Why do so many priests only use EP2?

[Santoku]

It’s shorter, plain and simple.

That makes it perfect for a daily Mass, where, I agree, every effort should be make to keep it short so more can attend. I have no problem with a 15 min. daily Mass.

On Sunday, the longer prayers are more appropriate, and should be used, IMHO. I’d like to see the Canon mandatory on Sundays.

God Bless

I have been to exactly one 15 minute Mass in my life and it took unorthodox means to achieve that.

No procession or recession. The altar was 100% set at the beginning of Mass including the gifts. The priest read the epistle, responsorial psalm and the Gospel himself. The homily was certainly under 3 minutes, maybe under 2. I would guess 30 or so received Holy Communion (both species.) The sacred vessels were purified after Mass (I hope) – they were not even removed from the altar at the end of communion.

This was a Saturday morning at 07:00.

 

[hamburglar]

Because it’s shorter.

That’s the main reason. It is interesting to note that EP II is essentially identical to the text in Hippolytus’ 3rd century text, Apostolic Tradition. EP II has the Sanctus and the Intercessions, which Hippolytus’ text did not have.

It really is a shame that Mass has to be such a rush. I find EP I to be so beautiful. It seems strange to me that the Eucharist is the peak(?) of the Mass, but often is rushed and very short timewise. One minute I’m contemplating the beauty of the Sacrifice, and after I blink, I hear the Great Amen.

 

[Rachel_J]

I’m another who has never been to a mass less than 30 minutes. In fact 30 minutes is on the short side. I attend at the Cathedral so daily mass is celebrated by a variety of priests - most go for 40 minutes.

I can’t see how it is possible to go for less than 30 minutes without using “unorthodox means” as another poster put it.

 

[MusicMan]

In the average town in Midwestern America, the length of a licitly and validly celebrated daily Mass can range from 20 minutes-45 minutes in length, depending on the celebrant (or, in some cases celebrants), the number of faithful present, and the pastoral needs of those gathered.

Much has to do with the length of the homily, the number of Prayers of the Faithful, the selection of an EP (and the options with the Roman Canon), and the number of communicants.

My pastor does not give a lengthy homily, in fact much of it comes from the homily guide that comes with the loose-leaf lectionary for the year. Still a licit practice. The Prayers of the Faithful come from the same resource. Still a licit practice. His Mass lasts no more than 25 minutes. No abuses, and he uses EP II, which is proscribed for daily Mass. Approx. 75 communicants.

My parents’ pastor usually takes 35 minutes, uses EP II, but gives a longer, more specialized homily. No abuses. Approx. 75 communicants.

At the church I worked at in college, the pastor gives a significantly longer homily, and uses the Roman Canon, albeit typically the briefest version the options allow. Takes just about 40 minutes for daily Mass. No abuses. Approx. 125 communicants.

 

[EasterJoy]

I love my parochial vicar, but, he does use EP II 95% of the time, even though he admits that he really shouldn’t. Of the two (my pastor and my parochial vicar), my PV preaches the longest, but, uses EP II. I told him that maybe he might want to shorten the homily just a tad and consider using EP I or EP IV, or the EPs for Reconciliation (and, he has done so).

I’ve often heard it said that it is far easier to prepare worthwhile remarks that are to last 50 minutes than it is to make remarks of value that may only last for five! When one goes over longer than one intended, and the amount of time simply cannot be lengthened, then the rush is on…

 

[Manfred]

Or, it could be that EP II has ancient roots, and cuts to the chase.

It gets to the meat and potatoes of why we’re there without additional fanfare.

“Meat and potatoes”, huh?

Baloney!

The word SACRIFICE is not even used in EP II.

 

[AngelRose81]

Ours change it up. In the past few weeks, I’ve heard I, II, III, & IV.

 

[MusicMan]

There are a lot of priests who exclusively use EP III. Never use the Roman Canon. While this isn’t an abuse, is it aesthetically appropriate? Is it good pastoral care?

EP IV gives a greater view of salvific history, and is more closely linked to the Divine Liturgy than the other EPs are. Would it not make sense to use this one more often as well?

Of course, this makes me wonder if those of us who post on CAF don’t have different pastoral needs than the average Joe Plumber Catholic…