SSPX or Orthodox
Novus Ordo means "New Order"  I don't see how there's negative content there ??? .  It was "marketed" as that at the beginning.  There are old pamphlets that I"ve found in books used in 1970, instructions for priests: New Order of the Mass.
Reply
Pope Paul VI used the term "Novus Ordo Missae". LOL
Reply
(10-06-2009, 05:47 AM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote:
(10-06-2009, 05:16 AM)Arun Wrote: wasn't the NO devised by Thomas Cranmer during the English reformation?

There's about a 400-year gap between Cranmer and the Council.

um yeah sorry that was a joke, in reference to Michael Davies trilogy. shouold have put a smiley face there, huh. lol.
Reply
As far as I'm concerned, in terms of names:

Novus Ordo=Ordinary Form=Mass of [Pope] Paul VI
Tridentine Latin Mass=Extraordinary Form

When I use the words, no insult as meant. Sometimes I call the 'New Mass' the Novus Ordo or the Ordinary Form and occasionally Mass of Paul VI. I may use either OF or NO as abbreviations. When I talk about the 'Ancient Mass' (for lack of a better descriptive term, again no insult is meant), I use Tridentine Latin Mass or Extraordinary Form and the abbreviations EF or TLM. No insult or degradation is ever meant on my part in any of the cases.
Reply
(10-07-2009, 08:18 PM)nsper7 Wrote: As far as I'm concerned, in terms of names:

Novus Ordo=Ordinary Form=Mass of [Pope] Paul VI
Tridentine Latin Mass=Extraordinary Form

When I use the words, no insult as meant. Sometimes I call the 'New Mass' the Novus Ordo or the Ordinary Form and occasionally Mass of Paul VI. I may use either OF or NO as abbreviations. When I talk about the 'Ancient Mass' (for lack of a better descriptive term, again no insult is meant), I use Tridentine Latin Mass or Extraordinary Form and the abbreviations EF or TLM. No insult or degradation is ever meant on my part in any of the cases.

Musica Sacra is using the Usus Antiquior, which is expressive.

The frequent or exclusive abbreviation are insult against the fullness (intellect, emotions, flesh) of the humanity. Try to read Orwell 1984 on that time this was evident for everyone. Abbreviation kills the emotional - flesh content of the word, and cases like the NO mass it intends to introduce new negative emitions.  Many contributors here work hard on that associating the it stinks.

Apparently they completely forget that the Mass is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, not our homage to him. This later is the greatest post Vatican heresy, and it is heresy not only from modernist side, but from traditionalist side too.

New Mass, or Ordinary form are correct name, Paul VI mass is questionable, (St Pius V mass is too, the mass is the Mass of Jesus Christ or and the Mass of the Church); NO mass is a big nono as my 2 years old grandson used to say. Jesu Christ should be yes, yes for us.
Reply
what's being referred to by terms like "Novus Ordo" and such is NOT the Mass of Jesus Christ's sacrifice, it's the liturgy surrounding the mass we're talking about.  That's why distinctions are being made in the first place, we're not talking about what's common to them both (the substantial presence of Christ's sacrifice), we're talking about what's different (the prayers surrounding that sacrifice--the liturgy)

thus, it's not a problem to use negative connotations for the NO if one really disagrees with the liturgical prayers as being unfitting of the sacrifice of Holy Mass.  It's not the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass that one is expressing negativity towards, but the prayers surrounding that Sacrifice.
Reply
(10-08-2009, 07:50 AM)Aloysius Wrote: what's being referred to by terms like "Novus Ordo" and such is NOT the Mass of Jesus Christ's sacrifice, it's the liturgy surrounding the mass we're talking about.  That's why distinctions are being made in the first place, we're not talking about what's common to them both (the substantial presence of Christ's sacrifice), we're talking about what's different (the prayers surrounding that sacrifice--the liturgy)

thus, it's not a problem to use negative connotations for the NO if one really disagrees with the liturgical prayers as being unfitting of the sacrifice of Holy Mass.  It's not the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass that one is expressing negativity towards, but the prayers surrounding that Sacrifice.

The first self evident principle of the philosophy is, that' every entity is identical with itself'.

One's favorite actress in that actress regardless what clothes she wears, and if you address her negatively, then she is denounced not the clothes.

One may denounce specific accindentalia of abused masses, strictly naming the time, place, mode, but  one should not use generic terms as 'it stinks' on the whole generic word: mass.

Those who believe that the hole world is heretic, only they and their small group reserves the faith, are at least logical. But those who believe that the about 2 million weekly masses in the Earth, or about 200,000 weekly masses in the US are the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, regardless of the outside clothes, cannot say negative terms without full specifics.

From our part, or the exactly from the priest part the Mass is nothing just the liturgy. It is Jesus Christ who identifies His body and blood with that liturgy. If you are not capable to accept Him in that clothes, you can find Him personally elsewhere, but you have not right to judge those, who are capable to find Jesus Christ on His shameful death, when it was bloody and stinky, and who are capable to find Him in each of the 2 million weekly valid masses, regardless of the outside reverence.

939 And this, [Mass] indeed, is that "clean oblation" which cannot be defiled by any unworthiness or malice on the part of those who offer it;
http://www.catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma10.php
Reply
Gigas u r wrong. The cloths matter. Further we r talking about the mass about the holy sacrifice. That's why the no is completely unfitting. Its a bastard prod mass. A new mass.  Yes CHRIST cares! We must offer him out best not pur worst.
Just because valid (sometimes) doesn't erase the hideous sacrelege around it through it and of it. Its not abput whether one preffers the tlm to the no, they r not equel. One is the true mass the mass for all time. The other is a modernist hathced prod devised bastard created to destroy the faith.
Good day
Reply
DK, will you please stop talking about CHRIST in capitals as if you are passing on HIS message through your own posts. It SHITS me.  :)
Reply
(10-09-2009, 04:13 AM)Benno Wrote: DK, will you please stop talking about CHRIST in capitals as if you are passing on HIS message through your own posts. It SHITS me.  :)

Pissy sare we?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)