Between 1965 and 1969 there existed a form of the Mass that was not the Traditional Mass nor the Ordinary Form as we know it. It more closely resembled the Traditional Mass than the Ordinary Form today does. It retained the use of Latin in some aspects and the Kyrie in Greek. Several things were moved around as I remember and several other things omitted or modified, although time has kind of blurred my memories of exactly what they were. It was different enough to be noticible but not different enough to really cause problems. The changes were generally well received and most of us thought that it was the new Mass that we had been told was coming…
No such luck.
Then the Ordinary Form came out, seemingly overnight and the transformation was immediate, drastic, confusing and sharp in comparison. It caught most of us completely off guard and along with other changes, removal of statues, altar rails, re-positiong of Altars etc took a lot of getting used to. Some could not cope with the changes. Others eagerly accepted them. Suddenly anything and everything was up for grabs. Change was considered the best thing posssible. Annything new was good and everything old was bad. You couldn’t find a public rosary recitation, a Corpus Christi procession or Eucharistic Adoration, Forty Hours etc anywhere. Communion on the tongue, gone. In the hand, the new and better way. In one fell swoop the traditions of 1000+ years were eagerly thrown out of the window, all in the name of progress. Why?
It was a sad sad time and one that is both hard to remember and difficult to forget.
I think it would be good if everyone stepped back for a moment and pondered one overriding and burning question.
What was it that was so bad about the pre conciliar Mass and Church for that matter, that required such drastic and dramatic changes? In all of the posts about the relative superiority and /or inferiority of both rites, I have never seen that question addressed or discussed. And in my opinion it is the one that really deserves discussion before anything else. Because if we cannot find a valid rationale for the changes, why were they accepted so eagerly by so many or even attempted in the first place? Were they accepted for the sake of change alone as appears to be the case or was there some valid reason for them?
I don’t know the answer and probably never will.
As far as a “Legit Ordinary Form” I would imagine you can find them just about anywhere. You may have to look hard and do some Parish shopping, but they are out there.
Somewhere.
