What to call the Mass

[jbelokur]

I posted today another threat, and one reply that I got contained this quote in response to my calling the TLM the Extraordinary Form of the Mass or the “EF” and the NO the Ordinary Form of the mass or the “OF”,

   *"Maybe I am confused, although I believe the Tridentine Mass is the true "ordinary form" I have come to accept that most on the forum call it the Extraordinary Form."*

I’m fine with people still calling the EF the TLM or the Tridentine Mass and likewise the OF the NO or Novus Ordo mass. But it seems to me that as Traditional Catholics we would want to demonstrate our utmost allegiance with the pope (any pope) using the language that he himself uses. Am I right, wrong, close?

And who are we to determine what the ordinary form is? If an ecumenical council while, “never juridically abrogated,” the EF, determined that the Novus Ordo would be the “Ordinary Form” then is there really any difference between those Bishops, priest and Laity would have taken V II and raped the mass it produced, and those who totally disregard that Councils decrees, simply ignoring that the NO exists or refusing to acknowledge that it is valid?

Anyone who is a student of history would know that this time we are in and have been in is totally normal following an ecumenical council…any and every ecumenical council. It takes 50-100 to get the equilibrium back and truly implement the decrees of the council. Who knows maybe the TLM will one day become the “Ordinary Form” once again, many of us think it should, I do, but it is not up to us to determine. Is it? Now I’m rambling.

 

[FrDavid96]

I posted today another threat, and one reply that I got contained this quote in response to my calling the TLM the Extraordinary Form of the Mass or the “EF” and the NO the Ordinary Form of the mass or the “OF”,

   *"Maybe I am confused, although I believe the Tridentine Mass is the true "ordinary form" I have come to accept that most on the forum call it the Extraordinary Form."*

I’m fine with people still calling the EF the TLM or the Tridentine Mass and likewise the OF the NO or Novus Ordo mass. But it seems to me that as Traditional Catholics we would want to demonstrate our utmost allegiance with the pope (any pope) using the language that he himself uses. Am I right, wrong, close?

And who are we to determine what the ordinary form is? If an ecumenical council while, “never juridically abrogated,” the EF, determined that the Novus Ordo would be the “Ordinary Form” then is there really any difference between those Bishops, priest and Laity would have taken V II and raped the mass it produced, and those who totally disregard that Councils decrees, simply ignoring that the NO exists or refusing to acknowledge that it is valid?

Anyone who is a student of history would know that this time we are in and have been in is totally normal following an ecumenical council…any and every ecumenical council. It takes 50-100 to get the equilibrium back and truly implement the decrees of the council. Who knows maybe the TLM will one day become the “Ordinary Form” once again, many of us think it should, I do, but it is not up to us to determine. Is it? Now I’m rambling.

If nothing else, we need to be consistent. Since the Holy Father used Ordinary Form for the Missal of Pope Paul VI and Extraordinary Form for the Missal of Pope John XIII then that’s the vocabulary we should use (at least for the time being). Trying to switch those around would just lead to chaos.

 

[grannymh]

Sorry, but I misplaced my list of text abbreviations so I will just answer what to call the Mass.

One should call it The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Annother old-time word which should also be brought back into use – Transubstantiation.

For clear, precise, easy to understand information about The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass go to
www.rockforddiocese.org click “Meet Bishop Doran”

or go to www.rockforddiocese.org/bishop

Blessings,
grannymh

 

[PacoG]

“Maybe I am confused, although I believe the Tridentine Mass is the true “ordinary form” I have come to accept that most on the forum call it the Extraordinary Form.”

Pope Benedict determined the language. It is not for us to question or debate. That is what Christ created the papacy for.

As I read this post, I could only think of paraphrasing that great American philosopher, Cookie Monster:

Summorum Pontificum stands for Popey.
That’s good enough for me.

Please pardon the bad joke.

 

[benedictgal]

When I post on these threads, I have always used the term “the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” It reminds us that what we have entered into sacred time because at this Holy Sacrifice, heaven and earth meet. The veil between the two is lifted and we are surrounded by a cloud of unseen witnesses. It is here where the entire Church comes together, the seen (the people in the pews) and the unseen (the saints and the suffering souls, along with the angels).

 

[grannymh]

When I post on these threads, I have always used the term “the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” It reminds us that what we have entered into sacred time because at this Holy Sacrifice, heaven and earth meet. The veil between the two is lifted and we are surrounded by a cloud of unseen witnesses. It is here where the entire Church comes together, the seen (the people in the pews) and the unseen (the saints and the suffering souls, along with the angels).

“Amen”

I liked what you wrote and will add “sacred time” to my vocabulary.

After attending the International Eucharisitic Congress in Quebec, I went back to using “the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” in the writing I do.

I also use the word “Transubstantiation” even though I learned on the internet that scholastic thought and especially St. Thomas Aquinas are no longer valid because of modern physics.

Wouldn’t it be neat if we more mature people (I’m actually older than dirt) said to any young person in a pew near us something like “I’m glad to see you here at the Holy Sacrifice of th Mass!”

grannymh

 

[de_profundis]

When I post on these threads, I have always used the term “the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” It reminds us that what we have entered into sacred time because at this Holy Sacrifice, heaven and earth meet. The veil between the two is lifted and we are surrounded by a cloud of unseen witnesses. It is here where the entire Church comes together, the seen (the people in the pews) and the unseen (the saints and the suffering souls, along with the angels).

That’s beautiful, I am at the beginning of a long road back to the heart of the Catholic faith (reverted 4 years ago), and I have never heard Mass described like that. Now I’m looking forward to experiencing the Eucharist with this imagery (this reality!) at the forefront of my mind

 

[DixitDominus]

“Amen”
I also use the word “Transubstantiation” even though I learned on the internet that scholastic thought and especially St. Thomas Aquinas are no longer valid because of modern physics.
grannymh

The Ecumenical Council of Trent obviously didn’t think so:

“If anyone says that in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist there remains the substance of bread and wine together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the entire substance of the wine into the blood, the species of the bread and wine only remaining, a change which the Catholic Church most fittingly calls transubstantiation: let him be anathema” (DS 1652)

 

[grannymh]

The Ecumenical Council of Trent obviously didn’t think so:

Thanks.

Council of Trent is excellent. A more modern resource is Bishop Thomas Doran’s Pastoral letter on the Most Holy Eurcharist.

Go to www.rockforddiocese.org and click Meet Bishop Doran or go to www.rockforddiocese.org/bishop.

What I was obliquely referring to was America’s “new atheism” coming from the scientific community–Richard Dawkins and friends.

But I think discussion about how the Council of Trent is obsolete–not to you and me etc.-- belongs in another category.

I’ve just joined and I am having troube figuring out the forums.

[Edited]

 

[grannymh]

The Ecumenical Council of Trent obviously didn’t think so:

Thanks.

Council of Trent is excellent. A more modern resource is Bishop Thomas Doran’s Pastoral letter on the Most Holy Eurcharist.

Go to www.rockforddiocese.org and click Meet Bishop Doran or go to www.rockforddiocese.org/bishop.

What I was obliquely referring to was America’s “new atheism” coming from the scientific community–Richard Dawkins and friends.

But I think discussion about how the Council of Trent is obsolete–not to you and me etc.-- belongs in another category.

I’ve just joined and I am having troube figuring out the forums.

I would also like to tie in the holiday campagn of the American Humanist Association “Why believe in a god?” but am not sure where to go with that…

Any ideas?