What Are You Doing To Promote The EF?

[YoungTradCath]

Yes sir, people are frequently afraid of the unknown, and for a lot of folks these days, the usus Antiquior is a total unknown since it was effectively suppressed in 1970, indults notwithstanding. These folks are often “won over” once they experience the EF.

There are other folks who were taught to fear (even hate) the Usus Antiquior by those who so readily embraced the “spirit of Vatican II” and all that goes with it. (They even anticipated the Novus Ordo: I vividly recall the goings-on after the 1965 Missal made its brief appearance, but I digress.) Sometimes these folks are likewise “won over” with experience, when they realize that the Usus Antiquior is not the horrid zombie they were taught it was.

OTOH, there are those who fear and hate the Usus Antiquior simply because it exists. For the most part, these are the so-called “teachers” in the above paragraph, and they (including some bishops) are just incorrigible. They are the diehards that will never accept the Usus Antiquior: “oh, it’s not (oy but how I hate the next two words …) relevant or meaningful”, etc etc. Well, maybe to them it’s not, but it is to others. The diehards are entitled to their opinion as long as they don’t continue to force their prejudice on the rest of the faithful.

What I can say to someone in the first two groups above is to try the Usus Antiquior a few times. Get a missal and do some online reading. Once the reality of what it is sets in, that reality may well dispel the fears. I doubt anything short of a miracle will affect those in the last group.

Relevance and meaning! Liturgy is never and never will be intrinsically relevant or meaningful in the way that self-described “spirit of Vatican II” Catholics, however well-meaning they are, like or would like for it to be. Any time you deprecate and deform the liturgy, you are by that very fact no longer celebrating something that can reasonably be fully called liturgy. A silly 70’s Mass remains a liturgy, but puppets, awful music, liturgical dance, and mini-homilies before every ritual act are not liturgical acts. They are a-, or even anti-, liturgical acts, with the exception of a short introduction to the Mass (OF) in the introductory rites.

Liturgy itself cannot be made meaningful and relevant in the pop culture, modern sense of those words. It is impossible. If funky things are added to the liturgy and people enjoy these things exclusively or mostly, then these funky things are what are meaningful and relevant, not the liturgical skeleton onto which they are unfortunately cut and pasted.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Relevance and meaning! Liturgy is never and never will be intrinsically relevant or meaningful in the way that self-described “spirit of Vatican II” Catholics, however well-meaning they are, like or would like for it to be. Any time you deprecate and deform the liturgy, you are by that very fact no longer celebrating something that can reasonably be fully called liturgy. A silly 70’s Mass remains a liturgy, but puppets, awful music, liturgical dance, and mini-homilies before every ritual act are not liturgical acts. They are a-, or even anti-, liturgical acts, with the exception of a short introduction to the Mass (OF) in the introductory rites.

Liturgy itself cannot be made meaningful and relevant in the pop culture, modern sense of those words. It is impossible. If funky things are added to the liturgy and people enjoy these things exclusively or mostly, then these funky things are what are meaningful and relevant, not the liturgical skeleton onto which they are unfortunately cut and pasted.

All this suggests that what are seen as objections to the OF are really objections to distortions and abuses than to the Ordinary Form of the Mass itself.

 

[YoungTradCath]

All this suggests that what are seen as objections to the OF are really objections to distortions and abuses than to the Ordinary Form of the Mass itself.

Certainly many objections are simply objections to the distortions and abuses.

 

[malphono]

All this suggests that what are seen as objections to the OF are really objections to distortions and abuses than to the Ordinary Form of the Mass itself.

That’s partially true, but I think that “liturgical purists” (ok ya got me, I’m one of them ) see much more to it than that. Sure the Novus Ordo can be done with due solemnity (although – with the possible exception of some monasteries and religious houses – in my experience, it rarely is), but no matter how it’s “dressed up” it’s still not the Usus Antiquior. A Granny Smith and a MacIntosh are both apples, but are certainly not the same. They have vastly different flavor and texture.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

That’s partially true, but I think that “liturgical purists” (ok ya got me, I’m one of them ) see much more to it than that. Sure the Novus Ordo can be done with due solemnity (although – with the possible exception of some monasteries and religious houses – in my experience, it rarely is), but no matter how it’s “dressed up” it’s still not the Usus Antiquior. A Granny Smith and a MacIntosh are both apples, but are certainly not the same. They have vastly different flavor and texture.

I’m starting to get that sense in more vivid detail with further study, and truly appreciate the comments here of the more educated on this subject.

 

[severus68]

That’s partially true, but I think that “liturgical purists” (ok ya got me, I’m one of them ) see much more to it than that. Sure the Novus Ordo can be done with due solemnity (although – with the possible exception of some monasteries and religious houses – in my experience, it rarely is), but no matter how it’s “dressed up” it’s still not the Usus Antiquior. A Granny Smith and a MacIntosh are both apples, but are certainly not the same. They have vastly different flavor and texture.

You can prefer the EF but please stop putting down the OF.

 

[Cat]

That’s partially true, but I think that “liturgical purists” (ok ya got me, I’m one of them ) see much more to it than that. Sure the Novus Ordo can be done with due solemnity (although – with the possible exception of some monasteries and religious houses – in my experience, it rarely is), but no matter how it’s “dressed up” it’s still not the Usus Antiquior. A Granny Smith and a MacIntosh are both apples, but are certainly not the same. They have vastly different flavor and texture.

I’m curious–which apple is the EF and which apple is the OF?

And I agree with severus68–we must appreciate both forms of the Mass even if we personally prefer one form over another.

I assume that you like both MacIntosh apples and Granny Smith apples, so I’m guessing you probably like both the OF and the EF Masses even if you prefer the EF over the OF.

I think it’s interesting to continue the analogy of apples to Mass.

The Granny Smith apple is tart and hard, and is usually recommended for pies and other baking. Some people enjoy eating Granny Smith apples raw, but I don’t like them raw because of the hardness and tartness; I personally wish that Subway would stop putting Granny Smith apples in their apple snacks because they’re so hard to chew and much too tart for people like me who have a sweet tooth.

The MacIntosh apple is sweet and juicy, and NOT recommended for pies or baking because it turns to mush when it is heated. It’s great for applesauce, though (yum yum, this is making me hungry!). And it’s highly-recommended for eating raw, although lately a lot of other breeds are showing up as “eating” apples; e.g., the honeycrisp and the fuji (yummy to both breeds!), and these breeds are giving the old-fashioned MacIntosh some competition!

So IMO, the EF Mass is the Granny Smith because it stands up to the test of heat and mixes all the individuals beautifully into one single pie in which the individuals keep their shape but still taste good together. But it is hard to take a bite out of, and many individuals stay away from it because it hurts to chew, unless it’s cooked into a pie, but most of us try to eat pie only a few times a year because it makes us fat. For many of us, pies are eaten at traditional celebrations; e.g., Thanksgiving and Christmas and other special times.

The OF Mass is the MacIntosh because it’s sweet and soft and easy to eat by individuals, and doesn’t mix them together into a a single pie, although it does tend to make people “emotional” and “mushy,” especially when really good contemporary or ethnic music is done. Some would say that the “mush” represents the softer theology of the OF Mass, which doesn’t have nearly as much symbolism in the actual liturgy as the EF Mass, which is filled with symbolism in every word, gesture, costume, and act.

To continue the analogy, the fujis and pink ladies and honeycrisps represent all the Protestant denominations that are attracting a lot of people away from the venerable MacIntosh and the Granny Smith.

I think I’m going to eat apples for lunch today! But which one? Hmmm…what a lovely, delicious choice!

 

[robert7685]

I just moved in with Catholic roommates, one of whom is a new convert. Both have expressed an interest in attending the EF Mass with me, but I can’t in good conscience bring them to our Latin Mass Community right now because members of our Una Voce committee are currently trying to convert me over to the pro-SSPX and anti-OF Mass side and bad-mouthing the bishop, pope, diocesan priests, as well as our own priest. They track me down after Mass to give me pro-SSPX and anti-OF Mass literature, which is starting to grow under the front seat of my car. Truth be told, I now dread going to Mass every day. I can’t risk the scandal such people could cause to my roommates, especially the convert who is very impressionable.

Are they people you know personally? You could (for the sake of diffusing the situation) say that you’ll just look it all up online if you are interested, and that you don’t want any more literature. If this is a group proselyting towards others as well, I’d say refer the situation to the priest in charge.

As for promoting the use of the 1962 Missal, I usually just have little cards at the ready with the Mass schedule and Church location. If I want to invite someone to visit, I try to steer them towards the first Sunday of the Month. In the FSSP parish I attend, there’s usually a brief introduction/Q & A meeting for those new to the Traditional Latin Mass after the High Mass. It is quite informative for such a short talk.

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

I think it’s a smart idea for the most jovial member(s) of your group to nod and say hello to people after they exit Mass; the human touch. Also for a lady to speak to female mass attendees.

Just say hello!

Worked for me. I was attending a TLM for a year. One guy heard me singing in the pews and approached me to sing in the choir and I demurred. Another chap approached me after Mass months later and I said ‘Okay’. I pointed that out that an offertory collector who’d been supporting the mass for years might like a go. He was so happy and became a staunch member of our schola.

People are shy. Trads can be very reserved. Say hello to them and give them a little push.

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t know how effective it is/was but when I joined the local Una Voce group back in the 90’s, I had a dozen or so rubber stamps made out. We decided on the wording “For the Full Restoration of the Old Latin Mass” and used it on all our letters and such.

Have to plant seeds somewhere.

 

[TimothyH]

You can prefer the EF but please stop putting down the OF.

I personally appreciate malphono’s honesty in coming out and saying that the thinks the Ordinary Form is objectively inferior to the Extraordianry Form.

-Tim-

 

[Denise1957]

I think it’s a smart idea for the most jovial member(s) of your group to nod and say hello to people after they exit Mass; the human touch. Also for a lady to speak to female mass attendees.

Just say hello!

Worked for me. I was attending a TLM for a year. One guy heard me singing in the pews and approached me to sing in the choir and I demurred. Another chap approached me after Mass months later and I said ‘Okay’. I pointed that out that an offertory collector who’d been supporting the mass for years might like a go. He was so happy and became a staunch member of our schola.

People are shy. Trads can be very reserved. Say hello to them and give them a little push.

Excellent advice here. I like your story about how you joined the choir, and how the offeratory collector joined, too. You are right about trads being reserved. The EF parish in our city does not greet or otherwise engage people they don’t already know, even newcomers (which is the main reason I don’t attend it anymore. I attend the OF at the same parish instead). I think that extra friendliness on the part of the regulars would go a long way to encouraging new folks, since new people might be shy about talking to people.

 

[Rich_C]

Why is it necessary to promote the EF?

The Holy Father has put the ball in the laymen’s court to ask for it en masse, before bishops make it more available.

 

[severus68]

I personally appreciate malphono’s honesty in coming out and saying that the thinks the Ordinary Form is objectively inferior to the Extraordianry Form.

-Tim-

If we could all be as honest - oh, but there are the Forum rules and a matter of disrespect.

 

[Cristiano]

I personally appreciate malphono’s honesty in coming out and saying that the thinks the Ordinary Form is objectively inferior to the Extraordianry Form.

-Tim-

I think that you are reading too much into it. He said that they are different and that you cannot vest one form to make it look like the other form. I think that he is quite correct about that and I am quite sure that it is why we are going to have a new form sometime in the future. Would you say that a form of the Divine Liturgy is superior or inferior to the OF/EF or that they are just different and no matter what you cannot pass a DL as an OF or EF Mass.

 

[YoungTradCath]

I personally appreciate malphono’s honesty in coming out and saying that the thinks the Ordinary Form is objectively inferior to the Extraordianry Form.

-Tim-

 

[clem456]

That’s partially true, but I think that “liturgical purists” (ok ya got me, I’m one of them ) see much more to it than that. Sure the Novus Ordo can be done with due solemnity (although – with the possible exception of some monasteries and religious houses – in my experience, it rarely is), but no matter how it’s “dressed up” it’s still not the Usus Antiquior. A Granny Smith and a MacIntosh are both apples, but are certainly not the same. They have vastly different flavor and texture.

Just so I can nail this down and understand what you are saying…,.

There are two Jesuses, with different flavors to suit the palate??
Or is it that there is only one Jesus, and at one Mass He is all we need, and at the other He is
-not- all we need?

Can you clarify?

 

[TrueLight]

This is why some of us are promoting the EF.

 

[Rich_C]

This is why some of us are promoting the EF.

And this. calcatholic.web141.discountasp.net/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=5b74824d-3f13-4d96-a789-1adee0044f9f

 

[YoungTradCath]

Just so I can nail this down and understand what you are saying…,.

There are two Jesuses, with different flavors to suit the palate??
Or is it that there is only one Jesus, and at one Mass He is all we need, and at the other He is
-not- all we need?

Can you clarify?

He is saying that the Forms are not the same and this goes beyond mere superficialities. That is all.