The Beauty of the Ordinary Form

I know that most Catholics either prefer the EF or the OF, but rarely both.

Personally, I love both of them.

Currently, I’m watching EWTN, and they have on the “Church and the Poor: Caribbean Christmas.” I’ve watched the “Church and the Poor” before and this reminds me of the beauty of the OF.

The OF has really allowed the Catholic Church to spread around the world. Places like Jamaica (where the “Church and the Poor” takes place), Africa, Asia, etc is really having an explosion of conversions; which was never possible with the EF (due to language and culture biases).

Watching this special reminds me that the Holy Spirit is behind the Church and guided Vatican II.

My prayer for 2014 is that we have more Masses in both the OF and EF, as more people return or join the Catholic Church worldwide, and that one day soon the EF is offered at least one Weekend Mass each week, in every Parish.

God Bless everyone, Merry Christmas, and I hope that everyone will have a safe and happy 2014.

with more OF and EF Masses in every

I agree with you 100%, thanks for the thread and post because it is tiresome to constantly see one against the other with the majority of the EF lovers bashing the OF Mass as if second place and those who attend it (majority of all Catholics) as second best.

Not to make this a EF vs. OF thread. However, it goes both ways. There are plenty who prefer the OF and view the EF and the people who prefer it in a negative way as well.

I like both forms, but prefer the EF. I still attend the OF fairly often (went to one yesterday actually) and will be going to one for Christmas Mass. I think that people do get too caught up in the differences. The main thing is that both Masses are done as reverently as possible. When they are not, that’s when many issues arise.

The vision of Pope Benedict XVI was to have both Masses live together in harmony and to complement each other. There may be people who the EF speaks to more. There may be others that the OF speaks to more. Both are valid forms of the Mass and unless the Vatican says otherwise, that’s how it will stay.

I never had a thought either way about either Mass. In fact, I would like to attend an EF Mass but my husband wants nothing to do with it because he disliked it as a child. Only when coming on CAF and seeing all the snarky nasty comments of liturgical abuse and the snipping at various things in an OF Mass and the numerous bad attitudes did I ever think otherwise. Reverence is not exactly defined and can mean different things to difference people and cultures. Reverence doesn’t always mean total silence either. Majority of CAF members are lay Catholics who don’t have any extensive training or even any basic training in the liturgy. Reading GIRM doesn’t make one an expert and the number of things people have posted about issues concerning “liturgical” abuse are not really abuses at all but one’s own personal tastes and ideas.

The EF can be culture biased, but certain things can be put in there to make it more friendly towards the local culture. For example, I read in a book about how Jesuit priests had the choir sing the Gloria and Credo in the Native American tongue.

Though, the OF seems more adapt to celebrating in mission territory. The OF can be easily celebrated on a rock, while the EF is harder, because it requires more things. Though, the Irish managed to do it, so I guess missionaries could do it too. :thumbsup:

I would say that this is not necessarily true. We can look at Saints such as Juan Diego, the Martyrs of Uganda, St. Francis Xavier, and the sheer explosion of conversions that the missionary activity of the 16th and 17th Centuries produced. That was all done with the Tridentine Mass.

This is not an attempt as promoting or disparaging either form of the Mass, but I would claim that this particular point is clearly invalid.

I stand to correct myself. I don’t think it would be hard to have a TLM in missionary encampments. Here are a few pictures of EFs on the battlefield:



We could also look no further than the U.S. and the U.K. where prior to 1850 or so, Catholicism was virtually non-existent.

Well, the US did have the benefit of lots of Irish, Italian, and other people from various Catholic countries coming after that pont :D.

That is true, although I heard something like 70% of the Poles returned to Poland; the time period escapes me. But since the 50’s, there have been a growing number of ex-Catholics in the U.S., as my pastor has pointed out a few times. Three times as many leave the Church as are converted these days. And many if not most of those who receive their First Holy Communion never set foot inside the Church again.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit