Why Hostility for the Latin Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Entwhistler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry. I thought folkswere arguing about whether it was offensive at some point.
 
pianistclare said:
As support for it being an offensive term maybe?

People have gotten pretty testy…already.

It seems CAF can never discuss this without a fight breaking out at some point.
Unsubscribing,
Again.
Click to expand...
That is because people do not think with a Catholic worldview. Not even good loyal Catholics think with a Catholic worldview most times.
 
Again, if anyone has a problem with the term “Novus Ordo Missae,” the blame should rest with those who invented it…who were NOT those nasty traditionalists who really just hate the OF.

“Novus Ordo Missae” was the official title printed on the original printing of the Ordinary of the Mass, which was the first part of the 1970 Missal to be published. It was published and used as a separate book with the existing Missal until the entire Missal was published.

These are just historical facts. Again, if someone has a problem with the title “Novus Ordo Missae,” blame Father Bugnini, his Consilium, and the pope who approved their work.
 
According to you, that is. What you really mean is that you wished good loyal catholics agreed with you.

Labelling something offensive in order to silence an view you disagree with is a typical liberal bully tactic.
 
Last edited:
Just to restate what I actually think. I DO NOT think the NO is invalid or unholy or whatever. I just believe there are certain things that could have been carried over to enrich that form.

I also think that the TLM should be more widespread as I think there is a great opportunity for teaching and evangelisation in that form.

I think the NO mass will eventually go back to being celebrated Ad Orientem and I would love to see altar rails and high altars making a comeback. I just think the symbolism of the Ad Orientem is more fitting to the sacrifice of the mass.
 
IMHO, it is offensive. “WHY” you ask?..

The answer is very simple. I do not speak or understand LATIN.

We are a society of Modern Catholics in the United States.

I can barely tolerate the Season of Advent and Lent. The musical responses are in Latin. It has no VALUE to a person that does not understand the words.

There is no DOCTRINE that requires that Latin be understood.

If you introduce language at any part into the MASS that at least one person much less the majority does not understand, then it is offensive to the MASS. Because any person that does NOT understand and/or comprehend the Latin words, they can become distracted and loose focus on the PURPOSE/FOCUS of the MASS.

Anything that causes one to shift their focus is in itself offensive to the beholder AND probably offensive to GOD as well.

What language does the POPE give his HOMILY in? LATIN?

What language do they speak at the Vatican?
On its official website Vatican City uses Italian, English, French, German, Spanish, Latin, Portuguese, Chinese, and Arabic, which are found on the official website of the Holy See.
You will notice that Latin is not list it.
So you’re saying that the mass was offensive to itself for the hundreds of years when Latin mass was the ordinary form?
Click to expand...
When the populations stop learning and speaking Latin, YES.
 
Last edited:
Latin is the official language of the Roman Catholic Church.
 
Last edited:
So you’re saying that the mass was offensive to itself for the hundreds of years when Latin mass was the ordinary form?
 
Holey Moley, how did this discussion veer into the realm of conspiracy theories, and how are people so easily offended?
 
Vadne said:
Again, if anyone has a problem with the term “Novus Ordo Missae,” the blame should rest with those who invented it…who were NOT those nasty traditionalists who really just hate the OF.

“Novus Ordo Missae” was the official title printed on the original printing of the Ordinary of the Mass, which was the first part of the 1970 Missal to be published. It was published and used as a separate book with the existing Missal until the entire Missal was published.

These are just historical facts. Again, if someone has a problem with the title “Novus Ordo Missae,” blame Father Bugnini, his Consilium, and the pope who approved their work.
Click to expand...
Vadne—this is a linguistics argument.

Using “NO” Mass is offensive because of the English language play on words. Besides the fact that it isn’t even accurate, because, as you state its the NOM Mass.

Those who insist on using NO and dropping the M show a clear agenda towards the wordplay that occurs when placing NO in front of the word Mass. That is the issue.

NO ONE is going to have an issue with someone saying NOM Mass. But those who choose to use NO aren’t going to do that…because that isn’t their perogitave.
 
I wasn’t specifically referring to you. I just mean the amount of times in this thread people have claimed to be offended. As for the banknote issue…I’m ignoring it. It’s an entirely different discussion.
 
Xanthippe_Voorhees said:
Using “NO” Mass is offensive because of the English language play on words. Besides the fact that it isn’t even accurate, because, as you state its the NOM Mass.

Those who insist on using NO and dropping the M show a clear agenda towards the wordplay that occurs when placing NO in front of the word Mass. That is the issue.
Click to expand...
As I said already, I’ve never heard of anyone being offended by the term NO Mass. I am not going to stop using that term purely because I do not like to be bullied into stuff by people claiming it’s offensive. People also say that being Pro-Life is Offensive…or being against Gay Marriage.
 
"Easily offended? Really? You think that my reaction to that phrase means I am “easily offended”. How can you NOT be outraged?
[/quote]

I’m with you (name removed by moderator).
 
To be honest I think this is probably more of an issue in the US than here in Ireland. I could talk about Novus Ordo and NO till the cows come home and nobody would bat an eyelid, even people who didn’t particularly like the Latin Mass.

Is it possible that this is a cultural thing within US Catholicism?

Also NO is simply an abbreviation. You could use NOM or OF or whatever. I have no particular preference for any of these terms over the other.
 
Last edited:
AdamPeter said:
40.png
Xanthippe_Voorhees:
Using “NO” Mass is offensive because of the English language play on words. Besides the fact that it isn’t even accurate, because, as you state its the NOM Mass.

Those who insist on using NO and dropping the M show a clear agenda towards the wordplay that occurs when placing NO in front of the word Mass. That is the issue.
Click to expand...
As I said already, I’ve never heard of anyone being offended by the term NO Mass. I am not going to stop using that term purely because I do not like to be bullied into stuff by people claiming it’s offensive. People also say that being Pro-Life is Offensive…or being against Gay Marriage.
Click to expand...
🤨

Really. I mean c’mon Adam, you’ve been a part of these boards for atleat a couple of years now. Here’s a thread discussing it. FROM 2004. That’s 13 years ago. Novus so-called Ordo? - #6 by jremaley

And even off of CAF, here’s a site that purposefully uses Norvous Ordo to be offensive. The Holy Catholic Mass – Novus Ordo Watch

Even if you haven’t been told-at length- NO is a play on words and isn’t even accurate- what do you logically think?

Playing the “I’m being bullied” card is ridiculous. There’s a huge difference between a phrase long used on this board to be offensive and a simple accurate term like “pro-life”.
 
AdamPeter said:
Also NO is simply an abbreviation. You could use NOM or OF or whatever. I have no particular preference for any of these terms over the other.
Click to expand...
NO is inaccurate. If it doesn’t matter to you, then use NOM because it’s correct. Problem solved. No one has an issue with saying NOM or OF. The double meaning is what causes offense.
 
Well I never used to takke part in liturgical discussions until recently.

Also I get the play on words. I just think it’s kind of funny actually. Obviously I don’t beleive that the NOM or OF or whatever you want to call it is invalid.
 
AdamPeter said:
Well I never used to takke part in liturgical discussions until recently.

Also I get the play on words. I just think it’s kind of funny actually. Obviously I don’t beleive that the NOM or OF or whatever you want to call it is invalid.
Click to expand...
🤨

I do not think it is funny when ANYONE degrades a Mass. That seems very callous.

I don’t even like it when I hear about sedevaticansts saying illicit Masses.

I prefer the Ordinary Form, because I think vernacular adds to the common knowledge and understanding. It is very powerful when a word that you are familiar with seems to take on a divine meaning. But if someone tried to make a cute perojitave name for TLM, I’d be just as upset. Becuase God deserves better than wordplay mockery.

It seems you’ve come to a reasonable conclusion to use NOM.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top