Ah, a cogent post! A well-stated vanity (please do read up about vanities. I'm not saying not to post them -- I do post them myself -- but I cite sources as sources only, and make clear that I am the author of the post).
Please note, however, that your point has already been won: The new official translation of the mass plainly forbids the use of the phrasing, "for all." Nonetheless, it is scandalous that so few priests, fully aware of the translation, are waiting to be forced to make the change, rather than willingly correcting what they know to be a false translation.
Yo, dangus!
Point well taken, thanks!
You were 100% right in what you said, inasmuch as in normal English usage, setting original sources aside by flanking the excerps with quotation marks [ " ]before the beginning, and another set of [ " ] at the end -- plus the cites and page numbers -- would have done the trick, as least back in the Stone Age, so far as enabling a reader to determine for herself (or himself) just WHICH is the cited material and WHICH is the submitter's personal knee-jerk opinion.
Then again, maybe I'm just lucky 'cause I learned the fundamentals by going to a more or less podunk public high school over 40 years ago.
"Back when we were still using clay tablets and a stylus.."
Thanks for the input, especially for what you said about all this having been already taken care of, since in the Diocese of El Paso, reality is whatever the individual priest makes it, and what he makes it is up to him.
As Bishop Ochoa told us genially one afternoon during the pm Mass, when he'd just come back from that particular meeting:
"Some of these changes I can live with, with others well, we'll just have to see."
Another priest told us it would be like 3 to 5 years or who knows (or cares) before all this is "supposed" to be implemented. (Heh! Heh!)
Dennis