What is the "Crisis"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brother_John
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bobzills said:
The topic here is “what is the crisis?” In reading through the thread, I would say that one aspect of the present crisis is that Roman Catholics cannot agree as to whether “pro multis” means “for all” or “for many”. One group of Catholics insists that it means “for all” and that is the proper translation. And they say that this is clear because it is the officially approved translation. Another group of Catholics insists that the correct translation of “pro multis” is “for many.” And they cite the Catechism of the Council of Trent, and the fact that in many European countries the term is translated as “for many.” Further, Cardinal Arinze and the Vatican Congregation for the Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has declared that:
There are, however, many arguments in favour of a more precise rendering of the traditional formula pro multis:

a. The Synoptic Gospels (Mt 26,28; Mk 14,24) make specific reference to “many” (pollvn) for whom the Lord is offering the Sacrifice, and this wording has been emphasized by some biblical scholars in connection with the words of the prophet Isaiah (53, 11-12). It would have been entirely possible in the Gospel texts to have said “for all” (for example, cf. Luke 12,41); instead, the formula given in the institution narrative is “for many”, and the words have been faithfully translated thus in most modern biblical versions.

b. The Roman Rite in Latin has always said pro multis and never pro omnibus in the consecration of the chalice.

c. The anaphoras of the various Oriental Rites, whether in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, the Slavic languages, etc., contain the verbal equivalent of the Latin pro multis in their respective languages.

d. “For many” is a faithful translation of pro multis, whereas “for all” is rather an explanation of the sort that belongs properly to catechesis.

e. The expression “for many”, while remaining open to the inclusion of each human person, is reflective also of the fact that this salvation is not brought about in some mechanistic way, without one’s willing or participation; rather, the believer is invited to accept in faith the gift that is being offered and to receive the supernatural life that is given to those who participate in this mystery, living it out in their lives as well so as to be numbered among the “many” to whom the text refers.

f. In line with the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam, effort should be made to be more faithful to the Latin texts in the typical editions.
The Bishops’ Conferences of those countries where the formula “for all” or its equivalent is currently in use are therefore requested to undertake the necessary catechesis of the faithful on this matter in the next one or two years to prepare them for the introduction of a precise vernacular translation of the formula pro multis (e.g, “for many”, “per molti”, etc.) in the next translation of the Roman Missal that the Bishops and the Holy See will approve for use in their country.

So this itself is indication of a crisis situation where Roman Catholics do not agree among themselves on the correct translation of the term “pro multis.”
Click to expand...
It has been pointed out before that all that is required for proper Form for the Eucharist is: “This is my Body”’ This is my Blood".
“For all” is an acceptable addition to the Form of the Sacrament.
So is 'For many".

None argues that the proper translation of the latin is ‘for many’, but all the printed texts we use, use ‘for all’.

To say that this is a crisis in the Church is overstating the situation. I just add it to other ‘crises’ of the Traditionalists, such as kneeling during reception of the Eucharist, on the tongue, latin, altar boys, bells, and such. These are not ‘crises’. These are accidents, and they should not bother you this much.

It’s 40 years ago. Please get over it.

prayer and charity to all who post here.

peace
 
Note:

This thread is closed. Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top