Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Benedict XVI explains to German bishops what the “pro multis” really says
WDTPRS ^ | April 24, 2012 | Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Posted on 04/25/2012 5:30:40 AM PDT by NYer

The Holy Father has explained to the bishops of German-speaking countries what the prayer really says.

Just as the document Liturgiam authenticam required a revision the English liturgical texts, all the different languages need revision, including German. You may recall that the Holy Father, not the Congregations for Divine Worship or of the Doctrine of the Faith, is the only one who can approve translations of sacramental forms. Years ago Pope Benedict instructed the CDW to instructed the bishops conferences preparing new translations that the words pro multis in the form for the consecration of the Precious Blood, were to adhere to the Latin and were to be some form of “for many” and not “for all”. The reason for the Holy Father’s decision was complicated, but in essence it comes down to the fact that, regardless of the Scriptural origins of the consecratory form, the Latin liturgical texts constitute their own theological source and they must be respected as such.

The German bishops and others beyond the Alps have been staging a nutty about the pro multis issue, insisting that they should leave the German as “für alle” and not change it to “für viele”.

It seems that the German theologian Pope, who cannot be fooled when it comes either to German or theology, has explained the situation to the German-speaking bishops.

The German Bishops Conference website has posted the Pope’s 14 April letter of almost 200o words.

I don’t have the time or energy to translate it for you at the moment, but in short Pope Benedict explains that the bishops do, in fact, have to use “for many” and they have to engage in catechesis. He adds personal observations about the difficulty of having to say Mass in different languages and the dissonance there can be between the translations. He also heads off the common questions and objections raised by those who want to stick to “for all”.

Once again the Holy Father has offered good reflections on what the prayer really says. I am sure the text of the letter will soon be available in English.

It is nice to be on the same page as Pope Benedict.

Please pray for the Holy Father!

TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Theology; Worship

1 posted on 04/25/2012 5:30:45 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...


2 posted on 04/25/2012 5:31:18 AM PDT by NYer (Open to scriptural suggestions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I found the translation from chrome's automatic translation tool surprisingly readable (I added paragraphs):

Pope Benedict XVI. has with the date 14 April 2012 letter to the members of the German Bishops' Conference wrote. In this letter, he goes into the appropriate translation of the word cup in the Eucharistic Prayer of the Mass. The Permanent Council of the German Bishops' Conference of the letter at its meeting on 23 April 2012 discussion. We document the letter of the Holy Father in the text.


Dear, dear Lord Archbishop! During your visit at the 15th March 2012 you have told me that respect is the translation of the words "pro multis" in the canon of the Mass prayers still no consensus among the bishops of the German language area. It seems there is a danger that will in the soon-expected release of the new edition of "Gotteslobs" remain some parts of the German-speaking world in translation "for all", even though the German Bishops' Conference had agreed to write "for many" , as desired by the Holy See. I promised you to express myself in writing about this serious issue in order to forestall such a split in the innermost room of our prayer.

The letter I hereby by the members of the German Bishops' Conference of writing, I am also the other bishops of the German-speaking countries can send. Let me first say a few words about the origin of the problem. Was transferred into the 60s, when the Roman Missal under the authority of the bishops in the German language, was an exegetical consensus that the word "many", and "many" in Isaiah 53.1 l f is a Hebrew expression to the community, "all" to name. The word "many" is thus in the creation accounts of Matthew and Mark had an Semitism and with "all" to be translated. This is also related to the immediately to translate the Latin text, the "pro multis" about the Gospel accounts of Isaiah had 53 previous referrals and therefore be translated as "for all".

This exegetical consensus is now crumbling, and he no longer exists. In the German unit of translation of the Scriptures is the Last Supper: "This is my blood, the blood of the covenant which is shed for many" ( Mk 14, 24, cf Mt 26, 28). This can be seen something very important: the reproduction of "pro multis" with "all" was not a mere translation, but an interpretation that was well founded, and remains, but already more than interpretation and translation.

This merging of translation and interpretation is in some respects to the principles that led directly to the council, the translation of liturgical books in the modern languages. It was clear how much the Bible and liturgical texts of the language and thought world of modern man are removed so that it also translates well to the participants of the service had to remain incomprehensible.

It was a new company, that the sacred texts in translations openly stood in front of the participants in the worship service, while remaining at a great distance from their world would, indeed, now more than ever seen in their removal would be. One felt not only entitled but even obliged to melt into the translation already interpretation, and thus shorten the way to the people whose hearts and minds so should be achieved by these words. To some degree, the principle of substantive and not necessarily justified even literal translation of the basic texts continue.

As I pray the liturgical prayers over again in different languages ​​must fall on me, that between the various translations is sometimes hard to find common ground and that the underlying common text often remains visible only from afar. It is then undermined Banalisierungen mean the real losses. To me over the years has also become increasingly clear in person, that the principle of non-verbatim, but as a structural equivalent translation has its limitations guideline.

Following these insights on the worship of the congregation adopted 28/03/2001 translator instruction Liturgiam has Authenticam again the principle of literal equivalent to the fore, of course, without imposing a one-literalism. The important insight is that this instruction is based, already expressed in the above distinction between translation and interpretation. It is both the word of Scripture as the liturgical texts compared necessary. On the one hand, the sacred word as possible as it will appear itself, with its strangeness and the questions which it carries in itself, the other is the church where the order of interpretation, so that - within the limits of our respective understanding - the message comes to us the Lord has intended for us. The empathic translation can not replace the interpretation: it is part of the structure of the revelation that God's word is read in the design community of the Church, that faithful representation and connect with each other. The word has it as himself, in his own strange form because maybe we have, the interpretation must be judged on the fidelity to the word itself, but also make it accessible to modern audiences.

In this context, was chosen by the Holy See, at that the new translation of the Missal, the word "pro multis" as is translated and not at the same time must be already configured. In place of the interpretive design "for all" must take the easy transfer "for many." I must here point out that both in Matthew and in Mark is not a product, not "for many", but "for many." When forth the decision of the basic assignment of translation and interpretation, as I hope is understandable, but I'm aware that they are a tremendous challenge to all is, the interpretation of God's Word is applied in the church. Because of the regular visitors to the church service this seems almost inevitable as a break in the center of the saints.

You may ask: Is not now Christ died for all? Has the church changed its doctrine? Can and should they? Here is a reaction at work that wants to destroy the heritage of the council? We all know the experience of the last 50 years, as far exceeds the change in liturgical texts and forms in the human soul, how much has to worry because a change of the text in such a central point of the people. Because it is so, was the time when according to the difference between translation and interpretation for the translation of "many" was held at the same time stipulated that this translation must be preceded in the various language areas a thorough catechesis, in which the bishops to their priests as by make its believers would actually understand what it is. The precedence of catechesis is the basic condition for entry into force of the new translation. As far as I know, such a catechesis so far in the German-speaking countries will not occur. The intent of my letter is to all of you, dear Brothers, to urgently ask the question of providing such a catechesis now to then discuss with the priests and the faithful at the same time make available.

In such CATECHESIS must have first briefly can explain why one has to translate the Missal after the Council, the word "many" played with "all" to clear in the sense intended by Jesus, the universality of salvation coming from him the least. Then of course the question immediately arises: If Jesus died for all, why did he say in the words of the Lord's Supper "for many"? And then why do we stay at these very words of Jesus? This will be initially introduced or that Jesus according to Matthew and Mark "for many," according to Luke and Paul, "for you," said. So apparently the circle is drawn closer still. But even from there you can also go on the solution. The disciples know that transcends the mission of Jesus over them and their circle, that he had come to gather the scattered children of God from around the world ( Jn 11, 52). The "for you" makes the mission of Jesus but, specifically, those in attendance. They are not some anonymous members of a vast whole, but every one knows that the Lord just for me, for us has died. "For you" reaches into the past and into the future, I mean you personally, we who are gathered here, as those of Jesus known and loved. So this "for you" is not a restriction, but a specification that applies to each community celebrating the Eucharist, they actually connects with the love of Jesus.

The Roman Canon has joined in the words of consecration, the two biblical readings with each other and, accordingly, says: "For you and for many." This formula was then taken over by the Reform liturgy for all Prayers. But then again, why "for many"? Is it not the Lord who died for all? That Jesus Christ as the Incarnate Son of God, man for man, the new Adam, is one of the basic certainties of our faith.

I want to remember only three texts of Scripture: God's Son "gave himself for all," Paul formulated in Romans letter ( Rom. 8, 32). "One died for all," he says in the second Letter to the Corinthians about the death of Jesus ( 2 Cor 5, 14). Jesus has "sacrificed as a ransom for all," it says in the first Letter to Timothy ( 1 Tim 2, 6).

But it is certainly ask again: If this is so clear, why is it in the Eucharistic Prayer, "for many"? Well, the church, this formulation has taken over from the creation of reports in the New Testament. She says so out of respect for the word of Jesus to him to enter the word to be true. The reverence for the word of Jesus himself is the reason for the formulation of high prayer.

But then we ask: Why did Jesus himself said so well? The real reason is that Jesus himself to be the servant of God, Isaiah was seen 53, as the figure of profit margin, the waiting, the prophet's words. Reverence of the church before the word of Jesus, Jesus' fidelity to the word "font", this dual loyalty is the specific reason for the phrase "for many." In this chain reverent loyalty we join with the literal translation of the scripture. As we saw earlier that the "for you" the Lukan-Pauline tradition, not narrow, but concrete, we can now see that the dialectic " many "-" all "has its own meaning. "All" moves on the ontological level - the existence and work of Jesus encompasses all humanity, past and present and future.

But in fact, historically in the concrete community of those who celebrate the Eucharist, it is only to "many". It can be a triple meaning of the assignment of "many" and see "all".

First, it should be for us, we must sit at his table, mean surprise, joy and gratitude that he has called me that I should be with him and know him. "Thanks be to God who has called me from grace 'in his church' ...".

But secondly, this is a responsibility. Like the other gentleman - "all" - reached in his own way is ultimately a mystery. But without doubt it is a responsibility, to be called directly by him to his table, so that I may hear: For you, for me he has suffered. The many bear responsibility for all. The community must be many light on the lampstand, city on the hill, all leaven. This is an appeal that meets each individual personally. The many we are, must bear the responsibility for the whole thing in the consciousness of their mission.

Finally, a third aspect may be added. In today's society, we have the feeling, not to be "many", but very few - a small pile that is continuously decreasing. But no - we are "many": "Then I saw a great multitude from every nation, tribe, people and language, and no one could count," it says in the Book of Revelation ( Rev. 7, 9). We are many and are available for all. Shall belong to the two words "many" and "all" together and relate to the responsibility and promise to each other.

Excellency, Dear Brothers in the Episcopate With all that I wanted to indicate the content outlines of catechesis should be prepared now with the priest as soon as possible and lay on the new translation. I hope that this can be used all at once a profound celebration of the Eucharist and thus in the great task enqueues, which is the "Year of Faith" in front of us. I would hope that for catechesis presented soon and become part of the liturgical renewal, which is about the council has labored from his first session on. With Easter blessing, I remain

Sincerely in the Lord,

Benedict PP XVI

3 posted on 04/25/2012 6:02:55 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Thank you for providing the translation of the entire text.

4 posted on 04/25/2012 6:13:43 AM PDT by NYer (Open to scriptural suggestions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dangus

“the figure of profit margin”? What does that mean?

5 posted on 04/25/2012 8:18:46 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

**Please pray for the Holy Father!**


6 posted on 04/25/2012 9:42:10 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

“Profit the whole world, yet lose his everlasting soul.”

Just a stab.

7 posted on 04/25/2012 9:43:43 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dangus

“Many” are called; few are chosen.”

8 posted on 04/25/2012 9:45:07 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

Since German uses compound words, I’m guessing it was an inappropriate translation of something like “theexcessofthatwhichismostdesired.”

9 posted on 04/25/2012 11:00:31 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYer

One of the changes I’d wondered about was the change from ‘cup’ to ‘Chalice’, in the prayers of the Consecration. A priest friend of ours explained it; at a Seder meal, the Chalice is shared by all at the meal, while each person also has his or her own cup. So all at the Eucharist are invited to share in the Chalice of Christ’s Blood; His Covenant with us.

10 posted on 04/26/2012 6:22:49 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson