“The latter takes the action of his predecessor by surprise, and reinforces a translation that we can rightly qualify as incorrect, since it does not respect either the text of the missal or the text of the Gospel, inspired by God, from which it is taken” . The subject of the proposition is Pope francesco, while the accusation comes from the Priestly fraternity of St. Pius X. Jorge Mario Bergoglio – in a nutshell – approved a text, a Roman Missal, which the emeritus believed to be wrong. Not all of the text: it speaks specifically of a passage that Joseph Ratzinger had modified according to his interpretation. A quibble? A minor step? Not exactly.
This is the ancient dispute concerning “pro multis”, those for whom the blood of Christ was “shed”. We are all more or less used to hearing, during the functions, the words “for all”, which follows “for you”. Benedict XVI he thought that in reality “pro multis” should be translated as “for many”. Which, in certain interpretations provided by traditionalists, can restrict the audience of those for whom Jesus worked “in the forgiveness of sins”.
It is, as stated, a dated dispute of a theological, philological and doctrinal nature, but Ratzinger was quite clear: “In this context, it was decided by the Holy See that, in the new translation of the Missal, the expression” pro multis “should be translated as such and not already interpreted. Instead of the interpretative version” for all “, the simple translation “for many.” I would like to point out here that neither in Matthew nor in Mark is there the article, so not “for the many”, but “for many.” If this decision is, as I hope, absolutely understandable to the light of the fundamental correlation between translation and interpretation, I am however aware that it represents an enormous challenge for all those who have the task of expounding the Word of God in the Church “. And again, the former pope wrote: “…if Jesus died for everyone, why did he say “for many” in the words of the Last Supper? And why then do we stick to these words of Jesus’ institution? “. Benedict XVI – how you learn on the official website of the Vatican – had invited the drafting of a catechesis on “pro multis” capable of explaining the reasons for the need for a literal translation.
The Roman Missal in question, therefore, should have presented the Ratzingerian translation. But the last version is like the penultimate: An expectation spiced up by the fact that Pope Francis himself had used in the recent past the expression “pro multis”. The text that Bergoglio approved during these days, however, continues to report “for all”, denying the intentions of the emeritus and perhaps seconding the opinion of those who think that a limitation of the number of those for whom Christ has shed blood, at least from the literal point of view, both to be considered as negative. The basic rationale of the other “front”, on the other hand, indicates that not all, for Christian-Catholic doctrine and according to evangelical teaching, are destined for salvation.
All this happens while a book published by Rizzoli, “One Church”, reaffirms the doctrinal continuity between the ruler and the former pontiff. A work introduced by the cardinal secretary of state, Pietro Parolin. It is unlikely that Francis’ choice would lead to a new “Vatican” controversy, but St. Pius X read Bergoglio’s move as a “counter-attack” aimed at changing Ratzinger’s approach. “THE‘many’ who will arise for eternal life are to be understood as the ‘many’ for whom the blood of Christ was shed “, said the former archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2017. In the Missal of the CEI that was recently handed over to Jorge Mario Bergoglio, however, there is still written “for all”. The “new” Our Fatherinstead, it was also shared by the emeritus: whoever goes to Mass will pronounce “do not abandon us to temptation” instead of “do not lead us to temptation”.