I would stay away from Fr. Brown. His orthodoxy is very questionable.Fr. Brown is an expert on the Gospel of John. Take a look at his two-volume set, or even the concise commentary on the Gospel and Epistles.
Isn’t he the one who wrote that Our Lord did not intend to found a Church, but rather just “renew” Isreal? And that the Church is just the leftovers of that mistake?Far from it. Fr. Brown’s commentaries on the Gospel of John are regarded among the best available by conservative and liberal scholars around.
Have you personally read any of his works, or are you solely relying upon hearsay from this forum and other internet sources (which are cited as “authoritative” sources to the point of death)?Isn’t he the one who wrote that Our Lord did not intend to found a Church, but rather just “renew” Isreal? And that the Church is just the leftovers of that mistake?
He also wrote that the stories of Christ’s birth are “dubious”.
Thanks, but no thanks…orthodoxy is not the best word to describe him.
catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Dossier/Jan-Feb00/Article5.html
ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/DESTBIB.TXT
Hi puzzleannie,Steve Ray’s book is the single best bible study volume I have ever read. It took me a year and few weeks to work through. well worth it, as this is my favorite gospel. Michael Barber’s book on Revelation is also excellent. It took me more than a year because I decided to do Daniel and Ezekiel first to be more familiar with some of the references.
Yes, I have several of his commentaries, including the edition on St John’s Gospel; they have been appropriately filed away in a box in storage. I stand by my statement. Avoid his works.Have you personally read any of his works, or are you solely relying upon hearsay from this forum and other internet sources (which are cited as “authoritative” sources to the point of death)?
Without having actually read the works which you attempt to undermine, you have no basis of criticism. Fr. Brown has contributed much more to the field of biblical scholarship than your accusations attempt to detract.
Fr. Brown stated himself that he believes in all Church doctrine, including the Virgin birth, and that he follows the Magisterium. If you do not believe me, then read his 101 Questions and Answers On The Bible for yourself where he lays his opinions out on the table for all to see.
As for your accusation that he denies the Virgin birth, he answers you quite clearly in the book:
“Forgive me for rather bluntly insisting that you pay attention to what I said. I did not say that the birth stories are not historical. I gave reasons why scholars think that some of the events described in those stories are not historical…I always emphasize that, besides disagreeing on certain matters, the two evangelists also agree on what might be called the most important points…[which] are very important agreements, and I would argue that a case can be made for the historicity of such details.” (101 Questions, pg. 80)
Any reading of his *Birth of the Messiah *will reveal this. Any actual open-minded reading of his books will demonstrate to the reader that he does not attempt to speak *as *or *for *the Magisterium.
Maybe it’s you who need to examine who you do and do not label as ‘orthodox’ without proper examination?
I just read them from the NAB Catholic Study Bible Oxford edition with the notes, I was not aiming at an in depth study, just a working familiarity with the references that crop up in Revelation. that is my first stop for study of a book in general.Hi puzzleannie,
When you did Daniel and Ezekiel, did you just read the books in Scripture - or did you also have a commentary that you used? If so, which one? I’ve always wanted a good Catholic commentary on Isaiah, but don’t know of any.
Nita
I agree. If you own an “unorthodox” copy of commentary for St. John’s gospel, then you should be able to state what about it is precisely unorthodox without making these generalized global statements based on “orthodox” trends.May I suggest as a general rule on this forum specifically that if we are going to trash one author’s writings we cite the actual work in question, cite from authoritative sources, or give links to such sources, that demonstrate the problems with that particular writing, rather than making general global statements about this or that writer’s orthodoxy. Since none of us has been put in charge by the Vatican of making such judgements, I don’t think they belong here.
I agree. If you own an “unorthodox” copy of commentary for St. John’s gospel, then you should be able to state what about it is precisely unorthodox without making these generalized global statements based on “orthodox” trends.
I stick by my original statement that Fr. Brown’s commentary is an excellent resource. The burden of proof does not fall on me to prove otherwise.