TRIUMPHALIST--YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT? I believe that the Catholic Church was founded by Christ, on his Apostles, especially Peter, the first Pope. I believe in the teachings of the Ecumenical councils, I revere the Fathers of the Church, and I am an unapologetic Ultramontane Catholic. If you don't like it, too bad.
"I'VE HAD ENOUGH OF EXHORTATIONS TO SILENT! CRY OUR WITH A HUNDRED THOUSAND TONGUES. I SEE THE WORLD IS ROTTEN BECAUSE OF SILENCE."--St. Catherine of Sienna
Please, do vote! It will make me feel relevant and included into the ever changing community and pluriform expression of cultural identity that is the Blogosphere, thereby empowering my attempt to navigate the human pilgrimage with integrity, honesty and solidarity!
I am getting really excited about this, and I know that some of the folks who read my stuff are wondering why exactly, I am so happy about it.
Well, here's a quick look: I'll compare the old translation with the new. Look at the "Opening Prayer"--once again given it's proper name of The Collect in the new translation, as the "Sacramentary" has once again been termed The Roman Missal--for the First Sunday of Advent.
All-powerful God, increase our strength of will for doing good that Christ may find an eager welcome at his coming and call us to his side in the kingdom of heaven, where he lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.
Grant your faithful, we pray, Almighty God, the resolve to run forth to meet your Christ with righteous deeds at his coming, so that gathered at his right hand they may be worthy to posses the heavenly kingdom. Through Our lord Jesus Christ, your son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit one God for ever and ever.
As i have compared the texts of the various propers to the old, I find much more meat to them! The imagery is richer by far. Other people, brighter than me, have pointed out that the Roman liturgy is rich in scriptural allusions, and that these are much clearer in the new translation, so I'm not going into that. But I can't help but notice that the more exact rendering requires a more full and actual listening on the part of the congregation.
It's been objected that the new translation is somewhat awkward. Certainly it doesn't scan nearly as well when you read it silently. But try this, read it once through silently, then read it a second time out loud. The second reading will work quite well! The cadence could be better, but it is actually rather reminiscent of the Older versions of the Book of Common Prayer, which were quite exact translations of the Latin prayers of the Gregorian Liturgy.
I think that this will be well received, except among those who don't want the Catholic Religion to be a religion so much as a socio-political identity.
Well, the poll is closed and 52% of respondents think i should ask for ammo, while 28% think I should ask for teeth. 12% think I should ask for a puppy, and 8% are in favor of me requesting long johns.
Nobody thought I should ask for socks, music DVDs or tools.
One Pot! An Angus chuck roast as the base. I stacked wedged potatoes around the sides of my crock pot, lightly salted and peppered the roast and put it in the middle, with two strips of bacon crossed on it. Then I filled the space with sliced carrots, celery and red bell pepper, seasoned it with thyme, rosemary, basil and garlic salt, and topped the whole thing with packaged vegetable broth (boiling), and set it aside to slow cook until dinner.
Sunday, the Solemnity of Christ the King, is the last time we will here the current Translation of the Mass. This is the only translation of the mass I have ever heard. I remember the first time I went to Mass, and it bowled me over. I was coming from a tradition of old school Protestantism. The Church we attended was an independent Church, with it's roots in Methodism, Calvinism and "The Fundamentals". (I know that that seem nearly contradictory, but such theological mish-mash groups exist in American protestantism.) From apace with a liturgy that consisted of an outline, and extemporaneous prayers and often practices it seemed so majestic, reverent and mystical that I was thrown for a loop.
So the 1970 Translation of the Pauline Missal showed me that there were better, more traditional and more beautiful ways to worship. Of course, Catholics at that time were still quiet in Church before Mass, still knelt to receive Holy Communion and were still singing hymns that were about God, not ourselves and our politics and gender issues. I started reading and ended up Catholic. The old translation helped to lead me to the Church.
It's the only one I've ever known. And I am delighted that it's going the way of the buggy whip. I can hardly wait until it's gone!
You see, I didn't stop reading after I was received into the Church. And I noticed that it was very bland, compared to the old translations of the Mass in the 1962 hand missals. And my Latin, though not very good at all, let me see that the translation didn't match very well. Not only that, but I had the spectacle of the erosion of Liturgy that occurred almost daily before the eyes of the faithful.
Having read the new translation, having though about it beyond the changes to the peoples responses I am very grateful that the Holy Spirit has stirred up the Hierarchy to cause this, and that we will have language that is more suited to adult worship, that seeks to reclaim the sense that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a participation in the Heavenly Liturgy, is a sacrifice, is in fact a miracle that is accessible to us whenever we wish to seek it out. This new translation is a good starting place for the Reform of the Renewal in the Anglosphere. I can hardly wait for the First Sunday of Advent.
I but I will be sure to thank Our Lord for the old translation as well. As flawed as it was, it showed me that God didn't leave us hanging with a difficult book and no real way to contact him, with only the subjective and uncertain criteria of inner experience to let us know he is with us, loves us cares for us and want's us to go to heaven.
FOLK MUSIC: Ok, I actually like some kinds of folk music, especially Romanian singing, English, Irish and Scots folk, the songs of Sub-Saharan Africa. But that's not what I'm talking bout. I'm talking about modern American Folk Music. Since the thirties at least, with Woodie Guthrie and his lefty propaganda songs, "Modern American Folk" seems very detached from the folk they're singing about.
I guess the place to start is with the Folklorists perennial question: first, one has to decide if there is a "folk" behind the item to be considered. Of Course, a professional Folklorist always answers "yes" to this question because, after all, if she answers no she can't study the item, and so gets no grant money. Since the professionals would say that there is a "folk" behind the "folk music" then the next question is, why do we not have an ethnography of them, at the very least?
I am not a trained ethnographer, but that's not a problem. The first ethnographers weren't either. So let me give a thumb nail description of the "folk" behind modern folk music. We will call them "Folkies" in order to have a name for this newly described "tribe".
First, Folkies are divided into moieties. On moiety is composed overwhelmingly of white people who reside in the upper 40% economic bracket, and who identify with an idealized and romanticized impoverished, melancholy and oppressed image of either an urban lumpen proletariat or an idealized impoverished, melancholy and oppressed rural agrarian or extraction industry laboring class, both of which occasionally seek solace in excess drink or forbidden love. They immerse themselves in what they imagine the aspirations and grievances of these two fictional fantasy/ahistorical constructs as a way of dealing with their inability to understand their own dissatisfaction with a life of privilege unknown to the vast majority of the human species. The other moiety is composed overwhelmngly of white people who reside int he upper 40% economic bracket who compose, perform (often very badly) songs in which they expound upon what they imagine the grievances and aspirations of an idealized and romanticized impoverished, melancholy and oppressed rural laboring class or urban lumpen proletariat should be, if only these two classes would recognize their own self interest and accept the leadership of the upper 40% bracket white people with liberal arts or law degrees who don't know how to do anything.
Both moieties point to their own modest economic circumstance ans a credential, while omitting the fact that they're broke because they got a liberal arts or law degree in an economy that has a glut of them, or flunked out of college because of smoking too much dope and spending too much time trying to emulate Saul Alinski. Nor will they admit that they are performing a form of niche music whose only real niche is among underachieving scions of upper middle and upper class families who raise children poorly, and is commercially nonviable.
Musicologists can examine the actual form and content of the music produced by these moieties of the Folkies, simply by going to the nearest "Occupy" camp and listening to the pathetic attempts of these two alienated groups--which often seem to suffer from Extended Adolescence Syndrome and Oppositional Defiant Disorder--to sing the heart and soul of the American Working Class, which by and large despises them.
Mean while, American Working Class concerns and aspirations are daily sung by Country and Western performers, and some Rock/Pop performers. (Rap expounds upon the aspirations and concerns of the urban criminal class, and the wanna be white suburban kids who wish they were urban criminals, so they would no why they are so dissatisfied with their lives.) Folkies will never admit to this.
I just saw an add for the nightly news, with the reporter chick just exuding crises, telling us to tune in to find out what a "local animal rescue group is facing if they don't find $10,000 by Tuesday."
Let me emphatically clear: I don't give a rat's ass what they are facing, and they shouldn't get the $10,000 dollars!
Was that clear enough? No? Let me repeat it. I don't give a rat's ass about animal rescue. Round them up, and put them to sleep. End of story. Especially in the Louisville Metro.
The hypocritical liberals in this town have fought every single thing for Human Rescue that has been proposed, They have written the zoning ordinances so that it's actually illegal to open a homeless shelter here. I cannot walk downtown, which I do three times a week, without encountering not one, not two, but dozens of homeless people. Homeless. People. People with no where to go, little to eat, no place that's safe. And most of them are mentally ill. Yet the news people, who seldom reports on them, is all worried about animals!
I got news for you clownish cartoons of journalists--a rat is not a pig, a pig is not a dog, and a dog is not a boy. Until there is enough mercy in this town to recognize the unique worth of human beings, and do something for the large number of mentally ill who are homeless and on our streets, I don't give a rat's ass about animals. I can't--they were not made in the image and likeness of God, and although we shouldn't be cruel to them, we have a mandate from Our Lord to feed, clothe, give drink to and treat the least among us like they were Christ. He said whatsoever we do to the least of our brothers, we do also to him. And around here we give more and care more about dogs than we do about people.
We are an evil, hateful and perverse race, that cares more for stray cats than for sick, mentally ill, addicted and impoverished people. If you give money to an animal shelter, and there are homeless hungry people in your area, you just stole food, shelter clothing and aid from Jesus.
If you don't like this plain speech, if you think I'm harsh, if it makes you feel bad, then look in the eyes of the next derelict you see, and tell him it's more important to care for a dog, than him. Because that's the choice you've made. Live with it, but don't tell me I'm being harsh, or insensitive, or that they're there through their own choices--just admit that you'd rather care for a dog, than a human. That animals are a better use of your "charity" than the person you try so hard to ignore.