The "N.O." Mass - objections to the term

[pnewton]

I have been tempted to post this on several thread but knew the result would be a derailment of the original topic. I would like to explain my objection to the term without seeing overly politically correct. First, let me not that the most common problem is that it is simply not new anymore. A generation or more has past. The sense of newness is only in the minds of a few, who are usually prejudicial against it. Second, the term has been used as a perjorative by some here. Occasionally I can almost hear the poster spitting out the disgusting term as they type.

The reason though I most object to the term is when it is abbreviated. It is a stroke of advertising genius worthy of the best shark on Madison Avenue. NO Mass? No Mass? For those who do not believe in subliminal messages, I suggest you look into the millions that are poored into it by companies that know it’s effectiveness.

Years ago, Winston came up with the slogan, “Winston tastes good like a cigarette should.” This is grammatically incorrect (should read “as a cigarette should”). But they wanted the word like to be in the middle of their slogan, every time it was read, every time is was spoken. I know that most who abbreviate the term just do so for speed of typing. Yet every time I read NO Mass, I *feel *like there is an inherent denial of the Catholic Mass. I know this sounds vague and meaningless to many of you, but I bet if we could test reactions of people to NO Mass, as opposed to Novus Ordo Mass, I bet we would find less of a gutteral reaction to the latter.

I do not mean to criticize a soul with this post. I just wanted to point out why I think tempers sometimes run high on the subject and make people self-aware of what might be going on with them.

 

[franklinf]

I have been tempted to post this on several thread but knew the result would be a derailment of the original topic. I would like to explain my objection to the term without seeing overly politically correct. First, let me not that the most common problem is that it is simply not new anymore. A generation or more has past. The sense of newness is only in the minds of a few, who are usually prejudicial against it. Second, the term has been used as a perjorative by some here. Occasionally I can almost hear the poster spitting out the disgusting term as they type.

The reason though I most object to the term is when it is abbreviated. It is a stroke of advertising genius worthy of the best shark on Madison Avenue. NO Mass? No Mass? For those who do not believe in subliminal messages, I suggest you look into the millions that are poored into it by companies that know it’s effectiveness.

Years ago, Winston came up with the slogan, “Winston tastes good like a cigarette should.” This is grammatically incorrect (should read “as a cigarette should”). But they wanted the word like to be in the middle of their slogan, every time it was read, every time is was spoken. I know that most who abbreviate the term just do so for speed of typing. Yet every time I read NO Mass, I *feel *like there is an inherent denial of the Catholic Mass. I know this sounds vague and meaningless to many of you, but I bet if we could test reactions of people to NO Mass, as opposed to Novus Ordo Mass, I bet we would find less of a gutteral reaction to the latter.

I do not mean to criticize a soul with this post. I just wanted to point out why I think tempers sometimes run high on the subject and make people self-aware of what might be going on with them.

I think you’re reading to much into this. People abbreviate N.O. for the same reason they abbreviate TLM - brevity, ease, and everyone still knows what is being talked about. Plus, Pope Paul VI used the term himself. And there is still a sense of newness, as there have been constant revisions / indults in regards to how it is celebrated (for example, altar girls, emHC).

 

[ProVobis]

Pnewton, it’s a legitimate complaint and I think the Holy Father has been very instrumental in changing the terminology to Ordinary Form. I’m with you in keeping with the Holy Father’s wishes in this respect. We should be using the OF acronym.

By the way, the “between you and I” songs have helped changed some grammar rules as well but I see a slow return to more-correct “between you and me.” Also, it’s “I don’t care if I NEVER (not EVER) get back” at the ball park. ’

Maybe we should make a list of these grammatical nuisances?

 

[Phemie]

I think you’re reading to much into this. People abbreviate N.O. for the same reason they abbreviate TLM - brevity, ease, and everyone still knows what is being talked about. Plus, Pope Paul VI used the term himself. And there is still a sense of newness, as there have been constant revisions / indults in regards to how it is celebrated (for example, altar girls, emHC).

But officially, since the Motu Proprio, it’s the Ordinary Form.

 

[weepixie71]

I have been tempted to post this on several thread but knew the result would be a derailment of the original topic. I would like to explain my objection to the term without seeing overly politically correct. First, let me not that the most common problem is that it is simply not new anymore. A generation or more has past. The sense of newness is only in the minds of a few, who are usually prejudicial against it. Second, the term has been used as a perjorative by some here. Occasionally I can almost hear the poster spitting out the disgusting term as they type.

The reason though I most object to the term is when it is abbreviated. It is a stroke of advertising genius worthy of the best shark on Madison Avenue. NO Mass? No Mass? For those who do not believe in subliminal messages, I suggest you look into the millions that are poored into it by companies that know it’s effectiveness.

Years ago, Winston came up with the slogan, “Winston tastes good like a cigarette should.” This is grammatically incorrect (should read “as a cigarette should”). But they wanted the word like to be in the middle of their slogan, every time it was read, every time is was spoken. I know that most who abbreviate the term just do so for speed of typing. Yet every time I read NO Mass, I *feel *like there is an inherent denial of the Catholic Mass. I know this sounds vague and meaningless to many of you, but I bet if we could test reactions of people to NO Mass, as opposed to Novus Ordo Mass, I bet we would find less of a gutteral reaction to the latter.

I do not mean to criticize a soul with this post. I just wanted to point out why I think tempers sometimes run high on the subject and make people self-aware of what might be going on with them.

i think if traditionalists thought that it wasnt a real mass then we would no more care what took place in the (out of respect for you) the ordinary mass than we would a protestant mass.
i think we have been calling it the novus ordo for so long that it is more habit than anything. it was only recently changed to the ordinary mass. traditionalists do not like change and itll take a little time.

 

[pnewton]

People abbreviate N.O. for the same reason they abbreviate TLM

i think we have been calling it the novus ordo for so long that it is more habit than anything. it was only recently changed to the ordinary mass. traditionalists do not like change and itll take a little time.

No doubt both of these are true. Still the point remains that it is something that is lends more to conflict than understanding. For those newer, this whole forum has had to be shut down for a month once, something I think is exclusive to the traditional forum. There also have been numerous bannings. I really think any little thing we can do to lower the emotional content of our posts is advantageous.

 

[Cider]

no mas, man :lol

When I see N.O. Mass I read it as no mas IE Spanish for no more.

 

[Tsuwano]

I have been tempted to post this on several thread but knew the result would be a derailment of the original topic. I would like to explain my objection to the term without seeing overly politically correct. First, let me not that the most common problem is that it is simply not new anymore. A generation or more has past. The sense of newness is only in the minds of a few, who are usually prejudicial against it. Second, the term has been used as a perjorative by some here. Occasionally I can almost hear the poster spitting out the disgusting term as they type.

The reason though I most object to the term is when it is abbreviated. It is a stroke of advertising genius worthy of the best shark on Madison Avenue. NO Mass? No Mass? For those who do not believe in subliminal messages, I suggest you look into the millions that are poored into it by companies that know it’s effectiveness.

Years ago, Winston came up with the slogan, “Winston tastes good like a cigarette should.” This is grammatically incorrect (should read “as a cigarette should”). But they wanted the word like to be in the middle of their slogan, every time it was read, every time is was spoken. I know that most who abbreviate the term just do so for speed of typing. Yet every time I read NO Mass, I *feel *like there is an inherent denial of the Catholic Mass. I know this sounds vague and meaningless to many of you, but I bet if we could test reactions of people to NO Mass, as opposed to Novus Ordo Mass, I bet we would find less of a gutteral reaction to the latter.

I do not mean to criticize a soul with this post. I just wanted to point out why I think tempers sometimes run high on the subject and make people self-aware of what might be going on with them.

I’ve always refered to the Mass as “the Mass” and never bothered about making distinctions between the ordinary form and the extraordinary form of the Mass until I came upon this website. I was surprised to find so much bitterness between those who support one form of the Mass against the other and was taken aback when I saw the ordinary form of the Mass refered to as the “N.O. Mass.” At first I believed there was no mean intent in this label, but after reading several very mean diatribes, I had to review my original opinion. I have also come to dislike the term N.O. Mass and feel it is often used to give insult and disparage the ordinary form of the Mass. I hope I am wrong about this. If I am, I don’t think it will be too difficult for those who usually use the label to stop using it in order not to give offense. I, for one, would appreciate it.

 

[palmas85]

I have been tempted to post this on several thread but knew the result would be a derailment of the original topic. I would like to explain my objection to the term without seeing overly politically correct. First, let me not that the most common problem is that it is simply not new anymore. A generation or more has past. The sense of newness is only in the minds of a few, who are usually prejudicial against it. Second, the term has been used as a perjorative by some here. Occasionally I can almost hear the poster spitting out the disgusting term as they type.

The reason though I most object to the term is when it is abbreviated. It is a stroke of advertising genius worthy of the best shark on Madison Avenue. NO Mass? No Mass? For those who do not believe in subliminal messages, I suggest you look into the millions that are poored into it by companies that know it’s effectiveness.

Years ago, Winston came up with the slogan, “Winston tastes good like a cigarette should.” This is grammatically incorrect (should read “as a cigarette should”). But they wanted the word like to be in the middle of their slogan, every time it was read, every time is was spoken. I know that most who abbreviate the term just do so for speed of typing. Yet every time I read NO Mass, I *feel *like there is an inherent denial of the Catholic Mass. I know this sounds vague and meaningless to many of you, but I bet if we could test reactions of people to NO Mass, as opposed to Novus Ordo Mass, I bet we would find less of a gutteral reaction to the latter.

I do not mean to criticize a soul with this post. I just wanted to point out why I think tempers sometimes run high on the subject and make people self-aware of what might be going on with them.

It is a valid term. What people think of it is their own understanding nothing else. If you feel unease at the sound of it that is your problem, not that of the one who uses it.

I agree there are those who use the term in perjorative manner in much the same way many of the more progressive among us toss the term traditional around as if it was some sort of curse.

As far as it being new it most certainly is new. It hasn/t even been around forty years yet, not even a generation in the biblical sense. And look at the changes that have transpired since it has come out. I doubt that many who attended their first in 1974 would agree it is the same today. In fact, I have a Missal from 1974 and I can tell you it is not the same today.

I say relax, chill out and worry about something of substance instead of this tired old red herring.

 

[LaRoza]

I’ve always refered to the Mass as “the Mass” and never bothered about making distinctions between the ordinary form and the extraordinary form of the Mass until I came upon this website.

There are other rites as well. Distinctions can be made without offense.

I was surprised to find so much bitterness between those who support one form of the Mass against the other and was taken aback when I saw the ordinary form of the Mass refered to as the “N.O. Mass.”

It isn’t just the rite, but the novelties and ideals which often come with it. The Pauline Mass, Ordinary Form, or whatever is, by the original text, not all that different and hardly objectionable, but it has been used to bring all sorts of things into the mass which should not be there.

At first I believed there was no mean intent in this label, but after reading several very mean diatribes, I had to review my original opinion. I have also come to dislike the term N.O. Mass and feel it is often used to give insult and disparage the ordinary form of the Mass. I hope I am wrong about this.

I use it for the same reason I use TLM. Brevity. Now, people use EF and OF, but once you get used to something, it is hard to change.

If I am, I don’t think it will be too difficult for those who usually use the label to stop using it in order not to give offense. I, for one, would appreciate it.

No, it is hard to stop a habit, and silly to do so because of other people’s misinterpretations and “feelings”.

 

[pnewton]

I notice there is also a double standard. We do not refer to the Tridentine Mass as the Old Mass. Again, I think it would be best to spell out Novus Ordo if one really likes the term. No point in giving in to sloth.

 

[LaRoza]

I notice there is also a double standard. We do not refer to the Tridentine Mass as the Old Mass.

Some do. Also, it is Sacred Tradition and is timeless so it can’t be “old”.

Again, I think it would be best to spell out Novus Ordo if one really likes the term. No point in giving in to sloth.

Abbreviations are not signs of sloth, especially when the appreviations are well accepted.

 

[franklinf]

I notice there is also a double standard. We do not refer to the Tridentine Mass as the Old Mass. Again, I think it would be best to spell out Novus Ordo if one really likes the term. No point in giving in to sloth.

That’s because none of the popes referred to it as such. Pope Paul VI did refer to it as the Novus Ordo. Plus it is a new Mass - it came out of Vatican II and replaced the TLM.

 

[eelpis]

I cannot see that OF(f limits ) is any better But there is no negativity friom my side when using the abbreviation NO or OF.

 

[pnewton]

That’s because none of the popes referred to it as such. Pope Paul VI did refer to it as the Novus Ordo. Plus it is a new Mass - it came out of Vatican II and replaced the TLM.

It is a new order. Vatican II documents are in Latin aren’t they? Then isn’t novus ordo a description rather than a title, and as such, would have been accurate at the time of Vatican II.

 

[Extempore]

Eh, its no worse than people describing the TLM as the “indult” long after the Moto Proprio.

I highly doubt that there is any ill will beneath any of the terms. I spell out “Novus Ordo” when proper to make the necessary distinction.

 

[Tsuwano]

I am pleased that all posters, so far, have stated that they have no mean intent or desire to disparage the ordinary form of the Mass when they use N.O. as an abbreviation for Novus Ordo. I trust that those who do mean to insult the ordinary form of the Mass when they use the abbreviation N.O. will be forthright in admitting it.

 

[pnewton]

Eh, its no worse than people describing the TLM as the “indult” long after the Moto Proprio.

No, it is not and probably not as bad, if one knows this to be false. But the question is not which is worse. Christians are supposed to be above, “If you don’t like it, that’s your problem.” We as supposed to do to others as we would have them do to us, not do to them because they do the same thing.

 

[tee_eff_em]

I am [thread=2077]long on record[/thread] in agreement with [user]pnewton[/user], except that my primary objection to the term is that it is not how the Church denotes the Mass.

Plus, Pope Paul VI used the term himself.

Perhaps on a handful of occassions, but the Servant of God did not call it the *

N

ovus Ordo Missae*, he called it the *

n

ovus Ordo Missae *(if you get the difference).

To me, when speaking among ourselves as Latin Rite Catholics, it is the Mass.
With no adjectives.
The one with respect to which other legitimate rites must distinguish themselves.
It is ordinary and normative.

:twocents:
tee

 

[palmas85]

I am [thread=2077]long on record[/thread] in agreement with [user]pnewton[/user], except that my primary objection to the term is that it is not how the Church denotes the Mass.

Perhaps on a handful of occassions, but the Servant of God did not call it the *

N

ovus Ordo Missae*, he called it the *

n

ovus Ordo Missae *(if you get the difference).

To me, when speaking among ourselves as Latin Rite Catholics, it is the Mass.
With no adjectives.
The one with respect to which other legitimate rites must distinguish themselves.
It is ordinary and normative.

:twocents:
tee

I’m sure that in the world in genaral and the faith in particular there are a million things more important to worry about than if someone calls the Pauline Rite the novus Ordo or Novus Ordo.

I mean come on, give me a break, how much more petty can you get?