The different apsects i notice in the EF and NO

Dear Forum and Moderators!! :smiley: , I am here to post my observances on what i notice between both Forms.

Here is my disclaimer*******

I LOVE BOTH FORMS. THe HOLY MASS is the HOLY MASS, Our LORD JESUS CHRIST is sacrficied on both Altars, validly (lets hope) by ordained Priests. I love both, and i do not want any arguements, if there is, i request that the moderators shut this down.

Now for my observance:
I have noticed that the EF is more like an actual Sacrifice, Whilst the NO is more like a Banquet. Both forms have the most pure, most tender, most cute, humble and beautiful BODY OF JESUS CHRIST, really and truly descend wholly and truly into the bread and wine, thus changing them completley as a result of Transubstantiation. However there is a difference in the “feel” in my opinion. In the EF, the Priest comes in with his short Chasuble, His Maniple dangling from his forearm, and with his back turned to us, focused on the altar, I just feel that it has a more Sacrifice “feel” to it. The Priest is focused not on us, at least not to an extent, but on the altar, and the PERSON whom he calls down, through the power of the HOLY SPIRIT. Meanwhile i feel like i am more at Table with the NO, obviously, the NO still has that Sacrifice “feel” to it, but at the same time i feel more like i am at Table. Obviously as a hopeful/aspiring Priest one day, i hope to offer both forms, as both forms are just as valid!!

Anyone else here feel that “difference” betweent the two forms. One feeling more like an actual Sacrifice, while the other feels like a Sacrifical Banquet??

I would apprecaite your opinions, but please no arguments, and be respectful or else…

:smiley: i get the Moderators :smiley:

P.s when i capitalize certain words, i intend not to yell or shout, but to give respect and honor to certain words , for example the HOLY NAME etc.

I really don’t believe that a thread such as thi is allowed since it does seem to pit the two forms against one another, ie: sacrifice versus sacrificial banquet, which by the way is a comparison I have never heard of before.

If its not allowed, i apoligize and request that the moderators remove it. I dont intend anything harmful here. If its a bad thread, please remove it moderators!!

Having never attended an EF Mass, I appreciated your descriptive feeling of it. I could picture myself there… However, NO (novus ordo) is considered to be somewhat of a pejorative. It is most accurately described as OF (ordinary form).

Anyway, like you, I hope that it is possible to have a reasonable and charitable discussion that the over-worked moderators wouldn’t feel the need to shut down.

So, out of courtesy to the OP, maybe we could do that? :slight_smile:

Thank you for the tip, i will make sure to call it the OF from now on, at least try. I dont want arguements, i just want some discussion as to whether or not you see the compairisions i see? or perhaps the reader sees some different comparisions?

Please share!! Respectfully at that!!!

Hmm…I know two priests who respect and offer the new Mass and, if I remember correctly, I have heard them both say “Novus Ordo”. It just means “new order”, which is a factually correct statement, as it is “newer” than the old form of the Roman Rite.

I don’t know what the common use of the phrase is, but I just don’t want people to see “Novus Ordo” and think that whoever used the phrase hates the new Mass.

Besides, wasn’t the whole Ordinary/Extraordinary Form thing something Pope Benedict came up with in Summorum Pontificum? At least I’m not aware of it existing before that. I could be wrong, though.

Your observation is right. The OF was intended to be more like the last supper. Some people who helped to design the OF said, that they tried to make it more protestant to make the gap smaller.

I think it’s the biggest difference between the two forms, actually. No one ever taught me the theology of the Sacrifice of the Mass, but when I began attending the EF, I learned it just from reading my missal. It is repeated over and over in the prayers, and spelled out in a way not found in the OF.

Remember, the biggest difference between the two is always what the prayers actually say, not the aesthetics.

Please provide.

If I could nitpick :p: You often see people say ‘Novus Ordo Mass’ but it is really grammatically incorrect: the term novus Ordo Missae (note how I capitalized it) should not be parsed as novus Ordo / Missae, but as novus / Ordo Missae, the ‘new Ordo Missae (Order of the Mass).’ Sometimes there are a few folks who like to connect the phrase Novus Ordo with something sinister like Hitler’s Neuordnung or the NWO conspiracy theories, but that’s just a gross misuse and misunderstanding of the term.

Maybe it was all started by “Novus Ordo Seclorum” (“New Order of the Ages”) which is printed on the U.S. dollar bill. :slight_smile:

Equal appreciation for both forms of the mass is best displayed by using the correct titles for both forms: EF & OF or Extraordinary Form and Ordinary Form.

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