Finally Going to my First EF Mass... Confession?

[wasserfall]

Could they think that because that is what they are being taught? If so, someone needs to step up to the plate and explain that there is no such thing as an Novus Ordo Catholic, just like there isn’t a rite, Traditional Catholic.

Well on the one hand you’re technically correct. On the other hand, what is one to say to the kids when they ask why people receive the host in the hand in “other” parishes, while it is forbidden at the EF parish?

I guess you could say: “it is permitted in novus ordo parishes, but not in traditional parishes”, which is true as a statement of fact, even if you don’t like the terminology. But then who are the mysterious people who frequent “novus ordo parishes”? I’d guess they are “people who frequent the novus ordo parish”, but that’s kind of long so… “Novus Ordo Catholic”.

I guess I can’t get too worked up about it. It is a easy way to refer to a population that seems to come up often in conversation. I don’t sense any pejorative intent.

 

[adopted_heir]

I think things like observation and paying attention would lead one to realize that while they aren’t technically different Rites, they are different. (I think I hear an echo.) It’s not another rite but it is another liturgy. Kids (or whomever) will see that things are done drastically differently, with a different ambiance and attitude, with a different language and form, with different people participating in the active roles, with different methods of reception and norms of behavior… and they’re supposed to come to the conclusion “This is the same thing!” … That’s quite a leap. Likewise the folks who attend the differing liturgies could be distinguished from each other, not in a prejudicial or condescending way, but in a categorizing way that facilitates communication and understanding.

 

[anp1215]

Well on the one hand you’re technically correct. On the other hand, what is one to say to the kids when they ask why people receive the host in the hand in “other” parishes, while it is forbidden at the EF parish?

I guess you could say: “it is permitted in novus ordo parishes, but not in traditional parishes”, which is true as a statement of fact, even if you don’t like the terminology.

I would say “Our Bishops in the United States asked the Holy Father for permission to receive the Eucharist in the hand, and the Holy Father granted their request.”

But then who are the mysterious people who frequent “novus ordo parishes”? I’d guess they are “people who frequent the novus ordo parish”, but that’s kind of long so… “Novus Ordo Catholic”.

I guess I can’t get too worked up about it. It is a easy way to refer to a population that seems to come up often in conversation. I don’t sense any pejorative intent.

I would say “They are Roman Catholics.”

 

[maryjk]

I would say “Our Bishops in the United States asked the Holy Father for permission to receive the Eucharist in the hand, and the Holy Father granted their request.”

I would say “They are Roman Catholics.”

Or even “They are Roman Catholic, just like we are.”

They simply attend a different form of the Mass.

Of course I would also use the terms Ordinary Form, (the form of the Mass that most English speaking Roman Catholics attend.) And Extraordinary Form, (the form outside of the norm.)

 

[anp1215]

Or even “They are Roman Catholic, just like we are.”

They simply attend a different form of the Mass.

Of course I would also use the terms Ordinary Form, (the form of the Mass that most English speaking Roman Catholics attend.) And Extraordinary Form, (the form outside of the norm.)

Funny, I almost added “just like we are” but decided to leave it as “They are Roman Catholics.”

 

[wasserfall]

Or even “They are Roman Catholic, just like we are.”

They simply attend a different form of the Mass.

Of course I would also use the terms Ordinary Form, (the form of the Mass that most English speaking Roman Catholics attend.) And Extraordinary Form, (the form outside of the norm.)

Yes of course they are Roman Catholics, but when the topic of conversation requires a distinction between those who attend the novus ordo mass and those who attend the traditional mass, then one has to choose some other term rather than a blanket term that covers both.

So one could say: Novus Ordo Catholics / Traditional Catholics
or: Ordinary Form Catholics / Extraordinary Form Catholics

whatever is preferable. But clearly, “Roman Catholic” does not identify the group in a sufficiently distinct manner, unless you claim that Catholics who attend traditional parishes are something other than Roman Catholic.

 

[maryjk]

Yes of course they are Roman Catholics, but when the topic of conversation requires a distinction between those who attend the novus ordo mass and those who attend the traditional mass, then one has to choose some other term rather than a blanket term that covers both.

So one could say: Novus Ordo Catholics / Traditional Catholics
or: Ordinary Form Catholics / Extraordinary Form Catholics

whatever is preferable. But clearly, “Roman Catholic” does not identify the group in a sufficiently distinct manner, unless you claim that Catholics who attend traditional parishes are something other than Roman Catholic.

I don’t see why you would need a term like Novus Ordo Catholics or Ordinary Form Catholics. Nor do I ever use the terms Extraordinary Form Catholics or Traditional Catholics.

We are Roman Catholic.

A Roman Catholic has the choice of the Ordinary From and the Extraordinary Form.

I don’t see creating a division where one isn’t.

 

[wasserfall]

I don’t see why you would need a term like Novus Ordo Catholics or Ordinary Form Catholics. Nor do I ever use the terms Extraordinary Form Catholics or Traditional Catholics.

We are Roman Catholic.

A Roman Catholic has the choice of the Ordinary From and the Extraordinary Form.

I don’t see creating a division where one isn’t.

I’m afraid there is a difference between the Catholics who choose to exclusively attend EF parishes and those who regularly attend OF parishes.

By that, I mean that there are distinct differences in outlook and approach to the faith in each population as a group, not necessarily in individual persons (although most of the time that is the case too.)

I have recently read posts over in the Traditional Catholicism forum saying stuff like: “the children in my class didn’t know it was possible to celebrate mass in English” or “for us, it is as if Vatican II had never happened”. And this is from FSSP parishioners.

It’s looking more and more like the SSPX will soon be regularized. Then you’ll have people here saying that their (fully regularized and in good standing with the Church) priest cautions them to recognize and resist the errors of Vatican II.

It’s doesn’t really help anything to pretend there isn’t a difference.

 

[Big_Feet]

so one could say: Novus Ordo Catholics / Traditional Catholics
or: Ordinary Form Catholics / Extraordinary Form Catholics
QUOTE]

I propose…
Eastern Catholics - indicating all members of the Catholic Churches, not Roman/Latin
Ordinary Catholics - those menbers of the Latin Rite Catholic Church who attend the Ordinary form of the mass (also, might I say that this is the majority of Catholics in the world)
EXTRAOrdinary Catholics - those menbers of the Latin Rite Catholic Church who attend the Extraordinary form of the mass.

or maybe we just say that we are “Catholic” and understand that there are cultural and spiritual differences and needs all within the Lord’s one, Holy, and Apostolic Church in this world?

 

[wasserfall]

I propose…
Eastern Catholics - indicating all members of the Catholic Churches, not Roman/Latin
Ordinary Catholics - those menbers of the Latin Rite Catholic Church who attend the Ordinary form of the mass (also, might I say that this is the majority of Catholics in the world)
EXTRAOrdinary Catholics - those menbers of the Latin Rite Catholic Church who attend the Extraordinary form of the mass.

That works too.

 

[Big_Feet]

recognize and resist the errors of Vatican II.

An ecumenical council of the Church cannot make errors with regard to Faith and Morals.

What “errors” do these priests say come from this council?

 

[wasserfall]

An ecumenical council of the Church cannot make errors with regard to Faith and Morals.

That is not true. An ecumenical council of the Church cannot make errors with regard to faith and morals IF it intends to speak infallibly.

What “errors” do these priests say come from this council?

I had to google that one. Here are some links:

sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2003_January/errors_of_vatican_II.htm
sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2003_May/errors_of_vatican_II.htm

 

[adopted_heir]

An ecumenical council of the Church cannot make errors with regard to Faith and Morals.

What “errors” do these priests say come from this council?

Hmmmyeah that’s not right. The council itself was pastoral, not dogmatic, and thus actually none of it is ex cathedra.

ETA: A good book on the subject of why exactly is there a problem with VII/NOM is Open Letter to Confused Catholics. A more aggressive book would be Problems with the New Mass.