The translation of "pro multis" as "for many" vs. "for all"
#41
(12-18-2010, 11:32 AM)Melkite Wrote:
(12-18-2010, 11:19 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Trent seems clear enough......the Vulgate is free from error in doctrine and morals.

Why worry about what St. Jerome did, did not do or why he did what he did? Bestter to be glad he did what he did and be done with it no?

Because I'm an inquisitive person.  I don't trust things blindly.  If the Church teaches the vulgate is free of error in doctrine and morals, I want to know why it teaches it.  If I don't have the answer it remains an open question in my mind.  There isn't one Catholic teaching I accept because the Church says so, and this one won't be the first.  I accept Catholic teaching because in every instance, I've used reason and found the Catholic teaching to be true.  But, unlike Scott Hahn, I don't say, 'well, the Church has been right every time before, it must be right this time too' and then drop it.  The church has to prove it to me, each and every time.  And based on its track record, I fully expect it will prove it to me, or already has proven it and I'm just not aware of it.  But to me, the Church's word alone is not good as gold.
Is not the very definition of Faith based on the teaching authority of the Church and not what we reason it to be?
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: The translation of "pro multis" as "for many" vs. "for all" - by Justin - 12-18-2010, 12:16 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)