One year ago today I posted this "oldie" PODCAzT which dealt with a question under discussion still today: the translation of the words "pro multis" in the consecration of the Most Precious Blood during Holy Mass.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download Subscribe: RSS
It seemed right for me to present it anew.
http://www.wdtprs.com/podcazt/07_07_27.mp3
In today’s PODCAzT, we hear from St. Augustine of Hippo (+430) who contributes to the second reading in today’s Office of Readings. The selection is from Bk 10 of the Confessions.
I use that as a spring board into a look at the issue of the fruits of Christ’s Sacrifice. Were they "for all" or "for many"?
When the new translation for Holy Mass is released we will no longer hear "for all" but "for many", which is more accurate. 
Still, we need to understand what is at the heart of the debate.
Joseph Ratzinger will help us figure this out along with a paragraph from the Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent.
This PODCAzT was a bit of an experiment. I changed a couple of my recording techniques and also just "winged it" with many notes for my comments, just to see if I could speed up the production time.
Some other oldies from that time period.
- 038 07-07-25 Ratzinger on “active participation”; The Sabine Farm; Merry del Val’s music
037 07-07-18 The position of the altar and the priest’s “back to the people”
036 07-06-24 St. Augustine on John the Baptist; Ut queant laxis
035 07-06-17 Cyprian on the Our Father; MP Rules of Engagement
034 07-06-09 St. Thomas Aquinas on the Eucharist; Mass in heaven? No!
Loading ...
I haven’t read or listened to your distinguished comments, but am I wrong in thinking that both are right, in different senses? Christ died for ALL. But, because of free will, not all will achieve the salvation offered to them – only MANY.
AB: Don’t just toss grenades. LISTEN, then THINK, then comment.
Well, explain to me, from your superior height, what is wrong with that formulation?
You are in a bad mood today, aren’t you?