About “pro multis”

[itsjustdave1988]

Scared to put it your own words, aren’t you? I don’t blame you.

Not scared…just tired of your Feeney-esque contentious attitude toward the teachings of the Catholic Church. If you don’t want to bother yourself to read Cardinal Ratzinger’s book, fine. Remain uninformed.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

… “Dave believes Pius V and Pius X are heretical … I know because I saw it on a website.”

I suppose I should’ve use the little rolling eyes face afterwards.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

…Maybe you should consider following their example.

I already described whose example I follow…

St. Paul:

“Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.” (Heb 13:17)

St. Thomas Aquinas:

“We must abide rather by the pope’s judgment than by the opinion of any of the theologians, however well versed he may be” Questiones Quodlibetales, IX:8]

Pope St. Pius X:

"If one loves the Pope, one does not stop to ask the precise limits to which this duty of obedience extends… one does not seek to restrict the domain within which he can or should make his wishes felt; one does not oppose to the Pope’s authority that of others, however learned they may be, who differ from him. For however great their learning, they must be lacking in holiness, for there can be no holiness in dissension from the Pope. " (Pope St. Pius X, allocution of 18 November, 1912, AAS vol. 4 (1912), 693-695. Selection from p. 695)

St. Catherine of Sienna:

“Divine obedience never prevents us from obedience to the Holy Father: nay, the more perfect the one, the more perfect is the other. And we ought always to be subject to his commands and obedient unto death. However indiscreet obedience to him might seem, and however it should deprive us of mental peace and consolation, we ought to obey; and I consider that to do the opposite is a great imperfection, and deceit of the devil.” (St. Catherine, Letter to Brother Antonio of Nizza).

"Even if that vicar were a devil incarnate, I must not defy him" (St. Catherine, Letter to Bernabò Visconti)

 

[Walking_Home]

St. Catherine of Sienna:

Quote:
“Divine obedience never prevents us from obedience to the Holy Father: nay, the more perfect the one, the more perfect is the other. And we ought always to be subject to his commands and obedient unto death. However indiscreet obedience to him might seem, and however it should deprive us of mental peace and consolation, we ought to obey; and I consider that to do the opposite is a great imperfection, and deceit of the devil.” (St. Catherine, Letter to Brother Antonio of Nizza).

“Even if that vicar were a devil incarnate, I must not defy him” (St. Catherine, Letter to Bernabò Visconti)​

A saint—that says to follow Satan—

 

[Dr.Bombay]

An invalid consecration…my, my. I’m glad I don’t attend the novus ordo.

Maybe ICEL should translate it, “Wine thou art and wine thou shalt remain.” That way, there won’t be any doubt.

I’m just here to offer helpful suggestions for the modern liturgy. :tiphat:

 

[porthos11]

An invalid consecration…my, my. I’m glad I don’t attend the novus ordo.

Maybe ICEL should translate it, “Wine thou art and wine thou shalt remain.” That way, there won’t be any doubt.

I’m just here to offer helpful suggestions for the modern liturgy. :tiphat:

Indeed, so true is the saying.

There is a shortage of vocations to the priesthood.
However, there is no shortage of vocations to the papacy.

I know my Pope and I know my Magisterium. What they say is valid is valid; Rome has spoken.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

I don’t believe the Pope has ever declared the novus ordo to be valid. Or surely somebody would’ve posted a link by now.

 

[Nicholas_Larkin]

steve green 2;1614333:

Next is doing something about "let us proclaim the mystery of faith "

And thirdly, do away with “For the kingdom, the power…”

Where did that come from anyway? Oh! the Protestants, I forgot,

Actually, the “For the Kingdom, etc.” was not Protestant in the orginal. It was taken from the Eastern Rite, atleast from what I have been told. I would be intrested in checking out a Eastern Rite Missal. But, from what I have gatherd, this saying was Catholc to begin with, and the Protestants took it from the Easter Catholic Rites. Anyway, let us continue!

 

[porthos11]

I don’t believe the Pope has ever declared the novus ordo to be valid. Or surely somebody would’ve posted a link by now.

The Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum is pretty much a declaration it itself, at least implicitly.

But it’s beside the point. The Pope doesn’t have to declare. He celebrates it himself.

 

[LilyM]

I don’t believe the Pope has ever declared the novus ordo to be valid. Or surely somebody would’ve posted a link by now.

Ummm … they’ve only celebrated it Doc … for 35-odd years
I should know, I was blessed to be present in 1986 at a Papal Mass that John Paul 2 celebrated here and it sure as heck wasn’t a TLM

 

[Ham1]

Notice the level of obtuseness we are sinking too: in the matter of a translation of a major liturgical text, a person is more willing to accept the most tortured reasoning possible to defend to the last breath that it’s a POSSIBLE correct translation, even in the face of evidence that they are wrong, than just to admit error and move on.

Sorry Bear, on this issue you were proven wrong, and you should drop the issue and move on…perhaps to quoting Pastor Aeternus (maybe it has a section on pontifical and episcopal rights to reinvent languages).

To repeat, for the forgetful: the Oxford Greek-English Lexicon, 9th Edition, large edition, DOES NOT print “multitude”, “common people”, let alone “ALL” as a possible translation of POLUS. Neither does the Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford, 1982) under MULTI. Neither does the 1879 Oxford Dictionary translated into English from the major German lexicon of Latin.

Nowhere. Not anywhere. In the Greek dictionary, we’re talking 2.5 dense pages of meanings that range from the common to the incredibly rare. Yet nowhere are the words all, multitude, or common people.

So sorry, Bear, you’re wrong.

P.S. for the curious: The Patristic Greek-English Lexicon of Lampp, also from Oxford, also does not offer these ICEL translations.

I guess ICEL has their own dictionary.

Remember, Bear, I stand by what is in the STANDARD, SCHOLARLY, BEST Latin and Greek dictionaries available.

Not lists of synonyms from online dictionaries. Because this isn’t a synonym game. It’s a translation question, and ICEL got it wrong. We haven’t even moved on to their next error(s). “Christus innocens Patri” = “Christ who only was sinless.” There, ICEL invented a word that is nowhere in the Latin.

Defend that.

In brief, it is UNACCEPTABLE from a scholarly point of view to look up a Greek or Latin word, take all the dictionary meanings, take those meanings to an English thesaurus, look up synonyms there, pick one at whim, and then claim it’s a valid translation of the original Latin or Greek.

No philological scholar would tolerate that. It’s sloppy, inaccurate work. Latin and Greek are notoriously precise languages. English isn’t. That’s part of the problem here. It’s also why sloppy English translations are major problems.

Okay…let’s try this for the 3rd time here. What are your thoughts on the opinions of Likoudis and Whitehead as noted in post #122 or 121 or whatever it was? Neither of these gentlemen are liberal theologians and yet both disagree with your assessment of the “pro multis” situation.

Also, since you appear to be the translation guru, how do you explain the fact that the latin and english translations of the Our Father appear to be defective and, if taken at face value, heretical? Was the latin mistranslated from the greek or whatever language in which it originally appeared. Should the ICEL change the english translation that has been around for centuries? Should the Vatican change the latin version of the Pater Noster? Could it possibly be incorrect given that it is a “notoriously precise” language?

 

[Dr.Bombay]

The Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum is pretty much a declaration it itself, at least implicitly.

But it’s beside the point. The Pope doesn’t have to declare. He celebrates it himself.

That’s dancing. I want a specific document linked that shows the Pope declaring, and I quote, “The novus ordo is a valid Mass.”

Failing that, we just can’t be sure.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Ummm … they’ve only celebrated it Doc … for 35-odd years
I should know, I was blessed to be present in 1986 at a Papal Mass that John Paul 2 celebrated here and it sure as heck wasn’t a TLM

You’ve heard the saying, “words speak louder than actions.”

I want a link. To the Pope. Declaring.

The novus ordo is valid.

Why can’t folks give me what I want?

 

[Ham1]

You’ve heard the saying, “words speak louder than actions.”

I want a link. To the Pope. Declaring.

The novus ordo is valid.

Why can’t folks give me what I want?

Maybe you could start a separate thread for your inane requests.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Maybe you could start a separate thread for your inane requests.

I’ll take that to mean you can’t provide a link either.

Novus ordo…perhaps invalid…quite shocking, if you ask me. And I know you did.

 

[bear06]

Novus ordo…perhaps invalid…quite shocking, if you ask me. And I know you did.

Congratulations, Bombay. You’ve out done yourself in your outrageous suggestion category. Let’s see, guess who said this:

A Mass (in any rite, new or old) is valid if: (1) a validly ordained priest intends to do—and does—what the Church intends; (2) uses valid Eucharistic matter (bread made exclusively of wheat flour and water, wine unadulterated by chemical preservatives); (3) says the Mass according to an approved rite of the Catholic Church.

I’m sure you can find it if you google. I don’t link to this site. Even they disagree with you. It became an approved rite with this: catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0262r.htm

What’s next? Are you going to now suggest that people stay home and say the rosary if they can’t attend a Tridentine?

 

[Rykell]

Dr. Bombay:

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Congratulations, Bombay. You’ve out done yourself in your outrageous suggestion category. Let’s see, guess who said this:

I’m sure you can find it if you google. I don’t link to this site. Even they disagree with you. It became an approved rite with this: catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0262r.htm

What’s next? Are you going to now suggest that people stay home and say the rosary if they can’t attend a Tridentine?

You mistake me, madam. I’m not the one who suggested such a thing. I was merely pondering the suggestion and asking if anyone had a linky to the Pope declaring the no valid. Which no one does.

Which leaves us all in a bit of a sticky wicket, no?

And I would never suggest anyone do anything. We all have to choose sides. We’re either with Him or against Him.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Dr. Bombay:

Yes, it is well past my bedtime.

I need my beauty sleep.

 

[bear06]

You mistake me, madam. I’m not the one who suggested such a thing. I was merely pondering the suggestion and asking if anyone had a linky to the Pope declaring the no valid. Which no one does.

Yes, I can just see you there with your best “who me?!” look on your face.
Again, beyond ponderance even according to the radical traditionalists minus the sedevacantists. No document necessary. Don’t have one - don’t need one.

Sleep well!