The good things about the N.O

[otjm]

I would have to disagree here. I think people started dressing more casually because they perceived the NO to more accommodating to a casual attitude.

Oh, come on! Next you will say that people dress casually at work because the Catholic Church instituted the NO. Please! The whole world, and the US in particular has been moving towards a less formal, more casual approach to almost all aspects of life for the last 50+ years (which goes back before the NO).

When you switch from Gregorian chant to folk tunes people are going to think it is okay to go right along with that.

Gregorian Cahnt was not all that popular for a long time before Vatican 2; popes were issuing requests and demands that it be used more long before Roncalli was a gleam in his father’s eye.

I’ll bet that where a TLM is instituted with Gregorian chant people, perhaps not immediately, but over time, will start dressing properly because they will perceive that they are at a serious event.

Go to Mass at Holy Rosary, one of the allegedly more conservative parishes, and you will find people there dressing casually. T’aint the issue.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Oh, come on! Next you will say that people dress casually at work because the Catholic Church instituted the NO. Please! The whole world, and the US in particular has been moving towards a less formal, more casual approach to almost all aspects of life for the last 50+ years (which goes back before the NO). Gregorian Cahnt was not all that popular for a long time before Vatican 2; popes were issuing requests and demands that it be used more long before Roncalli was a gleam in his father’s eye.

Go to Mass at Holy Rosary, one of the allegedly more conservative parishes, and you will find people there dressing casually. T’aint the issue.

I do maintain that because of the serious nature of the TLM you will find more people dressing up (and I’ve certainly noticed this to be the case in the TLM’s I have attended).

I have been to Mass at Holy Rosary a number of times and yes people do dress casually there (though probably not as casually as at other churches).

 

[Chuy]

I attend the Tridentine Mass exclusively but I respect the validity of the Novus Ordo Missae. In fact, the Novus Ordo was the only Mass that I knew as a child.

I am starting to think that the Church should do away with the Pauline Mass, and offer the EF in the vernacular for those who want it. My reasoning is that the EF is so much richer in terms of symbolism and sacredness. The Tridentine Mass is just better in my opinion.

However, I realise that most Catholics love the Novus Ordo. My question is, why? What does the Novus Ordo have that the Tridentine Mass doesn’t? Some may say the vernacular. What if the EF was celebrated in the vernacular…would you still prefer the N.O?

I want to know why people prefer the N.O to the Tridentine Mass? Surely, if people knew the symbolism of Tridentine Mass then they would flock to this Mass in droves.

The Tridentine Mass have everything that the N.O has, and more.

It’s not called the “Novus Ordo/NO” Mass. It’s the Mass of Paul VI or the “Pauline Mass.” Too bad folks like you cannot be more accurate with its name.

There are many things I prefer about the Pauline Mass. First, I like that it’s in the vernacular. It makes zero sense to me to fumble with a Vernacular/Latin missalette while attending the Mass.

I appreciate more exposure to the Bible --3 readings instead of 2 on most Sundays. I also appreciate the different cycles.

I appreciate focused homilies in place of sermons.

I appreciate the audible EP

I appreciate more than one EP

I appreciate being able to receive Holy Communion under both kinds via the chalice.

I appreciate the sign of peace.

 

[Chuy]

I don’t know about the dressing part, as it wasn’t an issue pre-V2, probably largely because there were few places where one dressed “casually” to go out for anything. But the lack of attention and reverence pre-V2 was every bit as bad as the worst OF Mass I have ever been to, at least in the dozen or so parishes I attended Mass at through the pre-V2 years and shortly after.

As an altar server for both types of Masses in both time frames, the looks on people’s faces then as they approached for communion was not any more or less reverent than now, just the same appearance of uninvolvement overall. Naturally I cannot comment on people’s dispositions as I cannot read minds or hearts, but the outward lack of enthusiasm just hasn’t really changed.

In my lifetime, it has always been my observation that Catholic Mass attendance is largely a “cultural expectation”, with the largest part of the population being uninvolved and there primarily to meet their “Sunday obligation”. That was true of the TLM before V2 and the OF since. It likely is not the case of the current TLM because the population there is there by specific choice. In my mind, the only thing that has changed is the culture, and we just live in a looser culture now. The Church didn’t create that culture but is affected by it and its looser expectations.

Quite frankly the OF Mass is the “right” Mass for those to whom it calls more clearly, just as the EF is the “right” Mass for those who feel God calling more clearly there. We are just different people with different ways of hearing God and different experiences. It’s not about one being objectively “better” than the other.

Peace,

Very well said. I’m not used to this caliber of writing on this forum. I appreciate your comments.

 

[joshhackerspmdo]

I am fairly lucky in that my parish (St. Agnes in Springfield, MO) has the EF and i do attend it but i also attend the OF. I find that both are good for different reason.

The EF dose to me seem to be more reverant and show the sacrificial nature of the mass in a more clear manner then the OF. However, we gain a greater sense of community with the OF and isn’t the mass and really all liturgical worship supposted to be communal in nature.

I have noticed among those who call themselves traditional a danerous pattern of over emphasis on the externals of worship at the expense of the worship itself and unfortunetly this leads in to scism and in some cases outright error.

but back to the point of the post…I feel there is a place in the church for both liturgical forms and that both must be fostered and cherished. As well both need to be said with reverence and according to the rubircs.

thanks
Josh

 

[TLM08]

I was born pre-vatican II and have vague memories of the Traditional Latin Mass…was raised in the 1970s Novus Ordo … Left for a four year stint in protestantism then returned to the Novus Ordo… Then discovered the return of the Traditional Latin Mass.

**As a former protestant, I see very little difference between the Novus Ordo and the protestant services I used to attend. **Needless to say, I try to exclusively attend the Traditional Latin Mass because it seems so… uh… CATHOLIC!

 

[Freshman88]

LOL…but I agree and I will light em too!!!

Sign me up!

 

[dang71]

I attend the Tridentine Mass exclusively but I respect the validity of the Novus Ordo Missae. In fact, the Novus Ordo was the only Mass that I knew as a child.

I am starting to think that the Church should do away with the Pauline Mass, and offer the EF in the vernacular for those who want it. My reasoning is that the EF is so much richer in terms of symbolism and sacredness. The Tridentine Mass is just better in my opinion.

However, I realise that most Catholics love the Novus Ordo. My question is, why? What does the Novus Ordo have that the Tridentine Mass doesn’t? Some may say the vernacular. What if the EF was celebrated in the vernacular…would you still prefer the N.O?

I want to know why people prefer the N.O to the Tridentine Mass? Surely, if people knew the symbolism of Tridentine Mass then they would flock to this Mass in droves.

The Tridentine Mass have everything that the N.O has, and more.

I really dislike the EF. The OF has more participation from congregation, while the EF is more elitist. The use of Latin is just plain ridiculous, so I love the use of the vernacular in the OF. The people are nicer at the OF, while the people of the EF (in my experience) tend to be really condescending and unfriendly. i like how the OF is audible throughout the whole Mass, where the EF only consists of reading a book (which i could just as easily do at home). i hate the “Sign of Peace”, but i would take that over a latin Mass any day. i don’t find the EF very reverent, because it is so quiet (since the priest doesn’t say anything) i get way too distracted by all the audible shuffling/sneezing/coughing/ahem-ing/etc.

 

[otjm]

I was born pre-vatican II and have vague memories of the Traditional Latin Mass…was raised in the 1970s Novus Ordo … Left for a four year stint in protestantism then returned to the Novus Ordo… Then discovered the return of the Traditional Latin Mass.

**As a former protestant, I see very little difference between the Novus Ordo and the protestant services I used to attend. **Needless to say, I try to exclusively attend the Traditional Latin Mass because it seems so… uh… CATHOLIC!

I am sorry that you cannot see the difference; it is so painfully obvious (inless perhaps you were attending a high Lutheran or Episcopalian Mass). The Novus Ordo has the same format that the TLM has; Liturgy of the Word, Liturgy of the Eucharist; reception of Communion. The NO has more Scripture than the TLM; it has more Eucharistic Prayers (and all of them have the same Consecration). The Gloria, Creed, Santus and Angus Dei are all the same.

So methinks either you are very unaware of the Mass itself in its basic outline, since the similarities outweigh tio differences, or you are playing a card I choose not to identify.

I have been to an Epsicopal Mass, a Lutheran Mass (which amazed me in its similarites at certain parts to the TLM), and numerous other Protestant services. I find no merit in your statement of the similarity of the latter to the NO. the first 2, yes; but your post was not specific.

Oh, and I was born pre V2 also; I was in the seminary while V2 occured.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

I really dislike the EF. The OF has more participation from congregation, while the EF is more elitist. The use of Latin is just plain ridiculous, so I love the use of the vernacular in the OF. The people are nicer at the OF, while the people of the EF (in my experience) tend to be really condescending and unfriendly. i like how the OF is audible throughout the whole Mass, where the EF only consists of reading a book (which i could just as easily do at home). i hate the “Sign of Peace”, but i would take that over a latin Mass any day. i don’t find the EF very reverent, because it is so quiet (since the priest doesn’t say anything) i get way too distracted by all the audible shuffling/sneezing/coughing/ahem-ing/etc.

Yea, thank God the Church dumped that stupid Gregorian rite that nourished the Saints for, like, 1,600 plus years and went to a Mass concocted by a committee in the 1960’s. Of course a Mass concocted by a committee in the 60’s headed by Archbishop Bugnini is going to outshine a rite developed organically over centuries!

 

[Ghoti]

I can’t compare, I’ve only ever known the Pauline Mass. As for the sign of peace, I think it could be moved to right before the dismissal – offer the sign of peace, then go in peace.

I do like the dialogue style of the NO, which I gather does not exist in the TLM.

Once I get my work schedule regularized – I am applying for Sundays off, on religious grounds – I will be making an effort to go to a Latin Mass – starting with a Latin NO.

Dominoes Nabisco.

 

[theistgal]

I was born pre-vatican II and have vague memories of the Traditional Latin Mass…was raised in the 1970s Novus Ordo … Left for a four year stint in protestantism then returned to the Novus Ordo… Then discovered the return of the Traditional Latin Mass.

**As a former protestant, I see very little difference between the Novus Ordo and the protestant services I used to attend. **Needless to say, I try to exclusively attend the Traditional Latin Mass because it seems so… uh… CATHOLIC!

That may actually be true. However, I think it’s because Protestant worship services which have any form of liturgical structure at all (not just a two-hour sermon followed by a collection and an altar call ) use the same basic structure that the Catholic (and Orthodox) liturgies use. So of course you’re going to see similarities.

I have attended Episcopalian masses that were almost identical to the Catholic OF. They omitted the prayers for the Pope, among other things. But the basic structure was the same. Still - I knew in my heart it was different.

 

[Trilor]

Maybe it is the ex-fundamentalist in me, but I like the OF Mass because of the Mass Readings and the Lectionary. I like my biblical content thanks. Can I say that in public?

 

[theistgal]

Maybe it is the ex-fundamentalist in me, but I like the OF Mass because of the Mass Readings and the Lectionary. I like my biblical content thanks. Can I say that in public?

Why sure - and welcome to CA!

I myself attend the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom most Sundays. Personally, I think both the OF and the EF could benefit from a little Eastern exposure.

 

[peregrinus_WA]

Sharing the “peace be with you” with your neighbors in the pew. It’s one of the highlights of my week. Truly.

Our parish goes to the “Agnus Dei” immediately after the priest says that.

Really? I’d light a candle every day for ten years if we stopped doing that…

I think that there are certainly parts of the Novus Ordo are beneficial, such as the audible canon and greater exposure to scripture. However, I was never a real fan of a three-year calendar, in that each year is too dependent on one Gospel. For example, this year seems to show far too much of Luke (not that I don’t like him, quite the contrary–I just think that seeing somebody else’s account of the same motiff in the same year would be of great benefit to all of us). I truly wish some kind of compromise could be made between these two issues.

However, despite the fact that the OF can be beautiful when properly celebrated, I think that many, many people like it for the wrong reasons. I think that many people go only for the sense of community, and the fact that at many NO masses, the presence of Christ is almost downplayed. At the EF, one feels so small in comparision to the deity before one, and there is no way to hide from Him there. During the NO, however (when poorly celebrated), it can be rather easy to “hide” from Our Saviour.

However, I NEVER see such sentiment come out at an EWTN Mass, and if every NO Mass were celebrated as it is there, you wouldn’t catch me complaining about anything.

The NO has enormous potential, some of which I think Cardinal Bugnini didn’t even see, like making Latin and Gregorian Chant more accessible to the laity. It also has enormous potential for Evangelization through its flexibility, and seemingly can accommidate reverent practices that formerly would have constituted and entirely different Rite. However, this brought on a responsibility that was often abused, and so certain re-thinking, which might be rubrical, theological, or educational, or all three, in nature, must take place.

You would love my parish. 99% of the time, chant is used from the Kyrie, Gloria, Santus, and Agnus Dei at the OF Masses. It is also Ad Orientum using the same Altar as the EF Mass. We also receive kneeling and on the tongue (which is the only way since intinction is used) from priests only.

When I go to 7:00 PM daily OF Mass there, it is always completely in Latin.

 

[palmas85]

I really dislike the EF. The OF has more participation from congregation, while the EF is more elitist. The use of Latin is just plain ridiculous, so I love the use of the vernacular in the OF. The people are nicer at the OF, while the people of the EF (in my experience) tend to be really condescending and unfriendly. i like how the OF is audible throughout the whole Mass, where the EF only consists of reading a book (which i could just as easily do at home). i hate the “Sign of Peace”, but i would take that over a latin Mass any day. i don’t find the EF very reverent, because it is so quiet (since the priest doesn’t say anything) i get way too distracted by all the audible shuffling/sneezing/coughing/ahem-ing/etc.

Why its our old friend Dang. Hi Dang

Good job not great but OK

You have successfully parroted the exact same things that thousands of others who loathe and despise the Traditional Mass have repeated ad nauseum over the centuries.::clapping:

Almost.:tsktsk:

But you left out the clacking of thousands of rosary beads driving everyone crazy and no one having a clue what was going on at the Altar.:bigyikes:

How could you have forgotten those two. I mean I thought they were questions 1 and 2 on the quiz you guys take before you post these things.

But don’t worry, you are a new poster and I’m sure that once you study the script a little bit more you will be just as effective as most of the other Traditional Mass bashers on this forum are.

I give it a 75, it has a good rhythm, but I couldn’t dance to it…

 

[ethelzguy]

Why its our old friend Dang. Hi Dang

Good job not great but OK

You have successfully parroted the exact same things that thousands of others who loathe and despise the Traditional Mass have repeated ad nauseum over the centuries.::clapping:

Almost.:tsktsk:

But you left out the clacking of thousands of rosary beads driving everyone crazy and no one having a clue what was going on at the Altar.:bigyikes:

How could you have forgotten those two. I mean I thought they were questions 1 and 2 on the quiz you guys take before you post these things.

But don’t worry, you are a new poster and I’m sure that once you study the script a little bit more you will be just as effective as most of the other Traditional Mass bashers on this forum are.

I give it a 75, it has a good rhythm, but I couldn’t dance to it…

Boy howdy. And you wonder why so many are turned off by traditional Catholics/Catholicism.

 

[dang71]

Why its our old friend Dang. Hi Dang

hello.

You have successfully parroted the exact same things that thousands of others who loathe and despise the Traditional Mass have repeated ad nauseum over the centuries.:

if thousands of people have been complaining about these things for centuries, then it is no wonder the Holy Spirit directed our church to the reform of Vatican 2. actually, i would be happy as a lark with the EF if 1.) it was in the vernacular, and 2.) the priest spoke audibly throughout the whole Mass, and 3.) the people there weren’t so cold and unforgiving.

---

so the OP asked:

I want to know why people prefer the N.O to the Tridentine Mass?

and i therefore gave my opinion.

 

[palmas85]

Boy howdy. And you wonder why so many are turned off by traditional Catholics/Catholicism.

I don’t wonder about it at all my friend. I know exactly why you guys hate it so much. The exact same reason that the alleged reformers Luther, Huss, Wycliff etc., did and the same reasons protestants today do. There is no real difference.

 

[palmas85]

hello.

if thousands of people have been complaining about these things for centuries, then it is no wonder the Holy Spirit directed our church to the reform of Vatican 2. actually, i would be happy as a lark with the EF if 1.) it was in the vernacular, and 2.) the priest spoke audibly throughout the whole Mass, and 3.) the people there weren’t so cold and unforgiving.

---

so the OP asked:

and i therefore gave my opinion.

Martin Luther would have probably been happy with those changes as well, so you are in good company.