|Sports 
November 3rd, 201011:38 AM ET
Share this on:FacebookTwitterDiggdel.icio.usredditMixxMySpaceStumbleUponShareComments (145 comments)Permalink #custom-tweet-button { padding: 20px 0 0 10px; }Tweet Catholics to learn new wording for Mass
Roman Catholics are being taught new wording for many familiar prayers.Roman Catholics will have to learn new wording for some of their most familiar prayers.
The Vatican is rolling out a new translation of the Roman Missal, the text around which the Mass and its prayers are built.
It's the first major revision since Pope Paul VI issued the original Missale Romanum in Latin in 1970.
The English translation was released in 1973 and revised two years later. Those translations were prompted by the Second Vatican Council of 1962, which did away with the Latin Mass and decreed that Masses should be celebrated in each parish's local language.
Pope John Paul II ordered the latest translation in 2000. The first use of the new text will happen about a year from now, on November 27, 2011, according to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The bishops' conference has been conducting workshops all year to help local clergy and lay ministers prepare for the changes.
Here's a sampling of the wording changes, some of which are throwbacks to phrasing from the late 1960s and early '70s:
Greeting and other dialogues
Old: (Priest) The Lord be with you. (People) And also with you.
New: (Priest) The Lord be with you. (People) And with your spirit.
Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God)
Old: (Priest) This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper. (People) Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.
New: (Priest) Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb. (People) Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
There are also significant changes to the Penitential Act (“I confess to Almighty God …”), the Gloria (“Glory to God in the highest …”), the Nicene Creed (“We believe in one God …”), the Sanctus (“Holy, Holy, Holy Lord, God of power and might …”), and other parts of the Mass.
To see all the changes and a revised order of Mass, go to the bishops' website.
"The long-term goal of the new translation is to foster a deeper awareness and appreciation of the mysteries being celebrated in the Liturgy," the bishops write on their website.
"The axiom 'Lex orandi, lex credendi' - ‘What we pray is what we believe’ - suggests that there is a direct relationship between the content of our prayers and the substance of our faith."
Posted by: The Editors - CNN Belief BlogFiled under: Catholic Church • Faith Now • Mass We recommend From around the web Next entry »Oklahomans vote against Sharia law« Previous entryAll Christians 'targets,' Iraqi militant group says soundoff (145 Responses) GB
@ Reality
Check out these verses from the book of Job. These verses (and the whole OT) testifies of Jesus Christ by prophesying of his life at least thousands of year before he lived. I am not a Catholic; I believe in Jesus and not in Mary or any idols (saints).
20:11 His bones still full of vigor [of his youth]
Lie down in the dust with him.
21:32 He is brought to the grave,
While a watch is kept at his tomb
20:24 He shall flee from the iron weapon,
and the bow of steel shall strike him through.
20:25 It is drawn; and cometh out of his body;
7:21 now shall I sleep in the dust; and thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be
23:11 I have followed in his tracks, kept his way without swerving,
I have not deviated from what his lips commanded.
If you were knowledgeable about all the accurate prophesies in the Bible, how they testified of Jesus, you too would comprehend why us Christians believe he is the Son of the Most High God!
November 3, 2010 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse | Reply ValerieGB- Catholics do NOT worhip Mary or any saints. We simply reverence them, and believe that those in Heaven can intercede for us, especially Mary, to our Lord. I am sure as a Christian, you believe Mary to be the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ? Well, imagine for a moment the bond between our Lord and her. Do you think he would not fulfill a request coming from her? Remember the water turned into wine at Cana? This was done upon his mother's request, even though Jesus had told her that "his time had not yet come" he performed this first miracle, anyway.
I hope I did ok explaining the whole "Mary" thing, as I do know most non catholics get confused by this.
Catholics worship the Trinity of God- The Father, The Son and They Holy Ghost, all three distinct "persons" in ONE nature, which is God. This is hard to understand, and is a mystery as well. God Bless.
November 3, 2010 at 2:43 pm | Report abuse | RealityAnother take on the "prophecies/fortune telling" from the Book of Job:
From Professor JD Crossan who has exhaustely studied all the doc-uments to include non-scriptural docu-ments written from 1 CE to 300 CE. (as per the conclusions found in his book Who is Jesus?)
"Moreover, an atonement theology that says God sacrifices his own son in place of humans who needed to be punished for their sins might make some Christians love Jesus, but it is an obscene picture of God. It is almost heavenly child abuse, and may infect our imagination at more earthly levels as well. I do not want to express my faith through a theology that pictures God demanding blood sacrifices in order to be reconciled to us."
"Traditionally, Christians have said, 'See how Christ's passion was foretold by the prophets." Actually, it was the other way around. The Hebrew prophets did not predict the events of Jesus' last week; rather, many of those Christian stories were created to fit the ancient prophecies in order to show that Jesus, despite his execution, was still and always held in the hands of God."
"In terms of divine consistency, I do not think that anyone, anywhere, at any time, including Jesus, brings dead people back to life."
November 3, 2010 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse | RealityAnother take on the "prophecies/fortune telling" from the Book of Job:
From Professor JD Crossan who has thoroughly studied all the doc-uments to include non-scriptural docu-ments written from 1 CE to 300 CE. (as per the conclusions found in his book Who is Jesus?)
"Moreover, an atonement theology that says God sacrifices his own son in place of humans who needed to be punished for their sins might make some Christians love Jesus, but it is an obscene picture of God. It is almost heavenly child abuse, and may infect our imagination at more earthly levels as well. I do not want to express my faith through a theology that pictures God demanding blood sacrifices in order to be reconciled to us."
"Traditionally, Christians have said, 'See how Christ's passion was foretold by the prophets." Actually, it was the other way around. The Hebrew prophets did not predict the events of Jesus' last week; rather, many of those Christian stories were created to fit the ancient prophecies in order to show that Jesus, despite his execution, was still and always held in the hands of God."
"In terms of divine consistency, I do not think that anyone, anywhere, at any time, including Jesus, brings dead people back to life."
November 3, 2010 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse | Mike, not meAh yes always go back to Crossan as the one and only person that agrees. Forget the fact that he was called out being a fraud for the horrible methods used in the Jesus Seminars. That he does not even qualify as a NT scholar for his "lack training in the Semitic background of the NT"
November 3, 2010 at 3:44 pm | Report abuse | capnjammerThe Romans wanted to as-similate Judaism in order to take it over, as they were fond of doing with the cultures they conquered. What better way than to forge their Messiah from their own pagan beliefs. If you studied anything besides your own religion you would find that the Jesus story is plagiarized, in some places (like the Chri-stmas story in Luke) almost word for word from Pagan sources. There are literally hundreds of pagan myths involving a man who was born of a vir-gin on December 25th, called the son of god, who had 12 apostles, who performed miracles, died for the sins of the world, rose from the grave at the feast of Ishtar (Easter), and ascended into heaven. You would realize that no other source besides the Bible references Jesus except one sentence in Josephus which has been verified as a hoax (considering Josephus plainly stated he believed Vespasian to be the Messiah), even though the Romans kept very accurate records, and you'd think someone besides four men fifty years after the fact would have mentioned that on the day Jesus died all the graves opened and a zombie army was walking around Jerusalem.
The OT prophecies would have been very easy to fulfill, in fact, one verse (where Jesus rode in to town on a donkey) says Jesus did it IN ORDER TO fulfill the prophecy. And, all the verses you quoted from Job are NOT Messianic prophecies. Job 20:11 talks about a man who was sinful in his youth, who hides the fact that he is a wicked man. 21:32 is talking about the wicked man who has done such terrible things that they watch his grave out of fear. In fact, all the verses you mentioned are talking about wicked men. You'd know that if you looked at the whole verse instead of taking it out of context in order to satisfy your particular religious needs. I challenge you to read the entirety of those chapters and see what the context is. You might not be happy with what you find.
November 3, 2010 at 4:35 pm | Report abuse | MeI'm sure as a Christian, you have asked friends or loved ones to pray for you, right?
This is no different than how Catholics "ask" Mary or the Saints to pray for us. We do not believe they can grant any requests, we merely understand that they are a valuable army in heaven to intercede on our behalf. Of course, since their earlthly life has ended, the only way to commune with them is through prayer. This is what causes confusion amongst non-Catholics.
November 3, 2010 at 4:36 pm | Report abuse | RealityMike, Mike, Mike,
Hmmm, still suffering from a severe case of the Three B Syndrome aka Bred, Born and Brainwashed in that old time Christianity.
With respect to Professor Crossan, you might want to read some of his over 20 books on the historical Jesus. His and the books/conclusions of other historical Jesus exegetes are partially listed at earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html.
With respect to the Jesus Seminarians:
"The ground-breaking work of the Jesus Seminar appears in two texts: The Five
Gospels (1993) and Acts of Jesus (1998), both published by Polebridge Press.
The Jesus Seminar is a group of biblical scholars chaired by Robert Funk, PhD.,
who took the unprecedented step of voting as a group on the authenticity of the
teachings and acts of Jesus. The following observations are taken from the
introductory chapters of 5G and AOJ.
Every individual saying and action was examined and rated by the Seminar as to
whether Jesus actually said it or did it, or whether it was primarily the
product of the author of the gospel. Building on the earlier work of individual
scholars, the Seminar's research represents an unprecedented cooperative effort
to separate what Jesus really said and did from what gets added on over time in
the story telling and writing process.
In addition to the four Gospels: Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John, that we have
known for two thousand years, the Seminar also included the Gospel of Thomas in
their considerations. Thomas consists of sayings of Jesus that were discovered
at Nag Hamadi, along with hundreds of other ancient texts, in a major
archeological discovery in 1945. Thomas is not in story form, but it is a
series of sayings. Many of the sayings are very similar to what appear in the
other four gospels, and it was used by the Seminar as an independent report of
what Jesus said.
The Seminar's work assumes that for a period of some years the stories about
Jesus were passed on by word of mouth as his followers practiced his teachings
and some anxiously expected his return. Ten years may have gone by before
teachings and actions began to be written down, and perhaps another ten years
passed before they were put into larger collections like Thomas. These
collections were probably taking place about the same time that Paul was writing
letters (Galatians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Romans) to various Christian communities.
Eventually the materials were put together in story form, probably first by
Mark, sometime around 70CE, followed by Matthew, John, and Luke/Acts, in that
order. Some of the writing occurred as late as the first part to the middle of
the second century CE.
When the Seminar members voted, a red vote received 3 points, a pink vote
received 2 points, a gray vote received 1 point, and a black vote received 0
points. The colors were given the following definitions: Red = This statement
is an accurate representation of what Jesus said or did. Pink = This statement
very likely represents what Jesus said or did. Gray = This statement is most
likely a formulation of the author, but the content is similar to what Jesus
actually said or did. Black = This statement is purely a formulation of the
author. A statement or event was given a final color code based on the
following percentages: Red = .7501 or more of the scholars agreed that the
teaching or event was authentic. Pink = .5001 to .7500 of the scholars agreed
that the teaching or event was authentic. Gray = .2501 to .5000 of the scholars
agreed that the teaching or event was authentic. Black = .0000 to .2500 of the
scholars agreed that the teaching or event was authentic.
THE SCHOLARS USED RULES to determine if Jesus really said or did something; for
example:
1. Primary assumption: Jesus was a reasonably well integrated person whose
behavior was more or less congruent with his words.
2. Certain categories, some much more than others, are common to the teaching
and behavioral materials.
(a) Itinerant
(b) Family ties don't bind
(c) Demon possession and exorcism
(d) Social dev-iance
(e) Association with undesirables
(f) Embracing the unclean
(g) Sabbath
(h) Critics of Jesus
(i) Healing
3. Material that reflects knowledge of events after Jesus' death must be looked
at cautiously.
4. Material that appears in independent sources is older than the sources.
5. Material that appears in independent contexts circulated on its own at an
earlier time.
6. Similar content that has taken on different forms had a prior life of its
own.
7. Oral memory best retains short, provocative, memorable material, like
aphorisms and parables.
8. It is more likely that the core or gist of a matter was recalled, rather than
precise words.
9. The writers likely put their own words in Jesus' mouth under the following
conditions.
(a) Story transitions: for example, "Let's go over to the other side." (Mk 4:35)
(b) Summarizing the message: "The time is up. God's imperial rule is closing
in." (Mk 1:15)
(c) Anticipating the story: "The son of Adam is being turned over to his
enemies, and they
will end up killing him." (Mk 9:31)
(d) Expressing the writer's view: "Why are you so cowardly? You still don't
trust, do you?" (Mk 4:40)
(e) Underscoring a narrative point: "He was unable to perform a single miracle
there, except." (Mk 6:6)
(f) Clarifying current practices: "The days will come when the groom is taken
away from them, and then they will fast on that day." (Mk 2:20)
(g) Eliciting a confessional point: "What about you, who do you say that I am?"
(Mk 8:29)
WHEN THE RULES ARE APPLIED an emerging pattern reinforces itself:
(1) Talks distinctively, distinguishable from common lore.
(2) Teaches against the social and religious grain.
(3) Surprises and shocks by role reversal or frustration of ordinary
expectation.
(4) Uses characteristics of exaggeration, humor, and paradox.
(5) Uses concrete and vivid images.
(6) Uses metaphorical language without explicit application.
(7) Seldom initiates dialogue, debate, or healing activity.
(8) Rarely speaks about himself in the first person.
(9) Makes no claim to be the Messiah."
November 3, 2010 at 5:11 pm | Report abuse | capnjammerI didn't read anything in Reality's initial quotes from Crossan (sorry, Reality, but second post was TL;DR) that seem to be unreasonable. God's sacrifice of Jesus does seem to be child abuse, and I wonder how I could have ever loved such a bloodthirsty god. Just because he is not considered a NT scholar doesn't mean you can't listen to what he has to say... after all, I doubt the pope would have authorized D.L. Moody as a Bible scholar, and just because you aren't John Madden doesn't mean you can't be authoritative about sports.
November 3, 2010 at 5:20 pm | Report abuse | MuneefGod never sacrificed Jesus his messenger to children of Israel to guide them to the truth after so many manipulations to the holy scriptures the children of Israel were lost from the truth God wanted them to have and knowing that the children of israel were not always easy to convince as never they listened to Mosses for that reason God created Jesus in a miraculous way and had him talk as infant but still that was not enough for them and when they feared that he will change the way they want to have their religion and beliefs to remain and it was specially those who knew the truth who had him to be sacrificed but God had not given them the chance to do and they had made the sacrifice but was not of Jesus but they thought they did when it was some one else in his clothes that they had sacrificed. While God had Jesus die latter on and rised him to heavens to await the moment he would come down again...
November 3, 2010 at 7:29 pm | Report abuse | GB@ Valerie & @ Me
I respect that you choose to believe that the dead can intercede for you. I fail to understand how Mary (or any dead person) can intercede for you. Jesus Christ is the only and all-sufficient mediator between God and man. John 14 V 13 states that: And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. Where does Mary fit in this equation?
Unless Mary is omniscient and omnipresent, it would be impossible for her to act as mediator between man and Christ. If she could hear any one, how could she hear more than one at a time, and if but one at a time of what avail would she be for the millions saying their Ave Marias at one time in various parts of the world?
@ capnjammer
Like most of the Bible, the Book of Job is allegorical, it cannot always be taken literally. The Book of Job is much more than the story of an ordinary man. If you are serious about understanding the book of Job, I challenge you to check out the following site and take your time to see how Job's suffering is analogous to what Jesus suffered after his arrest, during his trials and crucifixion. http://www.biblesecrets.org/JOB.htm
November 3, 2010 at 7:33 pm | Report abuse | Most High GodHey GB, if Jesus is the son of the "Most High God" what other gods do you believe in? If you only belive in ONE god, then isent saying God enough? Sounds to me like you are unsure of your own faith, just how many not so high gods do you believe in?
November 3, 2010 at 7:50 pm | Report abuse | capnjammer@GB: Read it. It's a ridiculous stretch of the imagination. "Riding the wind" really means crucified? Honestly, if you would focus one little bit of logic or reason into your thought process rather than just accepting anything that agrees with you as proof, and completely denying anything that opposes it regardless of veracity, verifiable sources, logical inference, or out-right obviousness, you would have no choice but to change your mind. Don't come around citing a random website you read as a good source of information. I read it in its entirety, and there is nothing about what is said there that would make a lick of sense to anyone not trying tenaciously to cling to the last strands of a broken lie.
November 3, 2010 at 8:24 pm | Report abuse | JGMany of the new phrases are those that have been used for the past two milennia by the Eastern Orthodox church. i applaud the progress being made towards unity of the Christian world.
November 3, 2010 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse | Reply ValerieI am a tradional Catholic and attend Latin Mass every Sunday.
These aren't really "new", in fact, they have reverted back to the older wording, more or less.
I am glad to see these changes, for the Mass in general. I firmly believe ALL cahtolic mass should be celebrated in Latin, in the original form, but it is not for me to decide this.
Peace be with you all.
November 3, 2010 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse | Reply Kathleen777Hooray for the Latin Mass! My family loves it!
November 3, 2010 at 4:02 pm | Report abuse | ChristineThank you for your insight. It is making me rethink my initial reaction to the changes.
November 3, 2010 at 5:15 pm | Report abuse | Latin Mass+1
November 3, 2010 at 8:28 pm | Report abuse | DonnewaldIs the original language of the Catholic Mass Latin? Because the Church originated regions surrounding Jerusalem, wouldn't aramaic or another local language most likely have been the spoken language for the early Christians?
November 3, 2010 at 11:04 pm | Report abuse | dalis@ Donnewald The Early Church conducted its rites in the vernacular languages of the Christianized regions – at Jerusalem they spoke Aramaic (and Chaldean Christians still do), at Corinth and Ephesus they spoke Koine Greek, and in Rome, they spoke Latin. Keep in mind that Latin wasn't always an elite language of law and medicine. Jerome translated the Bible from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, Koine Greek and Old Latin sources into a language of common people on the Italic Peninsula; this is why the Latin Bible is called the Vulgate.
Re: the original Mass, or celebration of the Eucharist...was done in Koine Greek, but of course its true antecedent is the Last Supper. There are many words in Roman Rite mass still retained from Hebrew (Alleluia) and Greek (Kyrie, Anaphora, Eucharist).
Another important point: the Roman Rite or Novus Ordo of the Mass that was adopted after the 2nd Vatican Council is one of 30 rites recognized as valid by the Roman Catholic Church and practiced worldwide by the world's 1.16 billion Catholics. The article is referring to wording changes to one rite out of those 30. The Tridentine (Latin High) mass, for example, is another and it's unchanged.
November 4, 2010 at 3:15 am | Report abuse | chrisIf the pope really wanted to fix the church he'd revisit 1st Timothy 4:3 which talks about how false teachers will forbid people to marry. Catholicisms ban on marriage for priests and nuns is a false teaching and has resulted in great misery for clergy and laypeople.
November 3, 2010 at 2:36 pm | Report abuse | Reply kcmNo one is forced to become a priest or a nun. This is a personal choice and they are well aware of the celibacy requirement, as well as poverty and obedience. I've discussed this choice with many priests and nuns and they are in full agreement with the rule and are not miserable. Saint Paul says living an unmarried life and giving all for God is an honorable life.
November 3, 2010 at 3:33 pm | Report abuse | capnjammer@kcm: obviously they are just hiding their misery, because it often comes out in the form of child abuse when no one is looking. Saint Paul was insane, by the way... he hated women, was probably a eunuch, and declared he wished everyone was unmarried like him, but if you couldn't keep it in your pants then you should get married so you aren't sinning when you boink. So much for the inst-itution of marriage!
November 3, 2010 at 4:38 pm | Report abuse | JGChris, the unmarried priest doctrine is a practice of the Roman Church of the West. Orthodox Catholicism has never implemented this "false teaching".
November 3, 2010 at 2:54 pm | Report abuse | Reply RealityActually, the Orthodox Church requires all bishops to be celibate and to come only from the ranks of celibate priests.
"Orthodox bishops come only from the ranks of unmarried priests, he faced the choice of all Orthodox seminary graduates: Be ordained unmarried and promise to remain that way throughout your career, or get married and then be ordained. Once ordained, there's no turning back."
November 3, 2010 at 3:05 pm | Report abuse | coastiegirl... and using that very term, "practice," one would realize that Priests remaining unmarried is someting that can be changed, as the Church sees fit. As for nuns, one of the vows is to remain celibate, in order to dedicate their entire lives to God. It's practical, too– hard to serve as a missionary or live amongst the poor if they have their own husbands and children to also care for...
November 3, 2010 at 3:36 pm | Report abuse | DWTTDown with the Trinity
November 3, 2010 at 3:05 pm | Report abuse | Reply MuneefYes you are right down with trinity because there is only one God that we worship and aware of and been told of by all messengers of God until they have manipulated with the facts relayed in the scriptures and the Roman too has changed it to suite the multi culture they were having into one so combined trinity,paganism and thinking they have sacrificed the Messiah they have made of him God on earth and others as son of God to avoid the mass anger of the crowed believing in him.
Therefore your Holy Books will keep on changing verses as done for many years before under the Roman empire and now under the American empire?
Valerie, I second your comments on non-believers. Its amazing how important it is to them to "teach" us that God doesn't exist. I certainly don't spend any time surfing atheist sites to "convert" them. Why are we so important to them? I wonder.
November 3, 2010 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse | Reply XPST> Why are we so important to them? .
That's easy. Because you may be wrong. Because you may be precisely wrong.
You may be acting exactly in the way that dooms us all to hell. If you close your own mind to alternatives, or, worse yet, impede the ability of others to find the Truth, you may impede your own ability to identify valid moral imperatives, or, worse yet, impede the ability of others.
By Valerie's "Paschal's wager" justification, you should hedge your bet, and oppose prescriptive moral assertions that are not justifiable. You should oppose attempts by others to constrain exploration and diversity, and instead allow for the largest possible exploration space. That is, of course, unless you can justify proposed constraints.
November 3, 2010 at 3:21 pm | Report abuse | MegatronBill, the reason it's so important is that believers consantly try and push their faith on us by way of blue laws. For example, having "in God we Trust' on our money. First amendment anyone? Not buying stuff on Sunday?
November 3, 2010 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse | Leave Me AloneBill you are blind to how believers push their beliefs on everyone around them with a blind eye. It's offensive and old. I bet if atheists came to your door with literature, tried to talk to your kids without you around to make them disbelieve, and other things you might actually get mad yourself. How about if we told them they were cannibals eating people and drinking their blood at communion. Yuck! Religous people are gross and your parents are gross too. Did you drink blood and eat people. Maybe you're vampires? But atheists aren't telling your kids that (but they are thinking some of it). But believers feel free to tell my kids they're going to burn in hell. If it was happening to you you'd be mad too.
November 3, 2010 at 5:03 pm | Report abuse | JGReality: exactly true about Bishops, but not for Priests. Before being Ordained a priest, it is acceptable to be married. Once ordained, clergy are on the path of celibacy and bishop consideration.
November 3, 2010 at 3:10 pm | Report abuse | Reply DBSRValerie..." I firmly believe ALL cahtolic mass should be celebrated in Latin, in the original form, but it is not for me to decide this."
Sorry Valerie the original form was Greek not Latin
November 3, 2010 at 3:12 pm | Report abuse | Reply ValerieI wrote, "form" not language.
: )
The Mass said today is not the same "form" as the old one. I do believe I worded myself correctly.
November 3, 2010 at 3:18 pm | Report abuse | MegatronIt's not the same form because people were bored with Catholicism and in fact were leaving the church. The songs were added to make it more "interactive" in the dark ages. I suppose God's design isn't good enough when the coin isn't flowing in eh? \ABS\Auto Blog Samurai\data\Cheesestick\cnn livings\icon_smile.gif)
Latin Mass is simply a confusion tactic. Just like the Bible was not allowed to be translated into the common language, and all copies of the Vulgate were burned by the Catholic Church, the Mass being spoken in Latin kept the common people ignorant and under their thumb.
November 3, 2010 at 4:42 pm | Report abuse | MuneefWell do not know if the original form was in Greek or Latin but sure they were in Aramaic and Hebrew but not sure which one was first. So do you see how many languages it was translated and circulated, only God knows how many changes took place deliberately or accidentally... Noticeably that even the true language of the Messiah the Aramaic was made to die after him...?
November 3, 2010 at 7:49 pm | Report abuse | dalis@ capnjammer Latin WAS the common language of people in the Roman Empire. Go look at pictures of Pompeii some time: the graffiti on the walls – the most basic, candid form of expression of common people – is in Latin. Only later it became an elite language of the university/professional fields like law and medicine. And the Vulgate was/is the Catholic Bible; don't know what you're talking about when you say they burned it.
To answer the other question, the original language of the mass, or Eucharist, was Koine Greek – another common language. Eucharist is a Greek word.
November 4, 2010 at 3:47 am | Report abuse | capnjammer@Dalis: Latin was not STILL the popular language in the Middle Ages, or the Renaissance, or just a hundred or so years ago, when it was still the language being spoken. And I'm sorry about my accidental use of the word vulgate, which means it was in the common tongue. The actual Bible that was in the common tongue is the one that was rounded up and burned en masse. Read the life story of John Wycliffe or William Tyndale. These men suffered and died for trying to translate the Bible into the language of the common man.
November 4, 2010 at 4:09 am | Report abuse | @XPSTA lot of assertions in that first paragraph...
November 3, 2010 at 3:27 pm | Report abuse | Reply @@XPSTSeriously??? I hit reply...
November 3, 2010 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse | Reply Iqbal khanHere we go again changes...
November 3, 2010 at 3:35 pm | Report abuse | Reply Muneef@Iqbal Khan.
Thank you for this important peace of information which I never knew before as I always thought that the Holy Books they have are the words of God and which it turned to be not?? Where is the True Angeel of Al Messiah which were told about in the Quran given to Jesus? It is the only truth that came before Quran? So as it seems not only tried to sacrifice Jesus and caused the death of the Aramaic language but as well they made the Holy Angeel to disappear?!
You have GOT to be kidding me. I just read all the changes on the website referenced above. I REALLY don't want to know the amount of money WASTED on this. Half of the changes don't even make sense. It's not as if there was some more accurate translation done to get to this point. They clearly decided to use some new words to jazz up the prayers people (including me who is not a member of the Catholic Church anymore) know by heart. I am sorry but if that is what the church thinks is needed to keep parishioners, doesn't it seem like there is probably a larger issue that needs to be addressed?
November 3, 2010 at 3:40 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammerMaybe that's the point. Just like when they couldn't restrain it any more the church had to start allowing the vulgate to be read without burning every copy they could find, now they find themselves in peril and are using diversionary tactics to get people's attention off the fact that they may not really be the mouthpiece of god...
November 3, 2010 at 4:44 pm | Report abuse | JimWhat Valerie is saying is why as a non believer are you reading articles and posting messages about verbiage used in a ceremony you don't believe in. For instance, I don't like video games. Why would I go on a video game message board and tell people they are stupid for liking video games? This doesn't pertain to you, so don't worry about it.
November 3, 2010 at 3:42 pm | Report abuse | Reply Doc Vestibule@Jim
It's a slow day on the Belief Blog and the non-believers are bored.
Riling up Catholics by pointing out the absurdities of cannibalistic rites, hierarchichal haberdashery, ancient inquisitions, biblical inconsistencies, rampant pedophilia etc. is almost as easy as pestering young earth creationists by showing them fossils.
It's always entertaining to poke at dogmatic thinkers.
@Jim, I'm sorry, but it does pertain to us. As long as you believe in your imaginary friend, my g-ay friends aren't allowed to marry, my cousin who almost died while giving birth to an encephalitic child whom the doctors knew would be stillborn anyway can't get abortions that would facilitate their survival and good health without risking a back-alley version of the surgery, stem cell research which could help all manner of illnesses and even facilitate the regrowth of lost limbs (which is something God has never done) will remain illegal, religious people will continue to break the first amendment and cause laws to be passed which give deference to their beliefs and no one else's, children will continued to be sequestered away from reality and not given a chance to make important choices that will effect the remainder of their lives, and the world will continue to be segregated by dogmatism. That's why I stand up and make my voice heard. I know you are most likely too indoctrinated to change your mind, but if I can reach someone who is struggling with their faith or who hasn't been fully indoctrinated yet, and prove that logic and reason win out over blind faith every time, I know I can make a difference.
November 3, 2010 at 4:53 pm | Report abuse | MattA good thing to do is ignore the comment sections. People who argue on the internet obviously have nothing better to do.
November 3, 2010 at 5:02 pm | Report abuse | EvanMatt, that is so completely true. Amen!
November 3, 2010 at 5:08 pm | Report abuse | brad@Doc Vestibule
When people level the charge of "cannibalism" against us Catholics, they are acting according to script (Jn 6): "How can this man give us his body to eat and his blood to drink?!" Jesus didn't pander. He responded "Does this offend you? What then if you see me return to the place from which I came?" (paraphrase)
"Those translations were prompted by the Second Vatican Council of 1962, which did away with the Latin Mass and decreed that Masses should be celebrated in each parish's local language."
This is absolutely wrong. Vatican II did not do away with the Latin Mass, With the permission of the local Bishop, a parish could hold a Mass in Latin (either in the old style or a Novis Ordo Mass). This is one of the ways in which some folks (in the opinion of many) went too far with Vatican II reforms. While the goal was to create an experience for Modern Roman Catholics, the intention was never to throw out the old.
November 3, 2010 at 3:48 pm | Report abuse | Reply Kathleen777We Catholic hippies may have gone a bit over board with change after VCII, but we are slowly dying off and the Church in its glory continues!
November 3, 2010 at 4:12 pm | Report abuse | Kathleen777For the non believers: a good history book to see how Catholic your day-to-day life is
Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church, H. W. Crocker III
November 3, 2010 at 4:07 pm | Report abuse | Reply ValerieKathleen- I like that......hahaha....yes!
November 3, 2010 at 4:14 pm | Report abuse | capnjammerOf course. That's because the Roman Empire knew it was dying out and a-ssimilated Judaism into its pagan roots so it would have an arm to continue growing throughout history, just as it had done with the Greeks, the Babylonians, and the Medo-Persians, and like it tried to do with the Ottomans during the Crusades. To the victors of history go the rights to write its history books. You follow the remains of the pagan Roman Empire.
The intellectual minds of the Renaissance knew this. That's why whenever you see a picture of St. Peter, the first pope, he is carrying a crooked staff and holding two fingers up to the sky exactly like in classical depictions of Jupiter.
November 3, 2010 at 4:58 pm | Report abuse | SHRIKE"Feel the power of the dark side"
November 3, 2010 at 4:09 pm | Report abuse | Reply KHmm. Just based on the sampling in the article, the new translations seem much more awkward than the old ones. Words repeated unneccessarily, odd turns of phrase, etc.
Not sure I really see any benefit from either the standpoint of being more precise in the meaning or of being more comfortable/understandable for parishoners.
There may be many areas where the church could strive harder to reform and revise, but as the culmination of a 7 year project this one seems kind of off-putting and unnecessary.
November 3, 2010 at 4:22 pm | Report abuse | Reply EvanHey, at least it kept them busy, you really don't want a bunch of priests with too much time on their hands hanging around, now do you? Busy minds, pure thoughts….
November 3, 2010 at 4:47 pm | Report abuse | cjTo "what we pray is what we believe" I suggest adding "what we pray is what we do".
November 3, 2010 at 4:44 pm | Report abuse | Reply LuluThat would've been a good addition ...
November 3, 2010 at 4:49 pm | Report abuse | LuluIt would be nice if – just once – a media story regarding religion didn't dissolve into a war between non-believers and the faith-filled. Many here who claim to be atheist are merely preaching the gospel of logic & science just as passionately as those who preach the teachings of Christ, Buddha or Allah. If they truly were humanists, they would believe in tolerance for all belief systems, and would disavow intolerance for those who envision the world as so much more than their senses bring to them.
As for the content of this story, I don't think anyone beyond active Catholics have any legitimate reason to comment on it. Changing the words we say at Mass won't affect those who don't attend.
November 3, 2010 at 4:46 pm | Report abuse | Reply EvanHmmm, for instance... keeping gay human-beings from marrying or legally having partnerships shouldn't affect those who don't attend?
November 3, 2010 at 4:50 pm | Report abuse | Sum Dude@Lulu
If you feel that way, then why are you even here? Why don't you go to your EWTN site or some other Christian site and enjoy the company you say you prefer???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
November 3, 2010 at 5:24 pm | Report abuse | Lulu@ Evan: I think everyone should be allowed to marry whom they wish so long as they are legal & consenting adults. Those who don't think so, should not attend the weddings. And I think religion should stay out of politics & law.
@ Sum Dude : Why do you think I prefer the company of religious-minded people ? I said no such thing. Do you have no better argument than to tell me to go away ?
November 3, 2010 at 6:59 pm | Report abuse | Sum Dude@Lulu
Oops! Sorry. I think I got you mixed up with Jim. My eyes started scrolling on their own separately from the wheel on my mouse. Sorry! \ABS\Auto Blog Samurai\data\Cheesestick\cnn livings\icon_redface.gif)
@Sum Dude
Hey Dude..! What's happenin'...?
Peace...
November 4, 2010 at 12:58 am | Report abuse | billhillergood job valarie
November 3, 2010 at 4:55 pm | Report abuse | Reply BrianWhy is it that non believers are so afraid to believe in something bigger than what they are? To admit God in one's life is not an easy thing. To accept the Holy Spirit is a frightening thing to receive in your heart if you do not believe.
November 3, 2010 at 4:55 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammer@Brian: I'm not afraid to believe in something bigger than I am. I've been a Catholic. I've been a Protestant. I've been a pastor, an evangelist, and a missionary. Letting go of God was the hardest thing I've ever had to do. Do you think I wanted to lose the only father figure I ever had? Do you think I wanted to lose the rights to pray directly to the creator of the universe and have him listen to my every word? Do you think I wanted to believe there was nothing after I died, and that I would never see my dead loved ones again? Do you think I wanted to go from having hundreds, at times even thousands of followers, to writing a blog that gets 30 views a day? Do you think I wanted all my Christian family and friends to forsake me? I did not, but I could do nothing else but stop believing.
Logic and reason won out. There is no God, and if there is, there is no human being on this planet that can claim to speak for him or to know his mind. If there was a God, the Bible and the Quran are obviously not his books. There is no reason to believe, and all belief does is cause dogmatic separation of people who could otherwise be friends and coworkers towards a better tomorrow.
November 3, 2010 at 5:05 pm | Report abuse | brad@capnjammer: I for one understand the loss one feels when faced with God's absence. The old mystics called this "spiritual desolation". I also appreciate the risk you run by stating your inner feelings on this site. There are too many others who will kick you when you're down.
November 3, 2010 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse | Sum Dude@capnjammer
A great post, bro!
Ignore these nastier trolls. They love to twist words and provoke using lies – in a decidedly sadistic manner, I must say.
They / he has been doing this on here a long time. They / he cannot speak straight, see straight, or hear straight, and they / he needs to go straight to somewhere that doesn't exist and makes no sense. \ABS\Auto Blog Samurai\data\Cheesestick\cnn livings\icon_biggrin.gif)
Gosh. No wonder atheists are so angry. They're exhausted from trying to crowd the infinite through their brains. As Evelyn Underhill observed, "Absolutes are known only to absolute mind; our measurements, however careful and intricate, can never tally with the measurements of God."
November 3, 2010 at 4:59 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammer@Brad: I beg to differ. Have you ever contemplated the universe? It is so much more than you can imagine, on both ends of the spectrum (microcosmic and macrocosmic). God was simply an excuse, a fill-in when we could not begin to understand. We are only just now stepping out into the shores of the vast ocean of discovery, and we no longer need the excuse "God did it." We want to find out what really did it, and we can no longer afford to let God get in the way of that. If the person who discovered penicillin had looked into his test tube one day and declared "It's a miracle!" instead of searching for the truth, millions would be dead right now. We must forsake God and doctrine. The world is not so black-and-white as it once was thought to be. We must investigate the grey areas, or we will die out as a species. The segregation, bigotry, hatred, division, and the stymieing of scientific, technological, medicinal, and societal advancement due to religion must be stopped.
November 3, 2010 at 5:12 pm | Report abuse | brad@capnjammer
Evelyn Underhill was explaining what we face when dealing with the absolute. The approach you offer is limited to the temperal, finite, and what we can detect and process with our mere five senses. I agree with what you say as far as it goes.
Then would you please explain, if all of this is really so beyond our five senses and ability to process, the organizations that claim to be the mouthpieces of God. I appreciate your own personal belief and respect your right to it. I find my "spirituality" in my contemplation on the vast amazingness of the universe. My Scripture is the beautifully lyrical way that Carl Sagan explains it, for example:
"The Cosmos is full beyond measure of elegant truths
Of exquisite interrelationships
Of the awesome machinery of nature
I believe our future depends powerfully
On how well we understand this cosmos
In which we float like a mote of dust
In the morning sky."
I also, whereas I once used to weep whenever I heard the old hymn "It Is Well With My Soul" now weep as I hear John Lennon envision a world where everyone is brother and sister and the last walls of government, religion, and greed have been brought down from between us.
But why is my accepted method of spirituality not good enough? Why should anyone claim to know the mind of God any more than me? Why is my "religion," which is peace and harmony for all people, not good enough for those who claim to speak for God, who claim my beliefs are only lies told to distract from the truth of their God, who divide the world through the theology of creed, who cannot prove themselves to be any more worthy, if at all worthy, of the revelation of God's mind than I? And why should I not fight against that which is clearly evil, clearly divisive, clearly harmful, not only to myself and my rights and beliefs but to the rights and beliefs of all of humanity? Why should I sit by and watch as children are sequestered away, never given the right to make a choice or learn of those things which I find so incomparably amazing? Why should I stand down and watch while those who mean to a-ssimilate my "faith" are not asked to do the same?
November 3, 2010 at 5:57 pm | Report abuse | treejammerAs for me and my house, we welcome. the new translation.
November 3, 2010 at 5:18 pm | Report abuse | Reply AmandaGod and the Devil were walking along a road one day and saw something shiny off to the side. God picked up the shiny object and said, "Oh look, it's Truth." The Devil said, "Give that to me. I'll organize it." And so, Truth became Religion.
November 3, 2010 at 5:31 pm | Report abuse | Reply Sum DudeDid "Reality" post something at the top and everyone hit the "report abuse" button to make it go away and glitch up this thread??
November 3, 2010 at 5:44 pm | Report abuse | Reply RealityApparently:
A copy of the original-
The Apostles' Creed Updated:
I might believe in a god whose existence cannot be proven
and said god if he/she/it exists resides in an unproven,
human-created state of bliss called heaven.
I believe there was a 1st century CE, Jewish, simple,
preacher-man who was concieved by a Jewish carpenter
named Joseph living in Nazareth and born of a young Jewish
girl named Mary.
Jesus was summarily crucified for being a temple rabble-rouser by
the Roman troops in Jerusalem serving under under Pontius Pilate,
He was buried in an unmarked grave and still lies
a-mouldering in the ground somewhere outside of
Jerusalem.
Said Jesus' story was embellished and "mythicized" by
many local semi-fiction writers. A bodily resurrection and
ascension story was promulgated to compete with the
Caesar myths. Said stories were so popular that they
grew into a religion known today as Catholicism/Christianity
and featuring dark-age, daily wine to blood and bread to body rituals
called the eucharistic sacrifice of the non-atoning Jesus.
Amen
November 3, 2010 at 10:17 pm | Report abuse | Sum DudeYet this freedom of speech thing is okay....as long as no one "reports abuse" for no good reason...!
Then the thread goes "spang". *sigh*
twa is on the list?
November 3, 2010 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse | DonnewaldBeing a Catholic, I find the butchery to The Apostles Creed offensive. But I won't report it as such because all interacting on this thread need to see it and make their own decision.
November 3, 2010 at 11:26 pm | Report abuse | Sum Dude@Donnewald
As this is the first time I have seen this statement (under Reality's label or anywhere for that matter), the first thing that popped into my head after reading your posted response was-an impression that you are having some kind of hang-up over the name "The Apostles Creed."
I say this because I can't remember if I've ever read that Catholic(I'm assuming) statement.
I am not going to look it up until I am done posting this.
This is just my first impression of why people hit the button on this...when I have seen (and written some of it myself) much "worse" in this blog.
The only difference between this post of "Reality's" and so many others is that here seems to be that someone hit the button enough times – not hard to do for one person with a little imagination (an obvious drawback to having a button like that)...so then the next clue would be that of the tltle to which you refer.
Consider if these words had not been given that particular tltle...would you have been as upset?
Is it because you are not used to seeing such things spelled out in a blog or something?
Your Catholic Church is guilty of some of the most heinous crimes against humanity done over 2000 years.
You know your Church's history, right?
So why would any Catholic feel justified in pushing that button for that purpose?
Pettiness mixed with revulsion of a religious nature? Shock? Outrage? Being monstrously offended?
You know that's how -I-, an agnostic tend to look at the Catholic Church, right?
For all the crimes that have been done, ARE STILL BEING DONE, and are very likely to continue to be done, the Catholic Church has very little cause to protest anything like a call for justice or a denouncing of the other policies and crimes of the CC. I'm not stopping you from being offended, am I? Oh, well. I thought it might be worth a try.
Thanks for supporting everyone's right to hit the post button, at least. If people can't express anything better than hitting a button, then perhaps they should play some videogames instead.
They can be rad fun, man. Consider the soft-ware market (the letters ft-w get "moderated", sorry)....is there some sort of Catholic videogame you could play or suggest to the right videogame developers?
Then you could be have some truly blessed fun instead of seeing our "offensive" posts....??
@Donnewald
Having looked up "The Apostles Creed" and looked at the different "types" I find that I have heard this somewhere before.
I used to drink that gra-pe juice, yeah. I remember hearing that at least once now.
Now I came back to compare the two "versions" and discover something amazingly obvious – what "Reality" posted is just a sort of statement of how Christianity is seen by some other people or maybe a statement of "belief" that views many of the usual tenets of Christian belief in a different light.
Some Jews, Muslims, (and probably others) would probably have this opinion of what is contained in the "official" creed statements.
Is this a bad thing?
Can it be refuted using good evidence beyond second and third-hand accounts?
If not, then maybe you don't really have good cause to be offended.
to capnjammer-
I will be praying for you specifically that you will turn back to Jesus Christ! The enemy(the devil) wants to do nothing but steal, kill and destroy...he knows his time is short....and he is going to try and take any soul that he can with him...but what is so awesome is that Jesus is Lord and He is coming soon and everything crazy that is going on in the world today is spoken of in the Bible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You are in my prayers and everyone on here!! I pray that you will turn back to Jesus...He is the ONLY way! God bless YOU all !
I'm sorry, believer... well, I'm not really sorry in general, I just don't want to seem ungrateful for your time and effort. But I know for one hundred percent absolute fact that there is no such Jesus. It simply is not possible. I did not choose to leave Christianity based on emotion or anger or being dissuaded from my particular denomination. I simply can not believe something that I know beyond the shadow of a doubt to be absolutely false. I cannot argue that there is no God (only that there is no valid proof of the existence of any God), but Jesus is a different story. If Jesus ever really did exist, which I doubt, he was not the Messiah, and he especially was not the son of God.
I could just as easily say that I'll be praying for you that you forsake the plagiarized religion of Christianity and follow the true religion it was based on, Zoroastrianism, and that you accept the original Jesus, Mithras, son of the god Mithra, and stop following the false god Jesus who is just a supplanter and usurper.
November 3, 2010 at 6:16 pm | Report abuse | MuneefWell for us as Muslims Jesus the Messiah did exist but was not sacrificed as told and died latter to be rised to heavens and come down again on time known to God. We know God exist from seeing the creation and that there is reason for every creature and creation and nothing came or created for nothing? We knew that God was not an idol from messengers of God who came one after another to warn and guide us to the truth.
The only thing I agree with you that yes Jesus was a creation of God and his creation was as miracles as Adam but not as a Son of God or to be worshiped rather than God the creator ?
We were told that there were Christion branch that did not consider Jesus as a son of God but heard they were exter,minated long ago and just wonder if any left existing..?
I think you mean the Gnostics, and yes, my best friend is a Gnostic. Everything else, well, I'm sorry (again, I keep saying this but I'm not really) but seeing the world around you isn't valid evidence of God. That's like saying finding a poo in the forest validates the idea that it was pooed by a leprechaun. The universe began to exist, yes, but just because it did in no way infers that a God did it. In fact, the God hypothesis adds nothing to the search for the truth of our origins. God is not necessary for the universe to make sense, and really only makes it that much more confused. When the first man with a brain big enough to do so stepped out of his hut and said "I don't understand how the world started, but I made that hut, so the world must have been made by someone like me, only bigger," you had the start of theology. Then, when he told someone "I just figured out that God created the world, and he wants you to give me that pretty rock or he'll allow me to kill you" the first religion was formed. All religions after that are just copies of that first man's ignorance and greed.
November 3, 2010 at 9:10 pm | Report abuse | MuneefGuess if that what you are convinced with then let it be because I am not here to convince you but marking our teachings although we all have minds and hearts that tells us the truth of things. As suppose I tell you a lie you will find your self unconvinced because you felt some thing telling you otherwise and that's how we can tell truth from lies..
God in the Quran told us that our minds and hearts are responsible of differentiating between the truth and the false but told us as well that some people have locks on their hearts or blinded hearts and couldn't tell the difference because their faith in God was weak or are more in to clone or traditions that they do not want to give up..
Yeah, you need a thick skin when it comes to religion, politics, sports, and Siberia.
November 3, 2010 at 6:02 pm | Report abuse | Reply Cecil NixxonTrue, Deacons can celebrate the Eucharist and preside over some aspects of mass.
But remember: The Clergy does more than Lay People!
November 3, 2010 at 6:04 pm | Report abuse | Reply Daithi mac curtáinThe changes seem strange lord Im not worthy to receive you under my roof ? I always thought to receive you was to receive you in the mouth as in the blessed host , I think this is really tinkering with something just for the sake of it or it does not translate well from italian to english . But if the holy father and the bishops feel this is for the better then so be it and God bless my beloved church .
November 3, 2010 at 8:04 pm | Report abuse | Reply LizI just went to the Bisthops' website. There is nothing new about this 'new' language. This is the language of the missal from the middle 1960's. I remember saying these prayers as a kid; they're a direct translation from the Latin! Sounds like the Pope is moving things backward some more....
November 3, 2010 at 8:22 pm | Report abuse | Reply dalisThese changes bring the Roman Rite closer to the Divine Liturgy of the Orthodox Churches and the Anglican Use of High Anglican and Anglo-Catholic Churches. My hunch is that they're not just trying to get the mass closer to a direct translation of the Latin (Tridentine) mass, but they're also preparing for the eventual reconciliation of the East-West Schism.
November 4, 2010 at 4:02 am | Report abuse | truehumanOur father who art in heaven
hallowed be thy name
thy kingdom come
thy will be done
on earth as it is in heaven
give us this day our daily bread
and forgive us our trespasses
as we forgive those that trespass against us
and lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from evil
Amen
Yawn. Just proving what a robotic church chump you are.
November 4, 2010 at 7:13 am | Report abuse | capnjammer@Brad: of eve-ryth-ing I said, your only arg-ument is that what I said is true, it just hap-pened a little later? I still as-sert that the vi-li-fi-ca-tion and murder of certain "Chris-tians" was part of a Roman scheme to cod-ify their beliefs into the new state religion and do away with the nay-sayers, and again stress that beli-eving something so firmly that you are willing to die for those beliefs does not, in fact, lend any cre-dence to those beliefs. Ja-pan-ese ka-mik-aze pi-lots crashed their planes into enemy shi-ps because they believed Hi-ro-hi-to was God.
Sorry about all the dashes but I couldn't for the life of me figure out what was causing my problem.
November 3, 2010 at 9:45 pm | Report abuse | Reply Sum DudeJa-panese
November 4, 2010 at 2:16 am | Report abuse | Sum Dude(newest addition = j-ap-- thx capnjammer!)
bad letter combinations / words to avoid if you want to post that wonderful argument:
Many, if not most are buried within other words, but I am not shooting for the perfect list, so use your imagination.
You can use dashes, spaces, or other characters to modify the "offending" letter combinations.
----------–
s-ex....Ess-ex, s-exual, etc.
c-um.........as in doc-ument, accu-mulate, etc.
sp-ic........as in disp-icable (look out Sylvester the cat!)
ho-mo...whether ho-mo sapiens or ho-mose-xual, etc.
t-it.........const-itution, att-itude, ent-ities, etc.
an-al......ban-al
sh-it
fu-ck...isn't this a great word? yet they filter it. \ABS\Auto Blog Samurai\data\Cheesestick\cnn livings\icon_sad.gif)
who-re
tw-at.....as in wristw-atch, (an unexpected one)
pr-ick....perhaps cupr-ic would also fall under the ban.
sl-ut
va-g....as in extrava-gant, va-gina, va-grant, va-gue, sava-ge, etc.
hor-ny...
ar-se....yet "ass" is not filtered!
nip-ple...those baby bottles are obscene aren't they?
c-ock
cu-nt...as in Scu-ntthorpe, a city in the UK, famous for having problems with filters...!
co-on...as in rac-oon, coc-oon
ra-pe...as in gr-ape, etc.
jacka-ss...but ass is fine lol
p-is.....as in pi-stol, lapi-s, pi-ssed, etc.
ft-w....as in soft-ware...!!!!!omg!
j-ap...as in j-apanese, ja-pan, j-ape, etc...this is one I had forgotten,as I only encountered it elsewhere...
There are more, some of them considered "racist", so do not assume that this is complete.
-----
okay words that you might have thought were bad...lol
penis
ass
crap
damn
anal
anus
sphincter
testicles
testes
pubic
boob
-–
I have found the best way to re-submit is to hit the back button, delete the cookies, look for and fix the problem and then hit "post". There are also "technical" ways past the filter, like "html ent-ities" (google it without the dash), but the filter is the problem, not a solution. Filters should not be needed in a free opinion blog.
November 3, 2010 at 10:06 pm | Report abuse | Reply Reality
From Sir Salman Rushdie's book "Satanic Verses", p. 376, paperback issue – for those 1.5 billion Muslims to read as they are forbidden to purchase or read said book:
One of the passages that prompted the crazy Ayatollah Khomeini to issue a fatwa against Sir Rushdie:
"The faithful lived by lawlessness, but in those years Mahound – or should one say the Archangel Gibreel? – should one say Al-Lah? – became obsessed by law.
Amid the palm-trees of the oasis Gibreel appeared to the Prophet and found himself spouting rules, rules, rules, until the faithful could scarcely bear the prospect of any more revelation, Salman said, rules about every damn thing, if a man farts let him turn his face to the wind, a rule
about which hand to use for the purpose of cleaning one's behind.
It was as if no aspect of human existence was to be left unregulated, free. The revelation – the recitation- told the faithful how much to eat, how deeply they should sleep, and which se-xual
positions had received divine sanction, so that they leamed that so-domy and the missionary position were approved of by the archangel, whereas the forbidden postures included all those in which the female was on top.
Gibreel further listed the permitted and forbidden subjects of conversation, and earmarked the parts of the body which could not be scratched no matter how unbearably they might itch.
He vetoed the con-sumption of prawns, those bizarre other-worldly creatures which no member of the faithful had ever seen, and required animals to be killed slowly, by bleeding, so that by experiencing their deaths to the full they might arrive at an understanding of the meaning of their lives, for it is only at the moment of death that living creatures understand that life has been real, and not a sort of dream.-
And Gibreel the archangel specified the manner in which a man should be buried, and how his property should be divided, so that Salman the Persian got to wondering what manner of God this was that sounded so much like a businessman.
This was when he had the idea that destroyed his faith, because he recalled that of course Mahound himself had been a businessman, and a damned successful one at that, a person to whom organization and rules came naturally, so
how excessively convenient it was that he should have come up with such a very businesslike archangel, who handed down the management decisions of this highly corporate, if noncorporeal, God."
Check what this professor is saying
November 3, 2010 at 10:21 pm | Report abuse | Reply RealityAmazing facts about the koran:
"Islam’s Koran and Wa-r Ve-rses
Readers will have heard apo-logists for the Koran acknowledge that, yes, there are w-ar ve-rses in the Koran, but only a few. Every Muslim ap-ologist hastens to add that the Koran’s sp-ar-se number of war ve-rses relate to just a few unavoidable military crises in Islam’s early history. They as-sure us that no war ve-rse was ever intended to serve as a model inc-iting Muslims in general to hostil-ity against res-istant non-Muslims in all ages.
What is the truth of the matter?
In fact, there are at least 109 ident-ifiable war verses in the Koran. One out of every 55 verses in the Koran is a war verse. War ve-rses are scattered throughout Mohammed’s chapters like bl-ood sp-latter at a crime scene. I will demo-nstrate from Mohammed’s own words that he leaves readers in no doubt—he obviously intended his war verses to aro-use Muslims to compel the conversion of non-Muslims to Islam, even by violence if necessary. Failing their con-version, Mohammed ordained that non-Muslims be killed, enslaved or—provided Islam is in full political control—heavily taxed for the adva-ncement of Islam in per-pe-tu-ity!
And yet I hes-itate. Why? If I simply cite war verse after war verse after war verse from among 109 samples, many readers, seeing just the words on paper, may think it was just that—ven-geful-sounding words that got written on paper but remain inn-ocent because they did not lead to actual deeds of vio-lence. Even Hitler’s Mein Kampf—minus World War II—could be just-ified by some as Ad-olph’s way of venting fru-stration. Thus I am obl-igated to quote Mohammed’s war verses in the con-text of the actual vio-lence they either described or inspired. Violent words that trigger vio-lent deeds cannot be dis-missed as inn-ocent ra-mblings.
The tragic events I describe in the next few pages are all confirmed from Muslim sources. Readers may find it odd that per-pe-trators of such lo-athsome crimes would confess them so aud-aciously. In fact, the vio-lence that Mohammed inspired in his followers was so per-va-sive that both he and they seem to have lost all sense of how vil-lainous the recounting of their deeds would appear to non-Muslim readers in ages to come. As the following chapter shows, they virt-ually brag about mur-dering inn-ocents."
November 3, 2010 at 10:36 pm | Report abuse | Reply billp"It is necessary for salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." – Pope Boniface VII
Those words say everything you need to know about the Catholic Church and its goals.
November 3, 2010 at 10:40 pm | Report abuse | Reply streetcar01This is earth shattering.
November 3, 2010 at 10:46 pm | Report abuse | Reply anotherviewIn the end, we all meet our Maker!!!
November 3, 2010 at 11:53 pm | Report abuse | Reply Nunyer BeezwaxOur parents?
November 4, 2010 at 7:11 am | Report abuse | jjsThis disappoints me as a Catholic because it ruins the joke my friend and I have when we quote Star Wars. One of us says, "May the Force be with you." To which the response is, "And also with you."
November 3, 2010 at 11:58 pm | Report abuse | Reply LesThey can re-write all they want (and some of it now makes no sense, like the Ecce Agnus Dei response) but it doesn’t make any of it any more true than it was before the changes, which is not true at all. It is a nice way to organize like minded people and give them something greater than themselves to look to when life isn’t easy, but the truth is there is no son-of-god Jesus, no god, no life after death. I am a believer in reality, and the goodness of human beings, and the idea that life is a short-term existance in which we should all be trying to do good for the world and be as happy as we decide we want to be.
November 4, 2010 at 12:55 am | Report abuse | Reply Sum Dude@Les
This may sound strange, as I am an agnostic, but you make assertions without proof and somehow believe that happiness is a "choice" that people aren't making often enough.
And life doesn't have to be a "short-term existence", either. You state things as if you know them to be true like many religious folk, but you cannot prove them, also like religious folk.
Human existence has uncertainty, discontent, and physical needs...our human bodies are erratic, unreliable, uncontrollable, very vulnerable to just about everything, and haphazardly evolved....and our brains are commensurately badly evolved as well.
Which might explain your post. lol (just had to put that in, sorry.)
People with clinical depression cannot "choose" to be happy. They did not make a "choice" to suffer depression.
The number of people who believe that happiness is just a "choice" one has to "make firmly" or something, is enormous.
You might be right about there being no gods around, but you couldn't possibly know for sure, as you cannot prove it...can you....
Just arguin'
Well that's going to be confusing...... I think the people are going to have a hard time changing what they've recited every week for 30+ years (or in my case, my entire life)!
November 4, 2010 at 2:26 am | Report abuse | Reply dalisWell, it will give you something to do.
November 4, 2010 at 4:05 am | Report abuse | Nunyer BeezwaxWell your other choice is to realize the ridiculousness of the entire situation, quit shoring up a monstrosity, and spend your time and money making the world a better place every Sunday, rather than standup/sitdown/standup/chant/sitdown/put money in the bowl/practice symbolic cannibalism/standup/kneel/sitdown...
November 4, 2010 at 7:09 am | Report abuse | JCizzleThe only church I believe in is Church's Chicken.
November 4, 2010 at 4:15 am | Report abuse | Reply Nunyer BeezwaxYou guys sure do waste a lot of time typing crap on here. Religion is a waste of time and an embarrassment to those of us humans who have chosen to use our brains.
November 4, 2010 at 7:05 am | Report abuse | Reply Answerman28What a complete pile of horse dung.. It staggers the imagination to think that anyone would dedicate thier lives to insisting there is a sky fairy in 2010.. I dare say there is no hope for these people.
November 4, 2010 at 8:12 am | Report abuse | Reply KevinChanges appear to be designed to de-emphasize the belief that the wafer is literally transformed into Christ's body, emphasizing the figurative rather than the literal.
November 4, 2010 at 8:53 am | Report abuse | Reply ValerieWow.
I am wondering why it is exactly that non-believers go so far out of their way to "sway" those of us that DO believe. Please explain. How exactly does it benefit you? Does it make you feel superior to us? Smarter than us??? What do you gain from it?
Just hope for your sake you are right, because if "I" am wrong, I end up just dead, but if YOU are wrong, you're SCREWED!
Have a great day!
November 3, 2010 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse | Reply XPST> I am wondering why it is exactly that non-believers go so far out of their way to "sway" those of us that DO believe.
That's easy. Because you may be wrong. Because you may be precisely wrong.
You may be acting exactly in the way that dooms us all to hell. If you close you own mind to alternatives, or, worse yet, impede the ability of others to find the Truth, you may impede your own ability to identify valid moral imperatives, or, worse yet, impede the ability of others.
By your own "Paschal's wager" justification, you should hedge your bet, and oppose prescriptive moral assertions that are not justifiable. You should oppose attempts by others to constrain exploration and diversity, and instead allow for the largest possible exploration space. That is, of course, unless you can justify proposed constraints.
November 3, 2010 at 3:16 pm | Report abuse | Reply CompassionValerie – it looks to me like what you just spewed at reality is anger and judgment. Forgive me if I am incorrect, but being raised Catholic I thought we were taught that judgment is reserved for God only. A God who teaches us compassion, understanding and above all else, LOVE for our fellow man.
November 3, 2010 at 3:17 pm | Report abuse | Reply ValerieXPST- but if there isn't a God, how come you are worried I might be dooming "us all to hell"?
Explain.
November 3, 2010 at 3:22 pm | Report abuse | Reply ValerieCompassion- I asked questions.....please re-read my post. I asked questions. I wonder why you are attacking what I wrote. Don't you wonder the same thing?
All this ENERGY it takes for non-believers to rake us over the coals....so what if they don't agree with what we believe? Why do they CARE so much? I certainly don't waste my time tracking them down to convert them......so why do they do this?
Makes you wonder..... : )
November 3, 2010 at 3:25 pm | Report abuse | Reply JB CalValerie, your response to Reality's Apostles' Creed update was spot on.
November 3, 2010 at 3:27 pm | Report abuse | Reply XPST> PST- but if there isn't a God, how come you are worried I might be dooming "us all to hell"?
God == valid moral imperatives. I cannot prove that valid moral imperative do not exist.
However, I do not yet know of any attributes of God other than that one attribute.
'Hell' is the consequence of violating valid moral imperatives.
November 3, 2010 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammerThank you, XPST. Let me add to your argument in a way that might be a bit more coherent for a layperson:
If you are wrong about God, for example, if he is really Allah, or the Gnostic god, or Zeus, or if he wants people to use the reason and intellect he has blessed them with and punishes blind faith, that is how you are dam-ning us all to H-ell. You have to remember that yours is not the only religion, yours is not the only god, and even among members of your own faith there are variant beliefs on how to get to heaven.
On top of that, I'm sure you vote for people based on your religious preferences rather than your belief that they would actually do a good job in office. George W. Bush, for example, prayed and read his Bible all night before the election, and thus won the popular vote for the religious crowd, but now we are engaged in what seems to be an endless war and the economy is worse now than it has been since the Great Depression. On top of that, we don't want people to vote against g-ay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, separation of church and state laws, etc. simply because they are predisposed to an unverifiable belief. Also, religion causes division and segregation. Martin Luther King, jr. said "Sunday morning is the most segregated hour in America." I don't believe we should have such divisions, but until religion eases its hold on the hearts and minds of people we are never going to see "Human Pride Day."
That's why we fight so hard against religion. I believe it is in the best interest of the human race.
November 3, 2010 at 4:19 pm | Report abuse | Reply PCBtw–who asked you, and why should we believe your opinion? You've certainly proved to be no smarter or better educated than many others on this site.
November 3, 2010 at 4:28 pm | Report abuse | Reply jojoSeriously!!!!!!! Of all the issues going on the Catholic church the Vatican an American Bishops want to waste time and revert back to Pre Vatican 2 Bull Crap. I swear, good god you dumb old men.
November 3, 2010 at 4:32 pm | Report abuse | Reply brad"Said stories were so popular that they grew into a religion known today as Catholicism/Christianity". Reality, I expect that people of the day hesitated to abandon the status quo (Judaism, Paganism) in favor of a "cult" in which they would be fed to wild beasts or scorched on a grid iron. Have you ever considered that in spite of human nature, something truly powerful was at work?
November 3, 2010 at 5:08 pm | Report abuse | Reply Leave Me AloneNo, you're gambling too. You see gos might only like Jews or Muslims. Who knows who'll be let in the door? Might not be you so better believe'm all to be safe.
November 3, 2010 at 5:07 pm | Report abuse | Reply Sum Dude@Valerie
Surely we could say the same to you? Yet your being "screwed" is happening NOW, whereas our being "screwed" will never happen other than having to deal with people like you while we are alive.
Enjoy your wastefulness, your lack of sense, your kludge-like motions and thoughts, for they steal your life.
And have a nice day.
Actually, it's interesting to note who did most of the persecution and killing... Furthermore, everyone who believes something to any extent will make certain sacrifices for it. According to your argument, Islam is the true faith. You Christians died for your beliefs (or so you say, but, like I said, who was doing most of the killing?), but I've never seen you run into a building with a bomb strapped to your back. I have seen practi-tioners of Vodun pour hot oil into their eyes. I've seen Buddhist monks set themselves on fire for their beliefs. I've seen charismatics allow themselves to be bitten by snakes. We all know that the Meso-Americans were more than willing to bring their own daughters to be sacrificed, and the Hindu Thuggee cult kills people in order to save the world from the wrath of Kali. If anything, your argument only shows how hard-headed you are: dying for your beliefs rather than listening to reason and recanting.
November 3, 2010 at 5:29 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammer@Brad: I replied, but it wasn't nested within your comment properly. Furthermore, why wouldn't they leave the status quo for a cult that was made the state religion by the Roman Empire? The people who were killed were most likely people who wouldn't convert to the new state religion, most likely the people who truly followed the Messianic cult and were against the state subsidization of it. They were most likely all killed off so the Romans could form their new religion (Catholicism) without argument.
And for those of you wondering why the Romans would take on the new religion... the Bible even explains that it was clear that the followers of the Messianic cult were growing in influence. The Roman's tactic for conquest was always to a-ssimilate the culture and religion of the people they wished to conquer, which is why the Greek and Roman pantheon is exactly the same, and (as I said in another post) why Renaissance depictions of Saint Peter picture him with a crooked staff and two fingers held up, exactly like classical depictions of Zeus.
November 3, 2010 at 5:37 pm | Report abuse | Reply Sum DudeI see this thread has gone "spang" like so many others.
Who do we have to thank for it this time?
Actually, Catholicism was made the state religion by Constantine long after the first century. Those first Christians converts faced the wrath of Diacletian, Nero, and the like, as well as being thrown out of the synagogue when Romans began putting the heat on the rebelious Jews.
November 3, 2010 at 5:44 pm | Report abuse | Reply MuneefHere I agree with you that the true Jesus believers and who believed in him as a messenger and not a Son of God were thrown to the beasts.. Wonder if Daniel was before or after but he as well was thrown to the lions by the Romans.
November 3, 2010 at 8:53 pm | Report abuse | Reply AmandaLuther must have posted his 95 theses. And Christendom went spang!
November 3, 2010 at 5:50 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammerFact checking is useful, Muneef. The Romans hadn't even begun to exist at the time of Daniel.
November 3, 2010 at 9:12 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammer@Muneef: oh, and isn't it fancifully convenient that it just happens to be the ones who didn't believe he was the son of god who were thrown to the beasts in your belief, while in other's beliefs it was? Can no one see that someone is obviously lying here to make their side sound better? How about instead of listening to your religious leader, you actually look at REAL science and REAL history? Did God not grant you the ability to use your brains? If God is real, as you so ardently a-ssert, then why are you willing to just believe "every wind of doctrine? (Ephesians 4:14) " Whatever happened to "Search the scriptures daily to see if these things be true (Acts 17:11)," "Study to shew thyself approved (II Timothy 2:15)," "Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear (I Peter 3:15)," "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (I John 4:1)," "No Scripture is of any private interpretation (II Peter 1:20)" which literally means the words of Scripture should not be taught by any one single man, or the injunctions in the Bible that in the last days teachers would come with false doctrines that seem real? What about the scripture that says that Satan deceives with false doctrines that have the appearance of the truth, and that he will give a "strong delusion" to most of the world?
So why not test your religion by researching others, using outside sources, and studying to shew thyself approved? Let me guess: your answer is probably going to be that, since I'm an atheist, I couldn't possibly be interpreting those verses right, or some other weak and worthless argument.
November 3, 2010 at 9:26 pm | Report abuse | Reply Muneef@capnjammer.
As it happens I was only writing what I became to know so I would be guided to the truth of things. Then I am a Muslim and know about Quran verses only and not the Bible words beside I read many of your posts which tells you been in to many beliefs but Islam was not one of them and I am sorry for that "not for not becoming Muslim but for not understanding it or giving a chance to be studied...
Yes agree with you that not every Rabbi or Priest or Imam could be true because many among them are the tools of the devil and would make of some thing ugly look good or good look ugly and which more of them became in this era which we call to be the Army of the dijjal or the so called Anti Christ which in fact is the Anti Religion..
But as you said we have minds and brains to decide for our selves what to take and what to leave out, so I take my religion as a link between me and God worship and prayers but not as politics or hatred or Doctrine nor I have any religious leader than the Quran and Prophet Muhammed.
But if you were referring to those thrown to the beasts,well this was not in the Quran it was in a book I once read that spoke that companions of Jesus were divided in to three groups two of which who made Jesus as son of God and trinity have united against the one who had the believe that Jesus was a messenger of God and fought them driving them to ext,inction
But since I couldn't assume if the book was right or wrong got me to wonder if any like that existed..even for Daniel is not mentioned in the Quran but have read a book of stories of the messengers of God which I assume got the story from any other holy book other than the Quran and told he was thrown to the lions ring and that's what made me think of the Romans since they were the ones enjoying this murders as as a sport. So my appologies if got you confused or think that I was trying some thing shine on account of another.
November 3, 2010 at 9:54 pm | Report abuse | Reply capnjammerLion's Den, not lion's ring. But now, I'm only picking. Mainly, it's because I feel the need after you made an assumption about me: that I never studied Islam. II did. Islam actually very much interested me after I heard about the supposed scientific miracles in the Quran. I studied it and them extensively, and actually spoke to several Muslim friends of mine. There is no more truth to Islam than to Christianity, or any other religion.
Let me point something out: I have said already that I have proof that Jesus was not who he is portrayed to be, and in fact is just a mashup of several fictional and mythological characters. But the Quran says he is real and a great teacher. We obviously already have a contradiction.
Feel free to drop by my blog and message me. I'm willing to listen to whatever you have to say, as long as you are willing to accept my rebuttal. If what you say is true, I shouldn't be able to defy it.
November 3, 2010 at 11:55 pm | Report abuse | Reply SandraCapnjammer
I am going to read your website as time permits. It looks very well done. I am a Christian, and I find you to be a very civil debater. I have some questions to ask, but will not do them here, as I see alot of insults and attacks. I would like to ask you my questions, (not trying to convert you either,lol) on your website, if thats ok? I feel confident you will answer with an honest heart and thats what I want . Thanks!
November 4, 2010 at 8:49 am | Report abuse | Reply Muneef@capnjammer.
Very well said and it will be my pleasure to be in posts with you but is there some where else you refer to other than this as I see you talk about a blog and Sandra mentions a website that you have so which one you mean and address.
Thanking you.
E-mail: (required, but will not be displayed)
CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service. Next entry »Oklahomans vote against Sharia law« Previous entryAll Christians 'targets,' Iraqi militant group says
Your church sign photos
Posted by: CanariocaJune 11, 2010
Posted by: aynisalMarch 26, 2010
Posted by: highqueueJuly 10, 2010
Posted by: GISSAugust 5, 2010
Posted by: aynisalJuly 23, 2010
Posted by: pgf202July 6, 2010
Posted by: andr0277March 11, 2010
Posted by: lindy500June 11, 2010
Posted by: vgprakMarch 11, 2010
Posted by: Brenda1eyeMarch 11, 2010
Posted by: Brenda1eye March 11, 2010
Posted by: krisgonterJune 9, 2010
Posted by: Nomad4LifeMay 21, 2010
Posted by: kerrfunkJune 5, 2010
Posted by: shastafayeJune 9, 2010
Posted by: mcaldwellMay 20, 2010
Posted by: Kalalau123April 6, 2010
Posted by: stribulaApril 6, 2010
Posted by: gtowncollegeMay 20, 2010
Posted by: mcaldwellMay 20, 2010
Posted by: SHG47March 11, 2010
Posted by: RynMarch 14, 2010
Posted by: msaurondonMarch 15, 2010
Posted by: pgf202March 21, 2010
Posted by: SHG47March 11, 2010
Posted by: sjlong3May 21, 2010
Posted by: RynMarch 14, 2010
Posted by: SHG47March 11, 2010
Posted by: amandawriterMarch 11, 2010
Posted by: Jolijuli23March 10, 2010
Posted by: fatherhoferMarch 11, 2010
Posted by: GusWhoMarch 11, 2010
About this blogThe CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Dan Gilgoff and Eric Marrapodi, with daily contributions from CNN's worldwide newsgathering team and frequent posts from religion scholar and author Stephen Prothero.
Recent PostsSome say Democrats' weakened faith outreach partly to blame for lossesMy Take: Why I changed from 'Faith' to 'Being'Christian conservative voters turn out big on election nightOklahomans vote against Sharia lawCatholics to learn new wording for MassAll Christians 'targets,' Iraqi militant group saysDesigners named for 'Touchdown Jesus' statue replacementAtlanta pastor, in response to suits, denies sex allegationsMy Take: Feminist theology and feminism, R.I.P.My Take: Why religious leaders are so scandal proneRecent CommentsMuneef on Catholics to learn new wording for Massbrad on Oklahomans vote against Sharia lawMuneef on Israeli conversion bill raises question of who’s officially JewishMike, not me on Oklahomans vote against Sharia lawTopkitty on Christian conservative voters turn out big on election nightTop tags'Ground zero mosque' Barack Obama Belief Books Catholic Church Christianity Church Courts Culture & Science Culture wars Europe Evangelical Faith Faith Now Homosexuality Houses of worship Interfaith issues Islam Israel Judaism Leaders Mosque Music Muslim New York Opinion Politics Pope Benedict XVI Quran United States ArchiveNovember 2010MTWTFSS« Oct 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
Weather forecastHome | Videos | NewsPulse | U.S. | World | Politics | Crime | Entertainment | Tech | Health | Living | Travel | Opinion | iReport | Money | SportsTools & Widgets | Podcasts | Blogs | CNN Mobile | My Profile | E-mail Alerts | CNN Radio | CNN Shop | Site mapCNN en ESPAÑOL | CNN Chile | CNN Expansion | 
| 
| 
| 
CNN TV | HLN | Transcripts
© 2010 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.Terms of service | Privacy guidelines | Advertise with us | About us | Contact us | Help | Advertising PracticesPowered by WordPress.com VIP
No comments:
Post a Comment