Deliver us all from these changes

Yesterday marked the beginning of the new responses and customs in the order of the Roman Catholic Mass. These changes have been discussed and in the works for weeks. The Boston Globe reported on them in yesterday's newspaper.

The changes are universally recognized as minor and maybe add a few seconds to the mass. The official word from the Church explaining the need for change is to give a "less awkward translation" of the customs and traditions of the Mass. I wonder why the congregation's responses didn't fit the translations but the scriptures, readings and gospels have translation that needs no changes or tweakings.

I have heard from a few priests. They all seem to be toeing the company line. Statements of, "This is a good thing," and, "Try it. You'll learn to like it and get used to it," are among the most common statements made by the cloth.

These changes are bad.

It is my opinion that thses changes are made to make the Mass more formal. Some examples:

Priest: "The Lord be with you."
Congregation; "And with your spirit."

Excuse me? Are we not told the body houses your soul? Is the human body not sacred? Now the Lord is not with us but the spirit?

Part of the mass before the distribution of communion is sung in Latin. I believe this pushes the congregation further away. This is not the time for the Catholic Church to push people away from the flock. The church should be doing everything it can to retain its numbers and add to them.

The Creed, also known as the Profession of faith also changes "One in being with the Father" to "Consubstantial with the father." Again, do not complicate things for old and new members of the congregation. Keep it simple enough for all to understand and follow.

My biggest fear with all thses changes is that Catholics all over the country will appeal to their respective archdiocese and even the Vatican to revert to the old form and the authorities will only wave them off. I fear authorities will tell them what is good for them and that they should learn to embrace the changes. This is a bad thing to do and one of the worse times to tell the faithful what they need and what is good for them.

Black Friday Blues

Thanksgiving is just aroud the corner. You know what that means: Over next couple of days we will be inundated with ads on the television and radio with incredible deals and unbelievable savings on merchandise that would normally cost you 40-60% more if you shopped at more sane hours.

Thanksgiving 2011 looks to be one of the more exciting and interesting periods in the retail industry. Stores are not only hoping the Chri$tma$ Season will help their bottom lines but some stores are opening on Thanksgiving Night.

We all know the driving motivation behind opening doors hours before the normal time. Stores everywhere count on the Holiday Shopping season to help turn a profit. The economic doldrums that have been hanging on for three years and counting have hurt stores' bottom line. Hence the "need" to get a jump on the jump on the shopping season.

I feel bad for the retail employees. Unless you work in management, you will never earn what you are worth. The employees have every right to spend and enjoy the holidays with their families like everyone else. If a store is going to open at 10:00 p.m., it does not mean a clerk will have to show up at 9:50 in order to be ready for the madness. They will have to be at the store at a time closer to 8:00 to be ready. Figure time for a nap so they can be up all night, then time to wash up, change and hit the road so they can get to work.

The Holidays are a time to spend with your family. They are not a time to be at work and to figure out when a quick meal can be squeezed in before making your shift.

The stores are putting out great deals and opening as early as they can in order to entice shoppers and their money. These stores have had well over 300 days to give customers a great deal on merchandise and bring in some cash. If stores had good deals the entire year, they would not have to open up in the middle of the night. Offering sales and bargains throughout the rest of the year will mean more money for stores and shareholders. Customers will get what they want and employees will feel a little more appreciated and better about their job, which means they will be happier to help.

Casino Gambling in Massachusetts

Casinos in Massachusetts are this close to becoming a reality. Now it's just a question of dotting the i's and crossing the t's. An article in today's Boston Globe reports on the Legislature's progress toward passing a bill that would result in three casinos and one slot parlor to be built at locations throughout the commonwealth.

I have long been a proponent of gambling in Massachusetts. I believe the benefits and revenues that will come into the economy outweigh the risks and concerns opponents of the idea have when it comes to preying on the less affluent and other impending social concerns others have. What I don't like is the restrictions and conditions that have been watered down by lawmakers that deal with the time current members of Beacon Hill would have to wait between leaving their office and going to work for the industry. The original wait time of five years hase been slashed to one year. Another provision in the bill takes casino revenue from local aid and gives it to the horse racing industry for the purpose of increasing payouts on gambler's winnings.

Governor Deval Patrick has given every indication of signing the bill if/when it is passed by the State House, saying in the aforementioned article article, "there are no 'showstoppers' that would prevent him from signing the bill". Patrick did say, however, that he was "surprised and worried" by the changes in the bill that would divert money from the local aid to the racetracks.

Stop right there, Mister Patrick and lawmakers.

Leave it to a group of politicians to take a potentially good idea for all and see if they can use it for their personal gain. That's what cutting the waiting period from five years to one will do. It will only add to the distrust the public has when it comes to lawmakers. Of course, Patrick will be delivered a political "hot potato" if the bill is presented to his desk with all of the provisions mentioned included. His veto gives opponents the opportunity to call him a hypocrite and accuse him of abandoning an issue he has long supported.

Do not allow yourself to be fooled by those accusations. Patrick will not be a hypocrite and he will not be abandoning a cause. He will be refusing to allow an economic stimulant to be used by state representatives and senators for their personal gain. Lawmakers should work and stand together to allow the five-year ban to stand and allow cities and towns to keep their money. If not, the Governor should use his veto power until the proper clauses are restored. If not, everyone on Beacon Hill has given their contituents another reason to be wary and distrustful.

Herman Cain

 

Photo from hermancain.com

Running for office is tough enough without sexual harassment allegations. Just ask Herman Cain.
Getting elected doesn't mean you're out of the woods. Just ask Bill Clinton.

A new accuser has made allegations against Cain, a GOP presidential candidate. Cain has continued to deny the allegations before the mdia, even blaming the media for publishing "anonymous, ancient, vague personal allegations" as described in an email Cain sent to supporters.

One allegation would be cause for a story since it concerns someone running for President. Two raises eyebrows. Four, which is what we have with Sharon Bialek, dominates the headlines and diverts a candidate's time and resources from what they should be talking about: How they will lead the country.

Bialek is the first woman to come forward and openly accuse Cain. She alleges the unwanted advances occurred 14 years ago. The statute of limitations will not allow for Cain to face criminal charges and Bialek, who has hired a lawyer, has said she does not intend to file a lawsuit but wants Cain to "come clean - admit what you did and move forward" according to published reports.

Cain has crossed the Rubicon as far as these allegations. If something had happened, he would have done well to address the issue, offer a mea culpa and hope the incident would fade as he continued with his campaign. Now, if these allegations are true, Cain wil be disgraced and will face a fallout not only with political supporters, but more importantly with his wife and family.

Cain is not the first politician to face women accusers. Bill Clinton was dogged by the issue when he ran for president in 1992. His womanizing lifestyle followed him into the White House and he finally admitted in the summer of 1998 to having an affair with an intern. The media covered it relentlessly for more than a year prior. Clinton's popularity due to the surging economy, couple with the fact that he was more thatn halfway through his second term in the Oval Office, shielded him from further political fallout.

Other politicians like Howard Dean allow themselves to get caught up in a moment and are never allowed to live it down.

Herman Cain has surprised many Americans with his high standings in the polls. If he continues to stand up to the accusations and disprove them, he will be that much stronger and tougher to beat in elections. If this is a mere attempt to hide past lapses in judgement, it will destroy his bid for the White House and define his legacy forever.