Are Catholics forbidden to read non-catholic Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Arnold1N2D
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well … just for one thing, I’d contend that not to know one’s King James Bible is to be less than fully literate in English. (I’m exaggerating a little, but not by very much.)
 
You’re welcome to that contention. I contend that to use the KJV of the Bible is to be woefully lacking in the fullness of Truth. Beautiful language does not make up for fundamental lacking.
 
The original KJV of 1611 included the books in the Catholic Bible, plus a few others. I believe in the 1800s they stopped printing them in an intertestiment space between the Old and New. And they did call it the “Apocrypha”.
Just ironic that the original actually had more books than what is even in the Catholic Bible. I own the 1611 version, very old English of course but nonetheless it is beautiful and historic in the English language.

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books/
 
Prodigal1984 said:
The original KJV of 1611 included the books in the Catholic Bible, plus a few others. I believe in the 1800s they stopped printing them in an intertestiment space between the Old and New. And they did call it the “Apocrypha”.
Just ironic that the original actually had more books than what is even in the Catholic Bible
Click to expand...
Yes, they do; that is a good point I should have mentioned. What are the “extra” ones? Now I can’t even remember. Esdras?
 
Last edited:
1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh. Though I have learned they always were in the Vulgate. Idk why the Church accepted the other ones but not those three. Weird. Though in the Vulgate they are called 3 and 4 Esdras as 1 and 2 are Ezra and Nehemiah. Esdras numbering is confusing. Actually Anglicanism puts them all on the same level. They are viewed as good for reading as a way of life but not for doctrine, but according to their 39 articles on the faith, 2 Esdras is the same as 2 Maccabees in authority etc.
See most people probably viewed it as they were in the Vulgate so they were just like any other book accepted by the Church. It’s probably why they are in the standard Protestant apocrypha. The Council of Trent affirmed all but those three and Clement Vlll relegated them to an appendix. But to a person before the Council of Trent it was probably just the case that people probably did view 2(4) Esdras as scripture. In fact Columbus used a verse from it to justify his journey.
 
Last edited:
When I want to be sure of the fullness of truth, I turn to my Catholic Bible. When I want to be sure of being a functioning heir of English-speaking civilization, I husband my knowledge of the KJV. There’s room for both accomplishments, I’d say.
 
Aside from some major doctrinal differences, especially concerning the sacraments, I would trust the footnotes of a Bible edition from a conservative Evangelical publisher over the disastrous notes in the NAB.
 
Another thing, there are TONS more options in buying Protestant Bibles than Catholic ones. I bought a 3000 page Zondervan Study Bible (NIV translation) on sale for less than $20.00. It has tons of maps, timelines, art, pictures, historical context, charts, etc. - all useful tools for any Christian. Again, obviously you have to be aware that these Bibles will give different treatment to the sacraments and some other Church teachings, but they tend to explore much more of the history of the Christian faith than Catholic Bibles.
 
It’s not forbidden to read Protestant bibles. Some of them are quite nice and can be good study resources. The average layperson is probably not going experience doubt in their faith simply by reading a Protestant translation. In fact, some of them are quite good. Their accuracy varies between translation. Just keep in mind that some Protestant translations will occasionally translate a passage in a way that is non necessarily wrong from a translation point of view, but in a way that favors certain Protestant ideas (I’m looking at you, NIV). Plus, the big thing that they usually are missing are the seven deuterocanonical books.

There’s only a few translations I’d actively avoid. For example, the New World Translation, which is promulgated by the Jehovah’s witnesses. It purposely contorts scripture to support their theological viewpoints. I’d also avoid Protestant study bibles for serious scripture study, since the notes are going to look at scripture through a Protestant lens. Of course, they can be helpful in comparing how Protestants view a certain scripture passage versus Catholics.
 
Last edited:
ProVobis said:
Anyone have the Knox version?
Click to expand...
Yep! I do! I always recommend it. It’s definitely a different approach to scripture translation and it can provide a fresh perspective on many scripture passages. It’s probably more for spiritual reading than studying, though.
 
Last edited:
I suspect your question is academic. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (c. 1992) has an article on this, which from memory, suggests that there was some prohibition in the past. I think the first application of this permission is for study and comparison to Catholic translations and versions.

I think the permission is qualified, to avoid anti-Catholic Bibles. There’s a Protestant fundamentalist Bible which would not be advised (The Scofield Bible, I think). The Ryrie Studie Bible has very anti-Catholic comments in it, and I’ve seen a Lutheran commentary which is extremely anti-Catholic.

I’ve read some Jewish commentaries which even cite Christian translations at times.
 
Last edited:
JoeShlabotnik said:
Your argument is kind of like, why ever attend a church service at a protestant church, since it is not a Catholic service.
I attend Mass on a regular basis, but I have attended weddings, funerals, and other services at other churches.
Click to expand...
Weddings, funerals and baptisms are okay. We need to make sure we do not miss Mass and attend a protestant service instead. That would put our soul in danger. Plus one should be very well grounded in their Catholic faith because protestants do not believe most of the same things Catholics do and listening to a protestant sermon can cause one to be confused.
JoeShlabotnik said:
When we give glory to God, it is a great thing!
Click to expand...
The greatest form of worship is the Sacrifice of the Mass.
 
Last edited:
Arnold1N2D said:
Now that we are in the era of Vatican II, is that prohibition still binding? Thanks.
Click to expand...
The prohibition is not binding but I would no read one. There are many new and very good Catholic bibles on the market today and I do not see why one would read a protestant bible as it is not complete, the notes in study bibles will not contain the fullness of truth and many times the wording of scripture is done in a way to promote protestantism instead of Catholic truths given to us from the Church.

www.ncregister.com

The Great Adventure Bible: A New Tool for Scripture Study

Tied to Jeff Cavins’ Great Adventure Bible Study, this is a great gift for anyone who’s eager to have a deeper understanding of the Bible.
www.ncregister.com www.ncregister.com
 
I am lucky enough to have stumbled onto a three volume set ($11.97 @ Goodwill) and the later (1954) Student’s Edition (< $10 on eBay). Took me a bit to Anglicize my eyes, but they are beautiful reads.
 
.
Can Catholic read a non-Catholic Bible?
A Catholic edition of the Revised Standard edition has come out. The Revised Standard edition has been produced by Protestant scholars. It is a very popular edition when it comes to Catholics. There are no objections on the part of the Catholic Church that it is very widely used by Catholics, and even that it is being provided as a Catholic edition.
The books of the Old Testament removed by Protestants are included in the Catholic edition, which in fact were also translated by Protestants. So this deficiency of Protestant Bibles has been ended there.
 
Last edited:
i used to be a protestant. protestant bibles are the same as Catholic except they’re missing seven books and parts of esther and daniel. the text is the same.

when i explained this to my novice mistress while at the monastery, she was very surprised. apparently a lot of cradle Catholics have the idea protestants made up their own bible completely, but it’s the same bible – just missing some stuff.

also, if you’re used to reading a douay-rheims, Psalm chapters will be numbered and divided differently – but the text is still the same. it’s just a different format like used in the nabre.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top