What's a Traditionalist doing qt your typical Novus Ordo type First Communion catechism classes? Help!

[TrueLight]

You have struck on something that has more to do with American culture than Catholicism. Having served around the globe in different countries, I have found that the world of instant communication has triggered new forms of expression for the sake of brevity. Just think of how we say things when we chat on the internet or text. Things like LOL, IM, PM, ROTFL, 4U, etc.

When I was in Latin America, I noticed that Spanish does not lend itself to this type of “short-hand”. When writing, people will use the English abbreviations, but when speaking, they would say Ordinary Form mass, not NO. It makes not sense in that language. NO in that language is just an abbreviation that does not correspond to the way people speak. They may use the terms Extraordinary Form or the Old Mass. They would not refer to their parishes in such terms. Their parishes are simply parishes. They don’t even refer to them by the religious who run them. I remember living near a Jesuit parish and asking someone for directions to the Jesuit church. The man looked at me and said, “There is a Catholic church up the road. You may want to ask there, because the priests are Jesuits. They may know where the Jesuit Church is.” I’m still laughing.

I believe that you may have hit on something. I believe that contemporary culture, especially in the USA, tends to want to simplify and shorten language as much as possible. I truly believe that it’s an effect of technology. Text is in and rhetoric is out. If one throws our rhetoric, one throws out elaborate language usage or uses language in correctly.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Maybe so… maybe so…

But surely all cultures have shorthand?

 

[OraLabora]

Putting a lot of traditionalists in the same light as the homosexual activists… Hm. The comparison is beyond ridiculous. You know what, I think I’ll drop out before things degenerate even more.

Sheesh, come on. You’re whacking at a straw man. I was pointing out how a group can appropriate a term and change its de facto meaning so that it would be imprudent to use it in another context, in current culture.

Lighten up, I was not trying to equate traditionalists with homosexual activists in any way. Geez…

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

He’s using that as an example of a word getting hijacked, not as a direct comparison.

Okay, one more just to show how unreasonable that comparison is:

Gay: The use a word to refer to a homosexual person. Used as a tool to paint immorality as good. If one is to say his brother is “gay” and he means “happy”, nobody else would think that. Here the common definition has changed.

Novus Ordo: Commonly used to refer to the Ordinary Form of the Mass. Sometimes people seemingly use it in a derogatory manner, according to others. However, whether used innocently or as a perceived slur, the meaning has not changed. To say one attends the Novus Ordo means that a person is attending the Ordinary Form, and this is true no matter who says it. There is no distortion of meaning. The term is NOT hijacked.

Again, people are grasping at straws to look for perceived offenses. Sometimes I feel like I’m talking to a bunch of lawyers who have to nitpick every tiny little thing. We’re not trying to find evidence to free someone from prison… we’re just discussing a topic!

 

[JReducation]

Putting a lot of traditionalists in the same light as the homosexual activists… Hm. The comparison is beyond ridiculous. You know what, I think I’ll drop out before things degenerate even more.

That’s not what he did. He was giving a very good example of a word that is used differently from how it started. I can give you another example, “negro”. It came from the Spanish word for black. It’s still used in Spanish speaking countries. However, in the USA, it no longer means black. It has a very offensive meaning. That’s what he’s trying to say.

Maybe so… maybe so…

But surely all cultures have shorthand?

If you mean abbreviations, not in the Romance languages, German, Arabic, Hebrew, or the Asian languages. That’s why you’ll see a text in Spanish that will end in LOL. The Romance languages use letters for names such as the UN or USA, not for expressions. The other languages don’t even have those letters, so they just use them as we do.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

Okay, one more just to show how unreasonable that comparison is:

Gay: The use a word to refer to a homosexual person. Used as a tool to paint immorality as good. If one is to say his brother is “gay” and he means “happy”, nobody else would think that. Here the common definition has changed.

Novus Ordo: Commonly used to refer to the Ordinary Form of the Mass. Sometimes people seemingly use it in a derogatory manner, according to others. However, whether used innocently or as a perceived slur, the meaning has not changed. To say one attends the Novus Ordo means that a person is attending the Ordinary Form, and this is true no matter who says it. There is no distortion of meaning. The term is NOT hijacked.

Again, people are grasping at straws to look for perceived offenses. Sometimes I feel like I’m talking to a bunch of lawyers who have to nitpick every tiny little thing. We’re not trying to find evidence to free someone from prison… we’re just discussing a topic!

Hold on, because you’re on something else. We were not speaking about the mass. We were speaking about parishes. We were saying that there is no such thing as a Novus Ordo parish. As far as the order of the mass goes, that has been called many names. But parishes have always been identified by jurisdiction, not by the mass that they celebrate. Novus Ordo is not a jurisdiction.

When radical traditionalists, who know that there is no such thing as a novus ordo jurisdiction refer to a parish, a priest, a religious order as “novus ordo” they are not being polite. They are being divisive. Divisive language nurtures divisive thinking. Divisive thinking leads to schism. That’s the reason to avoid saying “novus ordo parish” or “novus ordo priest” etc.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[OraLabora]

If you mean abbreviations, not in the Romance languages, German, Arabic, Hebrew, or the Asian languages. That’s why you’ll see a text in Spanish that will end in LOL. The Romance languages use letters for names such as the UN or USA, not for expressions. The other languages don’t even have those letters, so they just use them as we do.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

They’re starting to creep in in French. I work entirely in French every day, in technology (health care software).

We’re starting to use the odd abbreviation here and there especially in instant communications. For example, when we help someone else and are thanked, we respond “no problem” (pas de problème) in French. We’ve shortened that to PDP.

Give it time and we’ll manage to warp French as badly as English

 

[Julia_Mae]

Nice post, JM. Don’t become the teacher, make the teacher teach.

Thanks. I just think it’s okay, (alright, not just okay but really the right of any of the faithful,) along with however they want to structure the time, to also get a straightforward declaration of Church teaching on any topic when it is available.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Hold on, because you’re on something else. We were not speaking about the mass. We were speaking about parishes. We were saying that there is no such thing as a Novus Ordo parish. As far as the order of the mass goes, that has been called many names. But parishes have always been identified by jurisdiction, not by the mass that they celebrate. Novus Ordo is not a jurisdiction.

When radical traditionalists, who know that there is no such thing as a novus ordo jurisdiction refer to a parish, a priest, a religious order as “novus ordo” they are not being polite. They are being divisive. Divisive language nurtures divisive thinking. Divisive thinking leads to schism. That’s the reason to avoid saying “novus ordo parish” or “novus ordo priest” etc.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

So if there is no such thing as a Novus Ordo parish (and by legalistic definition, I agree with you) how can the term have been hijacked (which is what some people are claiming)?

 

[TimothyH]

To the OP - keepitreal…

One of the most important commandments which God had given Israel was that parents were to teach to their children all of what God had done for them, all of the law, and were to teach their children how to love and how to serve God.

You shall therefore lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul; and you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. And you shall teach them to your children, talking of them when you are sitting in your house, and when you are walking by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. And you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house and upon your gates, that your days and the days of your children may be multiplied in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers to give them, as long as the heavens are above the earth. (Dueteronomy 11:18:21)

Not following this one command - that parents teach the ways of God to their chidren - was Israel’s biggest mistake. The children were not taught by their parents, and Israel constantly feel into sin and the people were conquered.

One short conversation, one on one with one’s own child, is worth many classes and fifteen minutes together can undo much damage from many well meaning but misguided teachers who are not there to be an example for their sons and daughters. The example set by a parent lasts for a child’s lifetime.

My point is that it is up to us as parents to teach our children. If we are not reading and studying scripture, if we don’t have a prayerful life, if we don’t make use of the sacraments, and if we don’t try to advance in virtue ourselves, then we can’t teach our children. If we do all those things and fail to teach them to our children, then we can’t really blame a misguided teacher in a catechism class for teaching what they mistakenly think is right.

I don’t mean to lecture. Really I don’t. I hope my comments are taken charitably. If you do teach your own children then congratulations to you - you are one of the few.

But woe to us if we don’t teach our own children. I can certainly do better, but I have no one to blame if I don’t take the initiative. Scripture says that we should “Drill” God’s teaching into our children. God help us if we don’t do it in our own homes.

-Tim-

 

[Julia_Mae]

I believe that you may have hit on something. I believe that contemporary culture, especially in the USA, tends to want to simplify and shorten language as much as possible. I truly believe that it’s an effect of technology. Text is in and rhetoric is out. If one throws our rhetoric, one throws out elaborate language usage or uses language in correctly.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I think it’s a function of being educated which is popularly begun to be considered “elitist.” Imagine correcting anyone’s grammar on a forum these days. But… that’s off-topic.

However, it does speak to the apparent growing reluctance of people to delve into issues and search diligently for truths. They seem to want simple answers, hard edges and absolute answers. Not getting those things seems anxiety-producing. I believe this has much to do with the demarcation between NO parishes and EF parishes. And make no mistake, when the new pastor came to my closest parish he made it perfectly clear from the outset, we would become an EF parish, no one was getting communion in the hand and no OF Masses were going to be offered at all.

We aren’t the ones turning this into a battle of the parishes, we have the clergy to do it for us. If there is heresy, it’s coming down from above in many cases.

 

[OraLabora]

So if there is no such thing as a Novus Ordo parish (and by legalistic definition, I agree with you) how can the term have been hijacked (which is what some people are claiming)?

They are using “Novus Ordo” to mean something it doesn’t.

Moreover some are using it in a derogatory fashion to refer to the Mass. Not all of course and we all realize that Paul VI himself used that term.

However some are using it in such a manner. On top of that, Internet doesn’t lend itself well to capturing body language, facial expressions and other cues about poster’s emotional state that can help interpret the context.

If someone very clearly says “I love the Novus Ordo Mass”, I think we can be quite certain that the usage isn’t derogatory.

If someone says “the Novus Ordo is invalid”, I think we can surmise it’s being used in a derogatory manner.

The problem is any place in between. “I went to an abuse-filled Novus Ordo Mass” maybe was meant to be derogatory, or perhaps in an another thread the same person says “I attended a beautiful Novus Ordo Mass at a monastery last Sunday”. The thing is that with Internet, reading the former post only, one can’t be sure if it’s meant to be derogatory or not.

Charity would suggest that instead of stubbornly clinging to term that is open to misinterpretation, we instead use unambiguous language. It’s something I learned as a software analyst when writing specs. If a term, in its current usage is ambiguous and can lead to misinterpretation, then better either clarify the usage or look for an unambiguous term instead.

I therefore fail to understand why people just don’t emulate the holy father’s terminology. It’s unambiguous, and it isn’t in any way open to a pejorative interpretation, and it makes it easier to say “I prefer the EF to the OF” in a way that doesn’t potentially disparage those who prefer the OF. It boils it down to what it really is, a personal preference. On the other hand saying “I can’t stand the Novus Ordo”, really is waving a red flag.

In between those examples, there’s a whole range of emotions that can’t be captured on the Internet, and therefore the term can lead to unintended misinterpretations and hard feelings.

 

[TrueLight]

I therefore fail to understand why people just don’t emulate the holy father’s terminology. It’s unambiguous, and it isn’t in any way open to a pejorative interpretation, and it makes it easier to say “I prefer the EF to the OF” in a way that doesn’t potentially disparage those who prefer the OF. /QUOTE]

Maybe the “Extraordinary form” doesn’t resonate with me and since there is nothing preventing use of “Traditional Latin Mass” or “Novus Ordo”…

I don’t know what you’re experience is, but in my real-life experience, no one goes around saying extraordinary and ordinary form.

 

[Cider]

I think it’s a function of being educated which is popularly begun to be considered “elitist.” Imagine correcting anyone’s grammar on a forum these days. But… that’s off-topic.

However, it does speak to the apparent growing reluctance of people to delve into issues and search diligently for truths. They seem to want simple answers, hard edges and absolute answers. Not getting those things seems anxiety-producing. I believe this has much to do with the demarcation between NO parishes and EF parishes. And make no mistake, when the new pastor came to my closest parish he made it perfectly clear from the outset, we would become an EF parish, no one was getting communion in the hand and no OF Masses were going to be offered at all.

We aren’t the ones turning this into a battle of the parishes, we have the clergy to do it for us. If there is heresy, it’s coming down from above in many cases.

Wow, so many veiled insults in that post.

 

[clem456]

Our parish does a great job of sacrament preparation. Parents are required to attend sessions. Roughly 65% of our families are CINO and do not attend Mass. For them, First Communion is an opportunity for cute pictures and money cards. It’s something the kids do, because their parents did it, and their parents did it. It’s merely a cultural observance, like a first band concert or football game. No great meaning is attached. Required prep classes have brought some of these parents back into the practicing fold. A lot of this sacramental prep turns into divorced and separated ministry.

My own parents are in their 80’s and have been observant Catholics all their lives. They learned the catechism when they were kids but the substance of it was never learned, so it went by the wayside when they left school. Catholicism was simply inculturated into them, which is fine, but they couldn’t pass it along. They could not express the truths of the faith. It was not something they talked about other than “Go to Mass and say your Rosary”. There’s a lot of cultural competition for people’s intellect and attention, and parents must learn the faith beyond the rules if we are to engage our children’s power of reason.

Things are improving IMO but it will take a couple of generations to right the ship, to let parents know that learning and conversion are the lifelong duty of the laity, that it doesn’t stop at 8th grade, that it goes beyond learning a catechism, although that is certainly important. Most parents need to be given “theology lite” to get them going. For instance in RCIA a large part of the process is forming friendships and instilling a sense of belonging, and gradually presenting the truths of the faith in a personal witness fashion. The doctrine can’t be hammered down the throat, you must have trust, open ears and hearts first. This is why some of this sacrament prep and RCIA may seem “weak” to us.

 

[OraLabora]

Maybe the “Extraordinary form” doesn’t resonate with me and since there is nothing preventing use of “Traditional Latin Mass” or “Novus Ordo”…

I don’t know what you’re experience is, but in my real-life experience, no one goes around saying extraordinary and ordinary form.

It’s not a matter of what resonates or what’s used in real life or not. It’s a matter of clarity in written communications on a potentially contentious international forum. For example I dislike the term Traditional Latin Mass, because it can be misinterpreted to mean that only the EF Mass can be in Latin. I know that not to be the case, and I know that around here it’s generally known not to be the case, but we have newbies join daily who don’t know a whole lot about liturgy, and don’t know that Vatican II didn’t abolish Latin so I avoid the term.

And Novus Ordo as we know can open a whole can of worms and cause unwanted hurt feelings even though the person using the term meant well as we well know.

Besides, EF and OF are short and easy to write for lazy guys like me

Ya know I used to travel to Korea a lot on business. We worked in English (mostly pidgin English to get the message across). At the time I worked in large, noisy paper mills and to communicate we often had to use hand gestures. Some hand gestures common and innocuous for a Canadian would be highly insulting to a Korean. So in charity we learned to adapt and avoid derogatory gestures. It was much better than dealing with hurt feelings (that in this case explode a thread into dozens or more unnecessary posts). Yes it required more thought and did not come naturally, just like saying OF and EF maybe doesn’t come naturally to you.

Incidentally in French you almost never hear the term Novus Ordo when referring to the OF Mass.

As an aside, Internet forums are a bit like driving in your car. Things we would never do or say in polite discourse suddenly become acceptable cocooned in your car, or behind the anonymity of the Internet. Imagine how much better the world would work if we used the same consideration in our cars and on the Internet, as we do in polite discourse in person. I know I’m guilty of being rash both in my car and on the 'net.

I think the Rule of St. Benedict comes into play here. The idea is not to impose our own will, but to be sensitive to others views and try to adjust.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Charity would suggest that instead of stubbornly clinging to term that is open to misinterpretation, we instead use unambiguous language.

I’ll just disagree on whether or not it truly is ambiguous language. Really no sense arguing that for ages. But I would like to point out that charity would also suggest that people (and I’m not picking out anyone specifically) do not automatically assume the worst of a person just because he uses NO instead of OF. Unfortunately, I’m not seeing that considering I’ve been pretty much accused of lying (not in this thread) about my intentions on multiple occasions.

 

[ahaley]

Ask; don’t tell.

“It’s really interesting to hear everyone’s opinions, and, please tell me what the definition of sin is according to the Church?”

If they start to prevaricate, interrupt as politely as possible, “Are you saying there is no definition of sin in the Catechism?”

More prevarication? You smile as if making a joke,

“I’m sorry, is the Church’s definition of sin a secret for some reason? Do you, yourself, know what it is?”

There is no charity in such an approach, at least not as described here. It is little more than thinly veiled arrogance, and the catechist will likely not appreciate it.

Imagine if a person sat in the back of an elementary school classroom and, while the teacher was explaining the basics of atoms and molecules, started in:

“This whole Bohr model with its well-defined orbitals is interesting, but doesn’t your book talk about probability clouds?” He smiles as if making a joke. “I’m sorry, are discussions about hybrid orbitals secret for some reason?”

Alan

 

[Cristiano]

There is no charity in such an approach, at least not as described here. It is little more than thinly veiled arrogance, and the catechist will likely not appreciate it.

Imagine if a person sat in the back of an elementary school classroom and, while the teacher was explaining the basics of atoms and molecules, started in:

“This whole Bohr model with its well-defined orbitals is interesting, but doesn’t your book talk about probability clouds?” He smiles as if making a joke. “I’m sorry, are discussions about hybrid orbitals secret for some reason?”

Alan

How dare you making public the level of secrecy concerning hybrid orbitals?

 

[OraLabora]

I’ll just disagree on whether or not it truly is ambiguous language. Really no sense arguing that for ages. But I would like to point out that charity would also suggest that people (and I’m not picking out anyone specifically) do not automatically assume the worst of a person just because he uses NO instead of OF. Unfortunately, I’m not seeing that considering I’ve been pretty much accused of lying (not in this thread) about my intentions on multiple occasions.

Good point, although I would add that if the person is clearly using it in a derogatory manner, well it’s against forum rules to disparage one form or another of the Mass. But indeed, if the person is not obviously using in a derogatory manner, we should assume the best.

 

[jeannetherese]

Well, the good teachers were driven out of my parish (Novus Ordo) for being too traditional. I don’t really find it surprising that the OP described it like he did because, honestly, sometimes we’re treated like that, again, my parish being an example. CCD became a glorified arts and crafts session. Seriously!

I imagine that there is some variation from parish to parish in relation to this issue but have also seen what Curt Jester describes. A few weeks ago I was conversing with the person in charge of faith formation in another of our Archdiocesan parishes who was telling me about the program the parish was using. “That’s the Protestant version.” I exclaimed.
She had inherited the program from someone who came before her.
Perhaps that person had no idea that s/he had purchased the alternative version of the program. Correcting such challenges can take both time, and recognition that there is a challenge to be corrected. And, unfortunately, there is also the cost of replacement involved. My guess is that the Protestant program will continue to be taught for a while longer.
At least the faith formation teacher knows that a problem exists. It’s a start.