Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: NYer
Ratzinger has been quite firm on this: the translation "all" is a matter of dogmatic truth. Whoever says that Christ's Sacrifice was NOT sufficient for the redemption of "all"--is anathema.

That is, they are heretics.
103 posted on 06/07/2003 9:07:37 AM PDT by ninenot (Joe McCarthy was RIGHT, but Drank Too Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]


To: ninenot
Ratzinger has been quite firm on this: the translation "all" is a matter of dogmatic truth

Are saying Jesus was wrong in his choice of words and that we need Ratzinger to clarify?

110 posted on 06/07/2003 10:05:35 AM PDT by Aloysius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

To: ninenot
"Whoever says that Christ's Sacrifice was NOT sufficient for the redemption of 'all'--is anathema."

As usual you miss the point. Traditionalists are not arguing that Christ's sacrifice was not sufficient for all. They are arguing that it is a violation of the truth to pretend--for politically correct reasons--that he said what he didn't say on the night before his death. He did not say "all", he said "many". By changing what he said on the night before he died, the New Mass has falsified the truth. So we ask: since when is a lie permitted in a Catholic liturgy? The usual modernist response--that it is a little white lie that should go unnoticed--is not good enough.

120 posted on 06/07/2003 12:44:39 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

To: ninenot
"Whoever says that Christ's Sacrifice was NOT sufficient for the redemption of 'all'--is anathema."

One further point: anyone with an ounce of logic can see through the argument presented in defense of the new canon. But it is a straw man. Traditionalists don't quarrel with the idea that Christ's sacrifice was sufficient for all. Of course it was. But we quarrel with the idea that He did not understand that all would NOT be saved despite His sacrifice. In fact, He clearly understood that some would not achieve salvation, despite His sacrifice. This is why he said "many" and this is why we insist that the liturgy remain true to His words and not false to them.

122 posted on 06/07/2003 12:56:04 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

To: ninenot
**the translation "all" is a matter of dogmatic truth. Whoever says that Christ's Sacrifice was NOT sufficient for the redemption of "all"--is anathema.

That is, they are heretics.**

BTTT in agreement with your statement. Jesus died on the Cross for us all.

130 posted on 06/07/2003 4:25:37 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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