rbcbob
Puritan Board Graduate
Question raised by
new Catholic
liturgy: did Christ
die for 'all'?
By saying Jesus died “for many” instead of
“for all,” will Roman Catholic priests be
proclaiming a different theology beginning
this weekend — narrowing the extent to
which they believe Jesus saved sinners?
No, say the pope and bishops, the official
teaching authorities of the church.
Opponents of sweeping liturgical revisions
that will take effect this weekend, already
distrustful of the top-down process that led
to the changes, aren’t so sure.
The change in wording is just one of many
in the works.
As we reported earlier this fall, the
revisions are the biggest since Catholics
began having Mass in local languages
rather than Latin decades ago. They take
effect with Masses this weekend.
Controversies have ranged from the
content — such as the use of more
technical theological terms and the revival
of symbolic penitential breast-beating — to
the Vatican process for approving the
revisions, which critics said overrode years
of work by an English-language
commission.
Supporters say the new text is more poetic,
reverent and faithful to the Latin original.
After months of classes, training and other
preparation, parishes locally and
throughout the English-speaking world will
be using new words (and music) beginning
with Masses Saturday evening and Sunday
for start of the liturgical season of Advent.
The revised Roman Missal, which contains
the language used in the Mass, reflects
more of a word-for-word translation of the
Latin than the previous version that
Catholics have used for years.
The previous version relied on the concept
of dynamic equivalence — trying to capture
the idea of the original language rather
than the literal phrasing.
In one section, recalling Jesus’ words at the
Last Supper, the priest described Jesus’
blood being “shed for you and for all so
that sins may be forgiven.”
In the new version, the priest will describe
it as “poured out for you and for many for
the forgiveness of sins.”
Pope Benedict XVI specifically authorized
the change from “for all” to “for many,”
according to a 2006 letter from the Vatican
to bishops. (This affected more than
English-language Masses; Catholics
speaking other languages, such as Italian,
had been using the term for “all.”)
“For many” is a more faithful translation,
the Vatican said, to the Latin original, “pro
multis.”
Michael Diebold of the Louisville Liturgy
Forum, a group that has opposed the
liturgical changes, said there’s no question
“multis” means “many.”
But Diebold — a former priest and high
school Latin teacher — said the new
translation misses what “many” meant in its
Latin context.
“That meant for the whole crowd,” he said
in a recent interview. “When you translate it
into English it should mean ‘all.’ ”
The new translation, he said, “means that
some of them didn’t get redeemed, so
who’s the some that didn’t get redeemed?”
He called it a “subtle but very marked
change” from the mindset of the 1960s
Second Vatican Council, which opened a
new era of warmer ties with non-Catholics.
Louisville Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz said
there’s no change in church doctrine.
“Just as Scripture very clearly supports both
the universal call to salvation as well as for
the individual to freely receive and
embrace that call, so there is a need for
conversion,” he said in an interview earlier
this year. “Salvation is never forced on
someone. There has to be some act of
freedom to receive.”
The question relates to one that has
preoccupied Christian theologians of all
stripes for centuries: how to reconcile
biblical passages that say Jesus died for all
with those that say some will reject
salvation and face eternal damnation.
Theologians have written volumes about
“the interplay between freedom and
grace,” but Catholic theology has made
clear that both are essential, Kurtz said.
It’s the “Providence of God to decide who
has and who has not accepted it,” Kurtz
added.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
reiterates those points in a section on its
Website dedicated to the “pro multis”
question.
“It is a dogmatic teaching of the Church that
Christ died on the Cross for all men and
women,” it says.
For the Rev. Anthony Ruff — a Benedictine
monk from Minnesota who resigned from
work on a liturgy commission over the V
atican’s handling of the translation — the
problem is not the accuracy of “many.”
In contemporary culture, it sounds like “not
for all but for some,” he said, according to
the National Catholic Reporter. “So you
could make the case that it's a
mistranslation because it distorts the
original meaning.”
The Vatican, in a 2006 letter expressing
the pope’s view, said that “all” is a “correct
interpretation of the Lord’s intention” and
should be taught that way.
But the change reflects the shift to word-
for-word translation rather than conveying
general ideas.
“Many” reflects what Jesus actually said and
also conveys the idea that salvation is not
“mechanistic” but involves a believer
accepting an invitation, the Vatican said.
As we have noted in our coverage, most
Catholics surveyed this summer weren’t
even aware of the impending changes,
although awareness was higher among
regular Mass attenders.
Ready or not, they’ll be aware of it.
Question raised by new Catholic liturgy: did Christ die for 'all'? | The Courier-Journal | courier-journal.com
new Catholic
liturgy: did Christ
die for 'all'?
By saying Jesus died “for many” instead of
“for all,” will Roman Catholic priests be
proclaiming a different theology beginning
this weekend — narrowing the extent to
which they believe Jesus saved sinners?
No, say the pope and bishops, the official
teaching authorities of the church.
Opponents of sweeping liturgical revisions
that will take effect this weekend, already
distrustful of the top-down process that led
to the changes, aren’t so sure.
The change in wording is just one of many
in the works.
As we reported earlier this fall, the
revisions are the biggest since Catholics
began having Mass in local languages
rather than Latin decades ago. They take
effect with Masses this weekend.
Controversies have ranged from the
content — such as the use of more
technical theological terms and the revival
of symbolic penitential breast-beating — to
the Vatican process for approving the
revisions, which critics said overrode years
of work by an English-language
commission.
Supporters say the new text is more poetic,
reverent and faithful to the Latin original.
After months of classes, training and other
preparation, parishes locally and
throughout the English-speaking world will
be using new words (and music) beginning
with Masses Saturday evening and Sunday
for start of the liturgical season of Advent.
The revised Roman Missal, which contains
the language used in the Mass, reflects
more of a word-for-word translation of the
Latin than the previous version that
Catholics have used for years.
The previous version relied on the concept
of dynamic equivalence — trying to capture
the idea of the original language rather
than the literal phrasing.
In one section, recalling Jesus’ words at the
Last Supper, the priest described Jesus’
blood being “shed for you and for all so
that sins may be forgiven.”
In the new version, the priest will describe
it as “poured out for you and for many for
the forgiveness of sins.”
Pope Benedict XVI specifically authorized
the change from “for all” to “for many,”
according to a 2006 letter from the Vatican
to bishops. (This affected more than
English-language Masses; Catholics
speaking other languages, such as Italian,
had been using the term for “all.”)
“For many” is a more faithful translation,
the Vatican said, to the Latin original, “pro
multis.”
Michael Diebold of the Louisville Liturgy
Forum, a group that has opposed the
liturgical changes, said there’s no question
“multis” means “many.”
But Diebold — a former priest and high
school Latin teacher — said the new
translation misses what “many” meant in its
Latin context.
“That meant for the whole crowd,” he said
in a recent interview. “When you translate it
into English it should mean ‘all.’ ”
The new translation, he said, “means that
some of them didn’t get redeemed, so
who’s the some that didn’t get redeemed?”
He called it a “subtle but very marked
change” from the mindset of the 1960s
Second Vatican Council, which opened a
new era of warmer ties with non-Catholics.
Louisville Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz said
there’s no change in church doctrine.
“Just as Scripture very clearly supports both
the universal call to salvation as well as for
the individual to freely receive and
embrace that call, so there is a need for
conversion,” he said in an interview earlier
this year. “Salvation is never forced on
someone. There has to be some act of
freedom to receive.”
The question relates to one that has
preoccupied Christian theologians of all
stripes for centuries: how to reconcile
biblical passages that say Jesus died for all
with those that say some will reject
salvation and face eternal damnation.
Theologians have written volumes about
“the interplay between freedom and
grace,” but Catholic theology has made
clear that both are essential, Kurtz said.
It’s the “Providence of God to decide who
has and who has not accepted it,” Kurtz
added.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
reiterates those points in a section on its
Website dedicated to the “pro multis”
question.
“It is a dogmatic teaching of the Church that
Christ died on the Cross for all men and
women,” it says.
For the Rev. Anthony Ruff — a Benedictine
monk from Minnesota who resigned from
work on a liturgy commission over the V
atican’s handling of the translation — the
problem is not the accuracy of “many.”
In contemporary culture, it sounds like “not
for all but for some,” he said, according to
the National Catholic Reporter. “So you
could make the case that it's a
mistranslation because it distorts the
original meaning.”
The Vatican, in a 2006 letter expressing
the pope’s view, said that “all” is a “correct
interpretation of the Lord’s intention” and
should be taught that way.
But the change reflects the shift to word-
for-word translation rather than conveying
general ideas.
“Many” reflects what Jesus actually said and
also conveys the idea that salvation is not
“mechanistic” but involves a believer
accepting an invitation, the Vatican said.
As we have noted in our coverage, most
Catholics surveyed this summer weren’t
even aware of the impending changes,
although awareness was higher among
regular Mass attenders.
Ready or not, they’ll be aware of it.
Question raised by new Catholic liturgy: did Christ die for 'all'? | The Courier-Journal | courier-journal.com
