400 Irish priests claim new Mass translation is ‘elitist and sexist’
#31
(02-06-2011, 12:34 AM)spartacus Wrote:
(02-05-2011, 09:42 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-05-2011, 09:18 PM)justlurking Wrote: no soy digno de que entres en mi casa pero una palabra tuya bastará para sanarme

A better translation from the original Latin would be:

"Señor, yo no soy digno de que entres en mi techo (o morada), mas dí una sola palabra y mi alma será salva."

I think that "bajo" (under) mi techo, would be a better translation, than "en" (in, or on, maybe), no?

Yes, you're correct.
Reply
#32
(02-06-2011, 03:00 AM)Joshua Wrote:
Bakuryokuso Wrote:He's upset about that because he figures Jesus used a cup not a chalice and it's not fair to impose a new translation on the English but not the French.

Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich gives a detailed account of the chalice used in the Last Supper in her book, The Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ. In it she describes the chalice as being of several interconnected parts (if I recall correctly) with two gilded handles, various precious materials and is supposed to have originally belonged to Noah.

More than likely it was not the cliche dusty earthenware goblet we are so used to seeing. 

as i said in an earlier post, the Douay-Rheims says Jesus used a chalice.

that's more authoritative than a visionary's account. even if she gave a detailed description of the chalice in her vision.  no disrespect to her, but the Gospels in the D-R saying "chalice" should settle the matter, and apparently did for those who made changes to the Missal.


Reply
#33
(02-04-2011, 11:14 PM)dymphna17 Wrote:
(02-04-2011, 09:54 PM)CrusaderKing Wrote: God forbid that people might have to look up words they may not understand in a dictionary.

That might actually lead them to the true Faith!  :o  Burn the dictionaries!! :laughing:

You see the monks using French dictionaries in the documentary Into Great Silence
Reply
#34
Not to be callous, but would the average churchgoer even notice that there were changes? And if so, wouldn't they just chalk it up to the priest's poetic license?
Reply
#35
(02-04-2011, 11:31 PM)Bearded Man Wrote: I didn't know there were even 400 priests left in Ireland...

There are around 700 in the Archdiocese of Dublin alone! :)
Reply
#36
(02-07-2011, 04:02 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(02-04-2011, 11:31 PM)Bearded Man Wrote: I didn't know there were even 400 priests left in Ireland...

There are around 700 in the Archdiocese of Dublin alone! :)

Whoa! That's better than I thought! I guess I shouldn't rely on my insane atheist uncle in Cork for my Catholic news...  ;D
Reply
#37
(02-07-2011, 04:33 PM)Bearded Man Wrote:
(02-07-2011, 04:02 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(02-04-2011, 11:31 PM)Bearded Man Wrote: I didn't know there were even 400 priests left in Ireland...

There are around 700 in the Archdiocese of Dublin alone! :)

Whoa! That's better than I thought! I guess I shouldn't rely on my insane atheist uncle in Cork for my Catholic news...  ;D

Countrywide, there are about 4,500, but unless they start getting vocations, they're in trouble. In '07 160 priests died while only nine were ordained! :pray: :(
Reply
#38
Revixit Wrote:as i said in an earlier post, the Douay-Rheims says Jesus used a chalice.

that's more authoritative than a visionary's account. even if she gave a detailed description of the chalice in her vision.  no disrespect to her, but the Gospels in the D-R saying "chalice" should settle the matter, and apparently did for those who made changes to the Missal.

Yes, Revixit, I am aware of all of that. I wasn't touting Emmerich's account to be the definitive evidence. I simply found the visionary's account of our Lord's chalice to be highly interesting and somewhat relevant to the chalice discussion.
Reply
#39
(02-07-2011, 12:48 AM)Revixit Wrote:
(02-06-2011, 03:00 AM)Joshua Wrote:
Bakuryokuso Wrote:He's upset about that because he figures Jesus used a cup not a chalice and it's not fair to impose a new translation on the English but not the French.

Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich gives a detailed account of the chalice used in the Last Supper in her book, The Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ. In it she describes the chalice as being of several interconnected parts (if I recall correctly) with two gilded handles, various precious materials and is supposed to have originally belonged to Noah.

More than likely it was not the cliche dusty earthenware goblet we are so used to seeing. 

as i said in an earlier post, the Douay-Rheims says Jesus used a chalice.

that's more authoritative than a visionary's account. even if she gave a detailed description of the chalice in her vision.  no disrespect to her, but the Gospels in the D-R saying "chalice" should settle the matter, and apparently did for those who made changes to the Missal.

There's also a tradition that says the chalice used at the Last Supper was the golden gift given to Jesus by the Magi. 
Reply
#40
Quote:' being changed to 'chalice,'  the Douay-Rheims has Jesus using a chalice, so it's more correct and priests need to know this and point it out to stop some of the griping.  other Catholic Bibles may say 'cup,' but priests can still state that the original English translation of the Vulgate done by Catholics says 'chalice.'

And yet every single parishioner at my parish refers to the Chalice as ... the Chalice.  No one ever refers to it as "the cup" unless they're not Catholic -- in fact that's a pretty good way to tell who is and who is not Catholic.   The only others ones are little kids who may not have had their First Communion preparation.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)