Garr. Grr. Rrr. He may be evil, but *you* are formally an accomplice to that same. 
Thanks, man.
"Make a note of the small print--that may be the only time I say that. When the memorial acclamation begins, the consecration has just been completed. Hence, Christ is present on the altar, and the acclamation is more than a little dissonant with that sublime fact."
A. Thank you for the kind plug. Getting people who read your blog come to mine though is like getting people who shop at Tiffany's to go on a spree at Sears.
Two. Thank you also for introducing me to Tom Fitzpatrick's site. It's a nice site, but he just said...most traditional and widely used of the memorial acclamations. My head just exploded. You were so spot on with your analysis it was a little freaky. When i first started dating my wife, that's one of the first things I said to her. I went on a rant about how Christ is already present and how all the acclamations point to his coming in the future. Yes, that's the sort of stuff I talked about on dates.
3rd. How's the computer hunt going?
4. There is no four.
Ah, so you did read it. Mwahahaha!!!
I have been bragging to friends that a lawyer now rates me as "deeply, profoundly evil." Most of them consider this a impressive accomplishment.
Just had one of those birthday things myself. You're not allowed to muse too loudly about feeling old, since I think we determined that I've collected a couple more of those than you have ... 
Sorry, Dale, but I agree with Tom. After all, Christ did ascend into heaven (where He constantly intercedes on our behalf) to finish fulfilling His mission on earth: redeeming humanity by atoning for its sin. If that statement didn't negate Christ's sacramental presence in the past, why should it now?
Consider this exerpt from a post by a correspondent named Christine on Amy Welborn's blog:
"Here's the part that galls me: Trautman says that the former acclamation was 'well received and much loved by the Catholic faithful' but is theologically incorrect because it does not 'speak of the people's participation in the liturgy.' I completely understand the point he is making. But then he goes on to say 'Will the farmer in Dubuque understand that? No, but the theologians will.'" (emphasis mine)
We are not a church of theologians (thank God, or else we'd all be apostates!). We are a church of people who have been redeemed by Christ. This nonsense about farmers in Dubuque merely reflects the condescending attitude the bishops have toward the people they claim to serve. We're nothing but country bumpkins who must be "enlightened" by our "sophisticated" superiors. Balderdash times 1,000! These enlightened sophiticates give us sentimental flummery, psychobabble and intellectual fashion from the pulpit instead of the Gospel. Who gives two micrograms of dessicated mouse excrement for what they think?
I'm sorry Mr. D'Hippolito (I can't imagine calling a man with such an impressive last name "Joe") but I was agreeing with Dale.
Once I grew in the faith a bit more, I found the whole memorial acclamation part of the New Mass trite, silly, and somewhat disrespectful to the miracle which just occurred on the altar.
By my calculations Bishop Trautman will get one other thing right sometime. Just like a stopped clock.
I never read his statement, he really busted out "a farmer in Dubuque"? That's strong. He should be proud of himself for that one.
The debate about the "Christ is dead .." acclamation must be seen in the context of the Authentic Liturgy instructions from the Holy See: the ICEL had used a completely different acclamation, not even part of the Latin original. They were supposed to follow the text and translate the original into English. They didn't. Bishop Trautmann is using the wide acceptance of this one popular invented acclamation as a wedge to allow further "liberal" theologizing translations. If he is allowed to win this one then they can take further little steps to justify every reduction they made from the original.
Wait. Trautmann wants to do away with the innovation not found in the Latin texts and Mr. Phillips thinks his motive is to use this as a wedge to allow even further innovations?
I don't understand how this makes sense. Can someone explain?
Der Kommisar geht um...
Alles klar, Herr Kommisar?
Like someone said, it lends more gravitas than "Tom" or even "Donegal Tom". Besides, my wife won't call me it at home.
Let me clarify. When I say "most traditional" I really should have said, "used consistently since the very beginning of the 1970 Missal." I'm 40 and grew up with that particular acclamation used almost exclusively in my parish for the first 20 years of my church-going life.
But as I said, if you want to eliminate the problem of the memorial acclamation, just head on over to your local Indult Mass, where you won't have to deal with it.
Let me clarify. When I say "most traditional" I really should have said, "used consistently since the very beginning of the 1970 Missal.
I understood how you meant it. It just hurt my head is all.
But as I said, if you want to eliminate the problem of the memorial acclamation, just head on over to your local Indult Mass, where you won't have to deal with it.
We do. It give me much more time as my secret identity, and much less as "Likes to Fight Guy".
...ack!... must not... read... sample chapters!... savoring the... anticipation!!...
::duct taping self frantically to chair and twitching severely::
Of course, as soon as THE PROTECTOR'S WAR is out, I'll be putting up sample chapters from A MEETING AT CORVALLIS, the last in the trilogy... 8-).
Commenting by HaloScan
