Do we have to say Ordinary Form or Extraordinary Form?

[curlycool89]

You’re correct in terms of how “NO” is often used here. In addition, the majority of Catholics now alive have never known a Mass other than the OF, and I would think continuing to refer to the OF as the “new” Mass makes no sense to them. Further, how many decades need to pass – 4? 5? 10? – before something isn’t “new” any longer?

Probably at least 500 years.
But even after 40 years, using the term “New” to describe the OF could be seen as dating yourself.

We don’t even call Obama a “new” president anymore. Even Canada’s Conservative government finally stopped using the phrase “Canada’s New Government” last year (I think) after first forming the government in 2006.

It just doesn’t make sense to call it the Novus Ordo (New Order) anymore. It’s not new. And even the order part seems to have been (partially or wholly) inspired by St. Justin Martyr’s description of the Mass (it’s in the CCC), so it was really a misnomer to begin with.

That’s why people object to it being a political term. It’s like hearing another ad talking about “Canada’s New Government” when the PM has served longer than half the PMs in Canadian history (and at the end of his term will be #6 on the list, right below Chrétien). When we’re on the 3rd Pope where the OF has been the norm, it’s no longer new. We’re getting close to a time where no Council Fathers of VII are even alive (probably what, 20 years?). We don’t refer to a reunified Germany as new, and it’s 20 years younger than the OF. We don’t even talk about Kosovo being a new country anymore and that was only 4 years ago (South Sudan is still pretty new though).

 

[mattkubes]

Probably at least 500 years.

It will have been abrogated by then, so no need to worry.

It just doesn’t make sense to call it the Novus Ordo (New Order) anymore. It’s not new.

That may be your perception, but it’s a perfectly reasonable term. Compared to the TLM, which has been around in its essentials for many centuries, the NO is most certainly new. It will still be new compared to the “Vetus Ordo” a century from now. Do you have the same objection to New England, New Delhi, or even Nova Scotia? It seems to be nothing more than an old, neutral convention for describing different “versions” of things.

I’m not denying that some people try to use it as a slur, but vulgar usage of a word or term shouldn’t always make us jump to create new ones to replace them.

 

[curlycool89]

It will have been abrogated by then, so no need to worry.

Sounds like wishful thinking

 

[maryjk]

It will have been abrogated by then, so no need to worry.

That may be your perception, but it’s a perfectly reasonable term. Compared to the TLM, which has been around in its essentials for many centuries, the NO is most certainly new. It will still be new compared to the “Vetus Ordo” a century from now. Do you have the same objection to New England, New Delhi, or even Nova Scotia? It seems to be nothing more than an old, neutral convention for describing different “versions” of things.

I’m not denying that some people try to use it as a slur, but vulgar usage of a word or term shouldn’t always make us jump to create new ones to replace them.

Based on your first statement, it sounds like you would use it as a slur.

 

[mattkubes]

Based on your first statement, it sounds like you would use it as a slur.

How so? Just like our present Holy Father said, I find it to be a banal, on-the-spot product. I also have some reservations regarding the change in the sacrificial tone (not character) and the stripping of so many references to the Saints. Yet a Catholic today is perfectly within his rights to attend this legitimately promulgated liturgy. I just don’t attend it since I don’t have to and would be fine with a future pope or council changing things back.

I think that was an unfair assumption on your part. I’ve already stated my reason for using the terms that I do, and using it as a slur was not one of them.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

There was a Vatican document (think from the Papal Secretary’s office) that was written post-EF/OF usage. This document referred to the OF as the Novus Ordo. So if someone at the Vatican still uses it, there’s no problem with it.

Now, I tend to use NO/TLM because that is what I’m familiar with and changing a habit isn’t easy, nor do I feel like changing solely because a few people insist I’m being derogatory when I’m not. For instance, one person on this forum told me repeatedly that I was using it as a slur and when I repeatedly said I wasn’t, he insisted that I was - essentially just calling me a liar. Actually, I find the attitude of some of the people who insist on using EF/OF more rude than those who use NO. I mean at least the latter are just using what they’re used to while some of the former are becoming militant about it. I’m not belligerent, but those who say that I am certainly seem to be!

 

[Brendan]

It’s understandable that Paul VI would announce it that way since he was promulgating a new order of Mass. I could announce that I bought a new car and use “novus currus”. It won’t remain ‘novus’ for 45 years.
.

Then again, we haven’t started calling the “New Testament” the “Less Older Testament” yet either

 

[TrueLight]

Then again, we haven’t started calling the “New Testament” the “Less Older Testament” yet either

That is a great analogy actually.

 

[Jegudiel]

I noticed every time someone types “Novus Ordo” a bunch of people are quick to correct him or her.

Should the fact that our Holy Father referred to the Extraordinary and Ordinary forms of the mass be understood to mean those are the names we are to use now? He didn’t say, the Traditional Latin Mass, henceforth to be called, the “Extraordinary and Ordinary forms” did he?

When I first became Catholic, I visited Father Rutler’s church in NY and I had heard that there was a Latin mass. I wasn’t sure if it was a traditional latin mass, so I asked a choir member if the Sunday Latin mass was in the Extraordinary form. She looked at me blankly.

I said, “You know. The traditional latin mass… The Tridentine.”

She said carefully, you’re asking if it is the Mass of Paul VI? I’m not sure.

So much for Extraordinary and Ordinary form.

So again, does the fact that he used those terms to describe what is ordinary and what is extraordinary mean those are the terms we are to use from now on?

Since Benedict coining of EF/OF Masses I have never heard the term “novus ordo” used by anyone in person who did not dislike the OF Mass in favor of the EF Mass. Not ever. Once Pope Benedict gave us the new labels I figured it would take some time but that he certainly knew what he was doing. The OF Mass detractors still use “novus ordo” and it has become a slur.

Anyone paying enough attention to use the slur “novus ordo” (as opposed to those who use terms like “new Mass” and “old Mass” because they know no better) certainly know what the Ordinary Form of the Mass and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass is. The excuse that people still don’t know doesn’t ring true to me.

I know an Eastern Catholic priest who refuses to use the term “Extraordinary Form” because in his words “it sounds too much like extraordinary minister and it confuses people.”

 

[Jegudiel]

How so? Just like our present Holy Father said, I find it to be a banal, on-the-spot product. I also have some reservations regarding the change in the sacrificial tone (not character) and the stripping of so many references to the Saints. Yet a Catholic today is perfectly within his rights to attend this legitimately promulgated liturgy. I just don’t attend it since I don’t have to and would be fine with a future pope or council changing things back.

I think that was an unfair assumption on your part. I’ve already stated my reason for using the terms that I do, and using it as a slur was not one of them.

You are horribly confused if you think Pope Bendict XVI believes the OF Mass is “banal.”

 

[Jegudiel]

It will have been abrogated by then, so no need to worry.

That may be your perception, but it’s a perfectly reasonable term. Compared to the TLM, which has been around in its essentials for many centuries, the NO is most certainly new. It will still be new compared to the “Vetus Ordo” a century from now. Do you have the same objection to New England, New Delhi, or even Nova Scotia? It seems to be nothing more than an old, neutral convention for describing different “versions” of things.

I’m not denying that some people try to use it as a slur, but vulgar usage of a word or term shouldn’t always make us jump to create new ones to replace them.

Just look at your comments! Either you are woefully unaware of other peoples’ feelings (which I doubt) or you intentionally used “NO” to offend others here. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Jegudiel]

I think what it boils down to is this. OF Mass detractors enjoy using the term “novus ordo” as a means to softy/subtly denigrate the OF Mass. Otherwise they would stop if for no other reason that Pope Benedict XVI gave us OF/EF and because the use of “novus ordo” offends some fellow Catholics.

But they enjoy attacking the OF Mass in their soft/subtle manner so they are not about to quit even if it means having to fabricate excuses. Even if it means offending others – perhaps especially if it means offending others.

 

[mattkubes]

Since Benedict coining of EF/OF Masses I have never heard the term “novus ordo” used by anyone in person who did not dislike the OF Mass in favor of the EF Mass. Not ever. Once Pope Benedict gave us the new labels I figured it would take some time but that he certainly knew what he was doing. The OF Mass detractors still use “novus ordo” and it has become a slur.

Fine, but those are just the people you’ve met - that hardly makes for a valid sample. I called it the NO long before I started attending the TLM exclusively. I called it the NO when I was die-hard against the SSPX and other traditionalist groups. Sorry, but your experience is not the objective measure you’ve made it out to be.

Anyone paying enough attention to use the slur “novus ordo” (as opposed to those who use terms like “new Mass” and “old Mass” because they know no better) certainly know what the Ordinary Form of the Mass and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass is. The excuse that people still don’t know doesn’t ring true to me.

I don’t use it as a slur. Many people I know don’t use it as a slur. Yet in one fell swoop you’ve decided that we’re all hardened liars. How kind of you.

 

[mattkubes]

You are horribly confused if you think Pope Bendict XVI believes the OF Mass is “banal.”

Don’t ask me, ask him:
“We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”

Again, ease up on the scurrilous accusations if you can

 

[Jegudiel]

Fine, but those are just the people you’ve met - that hardly makes for a valid sample. I called it the NO long before I started attending the TLM exclusively. I called it the NO when I was die-hard against the SSPX and other traditionalist groups. Sorry, but your experience is not the objective measure you’ve made it out to be.

Statistically speaking you have absolutely no idea if my sample is representative or not because you did not ask.

I don’t use it as a slur. Many people I know don’t use it as a slur. Yet in one fell swoop you’ve decided that we’re all hardened liars. How kind of you.

It’s a slur at this point. The harder you fight the clearer it is in your case. Just look at your use of “NO.”

 

[Jegudiel]

Don’t ask me, ask him:
“We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”

Again, ease up on the scurrilous accusations if you can.

Again, you are deeply confused if you think Pope Bendict feels the OF Mass is “banal.” Does he feel that an individual celebration of the OF Mass (and the EF Mass for that matter) can be “banal”? Of course. That’s what he was talking about, not what you suggest he was talking about.

Again, please understand what you are talking about before attempting to speak for the Pope.

 

[Jegudiel]

Many Catholics object to the use of “novus ordo.”

So just stop already. Stop with the excuses to use “novus ordo” and “NO.”

Benedict gave us “Ordinary form of the Mass.” Shorten it to “OF Mass” or even “OF.” Done deal already!

 

[mattkubes]

Just look at your comments! Either you are woefully unaware of other peoples’ feelings (which I doubt) or you intentionally used “NO” to offend others here. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Or: I used it because that’s the term I always use and already gave my reasons for why I don’t find it to be troublesome. You are not a mind-reader. As a fellow Catholic you should be willing to take my words at face value.

I can’t really be bothered with visceral sensitivities to certain words. It’s obsessing over not saying anything that could be the least bit offensive that has gotten much of the West into this mess.

 

[Jegudiel]

There was a Vatican document (think from the Papal Secretary’s office) that was written post-EF/OF usage. This document referred to the OF as the Novus Ordo. So if someone at the Vatican still uses it, there’s no problem with it.

Now, I tend to use NO/TLM because that is what I’m familiar with and changing a habit isn’t easy, nor do I feel like changing solely because a few people insist I’m being derogatory when I’m not. For instance, one person on this forum told me repeatedly that I was using it as a slur and when I repeatedly said I wasn’t, he insisted that I was - essentially just calling me a liar. Actually, I find the attitude of some of the people who insist on using EF/OF more rude than those who use NO. I mean at least the latter are just using what they’re used to while some of the former are becoming militant about it. I’m not belligerent, but those who say that I am certainly seem to be!

Good grief! Stop already!

 

[mattkubes]

Many Catholics object to the use of “novus ordo.”

So just stop already. Stop with the excuses to use “novus ordo” and “NO.”

Many people object to my use of the term “Merry Christmas,” but that hasn’t stopped me yet. You have no authority to issue this command. Those with the authority to issue this command have not done so. You’re inventing a dogma where there is none.