Tridentine Mass( Extraordinary Mass) or Ordinary Mass?

[Solomonson]

Imagine for a moment if the introduction of the OF Mass resulted in:

• The faithful being required to use a missalette in order to try and follow what’s going on.
• The faithful praying the Rosary during the celebration of the Mass because they simply couldn’t follow what was going on.
• The Mass being celebrated extremely quickly in order to “get them out as soon as possible!”
• Holy Communion distribution limited to one species.
• The loss of one biblical reading each Sunday.

If that were the case, the OF Mass would be even more strongly vilified by those who prefer the EF Mass. It would be torn to pieces on a regular basis – even more regularly then it is today.

 

[StGerardMajella]

Thank you StGerardMajella, but reading along is a lesser participation than the responding. Yes, there are point to respond but most of the Mass the priest has his back to you and is hardly audible. Even with the missal it can be a struggle to even follow.

The priest having their back to the parishioners isn’t an issue for me, and never has been. It took some time to adapt to this change, but if you attend regularly, it is honestly not even noticeable. I like to sit up front, so I am less distracted.

I use the Missal as it is intended, which is to follow along with the priest’s prayers. For me, the Tridentine Mass when followed using the Missal in this manner, makes the Mass far more engaging and even meditative. I watch the priest’s actions at the altar carefully to make sure I am in the right section of the Missal.

As with anything, practice makes perfect. For a Catholic that isn’t attending a Tridentine Mass except once in a blue moon, the liturgy can be hard to follow. I have been going to the Tridentine Mass for almost a decade now, and it gets easier over time. It took me probably 3-4 times attending before I started to feel more comfortable. After a year, I was pretty fluent.

One of the things I did about a year ago was to start to attend daily Low Mass as well. That will also help.

So, in short, I think it all depends on how often one attends and how engaged they are as to their level of comfort with the liturgy. I usually advise new Catholics interested in the Tridentine Mass to take their time, be patient, and attend regularly. It does get easier.

Does he use a microphone where you go?

Only for the sermon, etc.

 

[Phemie]

They prefer to just listen and be passive?

You have no concept of how hard it was for adults who had spent their life attending Mass where you didn’t speak in church to suddenly be required to give responses. As far as they were concerned that belonged to the altar servers and to the choir.

I vividly remember our first Mass celebrated in the vernacular. We kids had rehearsed those responses for a couple of weeks with the grade 7 teacher. Sister had taught us to speak up and not be afraid. Not so the adults. It went against everything they’d been taught to suddenly be speaking in church. As a result the responses were pretty much inaudible except for a few high-pitched student voices. I remember Mom’s frantic whisper as she tugged on my sleeve, “NOT SO LOUD!”

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

Imagine for a moment if the introduction of the OF Mass resulted in:

• The faithful being required to use a missalette in order to try and follow what’s going on.
• The faithful praying the Rosary during the celebration of the Mass because they simply couldn’t follow what was going on.
• The Mass being celebrated extremely quickly in order to “get them out as soon as possible!”
• Holy Communion distribution limited to one species.
• The loss of one biblical reading each Sunday.

If that were the case, the OF Mass would be even more strongly vilified by those who prefer the EF Mass. It would be torn to pieces on a regular basis – even more regularly then it is today.

So it is about being popular?

• The faithful praying the Rosary during the celebration of the Mass because they simply couldn’t follow what was going on.

There was always a translation right next to the Latin texts in the mass books…

I never get enough time to pray.
To much singing…

 

[TK421]

Praying the Rosary during the Mass would be disobedient. The Mass is the greatest prayer of the Church. You are in prayer from the moment you walk in to the moment you leave.

 

[Kielbasi]

They prefer to just listen and be passive?

They were used to listening and praying, which was the paradigm that was followed for quite a few number of generations.

The liturgical reform of the age was a pretty dramatic change.

 

[James248]

A lot of misunderstanding is happening with the way the priest is facing. The priest is facing toward God and not away from the people.

Check this link:

www.newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2016/07/how-to-celebrate-mass-ad-orientem.html

 

[TK421]

You have no concept of how hard it was for adults who had spent their life attending Mass where you didn’t speak in church to suddenly be required to give responses. As far as they were concerned that belonged to the altar servers and to the choir.

I vividly remember our first Mass celebrated in the vernacular. We kids had rehearsed those responses for a couple of weeks with the grade 7 teacher. Sister had taught us to speak up and not be afraid. Not so the adults. It went against everything they’d been taught to suddenly be speaking in church. As a result the responses were pretty much inaudible except for a few high-pitched student voices. I remember Mom’s frantic whisper as she tugged on my sleeve, “NOT SO LOUD!”

That would have been fascinating to witness. I wish I could get in a time machine and be a fly on the wall to see all of that unfold.

 

[ProVobis]

Thank you StGerardMajella, but reading along is a lesser participation than the responding. Yes, there are point to respond but most of the Mass the priest has his back to you and is hardly audible. Even with the missal it can be a struggle to even follow. Does he use a microphone where you go?

I still have my old prayerbook with pictures and short prayers to go with them. Any 7 yr old could follow the Mass this way. The TLM is more visual and contemplative.

 

[Kielbasi]

The TLM is more visual and contemplative.

You are exactly right. Informed Catholics back in the day could follow the mass without really following every word the priest spoke- not that they could hear them all anyhow. What the priest was doing was how they knew the mass was progressing, the bells of course helped out as well.

The hand missals were popular enough during the early and mid 20th Century, but hardly were universally used.

 

[Phemie]

I still have my old prayerbook with pictures and short prayers to go with them. Any 7 yr old could follow the Mass this way. The TLM is more visual and contemplative.

Don’t have mine but remember following along in that little white missal. The pictures showed the various postures that the priest would assume. By looking at him and then at our book we knew where we were in Mass.

 

[M-Dent]

Having been blessed to have both forms of the Mass available, I only prefer reverence surrounding the Liturgy. If I was to try and distinguish what I find most highlighted in either form; I find the EF offers more of an experience of the Angels and Communion of Saints praying along with us in the Liturgy. The OF offers more of a sense of the Last Supper. Of course, one simple man’s sense.

 

[victrolatim]

I love both forms of the mass. An ordinary form Mass celebrated well is as solemn as an extraordinary form Mass. I remember speaking to a handful of people who lived through the changes and their was a general feeling of “They took our Mass away.” and led to some pockets of people attending illicit masses, the formation of groups like the SSPX etc. From those same groups of people I get the feeling that they were traumatized by things happening in the seventies with abuses and changes that they sort of drew nostalgic comfort with the Latin mass, and drew further away from the mainstream church. I have no doubt that things got kind of wonky in the 70s (the whole world did it seems), but the pendulum started swinging back in the 2000s with the Summorum Pontificum, the New Evangelization, the new translation of the Roman Missal, etc. I remember masses that I went to as a kid in the 1990’s that were full of some liturgical abuses, rainbow vestments, bad music and bad homilies that I see being phased out in the current day. With the extraordinary form I have seen two camps forming, the people who take comfort in the nostalgia and younger people who approach it with fresh eyes, having no former exposure to it and love it for the form of liturgy that it is. I also see differing reactions from clergy. I and some people I know have talked to various priests about the extraordinary form and those who were ordained in the 70s and 80s from my experience seem to have this mentality of the EF being “backwards” and they look at you like you are “one of those SSPX types”. One of the most reverent priests I know who celebrates the EF is in his thirties and does so from studying the rubrics. Sometimes he gets pushback from old timers who try to lecture him and tell him that that’s not how it was done “back in the day”. Of course he is following straight from the rubrics and has no experience from when it was the norm. As far as the ordinary form of Mass, there are very reverent ones out there you just have to find them. I attend Mass regularly at the local Dominican convent and their daily mass lasts an hour with a good sermon, incense, sanctus bells and Latin chant. I have also been to some where the priest, God bless him, is stuck in the 1980’s and seems oblivious to the advancements in the missal and the church in general. For those looking for a reverent and solemn OF Mass, I would suggest finding a local religious community or going to the earliest Mass. That way you tend to avoid guitars, contemporary music and all of that stuff if it bothers your prayer life.

 

[edwest2]

I am just curious. I am sure there’s plenty of people on here who are old enough to remember Mass before the new Missal was introduced in 1970. I believe the last Missal which is considered the legal Tridentine Mass Missal is the 1962 Roman Missal. My question is to those who have lived to see both. ( I am only 33, so I never experienced the Extraordinary form of Mass) which was just the ordinary form prior to 1970, so I am just curious, which do you prefer? Are there any parts you prefer in both sides? I.E. you may like a particular part of the Tridentine Mass but prefer the Ordinary Mass on other parts? Just curious how older Catholics view this; for me the Mass has been the same my whole life, but I assume it was a real shock when it first was made the ordinary form in 1970; how did people react to it? I mean I remember people getting all upset over the third edition of the newer Missal with different wording; I can only assume people were completely lost with such a drastic change that occurred in the early 1970s.

It is easy to assume a negative. I was there before and after Vatican II. At the time, respect for Holy Mother Church was very important. I was obligated to accept the Mass facing the people. It was not a shock. Parishioners could ask their priest or even nuns. It was all explained to us. People were not completely lost in the 1970s either.

Pope Benedict

"In the first place, there is the fear that the document detracts from the authority of the Second Vatican Council, one of whose essential decisions – the liturgical reform – is being called into question.

"This fear is unfounded. In this regard, it must first be said that the Missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic Liturgy. The last version of the Missale Romanum prior to the Council, which was published with the authority of Pope John XXIII in 1962 and used during the Council, will now be able to be used as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgical celebration. It is not appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they were “two Rites”. Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the same rite.

“As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted. At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal. Probably it was thought that it would be a matter of a few individual cases which would be resolved, case by case, on the local level. Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood. This was especially the case in countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the earlier Form of the liturgical celebration. We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level. Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.”

Ed

 

[edwest2]

There was an intermediate half-Latin version of the mass in the late 60’s, it didn’t go from all-Latin to all-vernacular over night.

The biggest change wasn’t really the change from Latin to English. The biggest change was asking the Faithful to read aloud different prayers and responses. In traditional days, the faithful were expected to and remained quiet during the entire mass, weren’t expected to say a single word during the entire liturgy. The liturgical reforms changed that paradigm completely.

That’s why even today, you might hear someone talk about “hearing mass”, because that was exactly the people’s role back in the day.

That is totally incorrect. There were parts of the Mass where our vocal participation was required.

et cum spiritu tuo The English and Latin were on the same page in the St. Joseph Missal. So the priest would speak and we would respond. We knew what we were saying.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

Personally I think the OF has made the laity to casual during mass, and the songs in the liturgy have really diminished in their beauty.

Is it just my country or are some songs more like folk songs than actual liturgical ones?

No, it is not just your country. Sacred music is returning.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

Back in traditional times, at least here in the United States, most of the local Catholic churches were ethnic based. The priest were from Poland or Lithuania or Italy or elsewhere. They used the veracular- which was their own native tongue- and many of the English speaking faithful were unfamiliar with it.

We had Mass in both English and Polish.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

The priest having their back to the parishioners isn’t an issue for me, and never has been. It took some time to adapt to this change, but if you attend regularly, it is honestly not even noticeable. I like to sit up front, so I am less distracted.

I use the Missal as it is intended, which is to follow along with the priest’s prayers. For me, the Tridentine Mass when followed using the Missal in this manner, makes the Mass far more engaging and even meditative. I watch the priest’s actions at the altar carefully to make sure I am in the right section of the Missal.

As with anything, practice makes perfect. For a Catholic that isn’t attending a Tridentine Mass except once in a blue moon, the liturgy can be hard to follow. I have been going to the Tridentine Mass for almost a decade now, and it gets easier over time. It took me probably 3-4 times attending before I started to feel more comfortable. After a year, I was pretty fluent.

One of the things I did about a year ago was to start to attend daily Low Mass as well. That will also help.

So, in short, I think it all depends on how often one attends and how engaged they are as to their level of comfort with the liturgy. I usually advise new Catholics interested in the Tridentine Mass to take their time, be patient, and attend regularly. It does get easier.

Only for the sermon, etc.

From the book, The Spirit of the Liturgy by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger:

“The turning of the priest towards the people has turned the community into a self-enclosed circle. In its outward form, it no longer opens out on what lies ahead and above, but is closed in on itself. The common turning towards the East was not a ‘celebration towards the wall’; it did not mean that the priest ‘had his back to the people’: the priest himself was not regarded as so important. For just as the congregation in the synagogue looked together toward Jerusalem, so in the Christian liturgy the congregation looked together ‘towards the Lord.'”

“As one of the Fathers of Vatican II’s Constitution on the Liturgy, J. A. Jungmann, put it, it was much more a question of priest and people facing in the same direction, knowing that together they were in a procession towards the Lord. They did not close themselves into a circle, they did not gaze at one another, but as the pilgrim People of God they set off for the Oriens, for the Christ who comes to meet us.”

Ed

 

[Phemie]

That is totally incorrect. There were parts of the Mass where our vocal participation was required.

et cum spiritu tuo The English and Latin were on the same page in the St. Joseph Missal. So the priest would speak and we would respond. We knew what we were saying.

Ed

Dialogue Masses pre Vat. II were not a world-wide phenomenon. Never attended one in my diocese.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Dialogue Masses pre Vat. II were not a world-wide phenomenon. Never attended one in my diocese.

“Et cum spiritual tuo”. Was about the extent of it. Except for “Domine, Non Sum Dignus…”