o{]:¬)

Fr. Z is Moderator of the Catholic Online Forum and the ASK FATHER Question Box. The WDTPRS columns appear weekly in The Wanderer. Fr. Z lives in Rome, though he is often in the USA. He is available for retreats and conferences. E-mail
LOGIN


Fr. Z on WDTPRS

↑ Grab this Headline Animator


Recent Posts
  • A Sabine oddity
  • Leaves
  • 11 Oct: Blessed John XXIII
  • UK seminaries: the seminarians are making the difference
  • QUAERITUR: Black pall for caskets in the Novus Ordo?
  • INTERNET PRAYER UPDATE: DANISH
  • QUAERITUR: Assistant priest puts an amice over the surplice
  • TULSA: Vocation of spiritual motherhood for priests

  • Recent Comments:

    • Margaret: I have to ask about the model of phone as well– I’ve had cheap digital cameras that...
    • Martin: I’m not sure from reading the previous comments that the use of a pall is now or has previously been a...
    • Woody Jones: I too am a big fan of Fr. Mark’s blog, which has greatly edifying material. Bishop Slattery is...
    • Maureen: He’s an English priest blogger, and other people call him that because his blog’s named the...
    • dcs: I remember reading somewhere that Pope Paul VI (I believe) abolished two branches of the Holy See’s corps of...
    • Dr. Eric: I’m new here, who is His Hermenuticalness?
    • dcs: http://birds.cornell.edu/pfw/A boutBirdsandFeeding/FAQsBirdFe eding.htm#robins
    • Tony: I hope that everybody who is reading this can *read between the lines* and actually get a picture of what...
    • MPod: “No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true Socialist.” Pope Pius XI
    • MPod: In thee, O Lord, have I trusted. Let me never be confounded. My sweet Jesus, mercy!

    • VOTE!
    My site was nominated for Best Religion Blog!

    Visit the new WDTPRS Store!
    Buy WDTPRS stuff!

    Calendar



    Subscribe to ... The Wanderer

    Subscribe to ... The Catholic Herald - UK






    This blog is hosted by

    Joyent


    Thanks for the support!






















    Add to Technorati Favorites

    Add to Google Reader or Homepage

    Add to My AOL

    Subscribe in Bloglines

    Powered by FeedBurner


    Where Fr. Z will be:
    • Upcoming Events:
  • Events

    • 8 July 2008

    Simply wonderful: Novus Ordo 2.0

    CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 1:22 pm

    For the following, many thanks to the first in the trail of bread crumbs, His Hermeneuticalness, and then Creative Minority Report.  Kudos.



    Notice the Instructions?


     

    • • • • • •

    38 Comments

    1. Great!

      Even unto the details 1-800-Pro Multis!

      Comment by Prof. Basto — 8 July 2008 @ 1:27 pm

    2. I needed that laugh this morning… think I’ll make that my new desktop background! :D

      Comment by Jenny Z — 8 July 2008 @ 1:44 pm

    3. ROTFL!

      Comment by Giles Hawkins — 8 July 2008 @ 1:52 pm

    4. Funny, funny. Well done.

      Comment by Mark Scott Abeln — 8 July 2008 @ 2:03 pm

    5. Excellent! Many levels of irony here. The words, “banal on-the-spot production” come to mind.

      Comment by T. Falter — 8 July 2008 @ 2:07 pm

    6. I’m waiting for the “Bugnini Free” and ad orientem supplemented version. You know, for those of us with sensitive stomachs.

      Comment by Aelric — 8 July 2008 @ 2:20 pm

    7. That is by far, the most amusing thing I have ever seen today.

      Clapping 0%
      Guitar 0%

      Consult a liturgist before attending :D

      Comment by patrick f — 8 July 2008 @ 2:22 pm

    8. Instead of “Now With 50% less Bugnini”, how about a Bugnini-free version?

      Oh, that’s right. It’s called the TLM. :)

      Seriously though, was everything that Archbishop Annibale Bugnini did bad? He was appointed to the Commission for Liturgical Reform in 1948, and thus was involved in the Holy Week reforms of Pius XII and the 1962 Missale of John XXIII.

      So even the TLM of 1962 is not Bugnini-free!

      While HE Bugnini is decried for producing the N.O., if he was so “bad”, how did he survive through three Pontificates?

      Comment by Brian Day — 8 July 2008 @ 2:24 pm

    9. He forgot: Liturgical “Dance” – 0%

      Comment by Michael — 8 July 2008 @ 2:28 pm

    10. Brian

      Many traditional liturgists question the Archbishop Bugnini reforms of 1962 and before. It was the drastic changes in the psalter and Holy Week in 1956, that led to the race for the Novus Ordo.

      This is not to say that the 1962 Missal is totally deficient but it lacks some of the more ancient ceremonies, octaves and vigils that Bugnini was responsible for excising and replacing with his cut and paste job.

      Comment by Ottaviani — 8 July 2008 @ 2:37 pm

    11. Were copyright permissions obtained for the instructions? :-)

      Comment by Fr. Marie-Paul — 8 July 2008 @ 3:22 pm

    12. “...some traditionalists may still be allergic.”

      HA HA HA!

      Well done.

      Comment by Patrick — 8 July 2008 @ 3:25 pm

    13. Bugnini’s great principle from 1948-1960 was “cut”. The 1962 Breviarium (really = 1961) is almost entirely a product of cutting things from the previous Breviary. In some cases, this has unintentionally humorous results. So on some Sundays, at Matins, the Father poses a question in the gospel homily that never gets answered, because it was answered in lessons that were cut.

      Comment by Dr. Lee Fratantuono — 8 July 2008 @ 3:38 pm

    14. Ottaviani,

      Thank you for your reply. Reading your and Dr. Lee Fratantuono’s reply gave me the shivers when balancing what you wrote and the call for reform in Sacrosanctum Concilium. It does make one wonder what the Bishops were thinking during Vatican II after a decade and a half of “reform” prior to the council.

      Comment by Brian Day — 8 July 2008 @ 4:34 pm

    15. Let’s not rehash the same old fights. Fun… Remember fun?

      Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 8 July 2008 @ 4:52 pm

    16. Its the “Novus Adoro!”

      Comment by TJB — 8 July 2008 @ 5:59 pm

    17. Creative Minority Report’s next opus should be “Papa Ben’s Converted Rites” for the Anglicans.
      —Guy

      Comment by Guy Power — 8 July 2008 @ 9:40 pm

    18. I’d add…

      *Warning: side effects may include sudden loss of apetite for burlap banners and tamborines. Not to be taken with Eucharistic Ministers or Call to Action Liturgists.

      Comment by Deusdonat — 8 July 2008 @ 10:39 pm

    19. Creative Minority Report had better watch out for any attempts to defraud customers under the trade descriptions act since their product may contain trace elements of altar servettes and GMF (generationally modified formulae).

      Comment by HMacK — 8 July 2008 @ 11:44 pm

    20. Wow, the creativity of this is very impressive. Good work!

      Comment by Atlanta — 9 July 2008 @ 12:30 am

    21. Greatest.

      Ever.

      !!

      Comment by Devin — 9 July 2008 @ 1:53 am

    22. Dear Friends:

      I do not agree with this “ad” or whatever you all wish to call it. It makes mockery of the Holy Father ( even if it is done in a so called “spirit of humor”. This is not funny and treats the office established by Our Lord on earth in a disrespectful manner. It is not unlike the sixteenth century cartoons made by protestants to make fun of the pope. THIS MUST END!

      Comment by rick — 9 July 2008 @ 5:38 am

    23. Rick,

      You are correct and thank you for speaking up.
      Hinding behind this false “humor” does not hold H2O.

      This is not the first time they have shown
      disrespect to the Holy Father on this blog.

      If another group were to do this
      they would be hung, drawn & quartered.

      Comment by PA — 9 July 2008 @ 7:06 am

    24. I love that one!.

      Comment by Bob K. — 9 July 2008 @ 8:08 am

    25. Rick and PA,

      I disagree. No one is being disrespectful to the Pope, and the “ad” does not make mockery of the Holy Father.

      Rather, the fake ad, indeed conceived in an “spirit of humor”, PRAISES the Holy Father for the liturgical “reform of the reform” he is implementing.

      So, there is nothing detrimental to the Pope. The piece is a compliment, it is a funny manifestation of praise and appreciation for the Pope’s actions.

      Comment by Prof. Basto — 9 July 2008 @ 8:35 am

    26. My new screendaver at work

      Comment by Coletta — 9 July 2008 @ 8:56 am

    27. sorry- i can’t spell. I am in Florida after all.

      Comment by Coletta — 9 July 2008 @ 8:58 am

    28. Thanks Father for the Link. I am glad some people found it funny (other than Rick & PA). You can’t please everyone. I would rather make a joke about the liturgy than a joke of the liturgy.

      Thanks again.

      Comment by Patrick A — 9 July 2008 @ 9:32 am

    29. Good call, Father, on having some fun. I haven’t been to a novus ordo in about 14 years—but must admit this was dang amusing. Keep ‘em coming.

      Comment by Ken — 9 July 2008 @ 9:36 am

    30. Rick and PA are both suffering from an extreme lack of a) humour b) understanding of allegory and c) historical context.

      To equate the above with a Reformation woodcut is both callous and deceitful. The above work does not in ANY WAY mock our beloved pope. ON THE CONTRARY. It is using allegory (i.e. a familiar item of nourishment: the packaged box of food) to convey a message of his success and glory in correcting previous wrongs within our church. The image of the Pope is not distorted in any way (i.e. putting horns on him) to convey a negative message as was the case in the Reformation woodcuts. This is no different than any other display of kitch with the image of the Pope sold WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE VATICAN.

      It has indeed by my unfortunate experience to run across people with zero tolerance for humor. These types of people usually try to make everyone else around them as miserable as they are. So, it’s probably best to avoid them.

      Comment by Deusdonat — 9 July 2008 @ 12:08 pm

    31. Deusdonat,

      Your reaction/response to Rick’s & mine objection is
      totally disproportionate; not to mention rash judgement.

      Cheers

      Comment by PA — 9 July 2008 @ 1:00 pm

    32. I disagree. Father Z has shown nothing but respect, reverence and fondness for our Pope. Sentiments which I and the vast majority of those who post on this blog share. That you would imply otherwise is distasteful and simply unwarranted.

      You have made your opinions clear, and so have I.

      Comment by Deusdonat — 9 July 2008 @ 1:04 pm

    33. Father, that has to be the most splendid picture I’ve ever seen, It really brought some laughs to my day. Thank you for sharing!

      Blessings,
      John P.

      Comment by John P. — 9 July 2008 @ 1:56 pm

    34. Does this version have puppet-blocker?

      Comment by Ioannes Andreades — 9 July 2008 @ 11:49 pm

    35. I found the ad rather humorous and not at all distateful. A couple months back, the Homeltic and Pastoral Review had an article on humor and laughter. The sour-grapers might benefit from a read of it.
      Give me Papa Ben’s any day of the week, as I am now refraining from eating Whacko’s, manufactured by those “cereal” killers who must “snap, crackle, and pop” at anything remotely akin to a smile, a jest, or a giggle! So, wake up every morning to a cupful of Papa Ben’s in your bowl. Its terrrrrifffic!

      Comment by Widukind — 10 July 2008 @ 12:42 am

    36. Does this version have puppet-blocker?

      (*laugh*) Brilliant!!

      As an aside, to those who take offense at this: with all due respect, I really wonder if you’re not presuming a slight against what might (though I believe it to be a fiction and a falsehood) be considered “the Holy Father’s pride”... and I can only say that your attempted defense of His Holiness may actually have had the effect of being an insult toward him—as if His Holiness would be so shallow as to “stand on his wounded dignity” and take umbrage at what is obviously a complimentary bit of humour towards him. Tactically speaking, I see no logical way that the above parody could be construed as derogatory toward the Holy Father (or to anyone else, save perhaps for H.E. Bugnini—and even that is directed at his works, and not toward the man himself), unless you take all humour to be below the dignity of a prelate of the Church. If that is the case, then I’d strongly advise you not to read G.K. Chesterton; it might drive you to a fit of apoplexy.

      In Christ,
      Brian

      Comment by Brian C. — 10 July 2008 @ 10:40 am

    37. AWESOME!! Thank you for the post.

      Comment by Steve — 10 July 2008 @ 10:54 am