Simply wonderful: Novus Ordo 2.0

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?


 

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Simply wonderful: Novus Ordo 2.0

  1. Prof. Basto says:

    Great!

    Even unto the details 1-800-Pro Multis!

  2. Jenny Z says:

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

  3. Funny, funny. Well done.

  4. T. Falter says:

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

  5. Aelric says:

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

  6. patrick f says:

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

    Clapping 0%
    Guitar 0%

    Consult a liturgist before attending :D

  7. Brian Day says:

    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?

  8. Michael says:

    He forgot: Liturgical “Dance” – 0%

  9. Ottaviani says:

    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.

  10. Fr. Marie-Paul says:

    Were copyright permissions obtained for the instructions? :-)

  11. Patrick says:

    “…some traditionalists may still be allergic.”

    HA HA HA!

    Well done.

  12. Dr. Lee Fratantuono says:

    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.

  13. Brian Day says:

    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.

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

  15. TJB says:

    Its the “Novus Adoro!”

  16. Guy Power says:

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

    –Guy

  17. Deusdonat says:

    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.

  18. HMacK says:

    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).

  19. Atlanta says:

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

  20. Devin says:

    Greatest.

    Ever.

    !!

  21. rick says:

    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!

  22. PA says:

    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.

  23. Bob K. says:

    I love that one!.

  24. Prof. Basto says:

    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.

  25. Coletta says:

    My new screendaver at work

  26. Coletta says:

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

  27. Patrick A says:

    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.

  28. Ken says:

    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.

  29. Deusdonat says:

    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.

  30. PA says:

    Deusdonat,

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

    Cheers

  31. Deusdonat says:

    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.

  32. John P. says:

    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.

  33. Ioannes Andreades says:

    Does this version have puppet-blocker?

  34. Widukind says:

    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!

  35. Brian C. says:

    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

  36. Steve says:

    AWESOME!! Thank you for the post.

  37. Peter says:

    I attend the Traditional Latin Mass. I don’t follow the ‘Reform of the Reform’.