First, I don’t think the term “trad” is allowed around here (because for awhile it was used as a perjorative against EF advocates). I know I got a moderator warning for using it once… shrug you might want to check.
Second, there is no such thing as the “Novus Ordo Mass”. I think what you mean to say is the “Ordinary Form” of the mass, which is it’s proper title.
I get kind of uneasy with the priest saying the prayers looking at the congregation
Why? Versus Populem was the norm until about the sixth or seventh century. Ad orientum came about as a means of having BOTH the priest and the people face east for the whole liturgy of the Eucharist… as a symbol of the universal priesthood.
So, when we consider the general line of “ad orientum has the symbolism of the priest at the head of the flock leading them to God” that is actually NOT the intention of ad orientum’s institution in the first place. It is, in fact, a modern interpretation of a symbol that was put in place more than a millenium ago… and it completely ignores the original meaning of elevating the stature of the laity for unity with the ordinary. It adds new meaning that was not intended when the change was put in place.
Today, the meaning of turning your back on someone has changed (as seen by the EF advocates saying it’s about the priest demonstrating the leadership of the flock)… but that change in meaning was NOT desireable… so to return to the original motivation for the symbolism of orientation during mass, a return to versus populem was restorative to the original intended meaning of the mass.
And that goes for adherents of the EF too… I don’t have a problem with ad orientem, but you should understand that you’re not being led by the priest. You’re facing east WITH the priest to demonstrate the universal priesthood of believers (because contemporary judaism at the time Christianity came about had ONLY the priest face east while giving sacrifice, but not their laity, who faced west).
I also get kind of freaked out when you are invited to greet the person next to you at the start of Mass, or even at the sign of peace.
Why? The oldest recorded writings of the mass (at least, any that go into detail) note that the kiss of peace is one of the oldest parts of the mass. It was REMOVED and has been RESTORED. I would suppose that it was removed during the outbreaks of the plague during the middle ages, but I can’t be certain of that fact. But the EF is one of the only rites in the history of Catholicism to NOT include a sign of peace (much less a KISS of peace, as many rites have called for).
Don’t get me started with all the blank looks of the special ministers standing around the altar and handling ciboria, chalices - AND THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. I just kind of try and ignore the fact that special ministers are handling the Blessed Sacrament.
What’s funny to me is that people look at an EMHC and say “how dirty, they can’t possibly handle the Eucharist”… and then proceed to put the Eucharist in their mouth… one of the most bacteria ridden areas of the human body.
Two questions should be asked: is the EMHC keeping their person physically clean and are they in a state of grace. If so, they are no less worthy (when needed) to handle the Eucharist than you are to put it in your mouth and swallow it. It is Christ lowering Himself to be sacrificed and humiliated for us on the Cross and continuing to offer His sacrifice for us WILLINGLY that allows us to be so bold as to partake of the Eucharist.
I don’t know whether to put this down to culture shock because the pious culture and ceremonies are so different in their outward expression, or attitude, or whatever; or if it is something more theological, etc.
It’s culture shock most likely, and possible that you should read a little bit more from authoritative sources (by which I mean P.h.D.'s of church history, not the writings of priests with a motivation to support their chosen method) on WHY various aspects of the EF were instituted. It may surprise you to find that the OF represents the SAME evolution of those changes in understanding, but uses different symbols to represent those understandings because OUR PERSPECTIVE on those symbols has changed.
I can’t remember ever being uneasy at the Novus Ordo growing up - except at the sign of peace sometimes. Does it work the other way around as well? Anyone get uneasy attending the Latin Mass?
Let me offer you this advice: preference between the OF and the EF is strictly a matter of personal taste. If going to the EF exclusively has made you actually UNEASY with the OF, then you might want to consider studying up on the OF a little more, or perhaps taking a break from the EF to reacclimate to the OF.
I don’t go to the EF in my area any more. Not because the liturgy is not beautiful, but because of the attitude of the priest towards the OF (which makes me uneasy). He skirts the line with sedavacantism in his homilies too closely for my taste.
I guess this is about subjective responses to liturgies you’re not used to.