Controversy over new missal
Madam, – Fr Dermot Lane says that the restored Mass wording that Jesus died “for many” rather than “for all” implies that Christ “was for some, not all” (Home News, February 4th).
What nonsense. If Fr Lane checks any English translation of scripture, he will find that Christ Himself used the phrase “for many” when he offered the Chalice to his Apostles at the Last Supper. Since the 4th century, that has been reflected in the phrase “ pro vobis et pro multis” in the normative Latin translation of the Mass. Only in 1968 did translators take it on themselves to change Christ’s words to “for all men” – now changed again to “for all”.
As a Catholic theologian, Fr Lane should be well aware that the church teaches that what Christ meant was that the sacrifice of His blood would be available to all, but not all would take advantage of it. Yours, etc,