Best Commentaries on the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GerardMajella
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GerardMajella

Guest
I’ve become quite a collector of various Bible commentaries over the years. I have the Douay-Rheims Haydock Bible, which has some excellent commentary from a Catholic perspective, as well as numerous volumes from other various, well-known commentators.

I would be interested in learning what the readers here consider the very best Catholic commentary on the Bible - Old and New Testament. Thanks.
 
The best I know of is the Navarre Commentary! Buy it at the EWTN Religious Catalog.
 
Though I understand the intent of the thread,

The Lord is the best commentary. For if He be with you when you read then would He not lead you and teach you? But with other commentaries there is the problem of preconceived notions that can blind the Truth of what the Lord would have you know of what He has said, and what He has done… Who knows better then the Lord Himself?
 
Ignatius Catholic Study Bible has commentary notes and study questions. There’s one small volume for each book with the commentary by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch. Very good and excellent value for money!

If you’re serious, I would recommend the New Jerome Biblical Commentary.
 
FightingFat said:
Ignatius Catholic Study Bible has commentary notes and study questions. There’s one small volume for each book with the commentary by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch. Very good and excellent value for money!
Click to expand...
Ignatius Press has now compiled the individual volumes into one book (New Testament only) and it will be coming out in just a few weeks. You can pre-order it on Amazon. It’s $14.93 for the paperback version.
 
Personally I prefer the Church Fathers commentaries and Doctors of the Church, such as Oecumenius, Theophylact, Ambrosiaster, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. John Chrysostom, Theodoret of Cyrus, etc etc. The Haydock is very reliable, and Cornelius A. Lapide is dynamic! As for modern commentaries I really like the Navarre Bible, and the Ignatius Study Bible is very good! I have a few volumes of the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture and I do like it a lot, especially the way it is layed out with photos and topic extracts and sidebars.

I totally reject the modernist unorthodox commentaries such as the New Jerome Study Bible and anything that resembles it. Any commentary that makes it look like the books of the Bible are forgeries and prophetic books posing like it is making prophecies ahead of time but written after the events is good for nothing but getting your campfire started.
 
Ignatius Study Bible, Navarre Bible, and Haydock Douay Rheims are my favorites. For a budget (and even WITH a budget), I cannot recommend the Ignatius Study Bible New Testament highly enough!

Let me take some extra time to point out the brand new “Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture” mentioned just above. It’s a brand new series, so only four books have currently been released. What’s out, however, is really good, and written for more of an average audience. Here are links to the what’s available:

The Gospel of Mark
amazon.com/Gospel-Catholic-Commentary-Sacred-Scripture/dp/0801035864/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252704824&sr=8-1

First and Second Timothy, Titus
(This one lets you look inside at some of the pages)
amazon.com/Second-Timothy-Catholic-Commentary-Scripture/dp/0801035813/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252704824&sr=8-3

Ephesians
amazon.com/Ephesians-Catholic-Commentary-Sacred-Scripture/dp/0801035848/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252704824&sr=8-2

Second Corinthians
amazon.com/Second-Corinthians-Catholic-Commentary-Scripture/dp/080103583X/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252704824&sr=8-4
 
Well, I can’t say if it’s the “very best” because I haven’t really compared it to any others. I have a “New Jerome Biblical Commentary” I like very much. It has a lot of historical and other kinds of information along with the commentary. One other thing though. I find it helpful to keep a dictionary close by when I’m reading it! But that may just be me. :o
 
Poco said:
Well, I can’t say if it’s the “very best” because I haven’t really compared it to any others. I have a “New Jerome Biblical Commentary” I like very much. It has a lot of historical and other kinds of information along with the commentary. One other thing though. I find it helpful to keep a dictionary close by when I’m reading it! But that may just be me. :o
Click to expand...
Here’s what EWTN has to say about it:

The most widely used Catholic commentary is probably the Jerome Biblical Commentary, now in a 2nd edition. There is also a summary version of it. This commentary is the work of well-known Catholic Biblical scholars and is filled with articles on historical, archaeological, linguistic and other subjects useful for understanding the background of the Scriptures. The JBC is, therefore, a valuable resource for those seeking such information. However, the textual commentaries use primarily the historical-critical method, and thus must be read with discernment. The Church approves of the use of this method for the purpose of understanding the historical and literary foundations of the text (see Vatican II, Dei Verbum 11-13), but finds it an incomplete method apart from the Tradition. Scripture must be interpreted according to the analogy of faith, that is, in accordance with what God has revealed in toto, as taught by the Magisterium.

There is nothing wrong with this Biblical commentary per se. It is a solid piece of research. HOWEVER… it generally examines the Bible from the point of what can be proven scientifically. For example, it’s the type of scholarship that could downplay the Miracle of the Loaves from a true miracle into “Well, the miracle was simply that everyone shared what they had”. For that reason, it could unintentionally shake someone’s faith were they to read it outside of the context of other church opinion. This commentary was written for a scholarly theological purpose, and amateurs might not be able to fit that into the broader context of church opinion.
 
Hello, Rolltide!

Thank you for your enlightening comments! 👍 I shall look for a supplement as soon as I can afford one.

However, as to this part of your post:
Rolltide said:
For example, it’s the type of scholarship that could downplay the Miracle of the Loaves from a true miracle into “Well, the miracle was simply that everyone shared what they had”. For that reason, it could unintentionally shake someone’s faith were they to read it outside of the context of other church opinion. This commentary was written for a scholarly theological purpose, and amateurs might not be able to fit that into the broader context of church opinion.
Click to expand...
Well, maybe the Holy Spirit is looking over my shoulder whenever I read it so I don’t get confused! 🙂 I understand your point, though. However, in my case, it has actually helped support my decision to “cross the Tiber”.

I suppose it would be “off topic” to mention that 'Bama was lucky to catch the 'Gators on a bad day. 😉 Congratulations! Great game!
 
There are some free documents that can be downloaded from the EWTN website that are really “deep” but give you some real “food for thought.”

Here they are:
The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PBCJWSCR.HTM

The Historicity of the Gospels
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PBCGOSPL.HTM

The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PBCINTER.HTM

Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation DEI VERBUM
Second Vatican Council
ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/v2revel.htm

The third one on interpretation is long and it won’t rot your brain. For all it says, there is no single approach to scripture that the Church has found satisfactory, but the different methods have good points and bad. So, don’t get overwhelmed by the words. It discusses different methods, and lists good and bad points.
 
GerardMajella said:
I’ve become quite a collector of various Bible commentaries over the years. I have the Douay-Rheims Haydock Bible, which has some excellent commentary from a Catholic perspective, as well as numerous volumes from other various, well-known commentators.

I would be interested in learning what the readers here consider the very best Catholic commentary on the Bible - Old and New Testament. Thanks.
Click to expand...
What a great thread question, I’m looking forward to reading the posts here…excellent question!
 
I have a number of excellent commentaries from the Anchor Bible series, including commentaries on John and the Johannine letters, Acts, Romans, and several others. I also like the Sacra Pagina commentaries.

I find the EWTN’s hesitation regarding the historico-critical method is unfortunate. Of course, any bible commentary must be used in light of Catholic tradition. The implication is that the best biblical scholarship is somehow at variance with Catholic tradition. Unless EWTN is willing to name names and point out the errors, such a charge is irresponsible. Scholars such as Raymond Brown, Joseph Fitzmeyer, John Meier, Joseph Blenkinsopp, Daniel Harrington, and many others deserve our admiration and respect for their service to the Church and to the truth.
 
Alan55 said:
I have a number of excellent commentaries from the Anchor Bible series, including commentaries on John and the Johannine letters, Acts, Romans, and several others. I also like the Sacra Pagina commentaries.

I find the EWTN’s hesitation regarding the historico-critical method is unfortunate. Of course, any bible commentary must be used in light of Catholic tradition. The implication is that the best biblical scholarship is somehow at variance with Catholic tradition. Unless EWTN is willing to name names and point out the errors, such a charge is irresponsible. Scholars such as Raymond Brown, Joseph Fitzmeyer, John Meier, Joseph Blenkinsopp, Daniel Harrington, and many others deserve our admiration and respect for their service to the Church and to the truth.
Click to expand...
I think the the historical critical method is a necessary component of scripture study, as does the Pope, as does EWTN. The problem arises when it is the ONLY method in use. Read the first 25 pages of Jesus of Nazareth (Joseph Ratzinger) he does quite a good job explaining the error.
 
JRRTFAN said:
I think the the historical critical method is a necessary component of scripture study, as does the Pope, as does EWTN. The problem arises when it is the ONLY method in use. Read the first 25 pages of Jesus of Nazareth (Joseph Ratzinger) he does quite a good job explaining the error.
Click to expand...
I second this answer. The first 25 pages, direct from Pope Benedict himself, sets up the issue nicely.
 
I own the first installment of the Navarre Bible (the Pentateuch) And I have to say it exceeded any expectations I had for it. I also own the Ignatius study Bible New Testament which I also like, but I think the Navarre Bible is much more expansive, and as a result more expensive The Ignatius study bible NT is contained in a single book whereas the Navarre Bible NT is in 3 separate books.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top