Im wondering your thoughts on the Novus Ordo vs. Traditional Latin Mass. I’ve been to a few Latin Masses, and they are unquestionably tend to be more reverent. My main question is does anybody have a Novus Ordo parish that is overall very reverent? I ask because many of the NO parishes in my area have troubled me in irreverent celebration of Holy Mass. The normal use of many “Eucharistic Ministers” also troubles me. By the way, I do not regularly attend the TLM. (Edited because I realized the condescending tone of the original post)
We do NOT have Ministers of Holy Communion. Our priest is the ONLY one who gives Holy Communion. I have never been to a Traditional Latin Mass. I honestly think our Novus Ordo Masses are very reverent as our Pastor is a very conservative, devout, holy priest and would do nothing that would not be proper for Mass or as a priest.
That would be nice.
My old parish used to have a Latin OF Mass every Sunday, with at least the Sanctus and Agnus Dei chanted and a traditional Latin Communion hymn. Additionally, if I recall correctly, only the priest and deacon distributed Communion, and everyone received kneeling on the tongue. That was actually my favorite Mass, and I often (though not always) chose it over the local TLM. When the priest retired they did away with that Mass, although their normal Masses are by no means littered with abuses. Also, a recently transferred priest now offers a weekly TLM at this church’s sister parish.
I’ve never been to a truly reverent Novus Ordo Mass, other than when I went to the Shrine of Mary, Queen of the Universe in Florida on holiday one year. I forget what Mass it was but the priest was the only distributor of communion, there was Latin, incense, and a good deal of chant. I happened upon it.
It is hard to find a good Mass in our archdiocese. We have two priests I know of who actually make an effort, in somewhat of an hermeneutic of continuity, to reverently offer the sacrifice of the Mass without abuse or degradation towards the sacrifice.
There are plenty of reverent Ordinary Form Masses. If a priest follows all of the directives in the Lifeteen manual–which adheres to every bit of the GRIM and has been approved of by Pope JPII and Pope B16–is incredibly reverent.
Also, many of the non-diocesan priests–Vincentians, Benedictines, Jesuits, Franciscans, Barnabites, Dominicans–who are in parishes tend to have incredibly reverent Ordinary Form Masses.
Also, depending on the priest there are MANY reverent Masses said.
I’ve also found that what people see as “reverent” depends very much on the parishioners. Again, I’ve found accurately done Lifeteen Masses very reverent because people want to be there. Many times people simply drag themselves to Mass. People travel TO the EF masses…so they are like ANYONE who wants to be somewhere.
Ever go to a free “opener” minor league baseball “A” level game? The crowds are TERRIBLE. Only like 1/4 of the people want to be there…maybe an 1/8 are actually paying attention. Compare that to an AAA finals game where the players are heading off to the majors?
It happens everwhere—it’s not limited to the Mass.
It is such a shame. Many times it feels like the priests don’t even believe in the Real Presence. It’s no wonder Catholics who actually believe in the Real Presence and other teachings are so few and far between.
So a mass cannot be reverent if there are extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion present?
Wow, that’s kinda harsh.
My parish has incredibly reverent masses and is very traditional.
I’ve been to the EF mass a few times, and wasn’t super excited about it to be honest. A bit hard for me to keep up with what’s going on when most everything is in a language I don’t understand, and Father whispers some of the prayers under his breath.
And yeah, I had the little booklet with Latin on one side and English on the other. I even had a friend trying to help me – “Father’s using this form, so you need to skip ahead two pages,” or “He’s whispering this part now,” or “You don’t say the responses, only the altar servers do.” No, definitely not my favorite form of the mass.
But if some people can draw nearer to God through the EF mass, then they should strive to participate in it. And if it were ever the only option available, I would run to it.
For now, my reverent and traditional OF parish is a rich and beautiful place to be.
I’m certainly not saying every person at those masses is not reverent, but it is without doubt an abuse. I would agree following the TLM is difficult not growing up with it.
Not sure the something that is allowed by proper authority can be called an abuse, unless one is a sedevacanist or more Catholic than the Pope.
I go to the Diocesan Cathedral and it’s perfectly fine!
I would disagree. It is technically allowed, but is only supposed to be in extraordinary circumstances, hence “Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.” The fact that is has become the norm is an abuse. It is ideal to receive from a priest or deacon.
If the Vatican has approved it, it’s NOT an abuse. Perhaps at one time it may have been, but it’s not now.
I didn’t grow up with TLM, but I know Latin. I find it frustrating for many of the reasons @Gertabelle does. It often seems as if the priest skips things on mere whims, there’s a lot of cloak’n’dagger whispering going on, you are effectively made mute because the altar servers speak for you…It is very trying to me. Like Gertabelle, if it was the only thing, of course, I’d go…but not for me at all. I find something VERY powerful in having to speak and respond in the OF Mass and it reminds me that Mass is a constant renewal of my Baptismal promises with some penetential elements. In the EF Mass I feel as if the emphasis is on penitential confession with some Baptismil elements…which is good…but again not something that gives me the strength to go out and face the world.
Let’s see, the Latin Mass. I remember them from my youth and high school days in the 50’s and 60’s. Serving as an altar boy, reciting Latin responses reverently - even though I didn’t really know what I was saying - and the congregation didn’t really care either. Then there were the people saying the rosary, not really paying attention to what was going on anyway, the priest who whistled through the Mass in Latin for 500 people with only the celebrant and maybe an associate pastor distributing communion, and saying the mass in under 20 minutes to get everybody in and out quickly. Then there was the 12hour plus fast for communion in un-air conditioned churches. Ushers would carry out several people who fainted from the heat and lack of food; usually the elderly but I was one when I was 7 in my little coat and tie in the 90 degree temperature. That sure made for a reverent situation. People phonetically reciting latin prayers and responses who had no idea what they were saying, just going through the motions. Oh and not really able to see anything of importance from 30 rows back since the priest had his back to everyone. And that was just a few of the wonders of the Latin Mass.
Communion in the hand. Funny, but at the first Mass on Holy Thursday night, help me out here, was it in Latin and was there a communion rail where the twelve received on the tongue?
And I love the comment about Eucharist Ministers. Nice to know that there are some who still believe that a layman is too unworthy to hold in his hand, He who said, “And now I no longer call you slaves, but friends…” I know, I’m a heretic who likes and appreciates the NO, but I guess I just really like to see my Lord appear to me at those wonderful words of consecration spoken in a language I can understand instead of hidden by the back of someone whispering something foreign to me. I like to believe that I am worthy to hold him for a moment and take body and blood (in my parish we receive under both species - something that the old Latin Mass held was reserved only for those far worthier than myself ) as my sustenance for the journey. Loving the Mass and being able to understand what is going on and letting it become a part of me … guess that offends the sensibilities of “real” Catholics.
Why would that change? The Eucharist does not change, so why should what is considered an abuse change?
I did not mean to offend, and I do not appreciate your personal attack. It is not about the priest being more worthy per se, but Holy Orders do mean something. Also, I do not hate the NO. I like hearing the priest in the vernacular. There is just an obvious trend is regards to reverence between most TLM and most NO.
Vatican has changed their statement. They allow EMC’s. Yes, some churches do ‘abuse’ the privilege of EMC’s but the use of EMC’s itself is NOT an abuse. It is permitted.
Remeber, the church in the US is still classified as “mission” which means that they have developed rules in accordance to that. Yes, in the 50’s and 60’s there were more than a few parishes with plenty of priests, but that is not the norm. Communion was never meant to be handled by a single celebrant to 500-1000 people.
EDIT: Remember we’ve had MUCH private revelation that has driven the teachings of Eucharistic Reception, too. That’s a HUGE deal. Centuries passed where people only received once a year…God has made it quite clear that this is NOT what He intended when He instituted Mass.
Are you saying that an OF Mass in which there is neither incense, chant, nor Latin , and in which there are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Commnion, cannot by definition be “reverent?”
Wait a minute, go back to your original post. You asked for thoughts about Latin vs. NO. I gave them to you. Rereading my post, I don’t find anything that attacked you personally. Did my sarcasm connote my feelings for those who believe that the NO is not reverential. Sorry. But I find those who denigrate the NO believing that the churchy smells and bells and latin are somehow more reverential, tedious.
the NO is approved by the Magesterium, that body guided by the Holy Spirit, and those who denigrate the NO saying it is inferior to the Latin rite, in my opinion, put their own prejudice before the work of the Holy Spirit.
My experience with the Latin rite from my boyhood first hand experience is what I offered. I saw much that was not reverential at all.
I’m sorry if my post offended you. But if you phrase your post as a question, next time, request only replies that agree with you.
Oh for goodness’ sake!
Is this thread about reverence, or supposed abuses?
Are you aware that even if the priest did allow certain abuses in mass, the mass could still be reverent because of the reverence of the people present?
Our pastor is a serious left-brained human being. He knows every rule and enforces them as if handed down by God Himself – because for Him, to obey is to demonstrate love for His Savior! “If you love me, keep my commandments.”
This man would NEVER allow an abuse to take place at a mass in his parish. If we have EMHCs at our mass, I can guarantee you that he is allowing this as an exact following of prescribed rules.
Meanwhile, back to reverence…
Again, our OF masses are incredibly reverent, because the people are a reverent lot. And yes, we also have incense, and Latin chant, and English hymns, and some people kneeling to receive communion on the tongue (I would stop the line for five minutes if I tried to do that), and all the other trappings that some believe make something “reverent.”
But I would argue that the reverence of a mass flows from the attitudes of the priest and his people. Our daily masses have absolutely none of the fancy Sunday stuff. One of the regular lectors mumbles so badly you can’t understand a word she says without a missal in hand. The entire mass is in English, no incense, and few – if any – kneel to receive Holy Communion; but those masses are beautiful and reverent all the same.
Incidentally, on the rare occasions when I can attend a daily mass, I always count how many people are there – usually around 50. Delights my heart to pray with those faithful souls!