The Hound Of Ulster

DOM reports that Cardinal Arinze is at it AGAIN.

The Vatican has ruled that the phrase pro multis should be rendered as “for many” in all new translations of the Eucharistic Prayer, CWN has learned.

Although “for many” is the literal translation of the Latin phrase, the translations currently in use render the phrase as “for all.” Equivalent translations (für alle; por todos; per tutti) are in use in several other languages.

Cardinal Francis Arinze, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, has written to the heads of world’s episcopal conferences, informing them of the Vatican decision. For the countries where a change in translation will be required, the cardinal’s letter directs the bishops to prepare for the introduction of a new translation of the phrase in approved liturgical texts “in the next one or two years.”

OK, so I guess that’s not really Cardinal Arinze who’s “up to something.” It’s the Church more generally. Still, a very interesting development. Jimmy Akin is very PLEASED.

Kudos to His Awesomeness Cardinal Arinze and His Most Awesomeness B16. Y’all’re aces!

At least I think that translates to “pleased.”

Dom also POSTS a copy of the Cardinal’s actual letter. The “justification” section for the change is particularly interesting. I like the way the letter approaches the issue: “there is no way the validity of the last 30 years can be called into question, of course. But, a more precise approach would be most helpful.”

The Bishops’ Conferences of those countries where the formula “for all” or its equivalent is currently in use are therefore requested to undertake the necessary catechesis of the faithful on this matter in the next one or two years to prepare them for the introduction of a precise vernacular translation of the formula pro multis (e.g, “for many”, “per molti”, etc.) in the next translation of the Roman Missal that the Bishops and the Holy See will approve for use in their country.

I think this is a great step. Not because I think there is any issue of validity, of course - but because I have had repeated discussions with serious, faithful Catholics who are greatly troubled by the apparently lackadaisical efforts to translate the Mass into an English that retains the beauty and precision of the original Latin. It does not shake their faith. But it does sadden them. And it serves as a constant distraction during the actual Mass.

I fall into that last camp all too often, much as I struggle against it. And my Latin isn’t even that good. I can only imagine what happens with my professor friends. The one that actually teach Latin.

This change will help. Well, this change and the spirit that enlivens such a change. I expect more, though it might take a long time. The USCCB moves at its own pace - a pace that would make a snail blush. (Oops. A bit of the ol’ cynicism showing through again. Down, boy. Down!)

It’s not with the Dodgers, thank GOODNESS.

The Cubs appear to have landed one of the biggest free-agent names on the market, reportedly signing outfielder Alfonso Soriano to an eight-year, $135 million contract.

OK, so I’m not a fan of the $17M-per, but I understand that might be a reflection on the market. Still, let’s put the money aside for the moment. We’re still left with a really, really long contract; eight years is mind-boggling to me. How can he possibly live up to that? Beltran and A-Rod can’t, and they’re much better players than Soriano.

True Blue LA has a LOOK at the Cubs, post-Soriano contract.

Where do the Cubs go from here? Fixing the holes in the rotation will cost them at least another 20 million dollars, and even then you’re counting on Mark Prior and Wade Miller to be healthy. The bullpen is pretty much unfixable, it’s filled with overpaid mediocrity. So what do they do? Can the Cubs push payroll into the $130 million range? Right now, that’s pretty much the only solution for them. At this moment, the Cubs are a mediocre team at best, and are sitting on a $100 million dollar payroll. This is the type of team that no G.M. would want to inherit, yet Jim Hendry just willingly put himself into this position. Well played.

The bullpen contracts are terrifying. Course, “my” bullpen has Tomko in it. I should probably put down these stones. My glass house could be at risk.

At least THIS is short.

The Dodgers on Monday will announce the re-signing of National League Comeback Player of the Year Nomar Garciaparra to a two-year contract.

Weisman REACTS, and seems to fall mostly into the “well, at least it doesn’t make them worse” camp.

In a Lara Thin Boyle free-agent market, however, with the Dodgers millions and millions away from reaching their payroll limit, whatever it is, it seems almost snobbish to suggest that the Dodgers can’t benefit from Garciaparra’s presence. Well, “snobbish” might not be the right word, but my point is just that even though first base isn’t a need position for the Dodgers, I’m not so confident that they will be able to solve all their true needs this offseason, which might leave depth at some positions as the next alternative.

I’m not overwhelmed by the move, but I don’t think there’s a lot to be done this off-season that wouldn’t be at least moderately risky. The risk involved in the Nomah is better than a lot of other options. Like signing Soriano to a 300-year contract. Or signing Carlos Lee to a contract of any length at all. Or the sort of THINGS Krivsky’s doing down in Cincy.

Step one: Alex Gonzalez gets signed to a one year, three million dollar deal.

Step two: Gonzalez plays in only 110 games, hits .255/.299/.357, and has a defensive season of debatable worth (zone rating loved him, rate2 had him at below average).

Step three: Alex Gonzalez gets a 433% raise.

Ouch.

Blue Notes has THIS interesting piece of analysis.

Meanwhile, fans inclined to boo the now departed J.D. Drew may not have travel to Boston or Chicago after all, since the Angels are showing interest. After all the moves Bill Stoneman hasn’t made in the last couple years, to throw Arte Moreno’s money- a lot of Arte Moreno’s money- at Drew seems an oddish choice. But hey, I’m just a blogger.

Plus, we weren’t that BAD defensively.