About “pro multis”

  • Thread starter Thread starter USMC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn’t lie.

John Paul II participated in a scandalous action: public prayer with pagans, heretics, and practitioners of false religions.

Parts of churches in Assisi were given to these pagans. Catholic churches.

Crucifixes were removed and covered.

Buddha was on a Tabernacle. The pope was seated in the room. When it was pointed out that the Buddha was on the Tabernacle (whatever possessed them to put it there?? Even Buddhists should know better?), it was removed.

But the scandalous event went on nonetheless. And the mistranslation of the sacramental formula of the Consecration WENT ON.

Justify that.
 
Don’t have to.

That’s Gods job.

I’m just a sinner.

Richard
AlexV said:
I didn’t lie.

John Paul II participated in a scandalous action: public prayer with pagans, heretics, and practitioners of false religions.

Parts of churches in Assisi were given to these pagans. Catholic churches.

Crucifixes were removed and covered.

Buddha was on a Tabernacle. The pope was seated in the room. When it was pointed out that the Buddha was on the Tabernacle (whatever possessed them to put it there?? Even Buddhists should know better?), it was removed.

But the scandalous event went on nonetheless. And the mistranslation of the sacramental formula of the Consecration WENT ON.

Justify that.
Click to expand...
 
I see. So Catholics are to remain silent when confronted with mistranslations of sacramental formulas.

How about invalid matter? Should we remain silent and let God sort that out, too?
 
Sorry, ALex.

Your baited hook shall continue to drift downstream.

God sorts out ALL things in His time. I do not judge. I try to live in concert with His will.

May our everlasting and everloving God give your soul peace in times of turmoil.

Richard
AlexV said:
I see. So Catholics are to remain silent when confronted with mistranslations of sacramental formulas.

How about invalid matter? Should we remain silent and let God sort that out, too?
Click to expand...
 
And translating “pro multis” as “for all” (which I note nobody has tried to defend) for over 30 years is a danger to the faith.
 
AlexV said:
First of all, I never mentioned John Paul II by name in that quote you’re calling “slander”.

Well, then, you’d be slandering alot more than him but anyone who’s been around knows the false story all though you apparently didn’t know it was false. If it’s not him, please provide evidence of any pope doing this.
Click to expand...
 
I’d rather have someone start answering questions that have long been asked and never answered:

) How can a mistranslation of a sacramental formula be introduced and tolerated for over 30 years?

Just how far does obedience go?
 
Alex,

I would submit 30 years given the life of the Church isn’t really that long. As the faithful, we of course are obligated to speak up but as with all things HOW we speak up can be just as important as what we are speaking up about. Change the course of the Church is like changing the course of an aircraft carrier. It’s slow and takes time

I pray that the mistranslation will in fact be corrected.

Vivat Iesus,

Stu
 
AlexV said:
And translating “pro multis” as “for all” (which I note nobody has tried to defend) for over 30 years is a danger to the faith.
Click to expand...
I have already said accuracy in translation is essential
 
rwoehmke said:
Yawn!
Click to expand...
Yah!!

Tiring, ain’t it. Same-O, same-o.

Been reading this stuff for over 40 years. Yup, before Gore invented the internet, there was the printed word. Same garbage, different day.

Richard
 
I really think our new Pope is doing his best to correct the mess the Church is in, but is proceeding slowly. It reminds me of the vision of St. John Bosco, who saw the Pope “straining every muscle” to direct the Church. I think that is the situation our current Pope finds himself in.
Click to expand...
Actually I think it’s the situation at least our last 6 popes found themselves in.
The pro multis mistranslation was not a small thing. In addition to not being the words our Lord used,
Click to expand...
i
ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/ZLITUR46.HTM
 
I see.

So if a priest uses bread with raisins in it, we can’t dare assert that it’s invalid matter, because we’re not in persona Christi, we’re just stupid lay people who can’t be sure of anything unless the “presider” tells us.
 
AlexV said:
I see.

So if a priest uses bread with raisins in it, we can’t dare assert that it’s invalid matter, because we’re not in persona Christi, we’re just stupid lay people who can’t be sure of anything unless the “presider” tells us.
Click to expand...
Your hypothetical is unreasonable.

A priest using raisin bread is NOT Catholic and is NOT celebrating the Mass of the Roman Rite.

You may keep trying but…this is now boring beyond tears, I move on.

Richard
 
Actually, a priest who would use any sort of invalid matter WOULD still be a Catholic, since invalid matter doesn’t excommunicate the priest who attempted to consecrate it.
 
AlexV said:
Actually, a priest who would use any sort of invalid matter WOULD still be a Catholic, since invalid matter doesn’t excommunicate the priest who attempted to consecrate it.
Click to expand...
And even an excommunication does not fully remove the penitent from the Church, just from it’s Sacramental Life.

All the penitent needs to do is repent and receive the Sacrament of Reconcilliation.

To be outside the Church requires Baptism to enter it. The Church does not re-Baptize.
 
CantorRick said:
Your hypothetical is unreasonable.

A priest using raisin bread is NOT Catholic and is NOT celebrating the Mass of the Roman Rite.
Click to expand...
So the premise still stands. If a Catholic priest attempts to consecrate invalid matter is outside the Church, how much less would a Bishop who give invalid instructions?

Would the laity still have a right to complain?

Or do you hold that it is impossible for a Bishop (who is not the Bishop of Rome) to provide invalid instruction to his flock.
 
And to answer AlexV’s question:

How can a mistranslation of a sacramental formula be introduced and tolerated for over 30 years? **I’m thinking it must be modernism infiltrating the highest levels of our Church.
**
 
I wonder how Saint Paul was able to “resist Peter to the face”, as we learn in the Epistle to the Galatians.

Thank God Paul didn’t have access to EWTN or any number of sources of information about how we must treat the pope’s actions.

But I’m also waiting for the day when people who celebrate to the stars all the glorious deeds of John Paul “the Great” explain precisely how to reconcile some of his statements (which often have myriad footnotes to Vatican II) with, say…the Council of Florence and Eugene IV.

We don’t hear much about him on these boards…
 
So if a priest uses bread with raisins in it, we can’t dare assert that it’s invalid matter, because we’re not in persona Christi, we’re just stupid lay people who can’t be sure of anything unless the “presider” tells us.
Click to expand...
Actually, invalidity would depend on the percentage of actual wheat bread. Just because it has raisins in it doesn’t automatically make it invalid-although it would of course be completely and utterly illict.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top