www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Revision of Novus Ordo in America

The US Bishops are changing the wording to the Novus Ordo to reflect a more traditional translation!

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0603008.htm

I noticed that they're not fixing the really important translational error... "this is the cup of my blood, which will be shed for you and for ALL"... it's supposed to be "for many."

Too little, too late, I'm afraid.

God bless,

Karen

What the bishops vote to send over and what the Vatican forces them to change maybe different things. My guess is "for all" will be required to change to "for many".

Fr. Deacon Lance

I hope that the "for all remains" - "for many" sounds exclusionary. My first thought was who are the many and am I one of them. Please I would love for everything to be as it was many many years ago and for us to truly hear words as Jesus spoke them but this is one change I am not fond of. But - "and with your spirit" sounds wonderful. In no way can I match up to the knowledge base on this forum but this is my view.

I hope so!

God bless,

Karen

Hi Sue!

The problem with "for all" is twofold:

First of all, it's not what Jesus said. In every single Bible translation I've ever seen, no matter how bad, His words at the Last Supper when He consecrates the wine are "for you and for many." The novus ordo Mass in the original Latin even says "pro multis" ("for many"). It's simply mistranslated into English-- as it is in all other languages, coincidentally-- as "for ALL."

Secondly, the Roman Catechism of Trent states that there is a reason why Jesus said "for many" and not "for all":

We all know that Jesus died for every single person who ever existed and who ever will exist; but Trent teaches that when Jesus said "for many", He wasn't referring to all who would be redeemed by His sacrifice (which is everyone), but to Christians who would participate in His sacrifice in the divine liturgy and receive Him in Holy Communion...which of course does NOT include everyone.

So basically, "for all" is an inaccurate translation of our Lord's words, and contradicts the clear teaching of an ecumenical Council and the Roman Catechism.

God bless,

Karen

I believe the translation "pro multis" as "for all" already raised long ago, and affirmed by the Holy See as justified.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur46.htm

The true "revision" of the Novus Ordo in America is the revision of the minds and the hearts of the faithful. For too long, poor and even erroneous catechesis and understanding of the Liturgy has been prevelant among the Church here.

Time to wake up O sleepers!

The Church in America has to be informed and educated on it's Traditions and Faith, as well as Liturgical practices. It's time for ongoing adult Catechesis, Morning and Evening Prayers.

This would greatly decrease alll the difficultly that is surrounding "new" translations of the Liturgy.

For me, a good place to start is Charity. Al overall fear, reveance and love for all. Seeing Christ in others and obeying the Holy Trinity, God's Will, serving the Church, worshiping with the Church and praying.

Sheesh, practically an entire dissertation attempting to defend the substitution of "for all" for "for many." It's pathetic, when you consider that there's no reason why we had to change it in the first place. Completely uncalled for and unnessary.

And all the exeggetical gymnastics in the world won't change the fact that Trent explicitly says that when Jesus said "for many", He wished to be understood as referring to the elect, those for whom His sacrifice would be efficacious, NOT for those who would be redeemed (which would indeed be "all").

And since the divine liturgy or Mass is NOT efficacious for all, since not everyone is a practicing Catholic or Orthodox, this flatly contradicts what Trent says that Jesus meant.

God bless,

Karen

Just out of curiosity - in the Divine Liturgy, the priest repeatedly intones the words "Peace be to all." Do you have the same objections to that as to the "for all" in the Mass?

Karen,
You are right, the Mass/Divine Liturgy is not efficacious for all BUT the sacrifice that Christ made on Calvary IS efficacious for all. And seeing that the Mass/Divine Liturgy is a re-presentation of that sacrifice, there is nothing wrong with the wording.

Small side note, the Divine Liturgy does not use "for all", it uses "for many."

Anyways, Rome sees nothing wrong with it so in obedience I see nothing wrong with it.


David, Byzantine Catholic and Carmelite pre-novice

'For Many' is a Semetic idiom meaning "for all".
...footnote from the Orthodox Study Bible

Alice,
Can't really use a non-Catholic Bible and its notes to defend Catholic Teaching.


David, Byzantine Catholic and Carmelite pre-novice

That wasn't my intention nor am I taking any position.

I just thought that it was interesting that they both mean the same thing having just read it last night in my scriptural readings.

Alice

Okay, I'm back (obviously! ) and I have a question.

Where is it written that the Divine Liturgy is only "efficacious" for Catholics and Orthodox?

(And I am sure there are plenty of Catholics who would exclude the Orthodox from that efficacy, and vice versa!)

Perhaps someone could tell us how they're defining "efficacious" in this context, and back up their opinions with some solid Church teaching.