Bibles

[Faith1960]

Dumb question alert!
I have several Bibles, Catholic and Protestant, but use my Catholic ones the most often. I have a bookmark that has Proverbs 3:5 written on it: Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.
I looked up this verse in both my Protestant bible and my NAB, St. Joseph Edition, and saw that the verse is translated somewhat differently in the Catholic bible. I prefer the translation I read in my Protestant bible better. I’ve been wondering if we can, as Catholics, quote Scripture translations that come from a Protestant bible, rather than a Catholic one, or are we expected to always use a translation found in a Catholic bible?

 

[Jehuty_X]

Dumb question alert!
I have several Bibles, Catholic and Protestant, but use my Catholic ones the most often. I have a bookmark that has Proverbs 3:5 written on it: Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.
I looked up this verse in both my Protestant bible and my NAB, St. Joseph Edition, and saw that the verse is translated somewhat differently in the Catholic bible. I prefer the translation I read in my Protestant bible better. I’ve been wondering if we can, as Catholics, quote Scripture translations that come from a Protestant bible, rather than a Catholic one, or are we expected to always use a translation found in a Catholic bible?

I think you can. Some members quote from the RSV, NRSV, NIV, etc.

Below are also a list of approved translations in case you did not know.
usccb.org/bible/approved-translations/

 

[Fidelis]

Unless the rendering of the verse is contrary in some way to Catholic teaching, it shouldn’t be a problem. For devotional purposes, you don’t have have to worry too much about this, but if the verse or verses is used to argue a point of doctrine, you should default to the Catholic interpretation.

Hope that helps!

 

[Leegal]

Dumb question alert!
I have several Bibles, Catholic and Protestant, but use my Catholic ones the most often. I have a bookmark that has Proverbs 3:5 written on it: Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.
I looked up this verse in both my Protestant bible and my NAB, St. Joseph Edition, and saw that the verse is translated somewhat differently in the Catholic bible. I prefer the translation I read in my Protestant bible better. I’ve been wondering if we can, as Catholics, quote Scripture translations that come from a Protestant bible, rather than a Catholic one, or are we expected to always use a translation found in a Catholic bible?

I don’t know – sorry. I know that I never do and only, when quoting, I quote from the Catholic Bible.

 

[svid2]

Most cases, pick the one you feel comfortable with.

 

[Cindyr9]

I came upon this thread and since I am a returning Catholic, I now try to stick to reading the New American Bible (Catholic Version) and I particularly like to reference the sidenotes in my personal and group studies of Holy Scripture. I still sometimes compare verses in different Protestant translations just to get a broader sense of the translation. If it comes down to a doctrinal interpretation, I look toward the Catholic version and the sidenotes to clarify any questions.

In the spirit of holding fast to the Catholic versions of Scripture, there is one thing that I find so odd. It is the loose translation that is used when the cantor sings the Psalm during Sunday Mass. The words are changed to fit the music and it is virtually impossible to follow along with the scriptural text written in the prayer book/hymnal. Why is such a loose paraphrasing of the verses of the Psalms permitted in the Catholic liturgy? I spent many years in the Anglican Catholic tradition and they never changed the words of the psalms to fit the music. They used plainsong or simple chant with a responsorial verse. It was beautifully done without altering the verses.

 

[Cryptic1]

If more Catholics read the bible they would probably have a better understanding or relationship with God. Unfortunately, I can’t say that many do and I believe that most Catholics depend upon the Mass to get their bible scripture.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Dumb question alert!
I have several Bibles, Catholic and Protestant, but use my Catholic ones the most often. I have a bookmark that has Proverbs 3:5 written on it: Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.
I looked up this verse in both my Protestant bible and my NAB, St. Joseph Edition, and saw that the verse is translated somewhat differently in the Catholic bible. I prefer the translation I read in my Protestant bible better. I’ve been wondering if we can, as Catholics, quote Scripture translations that come from a Protestant bible, rather than a Catholic one, or are we expected to always use a translation found in a Catholic bible?

It’s your bible study, quote the bible you use. Just please! Don’t use a Jehovah’s witness bible–that is a horrible translation, talk about manipulation of the scriptures.

It’s not unheard of of someone using a protestant bible in their studies. Some people use dozens of bibles in their studies (catholic and protestant). The best translation though (scholars agree) is the NRSV. I myself only use the Ignatius, however, I keep a 1611 KJV fascimile for sentimental reasons.

 

[Elisabeth51]

I came upon this thread and since I am a returning Catholic, I now try to stick to reading the New American Bible (Catholic Version) and I particularly like to reference the sidenotes in my personal and group studies of Holy Scripture. I still sometimes compare verses in different Protestant translations just to get a broader sense of the translation. If it comes down to a doctrinal interpretation, I look toward the Catholic version and the sidenotes to clarify any questions.

In the spirit of holding fast to the Catholic versions of Scripture, there is one thing that I find so odd. It is the loose translation that is used when the cantor sings the Psalm during Sunday Mass. The words are changed to fit the music and it is virtually impossible to follow along with the scriptural text written in the prayer book/hymnal. Why is such a loose paraphrasing of the verses of the Psalms permitted in the Catholic liturgy? I spent many years in the Anglican Catholic tradition and they never changed the words of the psalms to fit the music. They used plainsong or simple chant with a responsorial verse. It was beautifully done without altering the verses.

Technically paraphrasing is not permitted. The text is supposed to be from the Lectionary, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal number 63 reads:

“After the first reading comes the responsorial Psalm, which is an integral part of the Liturgy of the Word and holds great liturgical and pastoral importance, because it fosters meditation on the word of God.
The responsorial Psalm should correspond to each reading and should, as a rule, be taken from the Lectionary.
It is preferable that the responsorial Psalm be sung, at least as far as the people’s response is concerned. Hence, the psalmist, or the cantor of the Psalm, sings the verses of the Psalm from the ambo or another suitable place. The entire congregation remains seated and listens but, as a rule, takes part by singing the response, except when the Psalm is sung straight through without a response. In order, however, that the people may be able to sing the Psalm response more readily, texts of some responses and Psalms have been chosen for the various seasons of the year or for the various categories of Saints. These may be used in place of the text corresponding to the reading whenever the Psalm is sung. If the Psalm cannot be sung, then it should be recited in such a way that it is particularly suited to fostering meditation on the word of God.
In the dioceses of the United States of America, the following may also be sung in place of the Psalm assigned in the Lectionary for Mass: either the proper or seasonal antiphon and Psalm from the Lectionary, as found either in the Roman Gradual or Simple Gradual or in another musical setting; or an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of the psalms and antiphons, including psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the diocesan Bishop. Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the responsorial Psalm.”

At my parish our Psalms, chant, correspond to the Lectionary text as they should. Some hymnals contain alternate settings of the Psalms which are paraphrased, but I do not think these are appropriate for use.

Sorry for the deviation from main topic…

 

[thistle]

Dumb question alert!
I have several Bibles, Catholic and Protestant, but use my Catholic ones the most often. I have a bookmark that has Proverbs 3:5 written on it: Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.
I looked up this verse in both my Protestant bible and my NAB, St. Joseph Edition, and saw that the verse is translated somewhat differently in the Catholic bible. I prefer the translation I read in my Protestant bible better. I’ve been wondering if we can, as Catholics, quote Scripture translations that come from a Protestant bible, rather than a Catholic one, or are we expected to always use a translation found in a Catholic bible?

Douay-Rheims Bible (first English translation of the Bible, prior to KJV):

Prov 3:5 Have confidence in the Lord with all thy heart, and lean not upon thy own prudence.

 

[Cindyr9]

Technically paraphrasing is not permitted. The text is supposed to be from the Lectionary, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal number 63 reads:

“After the first reading comes the responsorial Psalm, which is an integral part of the Liturgy of the Word and holds great liturgical and pastoral importance, because it fosters meditation on the word of God.
The responsorial Psalm should correspond to each reading and should, as a rule, be taken from the Lectionary.
It is preferable that the responsorial Psalm be sung, at least as far as the people’s response is concerned. Hence, the psalmist, or the cantor of the Psalm, sings the verses of the Psalm from the ambo or another suitable place. The entire congregation remains seated and listens but, as a rule, takes part by singing the response, except when the Psalm is sung straight through without a response. In order, however, that the people may be able to sing the Psalm response more readily, texts of some responses and Psalms have been chosen for the various seasons of the year or for the various categories of Saints. These may be used in place of the text corresponding to the reading whenever the Psalm is sung. If the Psalm cannot be sung, then it should be recited in such a way that it is particularly suited to fostering meditation on the word of God.
In the dioceses of the United States of America, the following may also be sung in place of the Psalm assigned in the Lectionary for Mass: either the proper or seasonal antiphon and Psalm from the Lectionary, as found either in the Roman Gradual or Simple Gradual or in another musical setting; or an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of the psalms and antiphons, including psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the diocesan Bishop. Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the responsorial Psalm.”

At my parish our Psalms, chant, correspond to the Lectionary text as they should. Some hymnals contain alternate settings of the Psalms which are paraphrased, but I do not think these are appropriate for use.

Sorry for the deviation from main topic…

Elisabeth51, thank you for your response. Yes, sorry to go off the original thread with this point. I suppose I could ask my music director why they paraphrase the psalms when they are sung. From your response, I suspect the paraphrased version has most likely been approved by the USCCB or they wouldn’t be permitted to use it. Too bad the USCCB is so very fond of the OCP. That is another topic in itself which I shall save for another thread. Have a blessed day!

 

[Fidelis]

If more Catholics read the bible they would probably have a better understanding or relationship with God.

That’s very true, but that is also true of many Protestants and other non-Catholics. Many Protestants I know purport to love Scripture, but they do not appear to have a broad knowledge of it. They tend to have favorite books of the Bible and many passages memorized, but at the neglect of wide swaths of it, which deprives them of context. I even know a few that seldom read the Gospels because they don’t believe it applies to Christians (I knew a Baptist woman who had St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans memorized, but couldn’t remember reading about the Transfiguration of Jesus). Also, many of them rely on personal interpretation, which in itself is an unbiblical practice and a recipe for confusion. This is what I have observed, anyway.

Unfortunately, I can’t say that many do

I can say that many do. For sure, not enough of them do, and maybe few or none of the ones you know personally do, but many do–including those who have taught me, and and the people I in turn teach in my Bible studies.

and I believe that most Catholics depend upon the Mass to get their bible scripture.

I agree, and that should not be so. That is why me and many, many other Catholics are encouraging our fellow Catholics in regular reading of the Bible and helping them find good Catholic Scripture resources. Visit my website linked below if you want more info.

 

[COPLAND_3]

If more Catholics read the bible they would probably have a better understanding or relationship with God. Unfortunately, I can’t say that many do and I believe that most Catholics depend upon the Mass to get their bible scripture.

what a rude comment, especially since there is an equally same problem among non-catholics. I use to be a Baptist, and I was disturbed by a lack of knowledge and lack of zeal among them. But on the otherhand, I have found that knowledge of Scripture does not always mean that they are holier or walking right with God. As a matter of fact I have seen some of the holiest people had limited knowledge of Scripture, and some of the most arrogant people who were Bible scholars.

 

[Matt86]

If more Catholics read the bible they would probably have a better understanding or relationship with God. Unfortunately, I can’t say that many do and I believe that most Catholics depend upon the Mass to get their bible scripture.

Sorry, but your comment is terribly misinformed. Have you ever seen the lectionary reading plan for the Mass? How about coupling that with the Liturgy of the Hours, which aswell as scripture offers readings from the Church fathers and saints?

These arrangements mean that Catholics hear the vast majority of the bible over a three year course. Then throw in devotional reading, and the new translation of the Mass which is steeped in scripture as it’s basis (not that it wasn’t before, it’s just more explicit in places now!)

So what if a catholic ‘depends’ upon the Mass to hear the word of God? It’s portioned out pretty well for my liking. To throw out the age old claim that catholicism is ‘unscriptural’ is just archaic and ignorant

Pax

 

[brigid12]

Sorry, but your comment is terribly misinformed. Have you ever seen the lectionary reading plan for the Mass? How about coupling that with the Liturgy of the Hours, which aswell as scripture offers readings from the Church fathers and saints?

These arrangements mean that Catholics hear the vast majority of the bible over a three year course. Then throw in devotional reading, and the new translation of the Mass which is steeped in scripture as it’s basis (not that it wasn’t before, it’s just more explicit in places now!)

So what if a catholic ‘depends’ upon the Mass to hear the word of God? It’s portioned out pretty well for my liking. To throw out the age old claim that catholicism is ‘unscriptural’ is just archaic and ignorant

Pax

From my experience, few Catholics have any devotional practices including the Liturgy of the Hours or listen fully at readings during Mass (assuming they go to most of the Sunday Masses),

 

[Fidelis]

From my experience, few Catholics have any devotional practices including the Liturgy of the Hours or listen fully at readings during Mass (assuming they go to most of the Sunday Masses),

I’m afraid that’s the sad truth. There’s no use denying that too many Catholics do not take advantage of the wealth of Scripture that the Church provides them in all these areas. I get a little weary of hearing this cop-out by my fellow Catholics. There’s a lot of difference between the Church offering it (which it unceasingly does) and Catholics taking advantage of it. It does the average Catholic (who cannot/does not go to daily Mass, or never gets a good homily based on the Scriptures on Sunday, or who doesn’t pray the Divine Office) very little good if he doesn’t know or care about all these things. That’s where the rest of us Catholics need to pick it up a notch and promote Scripture reading for ALL our fellow Catholics on the parish level and in private devotions, be it lectio divino or serious study. After all, the Catechism of the Catholic Church quotes St. Jerome in saying “Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ.”

 

[guanophore]

If more Catholics read the bible they would probably have a better understanding or relationship with God. Unfortunately, I can’t say that many do and I believe that most Catholics depend upon the Mass to get their bible scripture.

Is that one of the reasons you left Catholocism?

 

[kkollwitz]

I’ve used the DR, KJV, RSVCE, and NAB in my catechism class. I do not use the NIV: too often its word choices push the text away from a Catholic sensibility.

 

[Roy5]

I am old,enough to recall when very few Catholics read the Bible. In fact, it seemed as though the Church discouraged it, perhaps fearful that individual interpretations might result and that this would create confusion and even heresy. After all, didn’t Protestantism get started once the printing press made the scriptures more readily available - etc?

 True, the lectionary does tend to cover much of the Bible in its three-year cycles. But hearing the Word read is a long way from absorbing it. And homilies in the Church are more often than not brief and not all that informative.

 Any serious student of scripture with an open mind, Catholic or non-Catholic, is likely to be shocked here and there.

 Let me illustrate with just one example. Gideon usually is presented as a great military leader and judge of the Old Testament. Read the story in its totality in Judges 6-8 and quite a different image emerges. To begin with, I found the miracles noted as questionable. Perhaps I'm too influenced by science and by simple, everyday reason?

 But assuming these miracles happened, I was never told until I read the full narrative that Gideon collected all the gold earrings from fallen Midianites, formed from them an idol, and misled the ancient Hebrews into worshiping it! Judges 8:23-27) Reading a bit further, Gideon had 70 sons by his many wives (no daughters mentioned, of course) and at least one other son by his concubine slave. Family values! Judges 8:29-31) That particular son, incidentally, kills all but one of his 70 male siblings - etc.

 Wild immoral story! Makes you wonder why we tend to gloss over the horrendous sins of these Old Testament 'heroes'. Maybe this helps explain why the Church for so long wasn't eager for laity to study scripture. Not only would they interpret it for themselves, but they might begin to think that many of these 'heroes' weren't all that heroic. I suspect that modern secularism is increasing because the Church still insists that such bizarre tales are 'the Word of the Lord'.  .

 

[Mintaka]

The whole point of the Bible is that God is always faithful. One of the subsidiary points is that humans tend not to be faithful, and that therefore there’s a pattern of God saving everybody, everybody going yay!, and then many people becoming ungrateful and doing bad stuff instead of following God.

Many of the great Old and New Testament figures are themselves shown as embodying this pattern. David, Solomon, Gideon, Saul, Peter – they all do it. Noah starts embarrassing himself about five minutes after he gets off the Ark.

I’m sad if most people don’t realize this, but it’s certainly not something hidden from Catholics. The lectionary is full of screwups.