Pope Francis followers might not escape the claims of neo-ultramontanism. But I did note dotCommonweal’s mention of this tidbit from his address last week in Florence, something I missed on the first read:
(Y)ou know well that the Lord shed his Blood not for some, or for a few or for many but for all.
A point of disconnect with the liturgy? I can live with ecclesiastical disconnect–not unlike life in the real world.
 | Todd on Laudato Si 237: Sunday |
 | Rick on Laudato Si 237: Sunday |
 | Debra on Funeral Lectionary: Psalm 116:… |
| Todd Flowerday on Cardinal Sarah on Traditionis… |
 | Steven Harpin on Lumen Gentium 12 |
 | freddie stewart on Cardinal Sarah on Traditionis… |
 | Figment of Your Imag… on Greetings for Lent? |
 | Liam on The Human to Angel Condui… |
 | The Human to Angel C… on Funeral Lectionary: Psalm… |
| The Human to Angel C… on OCF 276-294: Funeral Mass for… |
Catholic Sensibility 
The connection in the liturgy is made with the Scriptural referent texts. One can argue about how *necessary* that is, but it’s not an unreasonable approach.
Mind you, I am the one who reminds folks that the Mass is not a mere reenactment of the Last Supper any more than it’s a mere reenactment of Calvary, so that ideas that it should look/sound like those referents are incomplete ones – it’s is, rather, a mystical representation and participation in the entire Paschal Mystery. The “traditional” wording of the Institution Narrative included words that were not in the standard Scriptural accounts (mysterium fidei comes most notably to mind). Thus, I could accept “for all” when that was the authorized translation without any indigestion (unlike others). But, by the same token, “for many” is a legitimate translation of the original Greek (we don’t have an Aramaic or Hebrew transcript); we don’t have to quibble about the Latin between them. (I would have strongly preferred something like “for the many” or “for the multitude” but for some strange reason I didn’t get no vote.)
I don’t think Pope Francis has yet to unilaterally change his praying of the texts, and that perhaps means we should not seek to apply his remarks to liturgical practice. He may not see it as a disconnect in need of fixing. If and when he does, we can follow that.
I second Liam’s comments. The authors of Matthew and Mark choose “for many” instead of “for all”. If it was good enough for the Gospel writers, it is good enough for me.
I think the liturgy ought to clearly reflect Catholic belief. If Jesus didn’t die for all then he cannot be God. The current liturgical words imposed upon the Church against the wishes of the Bishops undermine Catholic faith. They should be changed to “for all”.
God Bless
@Chris
“For all” or “For some” or “for many”
Funny how all texts are always man made. Always.
Every Human has a Spirit. We are spirit beings 1st. All are dead in their trespasses and Sin. All have to be Born again ( have nature changed) to enter Heaven. Jesus’s death is the key to opening the Door. So when stated in John 3:16— For God so loved the WORLD he gave his only begotten Son that thru Him we can have everlasting life. ALL is EVERYONE.