Conservative study Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zenkai
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

Zenkai

Guest
I was wondering if anyone knows of any conservative Catholic study Bible. I don’t want it to have the heretical liberal historical-critical method garbage. I would prefer it to have the Jerusalem Bible text, as I have heard good things about that translation.

-Thank you
 
The Douay Rheims Challoner version is excellent but extremely concise. If Challoner would have given many more footnotes then it would have been the best.

The Ignatius Study Bible is great, and the Navarre Bible too. My website called the Aquinas Study Bible has a wonderful sellection of commentaries on every book of the Bible!
 
What about the DR Haydock commentary. You can read this free on the the net. I think this is one of the best ones around. I happen to have it in a 2 volume set. The OT and the NT. It is now out in one volume but it is costly.
 
I was wondering if anyone knows of any conservative Catholic study Bible. I don’t want it to have the heretical liberal historical-critical method garbage. I would prefer it to have the Jerusalem Bible text, as I have heard good things about that translation.

-Thank you
I think you can buy the JB readers edition which is sparse on notes. You can probably find one with commentary on the net under used books. I have one and this is my bible of choice along with the Haydock commentary.
 
I was wondering if anyone knows of any conservative Catholic study Bible**. I don’t want it to have the heretical liberal historical-critical method garbage**. I would prefer it to have the Jerusalem Bible text, as I have heard good things about that translation.

-Thank you
You can purchase any bible study you like, but a historical-critical method is not in itself heretical. The Church opens itself to many levels of investigation and study of scripture.
 
I was wondering if anyone knows of any conservative Catholic study Bible. I don’t want it to have the heretical liberal historical-critical method garbage. I would prefer it to have the Jerusalem Bible text, as I have heard good things about that translation.

-Thank you
I’m fairly certain that the historical critical method is likened to a facet of a diamond. It is not the sole method to evaluate scripture by. However, it seems to me that declaring it heretical would be the job of the Catholic Church, not yours. For if it is your job to declare it so, it seems to me you have a role in the Church we are unaware of.

The most positive aspect of the historical method that comes to mind is that it stresses that the bible is a product of the Church, the Church is not a product of the bible. Lest one go down the path of Sola Scriptura, I can not see a reason to call this one facet of a diamond a heresy. I can not find one pope to agree it is.
 
I’m fairly certain that the historical critical method is likened to a facet of a diamond. It is not the sole method to evaluate scripture by. However, it seems to me that declaring it heretical would be the job of the Catholic Church, not yours. For if it is your job to declare it so, it seems to me you have a role in the Church we are unaware of.

The most positive aspect of the historical method that comes to mind is that it stresses that the bible is a product of the Church, the Church is not a product of the bible. Lest one go down the path of Sola Scriptura, I can not see a reason to call this one facet of a diamond a heresy. I can not find one pope to agree it is.
“Pope Leo XIII (1810–1903) condemned secular biblical scholarship in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus.”
 
I would rather have commentary that believes what the Bible says.
 
“Pope Leo XIII (1810–1903) condemned secular biblical scholarship in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus.”
I’m sorry, but your quote does not define secular biblical scholarship. Maybe you can dig that connection up in the encyclical instead of doing cut and paste jobs.
 
“Pope Leo XIII (1810–1903) condemned secular biblical scholarship in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus.”
I am taking a stab that how you define “historical approach” is different that mine. From the catechism:

III. THE HOLY SPIRIT, INTERPRETER OF SCRIPTURE

109 In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words.75

110 In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression."76

111 But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. "Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written."77
The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.78

112 1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”. Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.79

The phrase “heart of Christ” can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.80

113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81).

114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith.82 By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.
  1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84
  2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.85
  3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86
118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses:

The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith;
The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.87

119 "It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgment. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."88

But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.89
 
I am taking a stab that how you define “historical approach” is different that mine. From the catechism:

III. THE HOLY SPIRIT, INTERPRETER OF SCRIPTURE

109 In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words.75

110 In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression."76

111 But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. "Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written."77
The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.78

112 1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”. Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.79

The phrase “heart of Christ” can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.80

113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81).

114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith.82 By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.
  1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84
  2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.85
  3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86
118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses:

The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith;
The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.87

119 "It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgment. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."88

But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.89
The historical critical method is different from that. One example is that it says the books in the Bible are not written by who the Bible says wrote them. It basically goes against biblical inerrancy.
 
The OP said:

The historical critical method is different from that. One example is that it says the books in the Bible are not written by who the Bible says wrote them. It basically goes against biblical inerrancy.

Dear OP,

You seem to like to say “it says” a lot. Earlier, you were speaking about what the bible “says” now you have decided what the historical biblical method “says”.

Perhaps it is your personal interpretation you are relying on heavily to come to these conclusions?
 
No, it is not my personal interpretations.
So far you have not offered a reason for us to believe the historical critical method is heretical, or that popes agree it is. So, how are your interpretations not personal?
 
So far you have not offered a reason for us to believe the historical critical method is heretical, or that popes agree it is. So, how are your interpretations not personal?
The Bible says one thing and the historical-critical method says something contrary. I don’t have to interpret anything to realize that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top