What I took from maurin’s post was was an opinion that people who find value in the Pauline mass are against tradition and that objections like that of the op are our last gasps of air. To me, this is an expression of arrogance and an unwillingness to listen.
:yup: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.
I [post=4699417]repeat[/post]: He hardly used those terms at all. :nope:When abbreviating, I find it better to stick with OF and EF rather than NO and TLM. Since OF and EF are the terms Pope Benedict used, I figure I’m in good company.
I really had no idea what it meant. I just knew it was negative tone.
Bravo!In response to the OP:
I admit that it doesn’t really bother me to see the abbreviation, but it does sometimes give me pause as to what the poster means. Did he mean “No Mass” and just accidentally held onto the shift key for a split second too long? Or is he referring to the Novus Ordo Mass?
When abbreviating, I find it better to stick with OF and EF rather than NO and TLM. Since OF and EF are the terms Pope Benedict used, I figure I’m in good company.
Yes and no.
There is certainly a lot of presumption that’s for certain. I think those who claim to hold “traditional views” (and what constitutes that is a whole other thread or ten) often try to play the martyr by presuming to know how others view them.
Yes, see above.
True. I think forums like this also brings together kinds of people who would likely never discuss such matters with one another.
I have yet to hear anyone successfully defend using the labels “NO Mass” or even “Novus Ordo Mass” given that we have actual names provided for us by the Church.The current thread for example while seemingly starting off innocently enough has degenerated into almost a bare knuckle brawl over what abbreviations are and are not offensive. NO is bad but nO is apparently OK.The using of NO acxtually means the poster thinks there is no Mass:bigyikes: Don’t say Novus Ordo beacuse it denotes that the Pauline Rite or the Ordinary Form or the shudder Novus Ordo Mass is well, new.
So? Why the need to continually advertise that.
I have seen the Tridentine Mass called the “Dead Mass” and especially the “Dead-Head Mass” on other on-line forums and in person. I didn’t care for it and I was vocal about it. I wonder how many defending the use of “NO Mass” would embrace that moniker, silly political correctness aside of course?
I did. That’s what started this thread. I thought I did a fair job explaining it. I also didn’t criticize those who use it out of habit or convenience (except the sloth comment, but that was a joke)
That’s not true. The term “Novus Ordo” was used over 40 years ago in some preliminary document(s.) It’s not used in the Missale Romanum or another other official Church documents.:yup:
I’ve never been to anything as a Catholic but the OF (there is no more “old Masses” now than the one in this archdiocese for the indult, which is way too far to go to) and converted after the “new Mass” was all there was. That said, until the MP all it was ever referred to was as the N.O. That’s what the vatican called it, too, and very few people in this neck of the woods are even aware that there was a MP! Unless someone is very young, it is new, besides compared with a rite that has over 500 years under it’s belt, it will be for a long while.
It took me three terms (EF, Mass of John XXIII, Traditional Latin Mass) to get a priest in this archdiocese to understand what rite I was referring to (the TLM) after the MP came out. Even the ** priests** here don’t know about “EF”! But all of them know the term N.O.
novus ordo in ecclesiastic latin means new order. so that is why some people call it the new mass. also because to some it is indeed in their eyes a new mass. my mother and father grew up in the tridentine mass. i dont like calling the novis ordo mass the ordinary mass because it doesnt seem ordinary to me. but to keep peace i will spell out novis ordo.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.
With all due respect, official church documents don’t have much to do with what the common Catholic or the common priest in the PNW does.
I neglected to post this earlier, but could you explain what you feel the difference to be? Pope Paul VI referred to it (on more than one occasion) as novus ordo*. And it is a new order, in fact a completely new order as there was no organic growth before it - it was created out of Vatican II. Novus Ordo seems to be a pretty apt description. Even now it would still be new (40 years versus 1500 years). The use of N.O. isn’t offensive, its just a short way to differentiate from the TLM. If it was a false / new term coined by those seeking to discredit it, then it would be objectionable.
to me, this is an expression of arrogance and a not so surprising wrong assumption.
These are two vastly different groups. Most who find value in the Mass are not against Tradition, but rather support it. What I do not believe is that there are Catholics who truly find no value in it since one can receive there the Sacrament that is the source and summit of our faith.
I’m not dead yet! To be honest, I am not comfortable with the term “EF” as if said Mass was in any way, shape, or form “extraordinary” the first sixteen years of my life. Gosh, those nasty memories…Right after this verse we are given the example of Christ that we are to follow. We should consider in all things what our Christian brother needs more than our own.
The EF is specifically the Missal of Blessed John XXIII, the 62 Missal. The “TLM” around the time when the “NO” was introduced hardly resembled the pre-Vatican II Mass. That’s why I prefer the EF terminology.