View Single Post
Old Oct 30, '06, 7:03 am
MikeDunphy's Avatar
MikeDunphy MikeDunphy is offline
Regular Member
Book Club Member
Join Date: April 25, 2005
Posts: 705
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: About “pro multis”

Both "for all" and "for many" express aspects of our Lord's sacrifice, but before the consecration of the Precious Blood, the priest says:
Again he gave you thanks and praise, gave the cup to his disciples, and said:
Where in Scripture or Tradition is it recorded that our our Lord said at the Last Supper that He sheds His blood "for all"? Nowhere. Both attest that He said "for many". The translators confused translation with interpretation.

Originally Posted by introibo View Post
"What, then, should we make of the new translation? Both formulations, "for all" and "for many," are found in Scripture and in tradition. Each expresses one aspect of the matter: on one hand, the all-embracing salvation inherent in the death of Christ, which he suffered for all men; on the other hand, the freedom to refuse, as setting a limit to salvation. Neither of the two formulae can express the whole of this; each needs correct interpretation, which sets it in the context of the Christian gospel as a whole...There can be no question of misrepresentation here, since whichever of the formulations is allowed to stand, we must in any case listen to the whole of the gospel message: that the Lord truly loves everyone, and that he died for all. And the other aspect: that he does not, by some magic trick, set aside our freedom but allows us to choose to enter into his great mercy."

Ratzinger, Joseph A. God Is Near Us. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003.
Veni, veni Emmanuel; Captivum solve Israel,
Qui gemit in exilio, Privatus Dei Filio.