[Grey Ghost II]

So I don't see any impediment to understanding that Rome has added the sufficiency of Christ's Passion as at least a secondary understanding of the words "pro multis" in the reformed rite, which can be proved from the Roman approval of the translation "for all".

I'm boggled by the defense of this lie. According to Sacred Scripture, Christ said "for many". It doesn't matter what you, or any other armchair theologian thinks He meant. IT'S WHAT HE SAID THAT MATTERS. Not you or the Pope can change what He said and to misquote Him is a lie.

[gbcdoj]

According to Sacred Scripture, Christ said "for many"

And did Christ say "the mystery of faith" or "for you and for many" according to Scripture? The Roman Catechism quoted by Maximilian said that the CHURCH joined "for you" and "for many" together by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

to misquote Him is a lie

Apparently certain ancient liturgies which contain words not in Scripture or which even differ from Scripture are lying then. Here's the Ottaviani Intervention:

C. The Anamnesis. The Roman Missal added the words As often as ye shall do these things, ye shall do them in memory of Me after the formula of Consecration.

This formula referred not merely to remembering Christ or a past event, but to Christ acting in the here and now. It was an invitation to recall not merely His Person or the Last Supper, but to do what He did in the way that He did it.

In the Novus Ordo, the words of St. Paul, Do this in memory of Me, will now replace the old formula and be daily proclaimed in the vernacular everywhere. This will inevitably cause hearers to concentrate on the remembrance of Christ as the end of the Eucharistic action, rather than as its beginning. The idea of commemoration will thus soon replace the idea of the Mass as a sacramental action.

It protests against the change from the traditional Missal to the formula of St. Paul - because they differed!