Is it okay for a Church to refer to their masses as "Novus Ordo"?
- Status
D
dochawk
Guest
Look closer. In that footnote, it’s a “d”, not a “b”, in the second to last position . . .
P
ProVobis
Guest
It was also the title of the 1969 Apostolic Constitution issued by Pope Paul.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Is that Scandinavian Edition?dochawk:
I think in the footnotes on page 235 it stated not to call the new Mass “friztubl”.
D
dochawk
Guest
Vee izz noccht stertain . . .
( I note that it wouldn’t be Serbian or Czech, as it has far too9 many vowels for either)
( I note that it wouldn’t be Serbian or Czech, as it has far too9 many vowels for either)
P
ProVobis
Guest
Let us know when you’ve completed the entire list of what it isn’t. 
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
It’s the same mass. They only updated the translation. I really don’t understand why people don’t want to call it novus ordo. If you like the new mass what’s wrong with calling it new?
D
dochawk
Guest
Err, from latin to, uhh, more latin???
It’s hardly new at this point . . .
My own preference is the Divine Liturgy, so . . .
B
babochka
Guest
Would that be the RDL? It’s only 12 years old at this point. In another 50 we can drop the “revised”.
Last edited:
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
My understanding was they revised the english translation. I could very well understand wrong.
It’s as old as a middle aged man. That’s not exactly old in liturgical time.
If that catches on… some people are pretty stubborn though.
D
dochawk
Guest
If I’m going to pick a sub-form of it, I’d probably go with the Melkite, but . . .
An actual promulgation in 2002, which was of course translated.
It caught on quite throughly, although we did come up with a shorter version a bit over sixteen centuries ago . . . but use the term for both, as well as another we don’t use much any more . . .If that catches on… some people are pretty stubborn though.
V
VictoriaAdAeternam
Guest
Why not? “Novus Ordo Missae” is literally what it was referred to when promulgated.
C
commenter
Guest
“Novus Ordo” is not the Mass, it is a set of directions and instructions for offering the Mass. The Mass itself doesn’t change at all.
Pope Benedict’s terms Ordinary, and Extraordinary Forms remind us of that truth. We need that reminder
Referring to the “novus ordo Mass” (or worse, “novus ordo Church”, which I have also seen) is not as accurate as “New Order of the Mass,” or Novus ordo missae".
Pope Benedict reaffirms the Catholic view that what is changeable, or variable, is the form, not the Mass itself.
Pope Benedict’s terms Ordinary, and Extraordinary Forms remind us of that truth. We need that reminder
Referring to the “novus ordo Mass” (or worse, “novus ordo Church”, which I have also seen) is not as accurate as “New Order of the Mass,” or Novus ordo missae".
Pope Benedict reaffirms the Catholic view that what is changeable, or variable, is the form, not the Mass itself.
Last edited:
D
Dovekin
Guest
What happened in 1570 is that the printing press allowed for multiple identical copies of a work. I doubt that St Pius realized how that would affect his promulgation of a new order of mass. The new technology changed his decree from being a norm to becoming a replacement.
Someone suggested new be dropped after 500 years. That might be about the right time to stop calling the revolutionary changes of 1570 new.
M
Mintaka
Guest
The United States has been around for more than 200 years, and we are still calling our system of government a “Novus Ordo Seclorum” (a new order of the ages) on our money. So it’s not like there’s a cutoff date.
(“Seclorum” or “saeclorum” is an elided spelling of “seculorum.” The motto is a reference to Virgil’s Eclogues IV, where “the great order of the ages is born anew” - " Magnus ab integro saeclorum nascitur ordo. This is interesting, because Eclogue IV has pretty much always been viewed by Christians as a sort of unintentional poetic anticipation of Christ (even though it was meant to be about Augustus), as well as the messianic age after the Second Coming. By using a motto drawn from Eclogue IV, the Founding Fathers were saying that a democratic republic and a new American way of life was a foretaste or sign of the New Jerusalem, where only Christ would be King. Which is a pretty consistent theme of American patriotic theology, and the American interpretation of history.)
(“Seclorum” or “saeclorum” is an elided spelling of “seculorum.” The motto is a reference to Virgil’s Eclogues IV, where “the great order of the ages is born anew” - " Magnus ab integro saeclorum nascitur ordo. This is interesting, because Eclogue IV has pretty much always been viewed by Christians as a sort of unintentional poetic anticipation of Christ (even though it was meant to be about Augustus), as well as the messianic age after the Second Coming. By using a motto drawn from Eclogue IV, the Founding Fathers were saying that a democratic republic and a new American way of life was a foretaste or sign of the New Jerusalem, where only Christ would be King. Which is a pretty consistent theme of American patriotic theology, and the American interpretation of history.)
Last edited:
- Status