Cardinal Arinze, For Many vs For All

I would encourage all to watch or read everything you can get your hands on by Cardinal Arinze. Just You tube the Cardinal and you will see what I mean.



On October 17 , 2006, Francis Cardinal Arinze, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, wrote to the Presidents of ALL conferences of bishops concerning the translation of pro multis in the order of the Mass.



Congregatio De Cultu Divino Et Disciplina Sacramentorum



Rome, 17 October 2006



and so may I quote:



" Prof. no. 467/05/L"



"Your Eminence/ Your Excellency"


" In July 2005 this congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, by agreement with the Congregation for the DOCTRINE OF FAITH, wrote to all Presidents of Conferences of Bishops to ask their considered opinion regarding the translation into the vernaculars of the expression pro multis in the formula for the consecration of the Precious Blood during the celebration of Holy Mass{ref. Prof.n. 467/05/L of 9 July 2005}"



" The replies received from the Bishops' Conferences were studied by two Congregations and a report was made to the Holy Father. At HIS direction, this Congregation now writes to Your Eminence? Your Excellency in the following TERMS."



1. " A text corresponding to the words, pro multis, handed down by the Church, constitutes the formula that has been in use in the Roman Rite in Latin from the earliest centuries. In the past 30 years or so , some approved vernacular texts have carried the interpretive translation "for all", "per tutti" or equivalents.



2. " There is NO doubt whatsover regarding the validity of Masses celebrated with the use of a duly approved formula containing a formula equivalent to , " for all" as the Congregation for the Doctrine has ALREADY declared {cf.Sacra Congregatio pro Doctrina Fidei, Declaratio, de sensu tribuendo adprobationi verisonum formularium sacramentalium, 25 Ianuarii 1974, AAS 66(1974), 661}. Indeed the formula , "for all" would undoubtabley correspond to a correct interpretation of the Lord's intention expressed in the text. IT IS A DOGMA OF FAITH that Christ died on the Cross for all men and women(cf. John 11:52; Corinthians 5:14-15: Titus 2-11: John 2:2) "

3. " There are, however, MANY arguments in favor of a MORE PRECISE rendering of the TRADITIONAL formula pro multis



a. The Synoptic Gospels (mt 26,28: Mk 14,24) make specific reference to "many" for whom the Lord is offering the Sacrifice, and this wording has been emphasized by some biblical scholars in connection with the words of the prophet Isaiah ( 53, 11-12 ). It would have been entirely possible in the Gospel texts to have said "for all" ( for example, cf Luke 12,41); instead , the formula given in the institution narrative is "for many" and the words have been faithfully translated thus in most modern biblical verses.



b. The Roman Rite in Latin has ALWAYS said pro mutis and NEVER pro omnibus in the consecration of the Chalice.



c. The anaphoras of the various Oriental Rites, whether in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, the Slavic languages, etc, contain the verbal equivalent of the Latin pro multis in their respective languages.



d. "For many" is a FAITHFUL translation of pro multis whereas "for all", is rather an explanation of the sort that belongs properly to catechesis.



e. The expression " for many", while remaining open to the inclusion of each human person, is reflective also of the fact that salvation is NOT brought about in some mechanistic way, without one's own willing or participation; rather, the believer is invited to accept in faith the that is being offered and to receive the supernatural life that is given to those who participate in this mystery, living it out in their lives so as to be numbered among the "many" to whom the the text refers.

f. In line with instruction Liturgiam authenticam, effort should be made to be MORE FAITHFUL to the Latin texts of the typical editions.





4. The Bishops' conferences of those countries where the formula "for all" or its equivalent in use are therefore requested to undertake the necessary catechesis of the faithful on this matter in the NEXT ONE OR TWO YEARS to prepare them for the introduction of a PRECISE vernacular translation of the formula pro multis ( eg, "for many", " per molti" ) in the next translation of the Roman Missal that the Bishops and Holy See will approve for use in their country.



With the expression of my high esteem and respect, I remain, Your Eminence/ Your Excellency,



Devotedly yours in Christ,



+ Francis Cardinal Arinze, Prefect "


End of Quotation>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I pray that this will be helpful in our prayers, reflections and contemplation to help with some of the many subjects that we discuss and often agonize over on this forum and in our daily lifes.

I don't know why the Cardinal simply did not repeat the perennial teaching embodied in the Catechism of Trent for the real reason why "for all" should not be used.

Instead, it almost sounds like an apology as if "for all" is the more correct and "dogmatic" rendering, but we should use "for many" because that's what Scripture says.

However, paragraph e comes very close to providing the correct theological reasons for why "pro multis" is used, though it could have been better stated -- so perhaps I'm being a bit over critical.

IT IS A DOGMA OF FAITH that Christ died on the Cross for all men and women(cf. John 11:52; Corinthians 5:14-15: Titus 2-11: John 2:2)

Correct, but only for those who partake of His Blood in the sacrament does it become efficacious ("to those who participate in this mystery").

This is an excellent example of the antecedent universal will (Christ died on the Cross for the salvation of all men) unfolding into the consequent effective will ("to those who participate in this mystery" - "the many").

MRyan,

Ah yes, Midnight at the Oasis.....

Salute,

When you watch The Cardinal speak specifically about Altar Girls, Abortion and several other specific topics that do not come to mind right now, you can see the Cardinal really zone in on that particular issue. Why not have cut to the quick and humbly say we misquoted Jesus words at the last supper and we are now correcting it. I still have most of my old prayer books where my Mom would underline 12 times it seemed "For Many" in the consecration and she would teach us that Jesus knew only many would benefit from Jesus dying dying on the cross, not all. I mentioned in a previous post that I have prayed for a long time about the return of "for many" to the consecration. I quess my joy is the return of "for Many" in a matter of weeks.

When I give communion to a patient in the hospital I say Blessed are those that are called to this supper. Happy meal sounds like McDonalds, not Jesus the Savior of the world!

And "with your Spirit" rather than and "also with you", takes us back to the more meaningfull supernatural love with a much deeper more eternal greeting of souls to Our Lord.