If you can find a funny punch line go ahead

[challenger]

pnewton:

In case you are not familiar with the discussions in the liturgy forum, “Novus Ordo” has been used extensively (and inaccurately) to refer to the current Mass. My point is that it has no entymological ties to the New World Order or New Age.

The current Mass is called the Novus Ordo many places, not just the liturgy forum here.

pnewton:

If you found my first attempt unhumorous, all I can say is,

BOOM!!

I’m not quite seeing the humor in that one, either…

 

[AlanFromWichita]

challenger:

I’m not quite seeing the humor in that one, either…

Now that you broke the ice, I didn’t get the second one either.

I didn’t know whether the boom was intended to be the first joke blowing up in his face, a violent advance reaction to those who said the first was unfunny (I hope it wasn’t this one and really don’t think it was), or maybe just an emotional “spike” which distracts everyone for a second, goes away as quickly as it came, and kind of resets everything.

None of these are very satisfying, so I’m sticking with “probably none of the above” so far.

Maybe it was a sonic boom, or a sound effect from a time warp we could use to go back and pretend we didn’t ever read the first joke if we thought it was unfunny.

Or maybe it could be like Ralph Cramden, “to the moon, Alice!”

Sorry, pnewton, for being so confused against you and not admitting it until someone else did. I’m sure you have a logical explanation. (That said, you don’t owe it to me.)

Alan

 

[pnewton]

challenger:

The current Mass is called the Novus Ordo many places, not just the liturgy forum here.

Then you should know why it is confusing and misleading to refer to the " New World Order" and the “New Order Mass” as if there is any connection. The Mass is not a reflection of New Age philosophy.

Alan, when the initial poster suggested the idea of a punchline, he knew, as did I, that someone would find the idea unfunny. I said that I would try for a punchline and walk in the mine field (post 2). Since challenger read the punchline I posted, I assumed that would include the first line. Oh, and mines go boom.

I also gave a serious answer on post 8.

 

[pnewton]

In the interest of fair play I will post another analogy that is more flattering to our traditionalist.

What is the difference between a pre-VII Catholic and a post-VII Catholic?

The first kneels at the railing, the second rails at the kneeling

 

[AlanFromWichita]

pnewton:

Alan, when the initial poster suggested the idea of a punchline, he knew, as did I, that someone would find the idea unfunny. I said that I would try for a punchline and walk in the mine field (post 2). Since challenger read the punchline I posted, I assumed that would include the first line. Oh, and mines go boom.

Oh my, I missed that. Shows how well I pay attention to detail.

I also gave a serious answer on post 8.

OK, but the serious answer isn’t nearly as memorable!

pnewton:

What is the difference between a pre-VII Catholic and a post-VII Catholic?

The first kneels at the railing, the second rails at the kneeling

:thumbsup:

I guess you have to know the makeup of the crowd to know which groups can be safely offended and which ones will become defensive! Maybe I am masochistic, but sometimes I like going the other way and offending the ones most likely to complain. That way I feel powerful because it caused such a strong reaction, and the strength of their reaction tells me how strongly I can jerk their strings!

Alan

 

[wcknight]

The thing about this, is that most Catholics would not even consider categorizing themselves under any of these names. I don’t think we should start labeling folks either. I don’t call myself liberal or conservative, nor progressive or moderate, certainly not orthodox. I’ve only heard of Orthodox Catholic being associated the the eastern Church. I just call my self Catholic.

I love the latin mass and I would attend them IF I knew of any in my area. But I have no problem with the modern mass or folk mass either. I love benedictions and the sacraments, but haven’t gotten around to reading any of the formal Church documents, not sure many folks can really get into these.

I doubt anyone can really understand them in detail. Someone get me the Cliff notes. For us non-theologians, a simply summary of one or two sentences will do. My attention span disappears after that.

wc

 

[wcknight]

AlanFromWichita:

Oh my, I missed that. Shows how well I pay attention to detail.

That way I feel powerful because it caused such a strong reaction, and the strength of their reaction tells me how strongly I can jerk their strings!

Alan

Alan,

just be sure the string you pull doesn’t have a tiger on the other end of it. :bigyikes:

 

[AlanFromWichita]

wcknight:

Alan,

just be sure the string you pull doesn’t have a tiger on the other end of it. :bigyikes:

Good advice!

If it is, I hope it’s a Christian tiger, preferably Protestant.

If I can talk it into calling off its attack and praying with me, I don’t want it to say, “Bless us oh Lord, and these Thy gifts…”

Alan

 

[HagiaSophia]

pnewton:

In case you are not familiar with the discussions in the liturgy forum, “Novus Ordo” has been used extensively (and inaccurately) to refer to the current Mass.

Actually it is not incorrect - the full verbiage is Novus Ordo Missae. The New Order of the Mass – it quickly became in the vernacular expressions of the day NO or Novus Ordo.

 

[pnewton]

HagiaSophia:

Actually it is not incorrect - the full verbiage is Novus Ordo Missae. The New Order of the Mass – it quickly became in the vernacular expressions of the day NO or Novus Ordo.

Then I stand corrected. I am sure you know of what you speak.

Maybe we can start a new abbreviation; the New Order of the Roman Mass of NORM.

 

[J.W.B]

RSiscoe:

I’ll give you my “long answer” to the question. To do this, I will need to also add the “liberal” to my response.

The devil has been very successful in our day in dividing society into liberal, or “progressive” and conservative. The liberal movements seeks to “liberate” man from God’s rule. He has does this by emphaszing man’s “rights”, and "dignity, to such an extent that he eventually claims that man has a “right”, based on his “dignity” to act contrary to God’s law. When you really examine liberalism, it is simply an attempt to liberate man from the authority of God. Liberals are also called “progresives” since their manner of behavior continually “progresses” in that direction.

The is a counter movement to the “progressives”. These are known as “conservatives”. Conservatives do what the name says: they seek to “conserve” what has been; whereas the progresseves seek to “progress” away from what has been.

We sometime hear the term “new world order” (you will find this term on the back of the dollar bill, in Latin). The liberals seek to bring about a new ordering of the world. And it is this new ordering which they “progress” towards. The “old world order” (which the new world order seeks to replace) is the Catholics Church with the state united to it, so that both Church, state, and individuals are ordered towards God as their center and summit. The “new order” (Novus Ordo) seeks to replace that, by ordering everything to man as its center and summit. The following quote would describe the mentality of this “new order”: “Believers and unbelievers agree almost unanimously that all things on earth should be ordained to man as to their center and summit” (Vatican II).

So, in society we have the two “forces” the progressives (or “liberals”), and the "conservatives. And we also have what is known as the “center”. The conservatives are those on the political “right” of center, while the liberals are those on the “left”.

But what happens over the years is that the “center” moves further and further “left” with each passing year, so that eventually the liberal thinking of yesterday becomes the “conservative” thinking of today. For example in the 1930’s it was only the extreme liberals in society who believed in birth control. Today, it is accepted by even the conservatives, while those who rejecte birth control are looked at as “out of the main stream of society”. We see the same today with abortion, which at first was promoted only by the extreme liberal, yet today is accepted by many “conservatives” in society.

Dennis Prager, the “conservative” radio show host said a few years ago: “I am a Kennedy liberal. I have not changed any of my beliefs. Yet today these same beliefs are considered conservative”. He is right. Because the liberal ideas of yesterday become mainstream and then accepted by the “conservatives” tomorrow.

So, we have the liberals, the conservatives, and the center. With each passing year the center gradually moves left, as the “progressives” progress in their error and the “conservatives” trail behind. The conservatives are like an anchor that slows the progress of the “progressives”, yet it never stops, nor reverses the trend.

A conservative and a liberal are required, by society, to remain within a certain distance from the “center”. If one becomes too progressive, they are considered “extreme” (at least until the center catches up with them a few years later). In the same way, if a conservative does not remain within the “allowed” distance from the center (if he does not progress in his thinking), he too becomes an “extremist” even though his views were mainstream only 20 or 30 years ago.

Next we have another group: These are known (at least within Catholicism) as “traditionalist”. This group is considered very “extreme” since they still believe what the Church has always taught, and still reject what the Church has always rejected. This group is “politically incorrect and socially unacceptable”, since they are not within the politically correct bounds of the center, which is necessary remain within the “main stream”.

These “radical traditionalists” still believe, for example, that “there is only one true Church outside of which there is no salvation” (ex-cathedra dogma of the faith). They don’t praise heretics (Martin Luther for example) but detest them; you will never find a traditionalist kissing the Koran, but you may find them burning one. They will never invite pagans to their Church and ask them perform a pagan ritual (Assisi),

Assisi? Are you impling St. Francis? Ah! He’s my favorite St.!

 

[RSiscoe]

J.W.B:

Assisi? Are you impling St. Francis? Ah! He’s my favorite St.!

No, not at all. By Assisi, I am referring to an event where witchdoctors, snake worshipper, and other pagans were invited to “Assisi” to offer pagan worship to their false gods.

St. Francis would have been scandalized

 

[HagiaSophia]

pnewton:

T
Maybe we can start a new abbreviation; the New Order of the Roman Mass of NORM.

I’ve come to the conclusion, (at least in the dioceses where I’ve lived) – there ain’t no “NORM”,everyone keeps trying to make their own version.