jump to navigation

Holy Father on ‘for many’ vs. ‘for all’…. May 9, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, Eucharist, Liturgy, Papa, scandals.
trackback

….and, he practically begs for vastly improved catechesis of the faithful.  I wonder if he moved the German bishop’s stony hearts.

In a letter to the German conference of bishops, the Pope demanded the use of the term ‘for many’ in the consecration of the Precious Blood, wherein it is stated that Jesus gave His Blood “for you and for many.”  There has been great strum and drang in Germany over this issue, with Vatican and other commissions indicating that “for many” should be used, and even the Pope making this argument, and the Germans refusing to change the text from the current “for all.”  It’s a completely analagous issue with what happened in the English-speaking nations with the recent new translations, except the liberals hold even more sway in the German countries than in the English, to their detriment.

The Pope’s explanation is long but very worth reading.  As opposed to trying to excerpt his detailed arguments, I found another, simpler representation of the issue in St. Alphonsus Ligouri’s ascetical work on The Holy Eucharist:

This divine mystery is called Mystery of faith, not to exclude, not to exclude the reality of the blood of Jesus Christ, but to show that in it the faith shines forth in a wonderful manner, and triumphs over all the difficulties that may be raised by human reason, since it is here, says Innocent III, that we see one thing and believe another. We believe, he adds, that eth form that we read in the Canon was received from Jesus Christ by the Apostles, adn that they transmitted it to their successors.  The Roman catechism, moreover, says that  the words of consecration should be thus understood: It is My Blood hat is contained in the Chalice of the New Testament.  This signifies that men recieve no longer the figure of the Blood of Jesus Christ, as was the case in the Old Law, but they really receive the True Blood of the New Testament. The words Pro vobis et pro multis (“For you and for many…..”) [this is the exact text in the Latin Canon of the Mass, the text from which all other languages are derived, and the Latin unequivocally says “for many”] are used to distinguish the virtue of the Blood of Christ from its fruits; for the blood of our Savior is of sufficient value to save all men, but its fruits are applicable only to a certain number and not to all, and this is their own fault.[!!] Or, as the theologians say, this Precious Blood is (in itself) sufficiently able to save all men, but (on our part) effectually it does not save all – it saves only those who cooperate with Grace. This is the explanation of St. Thomas, as quoted by Pope Benedict XIV.  (De Sacrasancto Missae Sacrificio)

This is really the issue.  Pope Benedict gives a detailed biblical exegesis to establish why “many” is used in the Latin text, and the Holy Father is of course correct and thorough in his analysis.  But that’s not the point.  The point is that “for all” was inserted to water down Catholic Dogma which says that not all are saved.  This has been a major error that has come up in the past several decades, part of the modernist push to align Catholic belief with the mores of a sinful, fallen world.  The world doesn’t want to think anyone could ever go to hell!  I know…..let’s just pretend it doesn’t exist!

A lovely idea, but one divorced from reality.  There is an elect.  That elect was predestined by God from before creation.  It’s not that God chose certain souls to be damned – those souls choose to damn themselves

I pray pray pray I am not among them.  I pray even more that my wife and children and parents and family and you are not among them.

Comments

1. Aunt Melanie - May 10, 2012

This is an example of how the precise definition or interpretation of words is essential to understanding Christianity. Even the subtle exchange of one word for another can have a drastic impact on meaning. Our society has changed “abortion” to “reproduction rights” to “women’s health care.” And, it has changed “same-sex marriage” to “marriage equality rights.” It is more difficult to argue against “women’s health care” than to argue against “abortion.” The purpose of the action has been reversed; re-directing the focus to the woman’s needs and totally losing sight of the unborn child (and his or her needs and rights).

“All” and “many” has that same quality of confusing the meaning, so that the Bible and the Church are distorted to fit all sins and to save even the unrepentant. Pretending that hell does not exist–because it cannot, not if the unrepentant want to continue living lifestyles which are not in alignment with Christian teaching. These lifestyles are so entrenched and justified, that it is easier for the unrepentant to bend the Church (if they could) than to discern truth and renounce the world. We barely have a language today; a language in which words have real definitions and in which we can communicate with people. If there is no language, then there is no way to teach–except perhaps to be role-models of lifestyle.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: