Does the Baronius Press Bible contain HERESY

[Crusading_Canuk]

First of all, its not the actual translation Douay-Rheims which I find strange. For the record when I’m given the choice I only use the Douay-Rheims and I love my Baronius Press edition. Instead the map “The Ancient World Showing the probable Settlements of the Descendants OF Noah” is mislabled. If you look at the key, the sons of Japeth (father of Europeans) are labled brown and the Isrealites and Ishmalites are labled a pale red. However if you look at the map, Europe is a pale red and the Middle East is brown. I know that this was probably a typo, but such maps are often associated with British Isrealism and Christian Identity heresies. Just wondering if anybody else noticed this. Also I’m not sure if their Clementa Vulgata edition contains the same map.

 

[malphono]

If anyone is really concerned about this, (and it’s certainly not “heresy”), it might be a good idea to contact the publisher with those concerns. Perhaps the publisher already know about the printing error and has a “fix” in the form of a replacement map. And if they are not already aware of it, they will be.

 

[Rolltide]

First of all, its not the actual translation Douay-Rheims which I find strange.

The website says that this is an exact reproduction of the 1899 Challoner revision of the Douay-Rheims Bible, down to the fonts and the family register used. This version made “major revisions to the Douay-Rheims version, to improve its readability without diminishing its accuracy. The revised Douay-Rheims Bible has been approved by the Church many times over, including the approbation of Cardinal Gibbons for the 1899 edition that Baronius Press is publishing.” Also, “the notes, written by Bishop Challoner are entirely faithful to the teachings of the Holy Catholic Church.”

Instead the map “The Ancient World Showing the probable Settlements of the Descendants OF Noah” is mislabled. If you look at the key, the sons of Japeth (father of Europeans) are labled brown and the Isrealites and Ishmalites are labled a pale red. However if you look at the map, Europe is a pale red and the Middle East is brown. I know that this was probably a typo, but such maps are often associated with British Isrealism and Christian Identity heresies.

According to the Baronius website:
“Maps - from the 1911 edition published by Wm. Aleiter Co., Catholic Supply House, Indianapolis. Imprimatur: John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. Eleven coloured maps digitally redrawn by hand and fully coloured.”

Whether the error is new or was an error from the 1911 edition, I do not know.

 

[Crusading_Canuk]

Ok, I absolutely love my Baronius Press Bible, it is the ONLY Bible I trust completely. I was only wondering if anybody else has noticed this on the map or if I was mistaken. I was only refering to the map specifically and would NEVER assert that the Douay-Rheims Bible is heretical. That would make make me a heretic as the Douay-Rheims is the official English Bible of the Catholic Church.

 

[At_Trent]

Baronius has had typo issues in the past.

The story of Noah isn’t Dogma or Doctrine.

 

[At_Trent]

St. Thomas (II-II, Q. xi, a. 1) defines heresy: “a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas”.
oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Heresy

 

[ProVobis]

I have an old Douay-Confraternity version. It carries an imprimatur of Francis Cardinal Spellman and a copyright of 1951. It mentions nothing about the translation being official. Is there such a thing?

 

[JReducation]

To the best of my knowledge, there is no official Catholic Bible, for many reasons. The Catholic Church includes many language groups, even within the language groups there are variances. Many Churches make up the Catholic Church and they use different translations of the bible.

There are requirements for an edition to receive an Imprimatur and a Nihil Obstat. The edition must contain all of the approved books. The wording must be such that it does not contradict revelation or alter the meaning. It is preferred that a translation be made from the ancient texts available, though there are revisions of translations that are often approved, such as the NAB. The latest edition is a revised version of an older edition.

Things like maps and charts are not part of the Canon of Scripture. Those are put in by the publisher, not the biblical scholars who read the text. The scholars often do not get to see these maps and charts, because it is not important for the purpose of exegesis.

Having been in the field of education for many years, particularly in theology, I can tell you that the publisher often purchases things like maps. This is common when publishing textbooks and the bible would fall under that category. The company that produced the map in question may have made a mistake. I would advise the buyer to inform the publisher of the error in the map. They usually appreciate this kind of feedback.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Zooey]

I actually have the Baronius. I also have a copy of the Bible it was copied from. The Baronius appeared to be an exact copy when I compared them side by side.
That was a few years ago, & my older copy is currently on loan to a relative who is very interested in old Bibles. But I could, if anyone thinks it should be done, get a look at it, & compare again.
Truthfully, speaking as someone who has seen a lot of old Bibles in my lifetime, it is my observation that the maps in the older ones are pretty odd on the colour palate side. (I suspect its the dyes they used; they seem to have turned colour a good deal with time).
And there are always a few printing errors in any Bible I have ever had. (I once had the prophet Isaiah twice: once in the Major Prophets , and again in the Minor Prophets…).

 

[ProVobis]

St. Thomas (II-II, Q. xi, a. 1) defines heresy: “a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas”.
oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Heresy

To some extent, all translations are corruptions of some original idea and meaning. And the further it gets translated and/or paraphrased, the more the original gets distorted. It’s what I call the entropy of communication. However, to call something a heresy involves something deeper than natural corruption, and that is, an intention to deceive, which I think is what St. Thomas is trying to say here.

 

[At_Trent]

To some extent, all translations are corruptions of some original idea and meaning. And the further it gets translated and/or paraphrased, the more the original gets distorted. It’s what I call the entropy of communication. However, to call something a heresy involves something deeper than natural corruption, and that is, an intention to deceive, which I think is what St. Thomas is trying to say here.

Of course. That’s what I meant. A typo or mistranslation isn’t heresy.

 

[JReducation]

Of course. That’s what I meant. A typo or mistranslation isn’t heresy.

Good grief no!

Typos happen all the time. They were worse before the age of computers.

There is also the issue of register. For example, English and Spanish are spoken in so many countries as the national languages. However, words don’t always mean the same thing. Translations have to find the word that means the same as the word in the Vulgate, if you’re translating from there or the same meaning as the word in the Semitic languages, if that’s your source.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[At_Trent]

Good grief no!

Typos happen all the time. They were worse before the age of computers.

There is also the issue of register. For example, English and Spanish are spoken in so many countries as the national languages. However, words don’t always mean the same thing. Translations have to find the word that means the same as the word in the Vulgate, if you’re translating from there or the same meaning as the word in the Semitic languages, if that’s your source.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

No ? So a typo can indicate heresy ?

 

[Hesychios]

No ? So a typo can indicate heresy ?

It seems to me that brother JR is agreeing with you.

However …

It is possible that an innocent typo can inspire, contribute to the idea or support a heresy.

 

[Hesychios]

St. Thomas (II-II, Q. xi, a. 1) defines heresy: “a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas”.
oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Heresy

… However, to call something a heresy involves something deeper than natural corruption, and that is, an intention to deceive, which I think is what St. Thomas is trying to say here.

I don’t think heretics in general intend to deceive, not even heresiarchs, the people we might blame for starting the error.

People generally believe what they do as if it were true, and I think we can assume that they believe they are teaching Truth.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m going to have to take something back in case in was misconstrued. Heresy can be spread inadvertently but two things about it. It (a typo or a mistranslation) doesn’t make one a heretic and it must be corrected as soon as it’s spotted, or as has been just noted, more and more people are going to believe it. Nontruths do and will get passed on. Same thing when someone reports the false news or a mistranslation. Some people shut off the TV after they hear the story, they may never hear the retraction, and they will just believe the “lie” even though the reporter isn’t a “liar” in the strict sense.

 

[JReducation]

I’m going to have to take something back in case in was misconstrued. Heresy can be spread inadvertently but two things about it. It (a typo or a mistranslation) doesn’t make one a heretic and it must be corrected as soon as it’s spotted, or as has been just noted, more and more people are going to believe it. Nontruths do and will get passed on. Same thing when someone reports the false news or a mistranslation. Some people shut off the TV after they hear the story, they may never hear the retraction, and they will just believe the “lie” even though the reporter isn’t a “liar” in the strict sense.

You’re absolutely right. The typo or the mistranslation is no the heresy. But it has to be corrected as soon as it is spotted, because someone will run with it and it ill lead to a lot of trouble, either heresy or nonsense as I always say.

A perfectly good example is YHWH. The vowel sounds were misplaced and someone got Jehovah out of it. YHWH is not heresy. Misplacing the vowel sounds is not heresy either. But now, we have all of these editions of the bible saying Jehovah, because someone did not correct the mistake in the vowel sound placement.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Zooey]

OK: I have consulted my Baronius.
On the map in question, I have as follows:
Shem= green.
Ham=yellow. (This includes Russia).
Japheth=beige.
Eber (Hebrews & Ishmaelites)=pink/red.

So there are four colours, not three. It looks to me like the map is intended to show two separate things: the possible spread of Noah’s descendants; and the countries to which the various Semite peoples have spread.
Probably not the best choice of colours–Shem is:shrug: green??? But I think the real problem may be that it may just be, as I say, a case of mapmakers trying to say too much in one space.

All of which is to say, I don’t see any ill motives. Just a badly done map. (I have 2 Bibles which show the track followed by the Israelites as they moved out of Egypt and into the Promised Land. **None **of them show Mt Sinai, for pete’s sake!!).

Over & out.

 

[JReducation]

OK: I have consulted my Baronius.
On the map in question, I have as follows:
Shem= green.
Ham=yellow. (This includes Russia).
Japheth=beige.
Eber (Hebrews & Ishmaelites)=pink/red.

So there are four colours, not three. It looks to me like the map is intended to show two separate things: the possible spread of Noah’s descendants; and the countries to which the various Semite peoples have spread.
Probably not the best choice of colours–Shem is:shrug: green??? But I think the real problem may be that it may just be, as I say, a case of mapmakers trying to say too much in one space.

All of which is to say, I don’t see any ill motives. Just a badly done map. (I have 2 Bibles which show the track followed by the Israelites as they moved out of Egypt and into the Promised Land. **None **of them show Mt Sinai, for pete’s sake!!).

Over & out.

I can top that one. I have one bibe with a map that does not show the Red Sea. It’s as if someone just deleted it. I can understand not putting a dot where Mt. Sinai should be. Now, how the heck do you make a body of water disappear?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF