Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: The New English Liturgy- A Cleaner Translation of a Protestantized Rite  (Read 4073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The New English Liturgy- A Cleaner Translation of a Protestantized Rite
« Reply #30 on: December 06, 2011, 12:09:10 AM »
I recently received this email which has some bearing on this topic, and which I share with you:

From Mumbai, India:

Welcoming the New Revised Roman Missal (T.E. [The Examiner, Mumbai ed.] November 26), Cardinal Oswald Gracias [of Mumbai] tells that it is thrilling that many of the revised texts now go back to 1000 years and beyond, to what was said by St. Francis of Assisi and other saints.

 

The Normative Roman Missal of Paul VI, issued first in Latin in 1969, remains untouched and the revised texts cited by Cardinal Gracias are only from the Ordinary of the Mass, which were common to the predecessor Latin Missals as well, as re-translated “formally” into English.

 

But a novelty in the Paul VI Missal of 1969, which  remains untouched in both the Latin and revised English versions, is the “offertory” or Preparation of the Gifts. Careful research carried out by Craig Heimbichner, a convert and recognized expert on Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and the occult, who is reachable at Catholic Family News, USA, has written: “A modern myth is that this "Jєωιѕн table blessing" has its roots in worship from the time of Ezra. Searching the Bible should reveal that this story is absent from the pages of Holy Writ. Where, then, does it originate? The Jєωιѕн Encyclopedia  (published 1901-1906, consisting of twelve volumes) tells us, in its article on Benedictions, that this story of the origin of "blessings" in Judaism is a "rabbinical tradition" in the тαℓмυd itself, ---in Berakoth 33a,” and he continues later: “And it is from this false religion, premised on the rejection of Jesus, that the replacement of the Offertory was culled.”  

 

Whether the saints cited by Cardinal Oswald Gracias would have used such a missal is indeed questionable.  

 

John Menezes
7 Esperanca, S. Bhagatsingh Road, Mumbai 400 001; Tel: 2202 5249.

 

The New English Liturgy- A Cleaner Translation of a Protestantized Rite
« Reply #31 on: December 06, 2011, 04:29:21 AM »
Quote from: pax
Quote from: Roman Catholic
Hey Pax you wrote:

If the Mass of Pope Paul VI is invalid then please state the reasons why.

Did you miss the following, or is it too long for your attention span?...


Yes. It is too long for my attention span.

Perhaps you could explain it to me in simpler language.

Thanks.


No language would be simple enough for you. You have rejected it already.


Offline pax

The New English Liturgy- A Cleaner Translation of a Protestantized Rite
« Reply #32 on: December 06, 2011, 07:07:42 AM »
Quote from: Roman Catholic
Quote from: pax
Quote from: Roman Catholic
Hey Pax you wrote:

If the Mass of Pope Paul VI is invalid then please state the reasons why.

Did you miss the following, or is it too long for your attention span?...


Yes. It is too long for my attention span.

Perhaps you could explain it to me in simpler language.

Thanks.


No language would be simple enough for you. You have rejected it already.


True. I reject it for the same reasons I reject dissertations from Protestants. I do, however, accept the critique from Cardinal Ottaviani.

Offline pax

The New English Liturgy- A Cleaner Translation of a Protestantized Rite
« Reply #33 on: December 06, 2011, 07:11:09 AM »
Quote from: AJNC
I recently received this email which has some bearing on this topic, and which I share with you:

From Mumbai, India:

Welcoming the New Revised Roman Missal (T.E. [The Examiner, Mumbai ed.] November 26), Cardinal Oswald Gracias [of Mumbai] tells that it is thrilling that many of the revised texts now go back to 1000 years and beyond, to what was said by St. Francis of Assisi and other saints.

 

The Normative Roman Missal of Paul VI, issued first in Latin in 1969, remains untouched and the revised texts cited by Cardinal Gracias are only from the Ordinary of the Mass, which were common to the predecessor Latin Missals as well, as re-translated “formally” into English.

 

But a novelty in the Paul VI Missal of 1969, which  remains untouched in both the Latin and revised English versions, is the “offertory” or Preparation of the Gifts. Careful research carried out by Craig Heimbichner, a convert and recognized expert on Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and the occult, who is reachable at Catholic Family News, USA, has written: “A modern myth is that this "Jєωιѕн table blessing" has its roots in worship from the time of Ezra. Searching the Bible should reveal that this story is absent from the pages of Holy Writ. Where, then, does it originate? The Jєωιѕн Encyclopedia  (published 1901-1906, consisting of twelve volumes) tells us, in its article on Benedictions, that this story of the origin of "blessings" in Judaism is a "rabbinical tradition" in the тαℓмυd itself, ---in Berakoth 33a,” and he continues later: “And it is from this false religion, premised on the rejection of Jesus, that the replacement of the Offertory was culled.”  

 

Whether the saints cited by Cardinal Oswald Gracias would have used such a missal is indeed questionable.  

 

John Menezes
7 Esperanca, S. Bhagatsingh Road, Mumbai 400 001; Tel: 2202 5249.

 


That is certainly something has always troubled me. Why the Pope chose to insert a prayer in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that dates back to medieval rabbinical judaism is beyond my ability to comprehend. Nonetheless, I do not see anything in the words of the prayers themselves that are heretical.

The New English Liturgy- A Cleaner Translation of a Protestantized Rite
« Reply #34 on: December 06, 2011, 07:23:04 PM »
Quote from: pax
Quote from: Roman Catholic
Quote from: pax
Quote from: Roman Catholic
Hey Pax you wrote:

If the Mass of Pope Paul VI is invalid then please state the reasons why.

Did you miss the following, or is it too long for your attention span?...


Yes. It is too long for my attention span.

Perhaps you could explain it to me in simpler language.

Thanks.


No language would be simple enough for you. You have rejected it already.


True. I reject it for the same reasons I reject dissertations from Protestants. I do, however, accept the critique from Cardinal Ottaviani.


Why do waste time and attempt to get others to waste their time by requesting they post things that you know you won't read?