# Are Catholics Debating The Doctrines of Grace?



## rbcbob (Nov 26, 2011)

*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


----------



## Rich Koster (Nov 26, 2011)

May this lead to a General Papists - vs - Particular Papists schism?


----------



## Rufus (Nov 26, 2011)

Even if it was decided that Christ only died for some, it would turn to Christ died for all who are baptized in the Roman Catholic church.


----------



## Scott1 (Nov 26, 2011)

Dr. Sproul has some good teaching on what happened in and around the Council of Trent. There was dissent, concern over these points then.

Perhaps this is about perpetuating dueling inconsistencies- that God is sovereign and man is sovereign, in a more palatable way?


----------



## dudley (Nov 26, 2011)

Rich Koster said:


> May this lead to a General Papists - vs - Particular Papists schism?




I would be hopeful that it will allow some Roman Catholics to begin to question the teachings of the Romanists and begin to see that perhaps the Protestant view of salvation by the Grace of God and accepting His grace you place your Faith in Christ alone for salvation is the true message and only hope for salvation. I pray that those who begin to question will never be deceived to believe salvation is by pacing faith in the Roman catholic denomination and that placing faith in Jesus Christ alone is the road to salvation. I think this popes move is like all of Satan’s influenced moves; to lead many away from Christ and true salvation. I pray in Jesus name that many will not be deceived and continue the exodus out of the Roman catholic church like I and 15 million other Catholics in the United States alone have done and become Protestants, like millions in many other European and Latin American countries have done. I pray that many souls will join the Protestant Reformation and that many will renounce popery and the Roman catholic church as I and many millions have done in recent years and become Protestant.


----------



## elnwood (Nov 27, 2011)

Calvinism with Catholicism would just revive Jansenism.


----------



## Weston Stoler (Nov 27, 2011)

Spraying perfume on a dead corpse.....


----------

