Read the Black, Do the Red...

Just some ranting about just the "Read the Black"...

25 April 2007 (Wed) was the feast of St Mark the Evangelist. I went for Mass in the evening. Since a more unique Preface for used, I decided to flip to the correct page in my daily missal. The Preface of Apostles II was used, as dictated by the Diocesean Ordo. But...

Priest: ... You founded your Church on the apostles to stand firm forever as the sign on earth of your infinite holiness and as the living gospel for all (extended pause) men and women to hear...

What is written in the valid vernacular English translation of the Roman Missal is "and as a living gospel for all men to hear". Granted that it sounds alright in the literal sense, the prayers in the Mass a not just supposed to sound alright. They are supposed to follow exactly what is in the missal, not come up something else. Some people may say that such is so restrictive and legalistic. It is said that the Mass is one and the same no matter where one attends Mass at. In terms of an external and audible sign there is a difference between hearing ""and as a living gospel for all men to hear" and "and as the living gospel for all men and women to hear". One is straight from the Missal, the other is the insistence on the use of inclusive language. In short, inclusive language detracts from the Sacred Traditions that have been handed down to us from the Apostles. The word 'men' refers to the male gender as well as both genders at the same time, why the need to insist that 'men' only refers to the male gender and insist that women are excluded unless the word 'women' is used when they really are not. On the level of inclusive language being the need to represent both genders "The Church is the Bride of Christ" would need to be changed to "The Church is the Bride and Bridegroom of Christ". But oops Christ is male, not some gender neutral entity.


27 April 2007 (Fri) was just a normal weekday Mass in Easter, but oh my...

Priest: Pray my brothers and sisters that our offering of bread and wine may be acceptable...

Huh? In the Roman Missal it 'sacrifice'. Is it so hard to verbalise 'sacrifice'? Did 'sacrifice' suddenly become a vulgarity? Or is it just that the Mass being a Holy Sacrifice is just too uncomfortable of a Dogma? Granted that the current Offertory Prayers leave much to be desired, be it in Latin or the vernacular, the Orate Fratres specifically still uses 'sacrificium' and it doesn't take a genius to equate 'sacrificium' to 'sacrifice'.



During the time of Pope John Paul II, the instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum was release in 2004. On these two specific instances, referring to No 59 would be appropriate "The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy." If the respect due to Pope John Paul II is more than just lip service, perhaps this very simple instruction would be followed.