If you've read my column at all over the last year or so you know I have little patience for the change in the eucharistic prayer from "for all" to "for many".
And if you're wondering what the heck I'm talking about, it's during the prayer over the cup:
The problem is, it sounds like we're suddenly rolling back God's plan of salvation. You know how we used to say God loves everybody, is interested in everybody, regardless of what they believe or ever did or what not? Well, now we're thinking, not so much. He'd settle with a good 30-50%.
Some are arguing that the point of the prayer is actually not God's love but people's receptivity. God came for many and not all because some choose to reject him. And hey, I love a good dose of Catholic guilt and recrimination as much as the next guy. But that's never what "the many" was all about.
So, Fr. Kvetching, what was the point of "the many", you ask? Well, I happened to be in conversation with my liturgy buddies, and they explained that Jesus used the phrase to make clear how expansive was God's circle of interest. Read his words again: Take this, all of you -- i.e. you all gathered here with me at the Last Supper -- and drink of it. This is my blood, given up for you -- again, you all here -- and for many -- that is, for many others who are not here.
"Many" isn't something that limits who this supper is for, but enlarges. Which is why in the 50s and 60s they came to translate it "for all" in the first place. One of my buddies said the proper translation is "so many more"; the other said it's "the multitudes" (which by the way is the French translation). Either makes clear the broadening sense of "many".
And herein is a real challenge of the new translation. It intends to be very, very literal -- that is, in most respects it avoids any attempt to shift the language of the Latin prayers into our own English, American terms. There's arguments to be made in favor of that approach, many of which I've presented in the past. But one downside is, at times it lacks the nuances that would actually have been clear to the original audience. And now presiders and liturgists and others are going to have to keep explaining that original sense to people, or paradoxically the literal meaning of the words will be lost.
Maybe this sounds like mountains made from mole hills. It's not. We are formed by the rites we practice. Having a fundamental portion of a rite seeming to suggest that God is not interested in all of us will impact how we think and act as a people down the line. And not for the better.
So I'm going to try to hold onto what I know to be true. This blood, given up for you, and for so many more.
And if you're wondering what the heck I'm talking about, it's during the prayer over the cup:
Take this, all of you, and drink from it.The reason they're changing it: the New Testament text from which it's taken literally says "for many", not "for all". So, it's a correction.
This is my blood, given up for you and for all
so that sins may be forgiven.
The problem is, it sounds like we're suddenly rolling back God's plan of salvation. You know how we used to say God loves everybody, is interested in everybody, regardless of what they believe or ever did or what not? Well, now we're thinking, not so much. He'd settle with a good 30-50%.
Some are arguing that the point of the prayer is actually not God's love but people's receptivity. God came for many and not all because some choose to reject him. And hey, I love a good dose of Catholic guilt and recrimination as much as the next guy. But that's never what "the many" was all about.
So, Fr. Kvetching, what was the point of "the many", you ask? Well, I happened to be in conversation with my liturgy buddies, and they explained that Jesus used the phrase to make clear how expansive was God's circle of interest. Read his words again: Take this, all of you -- i.e. you all gathered here with me at the Last Supper -- and drink of it. This is my blood, given up for you -- again, you all here -- and for many -- that is, for many others who are not here.
"Many" isn't something that limits who this supper is for, but enlarges. Which is why in the 50s and 60s they came to translate it "for all" in the first place. One of my buddies said the proper translation is "so many more"; the other said it's "the multitudes" (which by the way is the French translation). Either makes clear the broadening sense of "many".
And herein is a real challenge of the new translation. It intends to be very, very literal -- that is, in most respects it avoids any attempt to shift the language of the Latin prayers into our own English, American terms. There's arguments to be made in favor of that approach, many of which I've presented in the past. But one downside is, at times it lacks the nuances that would actually have been clear to the original audience. And now presiders and liturgists and others are going to have to keep explaining that original sense to people, or paradoxically the literal meaning of the words will be lost.
Maybe this sounds like mountains made from mole hills. It's not. We are formed by the rites we practice. Having a fundamental portion of a rite seeming to suggest that God is not interested in all of us will impact how we think and act as a people down the line. And not for the better.
So I'm going to try to hold onto what I know to be true. This blood, given up for you, and for so many more.
One of my favorite cartoons ever. Note the little space next to Jesus: "A Place For You".
That's what we're talking about here.
No comments:
Post a Comment