The translation of "pro multis" as "for many" vs. "for all"
#71
I maintain that there is no "short" or "essential" form of the sacrament; there is only the one form, and that one form, having been solemnly proclaimed by the Church, cannot be shortened or changed in a any significant way.  And that is why the Holy Father wrote them that way in De Defectibus and why those words have been separated and highlighted in approved missals in use throughout the pre-VCII Church.  The form for the sacrament is what the Pius V said it is--nothing more, nothing less.

Let's drop all the pretense: 1) "for many" and "for all" do not mean the same thing;  2) the words "pro multis" cannot be translated in any language to mean "for all;" and, 3) the words "pro multis" are an integral part of the sacramental form (again, we know that from Church authority); and, 3) in all the years since the promulgation of De Defectibus, the form of the sacrament was never disputed... that is until Bugnini and his Protestant henchmen decided what had been done for centuries was no longer good enough for Catholics.

"For all" implies universal salvation, a theological concept antithetical to Catholic teaching. No matter a Catholic's opinion on the validity issue, those words should not be used in the Catholic Mass, because as the Roman Catechism states, they do not impart the true meaning of Christ's actions.

Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: The translation of "pro multis" as "for many" vs. "for all" - by ripmarcel - 12-20-2010, 05:42 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)