Supportive Statements

MisguidedMissal Team responses are in RED.

10-15-2011

Feast of St Teresa of Avila                                                                                                                                 15 October 2011

Why I Am Outraged

I find it impossible to understand how the clergy can be completely supine, at least in public, about the imposition of a new “translation” of the Liturgy. Why am I so outraged? Because the process and the product alike strike at the very heart of Vatican II and aggiornamento.

1. The text contains heresy (“for many”), but is ordered to be used even when that flaw has been pointed out by responsible parties.  Only if you know the Hebrew, Greek and Latin roots does one know that this really means “all”. 

2. It defies an Ecumenical Council — and everyone knows it.

3. It makes a mockery of ecumenism. (unilateral abrogation of Common Texts; outright refusal of consultation or collaboration)

4. It is based upon a series of lies. (E.g., Liturgiam authenticam.)

5. It came about through strong-arm tactics and intimidation on the one hand, and a dereliction of duty by the bishops on the other.

6. It is being promoted through another series of lies — about what the changes mean, and how and why they came about.

7. The motivation for creating this ‘translation’ was wrong from the beginning. (See 2., above)

8. Its purpose is clearly to return us to something like the status quo ante — before Vatican II. (See 2., above) In truth, it may be purposely designed to drive so-called “Vatican II Catholics” away from the Catholic Church. All of us should be Vatican II Catholics, and most of us are.

9. Least of all, but still true: The English of this so-called ‘translation’ is abomi-nable. And (a somewhat separate issue), inclusive language is a thing of the past.

10. The changes — and especially the process — denigrate the bishops, the clergy, and the laity — women in particular. It is all of a piece with the sexual abuse cover-ups and with unchristian attacks upon and dismissals of theologians, health administrators, bishops, and peace activists.

It seems perfectly plain to me that, if a change is being foisted upon the Church by such means — strong-arm tactics, intimidation, refusal to dialogue, insults to ecumenical partners, lies, secrecy, and even heresy — then someone ought to realize that something has gone terribly wrong. And we ought to do something about it.

Clearly, any order to use a liturgy which was confected in purposeful opposition to the formal documents of an Ecumenical Council, and which contains a formula which is heretical in the judgment of competent theologians, and which is being promoted by lies and subterfuge — such an order is clearly illegal and immoral, and it ought not be obeyed. This is especially true when we take into account the larger context of the Church today: A Church mired in sexual abuse, cover-ups, financial misdealings, secrecy, and general abuse of power — possibly even murder (of Pope John Paul I, possibly others).

If we stand idly by, if we obey such an order without protest, then we, too, are derelict in our duty. We become like the “good Germans” who were “just obeying orders”. This so-called ‘translation’ is simply WRONG, and SINFUL , and it needs to be opposed. It does not bear the marks of the Gospel. It is not the work of the Holy Spirit.

One often hears the mantra, “The Church is not a democracy.” Perhaps so, but neither is it a totalitarian dictatorship — or ought not be. It is worth re-reading Chapter 15 of the Acts of the Apostles.

While I sympathize with the parish clergy in some respects, I certainly fault them for standing idly and silently by while this juggernaut charges ahead. It is not simply a matter of “new words”; it is about the nature of the Church itself. And most priests know that. They need to demonstrate some courage and leadership. With few exceptions (Bishop Trautman among them), their bishops (and ours) certainly have not done so. It is truly a disgrace — but one which may still be redeemed, even if at some cost.

In Christ,  Michael

Others Are Saying: “So relevant today are the words of the “Grand Inquisitor” penned by Dostoyevsky: “But we shall tell them that we are Thy servants and rule them in Thy name. We shall deceive them again, for we will not let Thee come to us again. That deception will be our suffering, for we shall be forced to lie.” (The Brothers Karamazov, Book V, ch.5).”

“Of course, Aquinas, who worked up close and personal with autocratic popes and bishops, has in the clearest terms spelled out our obligations as Catholics to correct clerics, including popes and bishops, in error. Please see his Article 33 [esp. #4] on Fraternal Correction in the Summa Theologica, Secundae Secunda. Aquinas cites Augustine and Matthew 18:15 for support.”

10-13-2011:  from United Kingdom

I would like to express my solidarity with all the statements on your home site. My extended family and friends feel the same. I have been writing to each Bishop in Britain to express my sadness at the alienation we feel now at Mass because of the new translation. Thank you for your good work.

10-11-2011:  from Melbourne, Australia

I strongly endorse all I have read on your website.

As a 78 year old grandmother said to me last week, “they” are now even stealing “our Mass”. She is very upset that a small clique have taken control of our Church!

Keep up your great work!  Blessings

10-7-2011:

Have the Vatican officials read this? It is a wonderful statement of faith and of showing the desire to remain faithful to our baptism.  Thank you!

Thank you to the three readers above for their support and prayers!

***

1. I believe that you are absolutely right. I belong to Notre Dame’s liturgical network, and we are exchanging similar discontent with translations that truly distort both the scriptures, the theology, and the process.  So many liturgists are discontented but so few know of their discontent.  

2. I believe that it is too late to abort the process. I believe that we now have to accept this fait accompli and deal with the consequences.  We just couldn’t live with ourselves if we remained quiet about everything that has gone wrong in this process.

3. I believe that we have missed a MONUMENTAL opportunity to form the faithful to become full, active, conscious People of God. As a result, I believe the real result of the change will be a gigantic snore. Even the music ministers can’t let go of their own egos to accept an initial regional/diocesan/national musical setting of the ritual music to start things off. NPM staged a national competition with a very competent result, and that’s going nowhere.

We agree with your first statement that we have missed a MONUMENTAL opportunity!

Our biggest concerns are:  How many will leave because of this translation?  Will anyone in the hierarchy even care?  Those who leave, we believe, are having not a crisis of faith, nor a crisis of Church because that is the People of God as a whole, but they are having a crisis of institution.  An institution that presently seems more concerned with the letter of the law than the Spirit of the law.

Will the majority of the young, who may be journeying away from their baptismal faith at present, even return as the older generations just ahead of them have done?

Does this translation, the central prayer of our faith community, truly reflect who we are as Church?  In our opinion, it does not!

4. I believe that the Spirit is continuing to lead us down to a nadir in order to humble the hierarchy. The Church has always marked time in centuries; it may take a millennium before we turn all this around.

In God’s time, not ours…  and yet, we are called to speak up – now!  

10-1-2011:  Stephen’s response to our reply…

I hate that there has to be this division going on right now.

The people implementing this change may have felt that we’d be uncomfortable, but we’d get over it, just like the change from Latin was hard for some people to accept, but they got over it.

One large difference is that changing from Latin to the vernacular was an actual improvement. Also, the church spent a good part of the past 40 years bringing the clergy down off their pedestals, in the eyes of the people. Lastly, we have this tool called the Internet, that didn’t exist back then.

I’m not trying to make this into an all out war, but I do want the church to consider that the members are not sheep who will blindly follow, especially on matters such as these which are not matters of faith.

Division within the Catholic Church has been a constant over the centuries of our history as a faith community, as Catholics.  Division is always a tough reality in interpersonal and group dynamics. It is no less so here!  

There have always been differing views, levels of understanding and interpretation within the Church.  There can be unity in this diversity, while there may not be uniformity!  May each baptized member work to promote the unity of our faith as Catholics, while acknowledging the Church’s diversity.

The words of the central prayer of our Church, our Eucharistic celebration, the Mass, are vitally important to the Church, the People of God.  This is not a trivial matter and it does deeply impact many, if not all, matters of faith.

9-28-2011:

If the church refuses to listen, then parish members need to withhold their weekly contributions until they do listen (and listen means more than agree to meet with you to try and convince you with the change is not so bad)

Once the church reverses the change, then the contributions can be released.

Some Catholics certainly will take this route with you, Stephen.  

The hard part of this very conscience laden decision is deciding whether the monetary impact on a local parish community does anything to solve this issue.   What power does a parish pastor, or the parish staff, have to change what is mandated by the Holy See?

Taking it to the next level, our bishops, may have more impact.  Yet, in most dioceses, the diocesan ‘tax’ is mandated to come out of parish funds regardless, so once again the parish community gets hit the hardest.   

Important, hard issues to ponder!

9-17-2011:

It would be interesting for you to add a fourth comparison to the side by side analysis — the English translation from the pre-vatican II Mass.

With the new translation of the revised Roman Missal, older Catholics are transported back to the days when they followed the pre-Vatican II Mass from their Latin-English missal. The St. Joseph Daily Missal, published in 1950, translated the Latin Mass into English for lay Catholics before Vatican II allowed the Mass to be celebrated in English. Since the basic structure of the Mass has changed little, the old St. Joseph Missal English text is easily compared with the new English revisions. The result: roughly eighty-five percent of the ‘new’ language corresponds to the English in the old St. Joseph Missal.

Another indication that Rome is rejecting Vatican II. Our renewed Church is disappearing.

The 1950 edition of the St. Joseph Missal uses the Tridentine Rite which was in use until after the Second Vatican Council.  Our current translation (October, 2011 in the U.S. and Canada) is based on a totally new Rite (though of course it would have similarities to the Tridentine) occurring immediately following and because of Vatican II.  The 3rd Edition of the Roman Missal is a revision of the post Vatican II Rite (2nd Edition) which the English translation being promulgated on the First Sunday of Advent uses.  

This new translation and the Roman Missal revision it is based upon certainly seem to be more Tridentine in nature.  While the ‘new’ translation harkens back to the Tridentine Rite in the words exchanged between the priest and the people, the prayers prayed exclusively by the priest, e.g.  Opening & Closing Prayers, Preface, Eucharistic Prayers, etc., are quite different. Hence, it did not seem appropriate to include this fourth comparison.

9-7-2011:

I’ve heard a number of clergy and laity who favor the new missal as saying that those who do not want to accept the new missal translation must have deeper problems between them and the church.

On the contrary, I love my church and have no other issues with it. But this is a radical change – nearly everything that the congregation says is being changed in some way. I will weep the last time I attend mass using the current missal, because to me it means that my church as died. The words that I have only ever used will no longer be valid to use.

I won’t accept it, I will continue to use the existing words, loudly, and will encourage others to do the same. When the priest says “The Lord be With You”, I will make sure that the people around me know that I am saying “And also with you”, and not “And with your spirit”

The only way that we’ll ever get the church to consider reversing this is if we show them, peacefully, that we do not accept it.

While many people in the church think that this will be accepted as easily as the change from Latin to English was accepted, they are forgetting one big thing. Priests, Bishops, and even the Pope, worked hard to make us view them as human beings over the past 40 years. And because of that, we’re not going to accept blind directives, at least not ones as rash as this, without any opportunity to provide input, or answer whether we want it or not.

See MM link to article on the Doctrine of Reception by James Coriden.

9-6-2011:  From Scotland…

It is good that this site has been set up. Some of the new translation is not too bad but some is really awful, particularly the new Exultet. The explanations being given for the changes assume we know nothing of the bible. I could live with an explanation of “and with your Spirit” if it was just that this is the tradition of all the churches, but to say that it is scriptural is not correct, as when St Paul uses it, he asks for the Spirit to be with his readers.  What it appears to be is that the priest has the Spirit and we in the congregation do not.

Last Sunday in our Scottish parish even with cards issued to all, some were using the new responses and prayers while others reverted to the well known ones.  So instead of a sense of unity there was none.   This may resolve itself, but there are older folk still using the earlier responses when the vernacular was first introduced.

I can live with the “I believe” of the creed even though I think the plural is better.  But “consubstantial”, which means of the one being or substance, I find problematic.  The biggest scandal of the change to the creed is its lack of concern for the ecumenical work which has been done over the years.

I decided to follow the Mass in an English/Italian book and did not respond aloud to any of the new prayers.  When comparing texts, it is clear that the English is clumsy.  The Italian has retained “of the same substance” in the creed and what is more theologically problematic in English the “for you and for all” rather than “for you and for many” in the words of institution.

I think I will continue to follow the Mass in this way, but now feel as if I have divorced myself from the church, which is not very good.

At least Louie is continuing to go to Mass and be in the presence of God and his faith community at  the celebration of the Eucharist.  Unfortunately, many may just walk away.  What does this say about who we are as Church, the People of God?  Will anyone notice that these Church members have left?  Will anyone go looking for them?  Will anyone care?

9-1-2011:  From the United Kingdom…

Well done on putting this website together. I was in Lourdes last month and managed to speak to three bishops from the UK, including Vincent Nichols, archbishop of Westminster. I’m not sure it will do any good, but at least I’ve put forward the case about just how bad this translation is. A lot of people aren’t happy. God is being distanced, humanity is being overly humbled. God as a friend is going, and God as a powerful master is coming in.

Thank you for your comments, Mark.  Your thoughts about how God is treated in the new translation are correct – the emphasis on how we understand God has been slanted in a particular direction.  It is a more Hebrew than Christian Testament image of God, a God of distance, a judge, while we, the people in the pews, are sinners  in search of justice and mercy kneeling in fear and adoration – “For my fault, for my fault, for my most grevious fault.”  

This is not the God that Jesus taught us to call “Abba!” in the Our Father.  “Abba” is often translated as “Father,” but may more accurately be translated into English as “Daddy”,  a close personal relationship of parental love!  This is not the God who loves us and seeks to share a meal with us in spite of our sinfulness, as he did with Zacchaeus!

Thank you, too, for speaking up to the bishops you have encountered. Our bishops need to hear from their people!   This is an issue wherever English is spoken in our Church – keep your voice being heard in the United Kingdom .

8-15-2011:

Just wanted to pass along a note expressing my unconditional support for your efforts. I am a 30-year-old Catholic from suburban Dallas and I have known about the impending changes in the liturgy ever since Liturgiam Authenticam surfaced a decade back.

Although I’m lay and have–as yet–no formal training in theology or liturgy, I consider myself well-versed in these disciplines. I am a fluent second-language speaker of Spanish and can understand most other Romance languages–including Latin–quite well. I served as a presider for my parish’s Children’s Liturgy of the Word ministry for about 7 years before resigning over the impending liturgical changes; there was no way I’d let the kids tell me “And with your spirit” after I greeted them. I have even stopped going to mass except on Christmas and Eater, and will stop altogether when the new missal is introduced, unless there’s a marked opposition to it then. I will probably become a Lutheran or an Episcopalian eventually.

There is a lot I still have to work out first, but I plan to pursue ministry in the Old Catholic tradition in the coming years. You can bet I would make extensive use of the 1998 missal as a priest!

I find the new missal positively atrocious, as well as the processes by which it was mandated, produced, and approved. It is an utter, complete betrayal of the directives and ideals of Vatican II. It boggles my mind that ANYONE is in favor of the new translation, particularly as blindly as some appear to be.

God bless you in your efforts. And God help us!

How many of our faith community will leave?  How many will just walk away with no mention to those in leadership as to why?  May all those who consider leaving the Catholic Church because of the new Roman Missal voice their concerns and plans of action to those in power in our Church.  May God be with us all!

***

Please do not publish my name, as I am a parish music director in a mid-west diocese with a very conservative bishop (“I am in joyful obedience to the Holy Father:, etc., etc.). Our pastor is not happy with the new missal, but really what practical recourse is there for us? The diocesan guidelines say to begin teaching the Gloria in September, Holy in October, etc. I’ve spent a lot of time reviewing the many Mass settings, and have chosen one that will work for our parish. I am sad & angry that so much of the music I have used for years will now end up in the recycle bin without even a wake to acknowledge its passing. Any suggestions would be gratefully accepted & shared wherever possible. Thanks just for reading.  A wake or funeral for the music we all have praised God with for decades?  What a wonderful idea!!!  Keep watching for more on what to do.

***

You might be interested in my ongoing daily series on LA. Currently posting in the 20’s. http://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/category/post-conciliar-liturgy-documents/liturgiam-authenticam/

What a wonderful website!  Thanks for sharing it.  We have included it as an Other Resources quick link!

8-16-2011:

God bless you on your passion for this issue! My prayers are with you and the Church as we enter this trying time. Come Holy Spirit, be with us!

***

I support and agree with all you are saying. But deep in my heart I know our bishops dont have the spunk, the will power to challenge Rome. They are company men just like in the past. Pray, Pay and Obey, Never question anything. Sound familiar. Sex abuse issues, financial troubles, abuse of power All because nobody would dare to question or make people (in power) respond. The power of silence.

8-17-2011:

I totally agree with your concerns and have spoken publicly along the same lines. I am concerned that the (many) who have raised concerns about the New Missal are about to be steam-rolled or sidelined. I am angry that the majority of the clergy (including Bishops) have simply acquiesced in this process when many of them don’t agree with it deep down. Please keep me informed.  We, too, are surprised at how easily our priests (& bishops) have acquiesced.  Especially when the 1998 translation was approved by all the English-speaking conferences of bishops worldwide.

***

Well done for taking the stance you have. I’ve tried to raise issues about the translation on my blog. the best article I’ve come across so far can be found here, thought you may have read it http://contemplativecatholicuk.blogspot.com/2011/08/vaticans-tahrir-square-fr-kevin-kelly.html

Thanks for the link!

***

What a wonderful website!! Thank you to all that worked on it. Blessings, Kathy

***

Please keep me informed about the translation. I am deeply concerned that this translation of the Missal is the first step to bringing back the Latin Mass, communion railings, the priest with his back to the people of God and possibly more pre Vatican Council authoritarianism. Thank you for your efforts and tell me what I can do to help.  More to come.  If you have any ideas, please share them with us!

8-18-2011:

Wow, never expected any reply. There are so few ways in which we can register our disdain over the issues surrounding this translation. I have written to the Arch of Liverpool only to receive standard pat on the head reply. Whatever I have been able to do I have placed on my blog. There are so many other issues that need addressing today but are ignored. Thank you for your witness. Hope the blog meets with your approval!

***

Thank God there is a group like you speaking up! I hope you have the Pope and Vatican on your mailing list, plus the USCCB, the NFPC, the true (former) ICEL and the current Vatican ICEL, University Theology departments and associations, etc. on your list. Please continue to protest. Thank you. AB  We are working on getting the word out from our end but word of mouth and sharing the link to our website from person to person is something you can do right now!

***

I was starting to feel alone in my angst about the missal until I found this site. Thank you for the comprehensive lists of resources. But what recourse do we have? There aren’t resources listed to take action, or are best not to yet? Will it be another 20 or 30 years before our voices are heard? I fear that in the interim, thousands more will fall away during what are already tenebrous times for the Church.

***

Friends in Christ, thanks for your candid discussion about this challenging issue! As a person who works in the Church, I appreciate your ministry here on this website.

***

Would you please put this in a format of a petition on your web site so that anyone may sign it. You be responsible for seeing it delivered to the appropriate Bishops, Cardinals and Pope in a timely fashion. It would also be helpful to see just how many affirmative replies you get and publish that on the internet and send totals to appropriate news agencies. Right now all that is happening is those who are opposed to the new translation are just preaching to the choir. Action is need and needed now.  We’re discussing this possibility, as well as, many others.

8-19-2011:

Thank you so much. I’d read something similar in America magazine, I believe, and I felt powerless to do anything. So thank you for standing up. Amen!

***

Thank you, thank you and thank you again I am a 68 year old Roman Catholic from Edinburgh Scotland UK. Your article Misguided Missal has given me hope and courage. I remember the feeling of Joy and liberation in the aftermath of Vat11. I truly believe that the rites emanating from Vatican II have deepened people’s understanding of the celebration of the Eucharist and appreciation of who Christ is and who we are each called to become. …. …I truly believe that the liturgical documents of Vatican II are inspiring and a great gift to the Church and I am deeply concerned with Rome’s retreat from the principles and theology of the Second Vatican Council. I want to know what I can do, how can I make my and others voices heard? We have a wonderful Parish Priest who is desperately trying to stay in the Church and shepherd his people and be true to himself. Not an easy task.  We are attempting to spread the word everywhere in the Catholic English-speaking world.  If there is something we can do to facilitate efforts in the UK, please let us know!

8-20-2011:

Thank you all very much for your efforts to counteract the authoritarian and vindictive nature of our Church’s current leadership. While focused on the manner in which the retranslation of the Eucharistic Prayers has been handled, the negative leadership pervasively contaminates almost all of its current stewardship of our beloved Church. Many of us are grateful for your work and are encouraged by your efforts. May God will bless you with success.

***

So what we do with our concern and our unhappiness at the present situation? Pray, of course but what else? I suspect none of us wants to be the cause of division within our own parish communities but at the same time it seems wrong to do nothing. Write to one’s archbishop? I’ve done that and received a ‘standard’ letter in reply that addressed none of my queries. I’d be really grateful for advice.

8-21-2011:

I have been following the controversy over this new translation since way back when, and have found no reason to accept it, so what do I do, where do I go? As far as I can ascertain, all of our U.K. priests are toeing the Vatican line (with 1 exception). How can I attend Mass when I believe the rite to be flawed and so changed theologically? Does anyone have any words of comfort for me and others in this position?

As the new Roman Missal roles out in the UK this month, it will be tough for many of our faith-filled Roman Catholic people.  We are all in this together.  God is with us!  You are not alone in any of your concerns!

***

Thank you for putting up this website. My family, many friends and I find ourselves very upset st the planned changes. You have beautifully articulated our objections. I personally dread the first Sunday of Advent and wonder how long I will be able to participate in Eucharistic celebrations in an RC community because I will no longer be able to worship as a Vatican II committed Catholic Christian. Please keep me posted as you make progress in raising very serious objections about the central prayer of the church. My prayers for your success.  A website can do nothing but educate and give ideas for action.  True success only can be achieved when people of faith speak up!  Please keep following our website.  More to come on ‘reception’ and the sensus fidelium.  

8-23-2011:

The FAQ shown last in your list should be given more prominence because the fact that all the bishops of the English speaking world approved it and then the Vatican rejected it is significant. (Good catch!  We will look into this.) Language that the Laity and celebrants are comfortable with, that does not get in the way of spirituality, is important. The new Third Roman Missal misses that mark … getting in the way of connectedness with Our Lord. Why are our bishops ignored as they strive to minister more effectively to their flock?  Did our bishops speak up for the 1998 translation?  Did they question the Vatican’s rejection of it?  Did they question the guidelines promulgated in Liturgiam Authenticam?  As a whole, NO! However, there have been some lone voices speaking out, particularly, Bishop Donald Trautman, Ordinary of the Diocese of Erie, PA.  See article links for information on Bishop Trautman’s concerns.

8-27-2011:

The statements on your Homepage in ‘Out of Love for the People’ is not explicit regarding the fact that the Laity, particularly the younger generations, communicates in shorter sentences and phrases. Should not Liturgy that invites them to celebration recognize this fact? The new Roman Missal goes the opposite way with long convoluted sentences, many difficult to understand. It is almost as if the Laity is being asked to worship in a ‘second language’ rather than their native language. So doing makes language get in the way of spirituality and turns people away. Granted it’s easier for the Hierarchy to reach back to a Latin text but that is not what Jesus would have done. He reached out to the people and engaged them instead of retreating to comfortable corners.  An article on linguistics which will speak to this concern is in process.

8-28-2011:

Thank you so much for this website. I have been searching for something to forward to my group of lay people at my parish. I am also looking for any kind of protests across the country that I might join my voice so the bishops and the Vatican know that it is time for my Catholic Church to move into the 21st century and out of the Middle Ages. Thank you again. Never can I thank you enough.

***

I can fully appreciate your decision to remain anonymous at this stage. I think this speaks volumes for the current climate in our Church. I have included my name because I feel safe disclosing it to you…

…I live in a very vibrant and forward-looking faith community in __________ (Scotland) – it is made up of _______ clustered parishes. We are blessed to have two visionary priests in our community and both of them, in collaboration with the people of God in the parishes, have encouraged me to become very actively involved in the life of our faith community.

For the past few months we have been studying, praying about and meeting to discuss the new translation of the Mass. The views expressed on your home page resonate so much with the views expressed by the vast majority of the people in our parishes – both those who experienced the pre-Vatican II era and those who only know the post-Vatican II church.

We have written to our local bishop expressing our grave concerns about the new translation, but are not really hopeful of any sort of meaningful response…

…Thank you so much for creating this website and articulating the concerns that so many of us who love our church share. The more I listen to folk in parishes around our diocese, the more I realize how many people share these concerns but feel powerless to do anything about what is happening.

If I can do anything to aid your efforts, please let me know.

Parts of this email have been deleted to protect the emailer’s identity.

***

via the FutureChurch newsletter we found our way to your website.

We congratulate you on the work you are doing and are glad that there are more people joining in the call for a Church that is the People of God

Always glad to share your news with our group.

8-30-2011:

My parish will start using the new Mass wording next Sunday. And, I can’t explain how angry I am about the fact that this archiaic and adulterated English text is being forced upon us! I am a devout Catholic, but I’m also a thinking Catholic; I believe blind faith to be dangerous. However, I am seriously thinking of worshipping in a Protestant church in future. My young adult children are also of the same mind, especially after my daughter was told last Sunday that the new wording was ‘beautiful’ because it would ‘bring you closer to God’. It was lovely to find your website and to read a balanced view. I would be interested to know of any way I could voice my disgust at this intrusion into my spiritual life. With kind regards