Names of the Masses

[CruceSignati]

I have a quick question about the names of the Masses.
Some people call them the Novus Ordo/ Vetus Ordo, others call them the Extraordinary Form/ Ordinary Form, still others mix and match the terms or just call the Extraordinary Form the Traditional Latin Mass. Is there a proper way of using these terms?

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Ordinary form or “Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite” is the correct term. Of course, there are many approved translations for different languages for the ordinary form of the Latin Rite, so it is always wise to specify which language. “Traditional Latin Mass” is more descriptive for those who might not know what the “Extraordinary Form” refers to. Novus Ordo, “new order”, is just a slang term.

 

[tee_eff_em]

If only…


tee

 

[pianistclare]

Novus Ordo is short for novus Ordo Missae, which literally means the “new order of the Mass” or the “new ordinary of the Mass.” It is used to refer to the Mass promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969 to distinguish it from the Traditional Latin Mass. The Novus Ordo is the ordinary form of the Roman Rite; the Traditional Latin Mass is the extraordinary form. Both are equally valid, and any qualified priest can celebrate either.

 

[ProVobis]

I have a quick question about the names of the Masses.
Some people call them the Novus Ordo/ Vetus Ordo, others call them the Extraordinary Form/ Ordinary Form, still others mix and match the terms or just call the Extraordinary Form the Traditional Latin Mass. Is there a proper way of using these terms?

It was called the Traditional Latin Mass to distinguish it from the (Novus Ordo) Latin Mass when it was still an indult. Now that any priest can celebrate it, it has been officially named Forma Extraordinaria (Extraordinary Form). Uses the 1962 liturgical books only in Latin.

Forma Ordinaria (Ordinary Form) is the official name of the now 2002 Missal, though you most likely will see Masses advertized in Church bulletins in a particular language, such as English Mass, Spanish Mass, etc.

 

[tee_eff_em]

It was called the Traditional Latin Mass to distinguish it from the (Novus Ordo) Latin Mass when it was still an indult. Now that any priest can celebrate it, it has been

officially

named Forma Extraordinaria (Extraordinary Form). Uses the 1962 liturgical books only in Latin.

Forma Ordinaria (Ordinary Form) is the

official

name of the now 2002 Missal, though you most likely will see Masses advertized in Church bulletins in a particular language, such as English Mass, Spanish Mass, etc.

Respectfully: [post=5235838]Disagree[/post].

tee

 

[bben15]

I have a quick question about the names of the Masses.
Some people call them the Novus Ordo/ Vetus Ordo, others call them the Extraordinary Form/ Ordinary Form, still others mix and match the terms or just call the Extraordinary Form the Traditional Latin Mass. Is there a proper way of using these terms?

Terminology varies among Catholics. Some prefer Novus Ordo, and others prefer Ordinary Form. But they all refer to the Mass of Paul VI.

Some prefer Extraordinary Form; some prefer Traditional Latin Mass; others Tridentine Mass; etc. But, they all refer to the Mass used before the Mass of Paul VI.

 

[ProVobis]

Respectfully: [post=5235838]Disagree[/post].

tee

It seems that the term Forma Ordinaria is not in that document, but it’s mentioned this way in Universae Ecclesiae:

1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI and the last edition prepared under Pope John XXIII, are two forms of the Roman Liturgy, defined respectively as ordinaria and extraordinaria: they are two usages of the one Roman Rite, one alongside the other. Both are the expression of the same lex orandi of the Church. On account of its venerable and ancient use, the forma extraordinaria is to be maintained with appropriate honor.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/ecclsdei/documents/rc_com_ecclsdei_doc_20110430_istr-universae-ecclesiae_en.html

However, I will correct myself on the year of this missal.

In the year 2000, Pope John Paul II promulgated the third edition of this Missal.

 

[otjm]

Pope Benedict, when he expanded the use of the Mas of 1962, referred to it as the Extrodinary Form (EF) and the Mass of Paul VI as the Ordinary Form (OF). Most Catholics who attend Mass, do so in the OF, and most of them have no clue as to its name - it is just referred to as “Mass”.

While there are other terms for the OF and the EF, most who follow Benedict’s lead refer to them as the OF and the EF.

Some of those who are particularly attracted to the EF refer to the OF as the Novus Ordo, and in conversations, it comes out as somewhere between a slight and a derogatory term. That does not mean that all who ise the term Novus Ordo mean to make a slight, but the fact is that there are a number of people who do. Anyone who wants to make a technical point out of it is simply ignoring the comments by Pope Benedict, for the most part.

So, in part, you have to decide what is “proper”. That, in part, may be dictated by those with whom you speak, which in turn may have to do with feelings for or against the (non-favored) Mass of the group or other factors. Speaking with most Catholics may simply leave them confused as to what you mean, however, as noted that most of them attend the OF and know little or nothing about the EF.

 

[Aramis]

I have a quick question about the names of the Masses.
Some people call them the Novus Ordo/ Vetus Ordo, others call them the Extraordinary Form/ Ordinary Form, still others mix and match the terms or just call the Extraordinary Form the Traditional Latin Mass. Is there a proper way of using these terms?

His Holiness Benedict XVI specified the correct terms to be “Forma Ordinaria” and “Forma Extraordinaria” - in English, Ordinary Form and Extraordinary Form.

The term “Novus Ordo” was used by rome for only a few years - in the 1970’s - and only in an informal way, to differentiate the 1970 missal from the 1967 provisional use and the 1962 revision of the Ordo Missae…

Prior to his holiness’ use of the terms, the normal mode for formal reference was by specifying the publication year.

 

[CruceSignati]

OK, thanks. Until this point I have been calling them the EF and OF, so I think I’ll continue doing that.

 

[ProVobis]

Prior to his holiness’ use of the terms, the normal mode for formal reference was by specifying the publication year.

In line with this, it may not be a bad idea to refer to them as the 1962 Missal or the 2002 Missal, respectively.