Old Mass/new Mass thoughts – part 3

20 Comments

1. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:22 AM

   Response:

   I am a 24-year-old convert. A bit of backstory: my dad was a very anti-Catholic protestant, who made my mother (who was Catholic) promise that his children would not be raised as Catholics. Well, he never took us to church, and my grandmother the devout, Polish Catholic took me to Mass every Saturday night, until I stopped spending much time with her. I was never really instructed in the Faith, and wound up delving into paganism and various occult activities, winding up with a minor demonic oppression problem (voices, visions, &c.). I wound up being baptized because of my ex-girlfriend as a Lutheran, and converted to Catholicism along with my now-wife after much study and soul-searching. I am very much the traditionalist, and prefer the Missa Tridentina for its solemnity, reverence, beauty and theological accuracy. While in most things I am very much the aestheticist and know not the word ‘gaudy’, I actually prefer the Missa lecta for its silence, especially when the priest has a microphone and one can just make out his whispering during the Canon. For what it is worth, I am also a fan of Eastern liturgies for the same reasons. The Novus Ordo could be greatly repaired if we were to restore the altar rails, have only the priest distribute Holy Eucharist, move the Pax from the Canon, stop the practice of encouraging theological schizophrenia with female altar servers, and turn back to the High Altar, ad orientem. Chanted liturgy and the removal of protestant hymns would be very good, as well.
2. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:24 AM

   Response:

   I am a 36-year-old, husband and father of three living in the Diocese of Nashville.  I am a convert (2001) and spent my youth as a high church Episcopalian.  From what I can recall from those years, all of the liturgies were dignified and quite reverent.  We celebrated ad orientem with incense.  We had an altar rail and received kneeling.  The language of the prayers was sacred and elevated.  Accompaniment was provided solely by the organ, and historic hymns were sung.  I was formed to understand that properly celebrated liturgies demanded something of me.  Along with everyone else, I knew that I was called to give my absolute best and maximum effort in bringing beauty to the worship of God.  After my conversion (in another diocese), I slowly became uncomfortable with the casual atmosphere at my home parish and the others I visited.  Today, in this diocese, I still regularly witness extremely disorganized altar servers, scandalously dressed Lectors and EMHCs, resurrectifixes hung in place of crucifixes (at least the felt banners are gone), tabernacles hidden out of sight, jokes told during homilies, applause directed toward our choir, and music that makes me want to shove an ice pick in my ear.  The general lack of reverence continues to be appalling.  In my current parish, our tabernacle is located in a small chapel just off the highly trafficked narthex.  I would be generous if I guessed that 5% of the parish makes any sign of reverence towards Our Lord resting therein.  No one believes in the Real Presence, it seems.  However, there is no stopping our creativity.  Last Pentecost, my first at this parish, a group of white haired lay folks processed into Mass ahead of our pastor carrying red flags while faux wind sounds were played over the PA system.  With such sloppy and disrespectful habits of prayer, it is no secret to me why the faithful in this parish and diocese struggle to believe.  But mention lex orandi, lex credendi around here and people (clergy included) look at you like you’re speaking in tongues.  I gravitate to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Mass to escape the sheer lunacy that governs modern parish life in my diocese.  I have no nostalgia or special attachment to Latin or Gregorian chant, as I have never really been exposed to those things properly.  However, I scratch and claw to find places that willingly and happily celebrate the Old Mass, because it seems that is just about the only refuge for someone who wants to teach his kids to be reverent and humble before God.
   
3. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:25 AM

   Response:

   I don’t know if I count as “younger.” I am 46 — born in 1963. I was born and raised Catholic, but never knew the TLM. I only remember the new Mass. In fact, I knew nothing about the pre-Vatican II times — my parents never spoke of it and I was oblivious. I drifted away from my faith in my teens and 20s and then had a deep conversion experience when I was 29. I began attending the TLM on a regular basis in 2007 after the Pope’s Motu Proprio and vastly prefer it. At first, it t took about a month or two to get used to it because it seemed so strange and different to me. But little by little I came to love it very much. I like that the priest is leading us, facing God, at the head of the congregation and not looking at us. At Novus Ordo Masses I find that I often have to close my eyes not to look at the priest and what is going on up in the sanctuary. I love the prayers of the TLM, I can focus more deeply on joining my prayers with the priests at the TLM. I am much more distracted at the Novus Ordo. I love the silence at the TLM, especially after Communion. So many times at Novus Ordo Masses there is so much  noise and busyness … there’s never just some quiet time for prayer. I think the TLM is deep, rich, beautiful and it raises my mind and heart up to God in a way that the Novus Ordo does not.
   
4. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:25 AM

   Response:

   I am 56 years old.  Dim memories of the Latin Mass. I do remember the priest, very excited, telling us all about the changes to come and how wonderful it is all going to be. Then I sort of ‘fell asleep’ in the faith as so many things from sacred items to tenets of the faith seemed to be jettisoned. No more a rock but shifting sands for us.  I certainly felt free to accept or reject what I pleased.  As a little child in Catholic school there was daily Mass but by the time I graduated from the Catholic high school, we no longer attended Mass. I never formally left the Church but had 19 years between confessions–we were told that as a ‘resurrection people’ we did not need it. Contraception? Oh, that is a matter of conscience said our pastor so I have my politically correct two children.  This went on and yet I had a great longing in my soul which I sensed but did not know how to address. I checked out new age and more. Then Our Lady had pity on my poor soul and drew me to her. I returned to confession at least monthly and more often; I became a daily communicant and my hunger for the fullness of faith has never abated.  I began to recognize liturgical abuse. And it upset me.  Then, about 10 years ago, a priest (who did not last long in my liberal parish) re-introduced the Sanctus, and Agnus Dei, and Kyrie.  And I was surprised to find that they came right back to me; they had been dormant since I was a child. Later, because I found myself getting angry and upset at the abuses, I began to pray with my First Communion missal and so came to pray the Mass of 1962. It would be years before I got to attend an EF since not even an indult was allowed  in my diocese. I moved away. I now attend a reasonable novus ordo parish with minimal liturgical abuse and the gospel is preached here and I have access to the FSSP Mass four times a month.  I would attend the EF all the time had I the opportunity to do so.
   
5. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:26 AM

   Response:

   I was born and raised a Catholic, and am now a stone’s throw from 25.  I fell away from religious belief in high school, but (eventually) in college found myself filled with the gift of Faith and back in union with the Church.  Being in Chicago for school, a classmate of mine had heard that there was a parish where they had an indult to celebrate the older form of mass (St. John Cantius).  When I first attended Mass there in the Extraordinary Form, I was struck by the fact that it seemed so different from the Ordinary Form of Mass.  I was moved, however, by the beauty and the realization that this was the same Mass my parents and grandparents and ancestry back and back and back had attended.  This was the first time I received our Lord and Savior on the tongue, a practice I have always followed since.  I also, while there, had the opportunity to participate in the Ordinary Form of Mass ad orientem in both English and Latin.  Where I am today, I have relatively close access to weekly masses in the Extraordinary Form in two locations.  However, I have come to find that I prefer the Ordinary Form of Mass, when done reverently and carefully, to an equally well done Extraordinary Form Mass.  That said, I am glad to have the EF Mass around and available.
   
6. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:27 AM

   Response:

   I’m 36 and converted two years ago.  What broke through decades of anti-Catholic indoctrination was attendance at the reverent, OF baptism of a friend’s son.  I’ve been to a dozen different OF parishes and one EF parish, and there is no place like home, especially for weekday Masses!  I pray often for those who have to endure sloppy liturgies.
   
7. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:28 AM

   Response:

   Age: 25, married w/o children; raised in an orthodox N.O. family, attended 1st TLM two years ago when offered on law school campus following S.P.; usually attend TLM since […] What drove me to go to my first TLM, and then to return despite the confusion of the new experience, was the sense that there was something important there (beyond the Obvious Thing present at any Mass): that there was value in praying the way that saints, popes, and my ancestors had all prayed.  I read my law school assignments and saw how twentieth-century jurists had thrown centuries of logical, accepted legal doctrines out the window on the basis of emotion, poor reasoning, and chronological snobbery; the result is a sickening mess.  I haven’t been able to resist seeing the same forces in the jettisoning of the old rites.  Maybe that makes me a grumpy reactionary.  But I have “positive” motivations as well: I enjoy having the entire ordo in front of me; I enjoy the untruncated invocations, the scripture interwoven in the rites, the knowledge that I’m not going to be distracted by father’s use of New, Improved, Unapproved Mass RubricsTM, and—frankly—I enjoy Latin.  But I also recognize that these things, these ancient rites, would be invaluable even if I didn’t enjoy them, because they are what we as Catholics do, or at least what we have always done.  I simply don’t see any way in which it is possible for us to make reasoned decisions about what we as Catholics ought to be doing in our homes, in church, or with our families if we act as if history began in 1970. 
   

    
8. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:28 AM

   Response:

   I was raised as an evangelical Protestant. Through a love of history and a discovery of the writings of the early Church Fathers, I came to realize that I could find no justification for remaining seperated from the Catholic Church. I came into the Church eight years ago and I am currently 30 yo. Because of my upbringing, anything remotely “liturgical” (in ways of worship) was new and exciting to me as a new Catholic. I was only exposed to the Ordinary Form at first, but it was not long before I realized that the “older form” of the Mass was still used but, it seemed to me, only by small numbers of “fringe elements” in the Church. This, I still believe, is the view of the Extraordinary Form among most Catholics in the U.S., a view that will have to be overcome if we are ever to see much traction and gravitation towards a more organic connection between the two forms.    I attend the Ordinary Form almost exclusively but would certainly love to have a choice in the matter. Tthere is not an Extraordinary Form Mass offered anywhere in my diocese, but when I visit New Orleans I attend the Extraordinary Form at St. Patrick’s Church there. I would probably prefer the Extraordinary Form if it were available in my area, but, as it is, I am just happy to have a priest who celebrates the Ordinary Form with dignity, including making use of Gregorian chant. And one Mass every Sunday is even celebrated ad orientem, so I am grateful.
   

    
9. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

   16 January 2010 at 8:29 AM

   Response:

   In response to your request for thoughts on the EF and OF, here goes:  I am 32 years old, a seminarian with a religious order.  I am a cradle Catholic, though spent some time away from the Church in my early 20’s. I was raised on the Novus Ordo, having never experienced the TLM until a few years ago.  I was fortunate for most of my youth to have a very orthodox pastor of the parish and (mostly) great music.  It wasn’t until I experienced the EF Mass at a midnight Christmas Mass in Mater Ecclesiae in Berlin, NJ several years ago that I realized how shortchanged I had been for so many years.  Certainly my own faith encountering the mystery of the Mass always drew me closer to God, the reading of Scripture at the liturgy always edified my spirit, and the grace of the Eucharist inflamed my heart to greater devotion.  These were constant even in the most mundane of OF liturgies, and I think that needs be stated.  However, when I experienced the EF Mass at Mater Ecclesiae, and again quite a few times since then at various places, I encountered something different.  For one, the use of chant in the liturgy naturally served to attune my soul to the transcendent mystery that lies at the heart of the Mass.  The same was true for the classical polyphonic music, though both achieved this in different ways.  Secondly, between the architecture of the Church and the selection of music, I encountered the kind of beauty that naturally awakened the divine spark in me.  In other words, the encounter with beauty (and yes, beauty has objective standards) was itself a sacramental encounter with God.  Finally, the Latin itself drew me into a prayerful encounter with the liturgy, a true active participation.  There is no doubt that until that time I had never experienced the Catholic liturgy more profoundly and seemingly more authentically than I had then. For a while it seemed to me that perhaps this did mean that I actually favored the EF over the OF.  But the more I studied, the more I sought out different parishes, I was finally able to see that it is not the OF itself that I was finding less perfect than the EF, but rather that the poor education of so many priests, for which they really can’t be blamed, and the changes in the liturgy that have nothing whatever to do with the changes called for by Vatican II, were the real problem.  I had the opportunity to attend a sung Latin Mass in the Ordinary Form a few weeks ago, and I can honestly say that I loved it just as much as any EF Mass.  It is true that the OF presently is subject to greater abuse than the EF.  It seems that in the current debates a picture is painted of pre-Vatican II Masses that just has little bearing in reality.  The EF was abused pre-Vatican II, and it is so beautiful now because the people promulgating it are those who are genuinely concerned with liturgical beauty.  By proper education of our seminarians, proper catechesis of the faithful, by bringing this same concern for orthodoxy and liturgical beauty to the OF, I am convinced that the Church can and will have two wonderfully complementary forms of the Latin Mass.
   

    
10. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:30 AM

    Response:

    I am a 26 year old, cradle Catholic. I am an attorney with a large law firm in Houston, Texas. My wife is 28 years old, a convert to the Faith and a stay-at-home mom with our 7 month old boy. I was raised attending the Ordinary Form of the mass, with the Mass of Creation as the default mass setting. Ugh. During law school, my wife and I began frequenting the Extraordinary Form, which was celebrated on campus and at a local parish visited by a priest of the Fraternity of St. Peter. We were initially attracted to the reverence of the celebration, the piety of the priests and congregation, and the sacred silence missing in most celebrations of the Ordinary Form. This exposure prompted me to study the history of the Roman Rite and liturgy generally and, by my last year in law school, my wife and I exclusively attended the Extraordinary Form. However, after the birth of our son and our move to Houston, we now normally attend a latin mass (with Gregorian chant) celebrated in the Ordinary Form. I still prefer the Extraordinary Form (and still attend it at least once a month), and believe that the historical and aesthetical arguments for the Extraordinary Form vis-à-vis the Ordinary Form are irrefutable. But I found myself placing a higher premium on the community life of the parish I attend—a feature I believe is somewhat lacking in the local Extraordinary Form parish.  Additionally, I’ve come to appreciate some of the reforms found in the Ordinary Form. For example, the “two-track” liturgy that can arise in a sung Extraordinary Form liturgy has always irked me and is something I don’t miss when attending the Ordinary Form. Moreover, I like the congregation—and not just the schola—chanting the Gloria, Credo, and other ordinary parts of the mass in the Ordinary Form. Ideally this should occur in celebrations of the Extraordinary Form as well, but I’ve found that this is the exception rather than the rule (at least in most of the churches I’ve attended) and can, in fact, provoke sharp glances from your co-religious in the pews.  In short, assuming it’s celebrated in latin with Gregorian chant and the Roman Canon is used, I guess I’m okay with the Ordinary Form. 
    

     
11. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:31 AM

    Response:

    I’m a 20 year old male, a cradle Catholic sent to CCD and all that but only really embraced my Faith and started attending Mass regularly in High School. Originally I was one of those Catholics who would zealously defend the Status Quo in the Church because I thought that is what being “loyal” meant…but as I became more confident of the truth of the Faith in its essentials, became less defensive about accidentals. My childhood experiences of the Church were in a Novus Ordo context, and to a child anything even remotely ritualistic is mysterious as it is different than the way people normally act…so on some primal level even the bland (though “by the books”) New Mass at my home parish still occasionally touches an old emotional place in my memory of childhood awe. However, as I learned more and more about the HISTORY of the Church, and as my tastes became more refined, I have come to be an ardent liturgical traditionalist. The breaking point came around the time I was 17 when I attended a wedding at a Lutheran parish. And their liturgy was essentially Eucharist Prayer #2 Novus Ordo…except with a middle-aged woman with a crew-cut presiding. And that image deeply disturbed me. “Could our liturgies really be so similar?” I wondered. Well, I did some research and found a side-by-side comparison of the TLM and the NO, and realized that they were not. Further experiences confirmed this for me, as I started to notice the little wooden tables placed out in front of the high altar in churches clearly built with a different liturgy in mind, and found out about all the beautiful vestments that had been thrown away in favor of solid color polyesters.  I continued to attend the New Mass at my home parish because there is no other option, but the same 20 songs the music director has been recycling for my entire lifetime (“On Eagle’s Wings” among them)…started to become increasingly distasteful to me. The bland “suburban American” protestantesque “feel” to the New Mass really started to irritate me. I find the whole thing very sappy and saccharine and tasteless and mundane. Especially in our church with wall-to-wall carpeting…I sometimes feel like I’m sitting in someones living room or at a PTA meeting. The current ICEL translation is especially patronizing and the perfunctory New American Bible translation lacks any literary beauty.  At college, I have had the great privilege of attending an Old Rite Mass regularly. I know of no young people who are ardent defenders of the Novus Ordo in the way that 59 year old guy was. I know young people who are traditionalist, though they still are no where near a majority. Mainly I know young “neoconservatives” who defend the Novus Ordo (because, like I once was, they somewhat scrupulously perceive any questioning of current discipline as “disloyal”) but even most of them are sympathetic towards the Old Rite since Summorum Pontificum.   If there is any personal resistance among young people I have encountered, it is only because of the Language Barrier (I think a nice vernacular translation of the Old Rite would solve this) and because the hierarchy still officially promotes the New. But most think all the little historical quirks and arcane gestures and rich prayers are really “cool”. There is just a sort of hesitancy because of fears over whether it is really now “kosher” for them to support that, sadly. But if the Pope were to tomorrow impose the Old Rite on the whole church again and ban the Novus Ordo…most young people would eagerly get behind it (because then it would be the “loyal” thing to do). There would, at least, not be any of the grumbling and uproar and outrage you’d hear from the Boomers.
    

     
12. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:32 AM

    Response:

    My situation is a bit odd.  I am a convert, female, and will be 38 in two days, but my mother is Catholic (though prior to my conversion not practicing).  I had never experienced the EF until ~ 4 years ago and knew next to nothing about it, but was very interested in seeing it.  I eventually planned a road trip to the nearest one (approx. 1.5 hours away), but it took me some time to get used to it all.  I knew there was a treasure there, but it was shrouded in mystery and not easily grasped at first encounter.  Now I unambiguously prefer the EF.  Liturgy was certainly not a point of my conversion at my parish (I came from “semi-high-Church Lutheranism”).  In fact, I had to overlook that aspect and focus on the truths of the Faith when I converted.  Due to the distance factor, I attend the EF regularly at least once a month, while spending the other Sundays at my home parish or in the area.
    
13. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:32 AM

    Response:

    I am a 29 year old cradle Catholic who came back to his faith following my early involvement in Youth 2000 and the 2005 World Youth Day. I always grew up thinking there must be something wrong with my spirituality, in that I found the Mass somewhat lacking. I now realise that at least part of the problem was the multiple banal, casual, irreverent, social, charismatic, pop/rock, etc… styles in which Mass was celebrated, and what served to put me off and repelled me, despite the best, although misguided efforts of those who were trying to appeal to the youth. The mass is about our worship of God in a fitting way, not warm fuzzies for ourselves. Additionally, I didslike how so many priests feel at liberty to adjust, change, and experiment as they please. This means that some people will be pleased with the alterations, sure, but a great many will be put off. I’m one of the latter.  Whilst I would prefer the EF, I am open to the OF when said reverently, following the rubrics and employing the traditional means of reception of Holy Communion, i.e. Communion Patens, altar rails, etc… I am so tired of all the regular abuses of the average OF Mass. I am tired of the legions of EMEs, the clapping at Mass at Easter and Christmas to thank the flower arrangers etc… I wish a simple crucifix was placed on the altar, instead of the microphone which is currently the centrepiece. And so on.  I did have the opportunity to attend an OF Mass said in Latin, ad orientem, with chant, last September. I was blown away by it, and to be honest, if this was the experience in my parish each Sunday, I’d be more than happy. I understand though that there are arguments in favour of the EF in terms of conituity and so forth, and that is fine. I think, for now at least, what we need is, as someone said in comments above, ‘the new rite done right’. The rest will follow in its own good time. I have learned that only when I worship God correctly can I hope to relate to God correctly. Whilst I accept fully the validity of the OF, I believe that the EF is a superior product.   I should add, that I have experienced disappointing EF Masses. The priest really rattled through the prayers at a shocking pace (this was in Ireland!) and needless to say I was not impressed. So I think that abuses and disatisfacitons can arise in both forms, although perhaps the OF is more prone.
    
14. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:34 AM

    Response:

    I am a 49 year old revert to the faith who was raised on the OF Mass, with vague memories of  the previous Mass. I left the church soon after college mostly because I really didn’t understand the faith, and didn’t think it was important, but at the same time, there was much uneasiness with what was going on in the church (folk masses and Communion in the hand specifically).  When I returned to the Church about 10 years later, (not due to the liturgy) I was still not comfortable with the Mass, especially the EMHC who seemed to come out of the woodwork at the most surprising times, and the ever popular folk Mass that I could not seem to get away from. It was then that I started studying and reading anything I could about the faith, but continued to attend the only form of Mass available, after considering the SSPX and then realizing that wasn’t the answer either.  I have since been able to find a few parishes where the OF is celebrated reverently (until the priests are transferred). After ‘parish shopping’ and feeling like a groupie to those few priests who actually say the black and do the red, I was happy when the Holy Father allowed the EF to be more widely celebrated (however, those same few priests are the only ones celebrating the EF–coincidence??)  At first I didn’t like the EF because I could not follow along, but by reading the English translation of the prayers, I have come to appreciate the beauty of it. The chant, the incense, the bells and even the Latin make the Mass something ‘different’, something mysterious and something that draws my attention to God, and not to me or my pew-mates.  So, I have to say I prefer the EF, but a reverent OF can be just as beautiful and holy.
    

     
15. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:34 AM

    Response:

    I am 30 years old, and converted to Catholicism four years ago, from a fundamentalist background. Currently, I am a diocesan seminarian. At the time of my converstion, the accessibility of the ordinary form greatly facilitated my conversion (at least I believe it did). I am not saying I would not have converted otherwise, but being able to go to Mass and not have to read along or study it as much later was very helpful in making me feel comfortable. I have spoken to other converts who feel the same way. Once I became Catholic, I took great delight in exploring the liturgical history of the Church, and have enjoyed greatly the visits to the Latin Mass Community in my diocese. However, as a matter of preference, I have to say I love the ordinary form when it is reverently celebrated (which can be a big “if”, but I’ve seen it done! :-) ). And, I’ll love it even more when we get the new translation!
    
16. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:35 AM

    Response:

    I am a 20 year old (male) student at Boston College.  I grew up with the Ordinary Form (‘cradle Catholic’).  Attending a Catholic high school I studied Latin and became more interested in the Latin Mass, though I never attended one.  When I came to college, I met other orthodox Catholics, and I attended my first Extraordinary Form mass at a local parish with a couple friends from the Catholic group on campus.  I have since attended the Extraordinary Form elsewhere, and even had the opportunity to serve at the altar for the first Extraordinary Form mass at BC in a long time.  While I love the 1962 Missal, it is the Ordinary Form Mass which I attend on a regular basis.  I think either Mass celebrated correctly is just as beautiful.  I usually attend Sunday Mass at St. John’s Seminary across the street from BC, where the Ordinary Form is celebrated with the utmost reverence (and sometimes the celebrant even throws some Latin into the Mass).  The 1962 Missal reminds me of the great history of the Catholic Church, and I think it is vital that that Mass continues to be celebrated if only to remember where we have come from.  I think we can learn a lot from the Extraordinary Form, and I think it’s a shame that many elements of that Mass have been almost demonized in the Spirit of Vatican II (incense during Mass, prayer after Mass, genuflecting in front of the tabernacle, etc), even though they are still a part of the current liturgy.  I can say this, that there are many young people, especially college students, who love the 1962 Missal as well as a properly celebrated Ordinary Form.  Whenever either the Latin Ordinary Form or the Extraordinary Form is celebrated on campus, the chapel is packed with students.
    

     
17. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:36 AM

    Response:

    Since you are soliciting the opinions of young folks regarding the Mass, here’s my two cents.   I’m a 24 year old convert from an independent Evangelical background, Confirmed Easter ’09, after attending Mass regularly for a year and a half.  Proper liturgy had close to nothing to do with my conversion, as I started my path towards entering th Church at a liturgically laxidasical Newman Center.  Still, the first time I attended Mass there, I was moved to tears at the sheer beauty of it, guitars and lay Eucharistic Ministers were not a concern.  I ended up going through RCIA at a parish that offers the EF and OF in Latin, though, so I got concerned with matters liturgical fairly quickly.   As to the two forms, the more I’ve seen, the more obvious it is that they are fundamentally the same.  The OF, when celebrated according to the rubrics, is close to indiscernable from the EF.  The EF in general is much more reverently celebrated, but this is almost an accidental feature, due to the demographic who celebrate it (if the same priest’s and laity celebrated the OF, it would also be beautiful and reverent).  There are prayers and rituals in the EF which I don’t think should have been replaced, but that’s above my pay grade.   One feature of the OF I really honeslty prefer is the kneeling.  Kneeling is great, but by the end of an EF low Mass I can barely feel my legs.  I’d prefer the Eastern practice of standing through the liturgy over kneeling throught practically the whole Mass (and traditional Western, too, pews are a modernist innovation!).  So, physically, I appreciate kneeling only at the most central moments of the liturgy.  This is, from my view, the biggest difference rubric-wise.  The other issues are usually more that of abuse, but abusus non tolit usum.
    

     
18. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:36 AM

    Response:

    I am 62 yrs. Old.  Wild experimentation and desacralisation preceded the official introduction of the Novus Ordo in my parish (Assumption, in Richfield, MN, under the Oblates of Mary Immaculate) by some years, beginning in 1968. It was a big church with two big choirs and two sung Masses every Sunday. In 1968, the choirs disbanded, most altar boys quit, the organists both quit, Mass attendance plummeted, and I left the Church to become agnostic, along with all my friends (I was 20 yrs old). In 1995, I discovered St. Agnes parish in St. Paul, MN. I came back to the Church, thanks to blessed Msgr. Schuler and his reverent Novus Ordo Latin Masses. However, I wanted the TLM! So, I started attending the local SSPX chapel, regularly. I attend the TLM as often as possible at St. Agnes, because, since Summorum Pontificum, it is offered at St. Agnes on the odd Sundays (1st,3rd,5th) of the month, otherwise, I usually attend the TLM at St. Augustine’s in South Saint Paul. God bless Pope Benedict!
    

     
19. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:37 AM

    Response:

    I’m a 23 y/o cradle Catholic.  I prefer solemn/reverent OF (which is almost a contradiction these days).  But, I prefer the OF over the EF (I’ve attended the EF a few times).  I feel that if more priests and parishes celebrated the OF more reverently and solemnly, there would be less need and less attention drawn to the TLM.  I have NO PROBLEM at all with people attending TLM, but I feel that most people migrate to it because of all the goofy stuff that goes on in most parish liturgies in the OF.   As a side note, I only started to notice all of the goofy OF things when I moved to the midwest from the south.  In Texas, either it didn’t happen (or I didn’t notice it) but in Illinois, you find this stuff everywhere!
    
20. Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:

    16 January 2010 at 8:38 AM

    Response:

    Age: 58, male revert after 40+ years as an atheist.  I fell under the category of “pius atheist” meaning I did not have the anger that animates Dawkins, liked visiting historic churches and always put money in the “for the maintenance of the church” boxes. I was convinced that religion answered questions that it made no sense to ask.  I left due to Vatican II. To my teenage mind the church authorities told me that all I had been taught for the first years of my life was false and that there were a new set of different things I was to believe in.  They convinced me only of the first proposition. The phony forced community aspect of the new liturgies was especially repugnant to me – still is for that matter.  In middle age I began to feel that there were things that were seriously not right with the world. As a science teacher I also began to notice that certain aspects of modern physics and cosmology had an almost mystical flavor. I also began reading some Christian theology out of curiosity – I am an omnivorous reader. I was surprised to discover that some of it made a kind of sense if one accepted the basic premises.  Gradually I became convinced of the “god of the philosophers” as Father Ratzinger called it in his “Introduction to Christianity” and I followed his exposition by accepting and integrating the personal God with that.  I was able to come back more easily because of the Moto proprio and the establishment in my area of an exclusively 1962 usage non geographical parish at the instance of Archbishop Burke. If there had been no such provision, I think I would have had to look into one of the Uniate churches, because the mystery is important to me and the NO lacks that IMO. But I’m glad that wasn’t necessary. I always was an adherent of the Latin Christian civilization even when I was outside the Church.
    

     

Comments are closed.