Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Kolokotronis; Andrew Byler
Ah, Kosta, you beat me to it! Some of us do have to work

Sorry, someone has to do it. :)

It is ironic, is it not, that the West chose theological opinions of both +Augustine and +Gregory which were outside the consensus patrum

In a way it explains how we drifted apart. If the west stuck with the consensus we would be on the same sheet of music, and probably there would have never been a rift.

There has been of late quite a discussion in the Latin Church over the proper “translation” of the words “pro multis” at the consecration. The post Vatican II era saw the usage of “for all” as opposed to the appropriate “for many”. +Gregory’s theology arguably would support the former

Pro multis is biblical (Mat 26:28, Mar 14:24). "For all" is not what He said. This is a good example that cherry-picking your favorite Church Father is inferior to consensus patrum, which is the only approach that guarantees the catholicity of the Church and the orthodoxy of the Faith.

For only through consensus do we all believe the same thing and agree that the faith is right and true.

21 posted on 05/09/2007 11:00:13 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: kosta50; Kolokotronis
"For all" was probably inserted to draw a brighter line with respect to Calvinism.

Blessed are all they that fear the Lord: that walk in his ways. (Ps. 127)

[God] will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Tim 2:4)

I agree, they should have kept it as in Latin.
23 posted on 05/09/2007 3:44:52 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | 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