It was really, really noisy before and after Mass. Socializing seemed to be very important to this group…even during Mass. Maybe because there were so many Eucharist ministers and they were all so friendly and knew everyone?..because it was noisy while waiting to receive Communion too. But the Church was packed out to the max.

 

[Entwhistler]

Same here. The EF I attend has one or two people who are judgmental but the majority of folks will give you the shirt off their back. Around 20 years ago, unfortunately, there were quite a few families who skirted the line between Catholics and sedevacantist. But that has drastically changed. Lumping everyone into the same bowl does not get you far. Saying most EF goers are judgmental jerks is like saying most OF goers are Protestants who like the ceremony. Both are patently false.

The EF gets a bad rap because of a few loud folks who everyone associates with the majority.

 

[Duesenberg]

The EF gets a bad rap because of a few loud folks who everyone associates with the majority.

The local EF Mass is FULL of severe, judgemental people. So is a local Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy that is full of “traditional Catholics.”

 

[Entwhistler]

Well, you might have one of those parishes. But the EF Masses and the one Melkite parish I have attended were not like that.

 

[R_H_Benson]

The problem with avoiding people at the local EF Mass who act ridiculously severe is that it’s most of the 70 or so that attend. They have driven everyone else out. It’s a terrible shame – the Mass should be attracting 300+. Instead it draws maybe 70 because of the behavior of those who do attend. Sad to witness.

That is sad, and I wouldn’t blame you for not attending. I am thankful that I have met many wonderful people at my closest Traditional Mass.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I never said you HAD to wear it. It’s interesting though that apparently it was so traumatizing you would ‘never wear a covering again’. I wonder why something so ‘minor’ seems to engender such deep-seated hostility among some people (I am not saying YOU are hostile).

Well, the sentiment of “never wearing that again” is exactly the sentiment my mother had. Exactly.

It is you, @stpurl, who chose the terms “traumatised” and “hostile”

I can’t speak for the person to whom you were writing…but I can speak for myself who lived through that era – that we have very happily moved beyond – thankfully.

My late mother was neither “traumatised” by what she wore in the era before the end of the 1960s nor was she “hostile” on account of it. But she saw it for exactly what it was…a mere societal convention. Needless and ridiculous in a new era.

She had worn pant-like outfits since the war, because of the work she did. She liked them. They suited her quite well. As time passed between 1940 and 1970, she was able to wear them more and more in a variety of settings and occasions. The fashions changed. The last place she wore a dress and hat was in church – and once the convention was done away with there, those outfits went to charity.

And she was glad to be liberated from prescriptions that imposed the need to wear a dress or a hat or gloves or carry a handbag in order to be a properly ensembled lady simply on account of societal convention.

It was a societal convention that held on in the Church longer than it did in the rest of society. And she would have said exactly “I will never wear again those dated outfits of the past.”

Just as women today do not wear Victorian mourning attire or hang the crepe – thanks be to God – nor do American women wear hoop skirts, like it was the 19th century.

We were all glad to be liberated of that silliness and to have the flexibilities of the new era.

My father and I similarly cast aside the hats that “gentlemen” were expected to wear, simply because that was what one was to do. They were a nuisance, actually. I still wear a hat, mind you…when it is cold, in the depth of winter, and I want to keep my head warm and I determine I need it – not because it is “supposed to be worn” to betoken my class or societal status.

And I would say the same thing about the attire and conventions of days past: “never again”.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

The EF gets a bad rap because of a few loud folks who everyone associates with the majority.

I have been encountering these sort since shortly after Marcel Lefebvre was forced out of the post of Superior General of his Congregation.

Across a long time and across many iterations of them, their reputation surrounds them. They did not need help from anyone else in acquiring that reputation…they did quite a job of it on their own, that’s for sure.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I don’t understand. Are you saying a girl/woman who forgot her head covering is impious? Last year while I was out and about in another state, I decided on a whim to stop at a Church I had never been before to visit Jesus in the Tabernacle. I didn’t have a veil in my car, so I grabbed the only thing I had…a tee shirt. I admit I felt a bit embarrassed that if someone saw me…but then I got over it quickly. I’d rather be embarrassed and have people think I was guilty of “faux piety” then to approach Him with an uncovered head.

There is nothing wrong in praying with your head uncovered.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I agree with this. And I never said I believed veiling was a major cause. My contention is that veiling could help.

But this very usage makes absolutely no sense to someone who lived through that era.

Veiling? Using the word “veil” as a verb?

My mother and my grandmother would look upon that usage as beyond bizarre. They would utterly reject it. It’s purely the fantasy of this era. Yes, my mother and my grandmother along with the other women covered their heads because that was what was done…but they attached no more of a profound spiritual meaning to it whatsoever than my father did in putting a tie around his neck. They certainly would not describe as being “veiled.” That is an Islamic practice.

The phrase “to take the veil” meant that a woman was choosing to enter Religious life. They wore veils…those who had them, that is. Already before the Council, we had women Religious who did not wear habits, due to the political situation.

This is like the fantasies that people have today that we all turned to face East to pray before the Council. We simply faced the apse. The parish church of my youth…built long before the Council…was on a North-South axis. We faced South. None of the parishes contiguous to mine were oriented toward the East. Not even the cathedral faced East in its pre-conciliar configuration. The altar simply faced the apse. There was no “mystical East” or “liturgical East”…we faced the direction we faced.

 

[Debbie_Kono]

There is nothing wrong in praying with your head uncovered.

Nor praying with your head covered.

 

[babochka]

R_H_Benson:

If you are being deterred from the EF Mass for the reasons you list above, perhaps you should consider this: The severity demonstrated by some who attend the Traditional Mass, while regrettable, does not reflect on the rite itself. Avoid the people who you find to be judgmental and seek out those who are friendly. Not all trads are of the sort you described.

First, it’s not a separate “rite.” It’s a separate form.

The problem with avoiding people at the local EF Mass who act ridiculously severe is that it’s most of the 70 or so that attend. They have driven everyone else out. It’s a terrible shame – the Mass should be attracting 300+. Instead it draws maybe 70 because of the behavior of those who do attend. Sad to witness.

I believe the term rite was being used in a narrower sense of the word, as in “rite of the Mass“. It is a word with multiple meanings and is perfectly correct in this usage.
“rite-a formal or ceremonial act or procedure prescribed or customary in religious or other solemn use: rites of baptism; sacrificial rites”

It seems that you live in a part of the country that is populated with very difficult people. Our local FSSP Parish has several hundred families, three outstanding priests, four Masses on every Sunday and two daily Masses. While the attitude that you mention most certainly exists there, I I have never seen it from the priests and the priests work very hard to set the tone for the parish. In the 15 or so years that I have had any involvement with that Parish, I’ve see a dramatic Improvement in the overall tone of the parish, as more and more families are attracted to the Mass and the parish as a whole. Those with a severe and rigid attitude are now far outnumbered by those who are welcoming and kind.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

You seem to have almost a hatred for tradition Father. What’s up with that?

You would be very very mistaken.

However, almost 50 years after the reprehensible actions of Lefebvre, the attitude of those who share – and reflect --his mindset hardly surprise me. Neither by what they say or how they act.

 

[LisaB]

I agree with those who say that comparing today’s EF and OF is like comparing apples and oranges because most people who attend the EF make an effort to seek it out, so there aren’t very many people there who are there merely out of obligation. I’m glad it’s this way though. I wouldn’t want the EF to become the norm. The EF (at least my parish) is like a refuge from the “mainstream” church that isn’t influenced by the times, or a modernist bishop that may happen to be assigned to a diocese, or a more “progressive” pastor that may be assigned to the parish. If the EF was the norm, it would become an equivalent of the current OF, some reverent, some less so, some traditional, some more contemporary and changing with the times. Then the folks who now prefer the EF will again begin looking for a new “refuge” from the mainstream EF. Why not just leave it how it is. I just wish the EF was more available so more people could be exposed to it, and then could make a choice to attend or not.