The new missal

Heavens. The new missal is somewhat similar to the DR 1988/1989 timetable.

And who will pay for it?

Michael Gilchrist writes on the new Roman missal

He argues that the new translation is more true to the Latin.

Does language not evolve?

On the one hand Gilchrist argues for holding fast on words, their use and meaning. Yet Gichrist's use of English is faulty according to his own rules. He misuses the word 'presently'. No doubt he will argue it has evolved to the US meaning. Ah, so words can evolve. But when it comes to these men who know exactly what God wants, says and does, then we have no alternative but to listen to them. It really is as absurd as that. And of course most of them, no doubt, know exactly the tricks they play. The boardgame is in constant change. The tragedy is the people who listen and follow them in good faith.

The issue of the use of the word 'men' in the new English edition of the missal is nothing less than laughable.

It's a little like the poor bargaining power the Irish have when dealing with the IMF compared to the Germans.

The German word Maenner means men, the German word Menschen means people. No need to say that the German bishops got their way. They may use the euro but the Vatican well knows the power of the mighty German Mark. Did someone mention God?

Any chance we could ask the brave people in Tahrir Square to move to a new location in Europe, south of the Alps?