A reader writes:

I’ve been reading your blog for months now and enjoying it immensely. Something came up lately that I realized your particular blend of knowledge, wit and tomfoolery might be perfect for.

I was discussing the upcoming changes to the Roman Missal with some friends lately and I had someone of a generation close to mine (and I’m so old I get most of your references) state that “I don’t have a problem with change but I will not say ‘Through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault’. The church is just trying to make us feel guilty like they used to.”

I pointed out that we already say that we sinned through our fault, is the problem that we are saying it three times? And they said they just weren’t going to say it.

Got any deep thoughts for this one?

Nothing too deep. Just the observation that people are funny. I have no idea if the new translation reinstates the Mea Culpa, but it cracks me up that your friend can say, “Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy” without batting an eye and see the Mea Culpa as somehow a plot to induce guilt. I suspect there is something almost purely acoustic in their reaction, since the Kyrie is just as much a confession of the need for mercy as the Mea Culpa.

I sometimes wonder how much language is a function of the sound and shape of words as it is their meaning. Very odd.