What Does The Prayer Really Say?»Blog Archive

November 2009
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« Oct		Dec »
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

November 2009
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	EC

December 2009
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31	EC

January 2010
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31	EC

19 November 2009

In homage

CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULA — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 1:20 am

From Vincenzo, the official WDTPRS photoshopper, comes this homage to guerrilla warfare at the meeting of the USCCB.

• • • • • •

12 Comments

That is HEEEEEEsterical!
Now for a pic of Abp. Burke’s desk when ‘the lawsuit’ lands on it. Burke grinning, a trash can fire on the side…

Very funny drama yesterday, from the sounds of it. I found myself humming ‘Desperado’ as I read about the antics of a certain bishop.
Comment by Singing Mum — 19 November 2009 @ 1:41 am
Is that a target on Bishop T’s head, or merely the USCCB logo? :-)
Comment by Warren — 19 November 2009 @ 3:45 am
Fr. Z, From the information referred to by Vicenzo(http://www.usccb.org/romanmissal/examples.shtml),
it would seem that the destiny of the peculiarly English acclamation: “Christ has died….” etc, has not yet been decided. I commented on it in your Post of 17 November: “Liturgical translation drama at the USCCB. Is it finally over?”

That acclamation should be scrapped, because it is doctrinally subversive. And in any case, English language is used beyond the boundaries of the English speaking countries, in international gatherings etc.; in a sense, it is imposed on the whole Catholic world.

If that acclamation were approved, it wouldn’t comply with the Latin text or any text other than English.
Comment by Ogard — 19 November 2009 @ 6:56 am
I think thanks might be in order, thanks to the Holy Spirit, and thanks to God’s instrument, none other than the sometimes snide but always villilant and persistent through trials and tribulations, Fr. Z, none other. His rallying cries have galvanized quite a few, enough, I would say, from keeping these translations skirmishes from going into “overtime.” Who knows how long and protracted would be this struggle without the solid majority, and one has to think that this majority, after not “getting it” for so many years, finally seems to be seeing the light and I would think this in no small part is owing to the mighty and indefatigable (rhymes with “effable”) Fr. Z.

Thanks Fr. Z, for not giving up, through depression and demonic attacks and whatever else you have gone through to keep the flame burning and the light lit. Kudos and blessings and ad multos annos. God Bless you.
Comment by Patrick J. — 19 November 2009 @ 7:14 am
That’s vigilant, not whatever else I wrote above (‘tis late).
Comment by Patrick J. — 19 November 2009 @ 7:16 am
The only possible inaccuracy in that picture is Bishop Trautman’s smiling face. I would think he isn’t smiling now. Perhaps this picture might also help document what happened this week in Washington to Bishop Trautman?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Custer_Massacre_At_Big_Horn,_Montana_June_25_1876.jpg
Comment by TNCath — 19 November 2009 @ 9:13 am
Ogard said

That acclamation should be scrapped, because it is doctrinally subversive. And in any case, English language is used beyond the boundaries of the English speaking countries, in international gatherings etc.; in a sense, it is imposed on the whole Catholic world.

How in the world is Christ has died, risen, and will come doctrinally incorrect? I always reflect upon that acclamation that Christ will come again, and that he HAS come again in the blessed sacrament—I suppose something is wrong about that too?

What I am not sure of is the contention that that acclamation is NOT in the Latin text of the new Roman missal—can anyone else shed light on that?

Michael Val
Comment by mvhcpa — 19 November 2009 @ 9:27 am
Can someone please explain to me why are we trying to reinvent the wheel?
Comment by kenoshacath — 19 November 2009 @ 9:41 am
If we already have “the most beautiful thing this side of heaven” (TLM), why do we waste time trying to improve the other form of the same rite? Ask for the TLM, promote the TLM, pray like the dickens, and you will put those individuals who have the intent of destroying the liturgy “out of business.” Through the Motu Proprio, our Holy Father has spoken personally to each of us. By following his directive, we can be a good example to all priests and bishops. Let us rejoice and be glad! Deo Gratias!
Comment by kenoshacath — 19 November 2009 @ 10:34 am
Ad mvhcpa

There is, of course, nothing doctrinally incorrect – nor did I claim so – with the assertion that Christ has died, risen, and will come again. It is actually a paraphrase of the Anamnesis of each EP (and thus superfluous, by the way). What is subversive is the context in which it is placed as explained in the Post of 17th November, which I made in response to Henry Edwards. Also involved were: mpm and catholicmidwest.

It would be at least ambiguous even if the acclamation run: “HAS come again”, because of the use of the third person singular. Quite pertinently, catholicmidwest commented: “It’s like talking about a person as though they weren’t in the room”.

As the central to the Mass is the mystery of transubstantiation/sacrifice made present on the altar, it is quite inappropriate to employ an acclamation that refers to something else, and place it immediately after the Consecration, instead of acclaiming the Presence itself.

Both the phrase: “Let us proclaim” and the use of the third person singular, naturally lead one to think that we are called to proclaim as mysteries the assertions articulated in the proclamations, and not the central Mystery present on the altar.

As for whether it is in the Latin text: http://www.usccb.org/romanmissal/examples.shtml

[I think it is bad form simply to interrupt and start talking about something that has very little to do with the topic at hand.]
Comment by Ogard — 19 November 2009 @ 10:37 am
Anyone else think the USCCB might benefit from meeting in a church rather than a hotel? Something about the Divine Presence in the Blessed Sacrament and images of Our Lord and the Saints starring down at them might help remind the bishops where their true duties lie.
Comment by Jonathan Bennett — 19 November 2009 @ 12:14 pm
The reason this is hilarious now is because Bishop Trautperson no longer has control.
Ten years ago this was not true. He had the NRSV all but sold. He still continues to wreak havoc in Erie, PA. We are forced to stand after receiving communion and most priests now omit the Confetior. Not to mention the millions in wreckovation.

Please, no one lose sight of the fact that MOST of our US Bishops are heretics!
They still collectively support Socialism, Obama and the party of death. Their documents hold no weight or truth and are doubles-speak incarnate.
Comment by thouart — 20 November 2009 @ 7:51 am

Comments RSS

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

What Does The Prayer Really Say?
W D T P R S

Recent Comments:

Calendar

Blogs by priests

How to subscribe

Some Blogs I Keep Track Of

Some useful documents

Useful WDTPRS References

What I Am Reading

What I have read not so recently

What I Have Recently Read

What I Listen To

Z STUFF

Buy Fr. Z a cup of coffee!

19 November 2009

In homage

12 Comments

What Does The Prayer Really Say? W D T P R S

Recent Comments:

Calendar

Blogs by priests

How to subscribe

Some Blogs I Keep Track Of

Some useful documents

Useful WDTPRS References

What I Am Reading

What I have read not so recently

What I Have Recently Read

What I Listen To

Z STUFF

Buy Fr. Z a cup of coffee!

19 November 2009

In homage

12 Comments

What Does The Prayer Really Say?
W D T P R S