Glossary of Roman Catholic Terms And Their Abbreviations

  • Thread starter Thread starter At_Trent
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, A few would have been fine… some common ones, but now you are intentionally hijacking the thread imo.

I’m asking the moderator to remove them
 
At_Trent said:
Well, A few would have been fine… some common ones, but now you are intentionally hijacking the thread imo.

I’m asking the moderator to remove them
Click to expand...
Go right ahead. Hijacking the thread was not my intent - those were posted in good faith, when I could have easily devoted the time spent to a number of other things. As to them being uncommon, they are very common abbreviations and terms about which Eastern Catholics and Orthodox are frequently queried.

COTT and CITH, otoh, seem to me to be both uncommon and rather less than respectful - but what do I know.

I’ll keep your open-mindedness on this in mind when you yourself heavy-handedly post traditional Latin interpretations to threads in the Eastern forum.
 
I suggest somebody more devoted than me compiles a list from what has been posted so far, doing the following:

-Select the more important ones and leave out some (not all) of the very numerous Eastern ones recently posted (I’m fine with leaving the posts there, but for the sake of usability and not running into CAF’s length requirements let’s just not include all of them in the master list. Maybe a companion list on the Eastern Catholic forum would be good to include as many Eastern terms as possible.)

-Put it all in alphabetical order.

-Standardize the format, for example when both an English and a Latin name are given.

Once we’ve got a good master list going maybe we could freshly repost it and propose the new thread as a sticky.
 
A more controversial question, should we include abbriviations like NO (Novus Ordo) in the list? I would vote yes since people will likely run across it, but note the controversy in the definition. Something like

NO- Novus Ordo, a common but sometimes controvercial term for the Ordinary Form of the Roman Liturgy.
 
At_Trent said:
Well, A few would have been fine… some common ones, but now you are intentionally hijacking the thread imo.

I’m asking the moderator to remove them
Click to expand...
Trent, I rarely disagree with you, but you did ask for (name removed by moderator)ut and you did express interest in expanding your list to include Eastern terminology. It was posted in good faith and could very well include items which will benefit us in the future. Please reconsider your position and do include the poster’s list of terms.
 
We haven’t even gotten to 100th post yet and there is already a schism! Brothers and sisters in Christ there is room for both sides.

God Bless
m
 
Aelred_Minor said:
A more controversial question, should we include abbriviations like NO (Novus Ordo) in the list? I would vote yes since people will likely run across it, but note the controversy in the definition. Something like

NO- Novus Ordo, a common but sometimes controvercial term for the Ordinary Form of the Roman Liturgy.
Click to expand...
My diocesan priest (pastor) uses the term 🤷

We can note the common term today is Ordinary Form , or, OF
 
ProVobis said:
Trent, I rarely disagree with you, but you did ask for (name removed by moderator)ut and you did express interest in expanding your list to include Eastern terminology. It was posted in good faith and could very well include items which will benefit us in the future. Please reconsider your position and do include the poster’s list of terms.
Click to expand...
Well, then the title of the thread needs to be changed.

My point is that there are terms on the Eastern list Diakonia provided that have never been used in this sub forum and may never be. I searched a few and the only hits were this thread.
(TC thread index/search this forum option) Economos is an example.

And already, someone is questioning a common Roman Catholic term because of rare instances where someone uses it as a derogatory abbreviation. We don’t see that here. The person would be banned or suspended.

When Scott asked about the Eastern terms, I thought it would mean common ones we do use at times here. Not hundreds we never use. At any rate, carry on. Whatever the consensus is is fine with me. I do feel if someone is going to post hundreds of Eastern terms on a thread titled Glossary of Roman Catholic Terms And Their Abbreviations, then they should take time to list them alphabetically. I won’t. Anyone else can feel free to do so.

Also, when I started the thread, I deliberately posted just a few terms so others could participate. Posting enormous lists takes that opportunity away from other members.

Frankly, the whole purpose of the thread has now been shoved aside.
 
They may be descriptive - but they are certainly very disrespectful.

Referring to the most Sacred Body of Our Lord God and Saviour as CITH and COTT - I’m not impressed .
 
Aelred_Minor said:
I suggest somebody more devoted than me compiles a list from what has been posted so far, doing the following:

-Select the more important ones and leave out some (not all) of the very numerous Eastern ones recently posted (I’m fine with leaving the posts there, but for the sake of usability and not running into CAF’s length requirements let’s just not include all of them in the master list. Maybe a companion list on the Eastern Catholic forum would be good to include as many Eastern terms as possible.)

-Put it all in alphabetical order.

-Standardize the format, for example when both an English and a Latin name are given.

Once we’ve got a good master list going maybe we could freshly repost it and propose the new thread as a sticky.
Click to expand...
Sounds fair and reasonable.
 
The_Idiot said:
They may be descriptive - but they are certainly very disrespectful.

Referring to the most Sacred Body of Our Lord God and Saviour as CITH and COTT - I’m not impressed .
Click to expand...
Well then, perhaps you may feel a need to write Cardinal Llovera and express your concern over the use of such terms. He may very well recant 🙂

see my sig
 
The_Idiot said:
Referring to the most Sacred Body of Our Lord God and Saviour as CITH and COTT - I’m not impressed .
Click to expand...
:confused: CITH and COTT are manners of reception. Not sure what you are talking about here. The Pope uses these terms, so does the CDW. Nobody is equating a hand or a tongue with the Eucharist - in fact, I’m not even sure what you think is going on with these innocuous and relevant terms.
 
I’ve deleted several posts, because they are off-topic. Please keep in mind that the heading of the thread is Roman Catholic Terms.

Thank You.
 
NewsTheMan said:
:confused: CITH and COTT are manners of reception. Not sure what you are talking about here. The Pope uses these terms, so does the CDW. Nobody is equating a hand or a tongue with the Eucharist - in fact, I’m not even sure what you think is going on with these innocuous and relevant terms.
Click to expand...
I’m not objecting to the** terms** ’ Communion in the Hand ’ and ‘Communion on the tongue’ - they are accurate.

What I am objecting to is the use of the abbreviation - it’s just plain sloppy and irreverent , and I’m sorry that you do not realise that we have , on the whole , lost our appreciation of just how we should refer to things - both sacred and secular.

Nowadays ‘text -speak’ seems to be the be all and end all of how we communicate with each other .
 
The_Idiot said:
I’m not objecting to the** terms** ’ Communion in the Hand ’ and ‘Communion on the tongue’ - they are accurate.

What I am objecting to is the use of the abbreviation - it’s just plain sloppy and irreverent , and I’m sorry that you do not realise that we have , on the whole , lost our appreciation of just how we should refer to things - both sacred and secular.

Nowadays ‘text -speak’ seems to be the be all and end all of how we communicate with each other .
Click to expand...
:confused: Even more bizarre. How can it be irreverent? To whom are we being irreverent? Our hands? The notion of “reception”? How is abbreviation irreverent in the first place? This is not “text” speak at all. When writing letters to a priest should I not use “Rev. Fr.”?

I think you’re being scrupulous.
 
NewsTheMan said:
:confused: Even more bizarre. How can it be irreverent? To whom are we being irreverent? Our hands? The notion of “reception”? How is abbreviation irreverent in the first place? This is not “text” speak at all. When writing letters to a priest should I not use “Rev. Fr.”?

I think you’re being scrupulous.
Click to expand...
Me - scrupulous ?

Never in a month of Sundays .

I just object to the use of sloppy language
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top