Roman Missal[1]

 

I. Introduction

Harvard University Press just published Volume V of the Dictionary of American Regional English.[2]  This means that American English is rich in nuance.  By refusing to use that richness, the 2011 illiterate Missal results in gibberish.

Some idioms come with rough-hewn vigor, much like ancient Latin when it was first set down.  For example, to explain one idiom with another, to “speak the word with the bark on it” means to “tell the unvarnished truth,” in Appalachia.  Personal Notes does try to speak the word with the bark on it.  Sadly, the illiterate 2011 Missal tramples standard American English. 

In her public apparition March 28 at Holy Love Ministries:  Maranatha Spring and Shrine, in North Ridgeville, Ohio, Saint Catherine of Siena depicts the relationship between Trust and Holy Love as the photosynthesis between the sun and a flower.[3]  Accepting truth, especially “truth with the bark on it,” takes trust.  The faithful can learn what that means, in the context of Church life, from Galileo.

Paula Findlen takes up two new books, Galileo by John L. Heilbron and Galileo:  Watcher of the Skies by David Wootton.  Findlen concludes, “I am inclined to believe that people in search of the truth, as Galileo surely was, are not especially good at playing by the rules.  Whether this makes one an unbeliever, however is a different matter.”[4]  Personal Notes is about trying to pray at Sunday Mass in the context of truth.

Words are important, because they control reality.  As an historian, I used to tell my students that anything I said was important, because of the ten thousand other things I might have said on the same topic.  As their professor, I was filtering the facts and giving them meaning.  The English teacher, Stanley Fish puts it this way, “The goal is to communicate forcefully whatever perspective or emphasis or hierarchy of concerns attaches to your present purposes.”[5]  Sadly, the hierarchy of concerns in the 2011 Missal appears to focus on the political power of the Holy See, rather than empowering the Faithful to communicate with their God.

John Calvin (1509-1564) had it right when he wrote, “the gospel is like a scepter, by which Christ subdues all people and rules them for himself.”[6]  For the Gospel to have a chance to communicate in the United States of America, the Church needs to present the Gospel in standard American English.  Personal Notes is a first step in that direction.

 

II. Prayer before reading Sacred Scripture (Collect)

 

A. Missal:      O God, who raised up Saint John the Baptist to make ready a nation fit for Christ the Lord, give your people, we pray, the grace of spiritual joys and direct the hearts of all the faithful into the way of salvation and peace.  Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God for ever [sic] and ever.

 

B. Italian Latin: Deus, qui beátum Ioánnem Baptístam suscitásti, ut perféctam plebem Christo Dómino praeparáret, da pópulis tuis spiritálium grátiam gaudiórum, et ómnium fidélium mentes dírige in viam salútis et pacis.  Per Dóminum. 

 

To make the Revised Prayers easier to find, Personal Notes repeats them on the last page.  Only the heartiest souls will want to plow through the preceding Appendix (see the heading on page 5/16), week after week, after identifying more and more repetitious nonsense.

 

C. Revised:   Saint John the Baptist prepared the Faithful for the Lord, not only Israel, but also the Gentiles.  Heavenly Father, enable us to rejoice in your salvation and peace.  We ask this through our Lord, Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, forever.

D. Comment: The Appendix explains the single-spaced material in bold print.

 

III. Prayer after Communion

 

A. Missal:      Having feasted at the banquet of the heavenly Lamb, we pray, O Lord, that, finding joy in the nativity of Saint John the Baptist, your Church may know as the author of her rebirth the Christ whose coming John foretold.  Who lives and reigns for [sic] ever and ever. 

 

B. Italian Latin:  Caeléstis Agni convívio refécti, quaesumus, Dómine, ut Ecclésia tua, sumens de beáti Ioánnis Baptístae generatióne laetítiam, quem ille praenuntiávit ventúrum, suae regeneratiónis cognóscat auctórem.  Qui vivit et regnat in saecula saeculórum. 

 

C. Revised:   Because the Eucharist has nourished your souls, praise God for Saint John the Baptist, who led the way to Jesus.  Today you celebrate his birthday.  John the Baptist explained that Jesus was the Lamb of God, whom you should follow to heaven.  Pray for the Church to have a rebirth.  Pray with Jesus who lives and reigns with you forever.

 

V. ICEL

 

Prayer before reading Sacred Scripture (Collect)

ICEL:            Just and gracious God, who raised up blessed John the Baptist to prepare a holy people for Christ the Lord, give to your Church gladness of spirit and guide the hearts of all the faithful along the path of salvation and peace. 

 

We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God for ever [sic] and ever.

 

Prayer after Communion

ICEL:            Lord God, your Church has been renewed at the table of the Lamb.  As we rejoice at the birth of John the Baptist, grant that we may acknowledge as author of our rebirth the Christ whose coming John foretold.  We ask this in the name of Jesus, the Lord. 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

A note to readers:  Personal Notes is uploaded to the internet at http://www.western-civilization.com/CBQ/Personal%20Notes/Personal%20Notes.htm and otherwise distributed as much as three months in advance.  When the time comes for actual use, two more otherwise unannounced revisions take place.  The first revision occurs a week before Personal Notes is presented to http://www.jamesriverjournal.com/  A second revision takes place after the particular Mass in question.  These latter two revisions are uploaded to http://www.western-civilization.com/CBQ/Personal%20Notes/Personal%20Notes.htm as they occur.

 

With the new Missal, the Roman Catholic Church is showing for what and how to pray.  According to standard American English, the prayers are so difficult to understand that I refer to the “illiterate 2011 Missal.”  The revised prayers are my paraphrases of the Bible-babble in the Missal into standard American English as heard in such venues as EWTN (Eternal Word Television Network), the Weather Channel, and the evening news.

 

The complete reference for this Sunday is:  n.a., The Roman Missal:  Renewed by Decree of the Most Holy Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, Promulgated by Authority of Pope Paul VI and Revised at the Direction of Pope John Paul II:  English Translation According to the Third Typical Edition:  For Use in the Dioceses of the United States of America:  Approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Confirmed by the Apostolic See (Washington, DC [sic]: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011) 878.

 

James Dallen, a retired diocesan priest[7] and emeritus professor of religious studies at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington, has written an article that sheds light on the 2011 Missal.  Dallen observes that an institutional Church model prioritizes preserving the Church institution, rather than the Gospel, for which the Church exists.  He asks the question, “What Kind of Ecclesiology?”[8]  His answer is that higher clergy, with an untenable and dysfunctional model of the Church as an institution, imposed the 2011 Missal on the United States and elsewhere. 

Long-time readers may have noted that Personal Notes rarely uses exclamation marks.  The reason is an academic preference for scholarship, rather than emotion.  When a scholar like Dallen gets emotional, however, Personal Notes pays attention.  In “What Kind of Ecclesiology?”  Dallen avoids exclamation points, until he reaches page 27/36.  With Dallen, Personal Notes is upset with for many versus for all; with priests receiving communion for and in place of the people; with the Vatican Holy See not following its own Liturgiam authenticam rules of “translation;”  and with substituting uniformity for Christian unity.

 

Though `many’ and `all’ contrast in meaning in English, linguists and exegetes say that is the not case in Aramaic or Hebrew.  Roman [Vatican Apostolic Holy See] authorities say otherwise and make explaining that `for many’ really means `for all’ the task of catechesis.  Surely it would have been better if that had been reversed!  It will be more difficult to convince people that what they hear means something entirely different.  Liturgy and life are once more divorced.

 

Many promotes the institutional Church at the expense of the Gospel, for all.

 

The next exclamation point happens on page 30/36.

 

A few points indicate its [General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM)] perspective.  GIRM says little about the Eucharist in relation to ecclesial communion.  It says little about the significance of sacramental communion.  Its incomplete theology of Eucharistic sacrifice centers almost solely on the priest.  This Counter-Reformation clerical emphasis is central in GIRM and the new English translation reinforces it.  This affects the theology of Eucharistic and ecclesial communion and the role of the assembly, all of which are crucial to postconciliar reforms.  It reminds us that we are not that far removed from the time when the priest “said” Mass alone and he received communion for and in place of the people!

 

Emphasis on institutional priorities comes at the expense of the rest of the Faithful.

 

The next exclamation point comes at page 32/36.

 

 . . A clerical perspective often overshadows the pastoral and the role of central authority is overemphasized.  The consequence is to downplay the role of the assembled community and the local Church.  The official English translation accentuates these attitudes beyond what is in the Latin—curiously, the requirement of literal translation (“formal correspondence”) is not always observed!

 

Institutional emphasis on Latin, which the Faithful do not understand, deemphasizes standard American English, which the Faithful do understand.

 

The final exclamation point comes at page 34/36.

 

Two traditional adages support making changes of this [minimal, as in the revised prayers here?] type.  Even when the institutional [Church] model was dominant, an adage for interpreting canon law said de minimis non curat lex:  law is not concerned with trivial matters.  In practice, of course, the passion for uniformity regarded little as trivial.  Someone once tried to calculate the stupendous number of mortal sins that a priest could commit praying the breviary!  Despite that unfortunate precedent, generally mortal sin presumes grievous matter and violating the bonds of communion in liturgy presumes a substantial change of the expected texts.

 

The juridical Church downplays the loving Church of the Gospels.   Personal Notes brings concerns and emotions similar to Dallen to the illiterate 2011 Missal.  The difference is that the juridical Church downplays while Personal Notes emphasizes the loving Church of the Gospels.

 

 


 

 

 

Collect is the technical term for Prayer before reading Sacred Scripture.

 

Misuse of interjections, such as we pray, contributes to the conglomeration of meaninglessness and is very confusing to listeners.  The Little, Brown Handbook gives some examples, hey, oh, darn, wow.  An interjection is “A word standing by itself or inserted in a construction to exclaim or command attention.”  A forceful interjection is set off with an exclamation point, a mild interjection with a comma.  The Missal only uses mild interjections and that is a cause of discombobulating.[9] 

 

Dallen explains,[10]

 

The [Missal] language is elitist . . .  Self-deprecating and deferential language entered the liturgy in the fourth through sixth centuries.  To a great extent this copied the language of the imperial court, where petitioners and even officials groveled at the emperor’s feet and were expected to kiss his foot.  Much of this was translated in a more straightforward manner in the old ICEL translation.  The new one restores it—“be pleased to,” “listen graciously to,” and “we pray, O Lord, that you bid”—to avoid seeming to tell God what to do.  The Lord’s Prayer should presumably be rewritten to avoid such direct language as “give us this day,” “forgive,” “lead us not,” and “deliver us.”

 

The we pray of the English Collect is not in the Latin.

 

Dallen points out that none of the heads of the Congregation of Divine Worship were fluent in English.[11]  I am not sure what Dallen means by fluent.  When I spoke with Cardinal Paul Augustin Mayer, O.S.B. in 2000 we seemed to have no trouble communicating in English.  Admittedly, the first language for Mayer was German. 

 

Someone like Mayer may have had such a difficulty, which I would have overlooked, as I reached out to him.  For example, I overlook the street sign that warns, “Caution:  Bridge may freeze,” rather than “. . .  might freeze.”

 

Might versus may in the Missal:  might connotes ability, wish, or desire;[12] may connotes permission.  According to the Dictionary, may is used in auxiliary function to express a wish or desire especially in prayer, imprecation, or benediction <may he reign in health> <may they all be damned> <may the best man win>.  I think might sounds better, because the faithful are expressing a desire, rather than asking for permission.  The Little, Brown Handbook explains, “the helping verbs of standard American English may be problematic if you are used to speaking another language or dialect.”[13]

 

The Latin does not capitalize beátum, but the Missal does capitalize Saint.  See page 14, below.  Since the Faithful will not hear the difference between an upper and lower case word, there is no reason to stray from the Latin, except, perhaps, to show the arrogance of the translator in the face of anyone objecting to the illiterate 2011 Missal.  The revision takes into account the hearing of the faithful.

 

Dallen comments,[14]

 

Unfortunately, catechesis is also needed to explain that what we hear at worship is not what we really mean.  Unfamiliar words can be misleading.  Grammar and style intended more for the eye and ear can be misheard or misunderstood or ignored. . . .  Even more dangerously, language communicates attitudes and outlooks at a level deeper than the surface meaning of words. . . .The new translation (and the hype surrounding it) presents views on Church, tradition, unity, Eucharist, priesthood, laity, liturgical assembly, symbol, and liturgical participation.  Sometimes these are unclear or conflicting or at odds with Vatican Council II perspectives.

 

The Little, Brown Handbook has some more advice, of which the 2011 illiterate Missal seems entirely oblivious.[15]

 

 . . . writing for readers is not the same as speaking to listeners.  Whereas a reader can go back and reread a written message, a listener cannot stop a speech to rehear a section.  Several studies have reported that immediately after hearing a short talk, most listeners cannot recall half of what was said.

Effective speakers adapt to their audience’s listening ability by reinforcing their ideas through repetition and restatement.  They use simple words, short sentences, personal pronouns, contractions, and colloquial expressions.  In formal writing, these strategies might seem redundant and too informal; but in speaking, they improve listeners’ comprehension.

 

Language is the tool humans use to think.  All languages have some thoughts that cannot be expressed in other languages.  Language is the window of the mind to reality.  Because language matters, the 2011 illiterate Missal matters. 

 

The Missal translates the Latin Missale into English.  I name the Missale Italian Latin, because of the accent marks, which do not appear elsewhere.  See pagina 772 and 775 at http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerusonline/en/  The Holy See, Congregation for the Clergy runs this website.  (accessed March 26, 2012).

 

The first sentence of the Collect contains thirty-eight words, in a 15.6 Senior College Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Readability.  It is a fused sentence.  See Chapter 18, “Comma Splices, Fused Sentences,” H. Ramsey Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, Eleventh Edition:  The Little, Brown Handbook (New York:  Longman, 2010) 339-444. 

 

My version of Microsoft Word 2010 Spelling & Grammar checker provides the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Readability.[16]  Dallen explains, “Applying readability criteria indicates that the number of years of formal education required for understanding Eucharistic Prayers on first reading has increased from 10.75 to 17.21,”[17] from sophomore high school to graduate school college.

 

The first sentence of this Prayer after Communion contains forty-two words, in a 17.0 Post Graduate Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Readability.  It is a fused sentence.  The revised Prayer after Communion has a 6.1 Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Readability.

 

The Little, Brown Handbook has a section, “Writing Concisely” that is helpful for the wordiness here.[18]

 

You may find yourself writing wordily when you are unsure of your subject or when your thoughts are tangled.  It’s fine, even necessary, to stumble and grope while drafting.  But you should straighten out your ideas and eliminate wordiness during revision and editing.

 . . . wordiness is not a problem of incorrect grammar.  A sentence may be perfectly grammatical but still contain unneeded words that interfere with your idea.

 

That is why the revised Collect has three, rather than two, sentences.  The first two sentences of the revised Collect have a 7.7 Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Readability.

 

Because American English is not the first language for many Catholics in the United States, pastoral care requires standard American English.  Otherwise, the Faithful are subject to two contrary conclusions about the readings.  The first conclusion for the Faithful is that the Church does not respect what the marginalized, particularly immigrants, are doing to learn standard American English.  In addition to the laity, twenty-two percent of the active diocesan priests in the United States are from outside the country.[19]  They need their local ordinaries (bishops) to insist they keep improving their use of standard American English.  The second conclusion is that the Church is actively sabotaging any attempt to learn standard American English, just as it is sabotaging Vatican II.

 

The respective ICEL Collect and Prayer after Communion have 13.2, and 5.7 Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Readabilities. 

 

The Latin omits the O in the Missal O God and O Lord.  The argument that the English is to stay close to the Latin does not hold up.  The English has O Lord.  The Latin has only Deus and Dómine, without the O.  O is a Latin word.  Cassell’s Latin Dictionary: Latin-English and English-Latin, revised by J. R. V. Marchant, M.A. and Joseph F. Charles, B.A. (New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1952) 371.

 

In the Collect, Jesus Christ is in apposition to our Lord and standard American English would set it off with commas.  The Little, Brown Handbook has a "using appositives” subsection.

 

An appositive is usually a noun that renames another noun nearby [in this case Jesus Christ], most often the noun just before the appositive.  (the word appositive derives from a Latin word that means “placed near to” or “applied to.”)  An appositive phrase includes modifiers as well . . . .  All appositives can replace the words they refer to:  [our Lord/Jesus Christ]  . . . Appositives are economical alternatives to adjective clauses containing a form of be . . . [our Lord [who is] Jesus Christ. . . ] you can usually connect the appositive to the main clause containing the word referred to . . . An appositive is not setoff with punctuation when it is essential to the meaning of the word it refers to [in the United States of America, which has no secular lords, our Lord is not essential to Jesus Christ] . . .  When an appositive is not essential to the meaning of the word it refers to, it is set off with punctuation, usually a comma or commas [as is the case here, our Lord, Jesus Christ,] . . .

 

H. Ramsey Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, Eleventh Edition:  The Little, Brown Handbook (New York:  Longman, 2010) 254-255. 

 

Through . . . is a sentence fragment the Missal uses throughout the book.  See The Little, Brown Handbook explains,

 

A prepositional phrase is a modifier consisting of a proposition (such as in, on, to, or with [including through]) together with its object and any modifiers (see pp. 242-43).  A prepositional phrase cannot stand alone as a complete sentence . . .

 

At the end of the Collect, the unity is confusing.  A dictionary definition for the word the:  “1 c:-- used as a function word to indicate that a following noun or noun equivalent refers to someone or something that is unique or is thought of as unique or exists as only one at a time <the Lord><the Messiah> . . . .”[1]  Unity is a noun meaning “1a:  the quality of stage of being or consisting of one.”[1]  Does the unity mean that the Holy Spirit belongs to a union, like a labor union?  Does unity in the Collect mean that the Holy Spirit, unlike Jesus, has only one nature, Divine?  Does unity mean the trinitarian unity?  In the same vein, does unity mean that it is the Holy Spirit, which is the relationship between the Father and Son, thereby causing a triune unity?  The last is how the revision would resolve the matter, substituting Divine Trinitarian nature for unity.  Because the Faithful have not challenged the unity since Vatican II, the now traditional silly phraseology remains.

 

See Part 4, “Clear Sentences,” Chapter 17 c, “Sentence Fragments:  Verbal or prepositional phrase,” H. Ramsey Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, Eleventh Edition:  The Little, Brown Handbook (New York:  Longman, 2010) 335.  http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=the&x=0&y=0  (accessed December 4, 2011).  http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=unity&x=0&y=0  (assessed December 4, 2011).

 

Whether to include or exclude the 1998 ICEL translation is difficult.  The reason to include ICEL is:  this is the best the American bishops could do, before the Vatican rejected the translation.  The ICEL translation also deals with some of the vocabulary and grammatical problems with which the revisions deal.  The reason to exclude ICEL is:  the ICEL translation is not significantly better than the Missal.

 

For the Collect see, International Commission on English in the Liturgy:  A Joint Commission of Catholics Bishops’ Conferences (ICEL), The Sacramentary:  Volume One—Sundays and Feasts (Washington, D.C.:  International Commission on English in the Liturgy, 1998), page 954 (278/362) , downloaded from https://rs895dt.rapidshare.com/#!download|895l35|387089704|ICEL_Sacramentary__1998_.zip|6767|R~00A3D4012C6FE19956DB84F71E5405F6|0|0 at http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/?page_id=23 (accessed December 8, 2011).

 

For Prayer after Communion see, International Commission on English in the Liturgy:  A Joint Commission of Catholics Bishops’ Conferences (ICEL), The Sacramentary:  Volume One—Sundays and Feasts (Washington, D.C.:  International Commission on English in the Liturgy, 1998), page 955 (277/362), downloaded from https://rs895dt.rapidshare.com/#!download|895l35|387089704|ICEL_Sacramentary__1998_.zip|6767|R~00A3D4012C6FE19956DB84F71E5405F6|0|0 at http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/?page_id=23 (accessed December 8, 2011).

 

Capitalizing Saint is meaningless for the Faithful, who will only hear (rather than see and read) the Prayer after Communion.  The Missal uses Saint twice once in the Collect and again in the Prayer after Communion.  In contrast, the Missale uses beátum both times in the lower case.  The Latin does not capitalize saint or blessed.  The argument that the English is to stay close to the Latin does not hold up.  The revision takes into account the hearing of the faithful.

 

Rationale

Clarity is not a prerequisite for prayer.  The search for clarity can be a means to prayer.  As part of catechesis, these Personal Notes set up what the Church needs to explain to enable the Faithful to pray with faith seeking understanding, as Saint Anslem of Canterbury (1033-1109) puts it.[20] 

 

Dallen refers to an “omitted rubric” that makes one wonder how free presiders may be to use and adapt my paraphrasing of the current illiterate 2011 Missal.[21]

 

An omitted rubric also suggests a move toward greater uniformity.  In several places the 1973 translation advised the priest that he could say something to the assembly “in these or similar words.”  Whether paragraph 14 of Eucharistiae participationem (1973), which permitted this, has been repealed or not is unclear, but that option goes unmentioned in the new translation.  In some cases, the Latin text (and English translation) does provide a few variations and the impression is that only these are allowed.  Unity again required uniformity.  Apart from the omission of this rubric, the very fact that the many nations divided by a common language . . . are required to use the same translation makes clear the relationship between unity and uniformity.

 

In an attempt to use the prayers the anti-intellectual, anti-Vatican-II, dysfunctional, illiterate Vatican, is now setting forth, these Personal Notes are taking on a new focus.  This new focus began November 27, 2011, the First Sunday in Advent.  From the First Sunday in Advent until just before the First Sunday of Lent, February 26, 2012, these Notes had a double focus, including both the Lectionary and the Missal.  After that, the focus remains on the Missal, until the end of the liturgical year, December 1, 2012.


 

Saint John the Baptist prepared the Faithful for the Lord, not only Israel, but also the Gentiles.  Heavenly Father, enable us to rejoice in your salvation and peace.  We ask this through our Lord, Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, forever.

 

Because the Eucharist has nourished your souls, praise God for Saint John the Baptist, who led the way to Jesus.  Today you celebrate his birthday.  John the Baptist explained that Jesus was the Lamb of God, whom you should follow to heaven.  Pray for the Church to have a rebirth.  Pray with Jesus who lives and reigns with you forever.

 



[1] For regular readers of Personal Notes, the documentation is very repetitive.  For that reason, there is an Appendix, between the end of Personal Notes and the repeated Prayers.  New readers should include that Appendix as they read.  Regular readers should look in the Appendix to refresh their memories. 

 

[2] Erin McKean, “The Word Wagon,” review of Dictionary of American Regional English, Vol. V:  Sl-Z, The Wall Street Journal, Saturday/Sunday, March 17-18, 2012, page C 7, col. 1-5, below the fold.

 

[3] Email from Holy Love Ministries, March 28, 2012.

 

[4] Paula Findlen, “Books & the Arts:  Galileo’s Credo,” The Nation, Vol. 294, No. 10 & 11 (March 5/12, 2012) page 31, column 2, last paragraph.

 

[5] Stanley Fish, How to Write a Sentence and How to Read One (New York:  HarperCollins Publishers, 2011) 38.

 

[6] John Calvin, CTS 23:211-12 (CO 18:420) in Reformation Commentary on Scripture:  Old Testament XII: Ezekiel, Daniel, (ed.) Carl L. Beckwith (Downers Grove, Illinois:  IVP Academic, An Imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2012) 96. 

 

 

 

[7] http://salinadiocese.org/priests/231-priests/980-dallen-rev-james  (accessed March 11, 2012).

 

[8] http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Translation-Ecclesiology-Jim-Dallen-3-6-2012.pdf  (accessed March 11, 2012).

[9] H. Ramsey Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, Eleventh Edition:  The Little, Brown Handbook (New York:  Longman, 2010) 233, 431, 893.

 

[10] James Dallen, “What Kind of Ecclesiology?” http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Translation-Ecclesiology-Jim-Dallen-3-6-2012.pdf  (accessed March 11, 2012), page 17/36.

 

[11] James Dallen, “What Kind of Ecclesiology?” http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Translation-Ecclesiology-Jim-Dallen-3-6-2012.pdf  (accessed March 11, 2012), page 11-12/36.

 

[12] http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=might&x=15&y=10  (accessed January 29, 2011).

 

[13] H. Ramsey Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, Eleventh Edition:  The Little, Brown Handbook (New York:  Longman, 2010) 274.

 

[14] James Dallen, “What Kind of Ecclesiology?” http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Translation-Ecclesiology-Jim-Dallen-3-6-2012.pdf  (accessed March 11, 2012), page 2/36.

 

[15] H. Ramsey Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, Eleventh Edition:  The Little, Brown Handbook (New York:  Longman, 2010) 856.

 

[16] For a description of readability levels, go to http://www.online-utility.org/english/readability_test_and_improve.jsp  (accessed March 11, 2012).

 

[17] James Dallen, “What Kind of Ecclesiology?” http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Translation-Ecclesiology-Jim-Dallen-3-6-2012.pdf  (accessed March 11, 2012), page 17/36.  Dallen cites http://www.praytellblog.com/index.php/2011/02/18/readability-tests-on-the-eucharistic-prayers/ that I accessed March 11, 2012.

 

[18] 8. Effective Words, 39.  Writing Concisely,” H. Ramsey Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, Eleventh Edition:  The Little, Brown Handbook (New York:  Longman, 2010) 523-524.

 

[19] http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/it-doesn%E2%80%99t-sing  (February 26, 2012).

 

[20] http://www.google.com/search?q=faith+seeking+understanding&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a  (accessed November 28, 2011) and http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anselm/ (accessed November 28, 2011).

 

[21] James Dallen, “What Kind of Ecclesiology?” http://misguidedmissal.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Translation-Ecclesiology-Jim-Dallen-3-6-2012.pdf  (accessed March 11, 2012), page 28-29/36.