B.E., you said you would abide by NYer's judgement, well she HAS posted, and has even highlighted the words "for many" for your behalf..
The ridiculous canard, that Aramaic/Syriac did not have a word that signified "many", was just one of a legion of lies that were spewed forth in the 1960's to justify a heretical translation, in practically every nation's vernacular, to justify universal salvation, i.e. that all would be saved.
The Council of Trent, the Council of Florence, Saint Thomas Aquinas' Summa, etc. are most clear that although OUr Lord incarnated, suffered and died for the salvation of ALL, not all would avail themselves of the FRUIT of His passion, hence the correct translation, is "for you and for many". Anything else is heretical, and because it is heretical and thus significantly changes the words of the sacrament, Christ's words, it invalidates the sacrament.
A further note, the latest 'eucharistic document' of 'john paul ii', employ in Latin, the incorrect and heretical words for you and for all in absolute contradiction of the words of Our Lord and even of the Latin version of the novus ordo missae.
He did so by design. The direction he and others have been moving the 'church of vatican ii' all along. In this instance it is universal salvation, we do not know if anyone is in hell, "hell is not a physical place", etc.
From the Maronite Liturgy:
Aramaic Consecration
Byow mo how daq dom ha sho dee leh ma' bed hy eh nsa bel lah mo be dow qa dee sho to. Ou ba rekh ou qa desh waq so ou ya bel tal mee dow kad o mar: Sab a khool meh neh kul khoon: Ho no den ee tow faghro deel day lo fy koun wah lof sagee hey meh tez seh ou meh tee heb lhoo so yo dhow beh was ha yeh dal 'o lam 'ol meen.
English Translation
On the day before his life-giving passion, Jesus took bread in his holy hands. He blessed, sanctified, broke, and gave it to his disciples, saying: Take and eat it, all of you: This is my body which is broken and delivered for you and for many, for the forgiveness of sins and eternal life.
Was Pope Innocent X trying to justify universal salvation?
5. It is Semipelagian to say that Christ died or shed His blood for all men without exception.Declared and condemned as false, rash, scandalous, and understood in this sense, that Christ died for the salvation of the predestined, impious, blasphemous, contumelious, dishonoring to divine piety, and heretical. (DZ 1096)
A further note, the latest 'eucharistic document' of 'john paul ii', employ in Latin, the incorrect and heretical words for you and for all
The official version published in the AAS has "pro multis".
Don't know if anyone will find it interesting, but the Japanese-language vernacular translation of the NO is "for many." In Japanese, of course.
In this particular case it was more likely to have been an accident. A serious problem since Vatican II has been the fact that Latin is no longer the primary language of papal documents. Although the legal fiction persists that the Latin version is the authoritative version, it is often the last one translated. The usual process is that the pope writes in Polish, which is translated into Italian for comment and editing, and then back into Polish for his final revisions, and then back into Italian for publishing, and then translated to French as the definitive source and the other vernacular versions are translated from the French. Then at some point a Latin translation is created as a supposedly "official" version, even though it never was part of the process of promulgation.
In this particular case, the vernacular words of consecration were published, and when the Latin version of the document was created, a lazy translator didn't realize the doctrinal implications of translating "all" in the vernacular into "omnes" (all) in the Latin. To be consistent with the current situation in the New Mass, "all" in Italian or French has to be translated as "multis" (many) in Latin.
Glad you made it all so clear for us.
(Tune: Some Enchanted Evening...)
Some Enchanting Schism....
You have met the Tempter!
You have seen the Devil, across a crowded room....
And somehow you know,
This Schism's for MEeeeeeee!
(Etc.,etc., etc.)
As we wait, do you think that anyone conceived AFTER Christ's sacrifice and who acquired knowledge of that sacrifice was excluded BEFORE conception by Christ from the possibility of salvation?
Who was so excluded?
What was the pre-conception standard of exclusion?
Are you in communion with the Holy See?