SPLIT: Offended by term NO Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spelling
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Spelling

Guest
Love_Divine said:
The NO Church I attend still has the hand sanitizing ritual.

It’s funny you bring up the sick priest not distributing communion. We had an older priest fill in for our regular priest on Ash Wednesday, and he was sick with a really nasty cold. I could hear the phlegm being coughed into his hand, and then there was the snotty Kleenex and nose blowing. :eek: As someone who receives communion on the tongue, I didn’t want that hand near my mouth. I was so thankful when he opted to sit out communion. Although, I still don’t know why the deacon sat it out. :hmmm:
Click to expand...
“NO Church?” How utterly ignorant and offensive! :mad:
 
Phemie said:
To avoid giving offense, I suggest you use OF and EF, the terms used by Benedict XVI to describe the two forms we now use.
Click to expand...
What’s so offensive about NO. It is the Novus Ordo Mass too.
 
Spelling said:
“NO Church?” How utterly ignorant and offensive! :mad:
Click to expand...
Have you maybe misunderstood what NO means, Spelling? It’s certainly incorrect to use now, and can be used in an unpleasant way, but I wouldn’t say that of itself, the term is ‘utterly ignorant and offensive’.

Did you think it meant No, as in ‘not a true church’ or something?
 
paperwight66 said:
Have you maybe misunderstood what NO means, Spelling? It’s certainly incorrect to use now, and can be used in an unpleasant way, but I wouldn’t say that of itself, the term is ‘utterly ignorant and offensive’.

Did you think it meant No, as in ‘not a true church’ or something?
Click to expand...
I’ve come to understand on these boards that some use the term NO Mass to denigrate the OF. I’m sure that wasn’t your intention but it does occur.
 
Phemie said:
I’ve come to understand on these boards that some use the term NO Mass to denigrate the OF. I’m sure that wasn’t your intention but it does occur.
Click to expand...
No, I simply use NO and EF, TLM, etc to distinguish between the two churches I attend. I attend one church two hours away because the associate pastor is an FSSP priest and does the EF Mass, and when money is too tight, or the roads are too terrible to make the drive, I attend another church in my home city for the NO Mass.

However, the majority of NO Masses I attend do tend to turn into happy fun time, which makes it difficult for me to stay focused on the reason why I’m there, the most Holy Sacrifice. That’s why I’m willing to spend four hours of my Sunday driving to another city for the EF mass. I have attended very reverent NO masses when I lived in southern Ontario and could go to the Cathedrals.
 
Love_Divine said:
No, I simply use NO and EF, TLM, etc to distinguish between the two churches I attend. I attend one church two hours away because the associate pastor is an FSSP priest and does the EF Mass, and when money is too tight, or the roads are too terrible to make the drive, I attend another church in my home city for the NO Mass.

However, the majority of NO Masses I attend do tend to turn into happy fun time, which makes it difficult for me to stay focused on the reason why I’m there, the most Holy Sacrifice. That’s why I’m willing to spend four hours of my Sunday driving to another city for the EF mass. I have attended very reverent NO masses when I lived in southern Ontario and could go to the Cathedrals.
Click to expand...
Wow! If I want to attend Latin mass I just have to go about a mile further than for the Ordinary mass. Even daily mass in the ordinary form at a different parish same city is much more quiet and “say the black, do the red”.
 
Love_Divine said:
Don’t be offended. I use it to distinguish between the two churches I attend. One’s a NO, and ones an EF.
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as a “NO church” and an “EF church.” I don’t know if some realize just how ignorant and/or nasty those labels sound?

For many years before the moto proprio some bishops did not allow the EF Mass because they were afraid that it would cause divisiveness in the Church. I discounted that position for a long time but seeing comments like “NO church” or “EF church” in this day and age it makes me believe that in some cases those bishops were absolutely right.
 
Phemie said:
I’ve come to understand on these boards that some use the term NO Mass to denigrate the OF. I’m sure that wasn’t your intention but it does occur.
Click to expand...
The moniker “NO Mass” is often used to denigrate the OF Mass. If no malice was meant I would think that 99% of those that use that label would have switched to OF/EF once Pope Benedict XVI referred to the two Masses as such.

I have never (and I mean never) heard the term “NO Mass” or “Novus Ordo” used in real life by someone who didn’t prefer the EF and typically has major problems with the OF.

Even worse though I think some are trying to suggest that the EF constitutes a separate rite within the Church and that’s simply not the case.
 
Spelling said:
I have never (and I mean never) heard the term “NO Mass” or “Novus Ordo” used in real life by someone who didn’t prefer the EF and typically has major problems with the OF.
Click to expand...
That’s unfair. Many of us who have no problem with the OF, in fact, we attend it regularly, have used the term Novus Ordo for 40+ years and I’d never realized it was a four-letter word until I started frequenting these boards.

If you haven’t read the MP you might not be familiar with “Ordinary Form” and would still use the term that’s been in use since the 60s
 
Why did you people highjack this thread with a discussion of the NO. You should have sent a PM
 
Love_Divine said:
What’s so offensive about NO. It is the Novus Ordo Mass too.
Click to expand...
The term NO has become laden with anti-Pauline Missal hostility. Especially of the “Just say No to the NO” variety.

The correct term specified in a papal moto proprio, is “ordinary form.” This is both a reminder that it is, in fact, the normative mass for the Roman Rite, and also that the continued use of the EF is in fact not normative… but a special faculty granted to Roman priests by the Pontiff. Universally granted, at that. And the use of OF and EF reminds that BOTH are the Roman Mass.
 
Love_Divine said:
What’s so offensive about NO. It is the Novus Ordo Mass too.
Click to expand...
It is construed as offensive because you refer to it as a Church. It is not. There is the Catholic Church. EF/TLM and OF/NO are Masses, not Churches.
 
Why not just use the terms “OF” Mass and “EF” Mass? These two terms go together, as both refer to the form of the Mass.

IMO, if there is any doubt about a word, it’s best not to use it. Even if you are convinced that the word is OK, why cause someone else to stumble over it? NO apparently has negative connotations. So why use it if there is another less negative way to say something?

To me, this is kind of like insisting on saying “colored people” instead of using the currently-preferred term (African American). Why would anyone use this term that has developed a negative meaning these days?

Just be nice!
 
I’ve yet to see NO being used in a derogatory manner. I think people are just way too sensitive about that and want to bring up pointless arguments. If four forty years nobody was ever offended when people referred to the Ordinary Form as the Novus Ordo, why should anyone be offended now? Simply, they shouldn’t.

Am I offended when a person says Tridentine Mass to refer to the… Tridentine Mass instead of using Extraordinary Form? No. But apparently I should because we apparently aren’t supposed to call it that anymore.

The only divisiveness caused by using the abbreviation NO is by those who are overly sensitive.
Cat said:
Just be nice!
Click to expand...
I agree entirely. People can just be nice and quit accusing anyone who uses NO (Novus Ordo) as being derogatory. Surely there must be better things for them to do.
 
Until 7-07-2007, the terms OF & EF weren’t even heard of. People have gotten so super sensitive that its even difficult to hold a conversation. Lighten up troops.
 
Novus Ordo is not the term the Catholic Church uses…

It is “Ordinary Form” of the Roman Rite.
 
Phemie said:
That’s unfair. Many of us who have no problem with the OF, in fact, we attend it regularly, have used the term Novus Ordo for 40+ years and I’d never realized it was a four-letter word until I started frequenting these boards.

If you haven’t read the MP you might not be familiar with “Ordinary Form” and would still use the term that’s been in use since the 60s
Click to expand...
“NO” or “Novus Ordo” is offensive no matter how you slice it.

The very people that use those monikers are the people who are aware of the MP. One person says they use NO and EF. Why not OF and EF? Only one reason – they want to take a little shot at the OF. Face to face in real life, the use of NO or Novus Ordo is a dead giveaway for someone who dislikes the OF.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top