ROME, MAY 24, 2011 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Readers from several parts of the world have requested commentaries on the new English translation of the Roman Missal. While I have never been directly involved in the project and can boast no technical studies in the art of translation, I hope to offer occasional theological reflections on the new texts.
We have already broached the question of translation in several articles. On June 15, 2004, and then last Sept. 14 and Sept. 28, we dealt with the reasons to prefer translating “Et cum spiritu tuo” as “And with you spirit” rather than “And also with you.”
On Sept. 7 and 21, 2004, we explained the reasonableness of translating the “pro multis” in the words of consecration as “for all” in spite of its literally meaning “for many.” Although the reasons offered for this translation are valid, from the theological point of view it was still an inaccurate translation. Having consulted widely, Benedict XVI decided that henceforth all new versions of the missal must translate this text literally as “for many.” The reasons behind this decision were laid out by the Congregation for the Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments in a letter to the presidents of all the national bishops’ conferences on Oct. 17, 2006 (Prot. N. 467/05/L):
“In July 2005 this Congregation for the Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, by agreement with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, wrote to all Presidents of Conferences of Bishops to ask their considered opinion regarding the translation into the various vernaculars of the expression pro multis in the formula for the consecration of the Precious Blood during the celebration of Holy Mass (ref. Prot. N. 467/05/L of 9 July 2005).
“The replies received from the Bishops’ Conferences were studied by the two Congregations and a report was made to the Holy Father. At his direction, this Congregation now writes to Your Eminence / Your Excellency in the following terms:
“1. A text corresponding to the words pro multis, handed down by the Church, constitutes the formula that has been in use in the Roman Rite in Latin from the earliest centuries. In the past 30 years or so, some approved vernacular texts have carried the interpretive translation ‘for all,’ ‘per tutti,’ or equivalents.
“2. There is no doubt whatsoever regarding the validity of Masses celebrated with the use of a duly approved formula containing a formula equivalent to ‘for all,’ as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has already declared (cf. Sacra Congregatio pro Doctrina Fidei, Declaratio de sensu tribuendo adprobationi versionum formularum sacramentalium, 25 Ianuarii 1974, AAS 66 , 661). Indeed, the formula ‘for all’ would undoubtedly correspond to a correct interpretation of the Lord’s intention expressed in the text. It is a dogma of faith that Christ died on the Cross for all men and women (cf. John 11:52; 2 Corinthians 5:14-15; Titus 2:11; 1 John 2:2).
“3. There are, however, many arguments in favor of a more precise rendering of the traditional formula pro multis:
“a. The Synoptic Gospels (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24) make specific reference to ‘many’ (πολλων = pollôn) for whom the Lord is offering the Sacrifice, and this wording has been emphasized by some biblical scholars in connection with the words of the prophet Isaiah (53:11-12). It would have been entirely possible in the Gospel texts to have said ‘for all’ (for example, cf. Luke 12:41); instead, the formula given in the institution narrative is ‘for many,’ and the words have been faithfully translated thus in most modern biblical versions.
“b. The Roman Rite in Latin has always said pro multis and never pro omnibus in the consecration of the chalice.
“c. The anaphoras of the various Oriental Rites, whether in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, the Slavic languages, etc., contain the verbal equivalent of the Latin pro multis in their respective languages.
“d. ‘For many’ is a faithful translation of pro multis, whereas ‘for all’ is rather an explanation of the sort that belongs properly to catechesis.
“e. The expression ‘for many,’ while remaining open to the inclusion of each human person, is reflective also of the fact that this salvation is not brought about in some mechanistic way, without one’s willing or participation; rather, the believer is invited to accept in faith the gift that is being offered and to receive the supernatural life that is given to those who participate in this mystery, living it out in their lives as well so as to be numbered among the ‘many’ to whom the text refers.
“f. In line with the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam, effort should be made to be more faithful to the Latin texts in the typical editions.
“The Bishops’ Conferences of those countries where the formula ‘for all’ or its equivalent is currently in use are therefore requested to undertake the necessary catechesis for the faithful on this matter in the next one or two years to prepare them for the introduction of a precise vernacular translation of the formula pro multis (e.g, ‘for many,’ ‘per molti,’ etc.) in the next translation of the Roman Missal that the Bishops and the Holy See will approve for use in their country.”
Some countries, such as France, have always translated this text literally (in this case as “for the multitude”). Some Spanish-speaking countries have already changed the words of consecration even though the full retranslation of the missal is not completed. Most English speakers will be hearing “for many” by the end of this year and eventually all countries will use this formula.
* * *
Follow-up: Exposition of the Precious Blood
With respect to our May 10 article on exposition on Holy Thursday, a reader from Texas commented that although I correctly stated that the bishop should be informed of the abuse, this should be done only after having first taken up the issue with the parish priest himself. I agree with this point, since the error might be the fruit of honest ignorance of the law and might be resolved immediately without recourse to possible disciplinary actions.
Meanwhile, an Irish reader offered some informative observations:
“1. As you are aware, the equating of adoration of the Eucharistic species outside of Mass (especially organized periods of adoration) and exposition of the Blessed Sacrament in the monstrance is becoming more and more the norm. The terminology is being confused repeatedly and this is being shown up in discussions around exposition during the Paschal Triduum.
“2. Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament is permitted in Poland — by indult of the Holy See — during the Paschal Triduum. I understand that a semi-transparent veil is used to veil the monstrance from the end of the Holy Thursday Mass and right through to the Easter Vigil. Secondly, on Easter Sunday morning the early Mass remains quite popular in that country — the night vigil has had great difficulty in becoming popular due to restrictions placed upon people in socialist times (the night vigil becoming obligatory from 1956) — and the early morning Easter procession outside the church with the Blessed Sacrament is also quite popular. The current Roman Missal for Poland contains the details of the indult and the details of the ceremonies they follow there.”
Similar indults may also exist in some other countries, allowing for exceptions to the universal laws. I am grateful to our correspondent for this helpful information
which furthers our own and our readers’ knowledge of the liturgy.
* * *
Readers may send questions to firstname.lastname@example.org. Please put the word “Liturgy” in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive.