Is My Bible Acceptable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter anon76821255
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

anon76821255

Guest
Hello,

I have five bibles - two Catholic Compact Bibles, a Protestant Bible (I have as a back-up!), a children’s Bible, and a beautiful study Bible.

My study bible was published in 1958, and has beautiful colour photographs throughout, with a message from Pope Pius, and a colour photograph of him praying. I use it for in-depth scripture study, as it has relatively comprehensive notes, essays, history of the church and art, maps of Ancient Judea etc. But, it was published before the Second Vatican Council. Can I use it as a study bible, or do I need a new one?

Regards.
 
Last edited:
It’s completely fine to use it as a study Bible, the teachings should be the same. It might not be as relatable to situations or objections brought up more recently but the core teaching of catholicism should still be present.
 
If it has an Impramater and Nihil Obstat, you’re good to go. Doesn’t have to be post VII.
 
Hello,

It has both an Imprimatur and a Nihil Obstat - the only one of my Bibles that does not is my back-up Protestant Bible. Thank you for your reply.

Regards.
 
Perfectly acceptable to use - as for the protestant Bible, it is missing a few books in the the Old Testament and some of the foot notes might not represent Catholic beliefs.
 
You can certainly use your Bible with Pope Pius in it. The Bible was not changed substantively by Vatican II.

Post-Vatican II there have been some new translations of the Bible that did things like update the English language to more modern-sounding language or add new footnotes. Sometimes I prefer to read the “vintage” Bible text so I use an old Catholic Bible. It’s perfectly fine.
 
Last edited:
anon76821255 said:
a Protestant Bible
Click to expand...
There is no Protestant or Catholic Bible…the canons are different, but the bibles (if you discount footnotes and commentary) are remarkably consistent, with the exception of the missioning deuterocanonical books.

Whether the RSVCE2, or NABRE, or any other translation, the texts are fine, the footnotes might be subjective, but if you rely on the CCC, and the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and other Church Documents, you’ll be fine.

It has always amazed me how the differences between the “Catholic Bible” and the “Protestant Bible” cause so much concern, when we throw out all but the text, and consider the differences in canon, there is little to no difference…and it amazes me how those so worked up about the differences in the canon have not read the deuterocanonical texts anyway.
 
Last edited:
Hereiam said:
There is no Protestant or Catholic Bible…the canons are different, but the bibles (if you discount footnotes and commentary) are remarkably consistent, with the exception of the missioning deuterocanonical books.
Click to expand...
Actually, they aren’t “remarkably consistent”, except for comparing the KJV and the Douay-Rheims perhaps. Those are reasonably consistent (except for the difference in canon).

The modern Protestant Bibles often have significantly different text than the modern Catholic Bibles. This can be important, particularly in areas where Protestant teaching differs from Catholicism such as Mary’s sinlessness.

As an example, here are a bunch of Protestant (and a couple Catholic) versions of Luke 1:28 from whence comes the Hail Mary prayer. NOT very consistent. And the differences are important if you’re serious about Mary.

https://biblehub.com/luke/1-28.htm

So no, it is not a case of one Bible being as good as another.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
As an example, here are a bunch of Protestant (and a couple Catholic) versions of Luke 1:28 from whence comes the Hail Mary prayer. NOT very consistent. And the differences are important if you’re serious about Mary.
Click to expand...
This example is one (and please, this is not meant pejoratively, but from an academic standpoint) is either one of disingenuous or ignorance…the linguistic differences between translation of “full of grace” and “favored one” are just a matter of semantics and not the anagogical.

Whether we prefer “full of grace” to “favored one” the spiritual meaning is consistent.
 
I completely disagree with your post. The differences are highly significant, even if you yourself do not care about them. Others do care, and a good Catholic uses a Catholic Bible.
You take ecumenism way too far when you start telling people to just use what they want. You are spreading error when you do that.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I completely disagree with your post.
Click to expand...
That’s fine, I respect your opinion.

The problem in “spreading error” is often not knowing the difference between translation and interpretation…translation is a worldly aspect of scripture, interpretation a spiritual and ecclesiastic aspect.

Error is not being spread, however dashing of paradigms might.
 
Last edited:
If only Pius X was the end all and be all of Church teachings, I guess I see your point.
 
The average person reading a Bible is not a translation expert. They are going to believe the words on the page are the word of God. For that reason, it is important that those doing the translation do not have the goal, however suble or sneaky or whatever, of undermining the Catholic faith and upholding their own view of it.

And yes, that is what Protestant Bible translators are often trying very hard to do. Otherwise they could just buy and use the Catholic Bibles.
 
anon76821255 said:
Hello,

I have five bibles - two Catholic Compact Bibles, a Protestant Bible (I have as a back-up!), a children’s Bible, and a beautiful study Bible.

My study bible was published in 1958, and has beautiful colour photographs throughout, with a message from Pope Pius, and a colour photograph of him praying. I use it for in-depth scripture study, as it has relatively comprehensive notes, essays, history of the church and art, maps of Ancient Judea etc. But, it was published before the Second Vatican Council. Can I use it as a study bible, or do I need a new one?

Regards.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you have one of the New Catholic Editions from Catholic Book Publishing Company, which were fairly popular at that time. If that is what you have, it probably contains the New Confraternity Edition of the New Testament and the New Confraternity Edition of certain parts of the Old Testament, with the remainder being the Douay Version.

These bibles are actually really good to have and the study aids found at the back are also very helpful. I would say that you are fine keeping it as your main bible of choice for study and devotional reading. In fact, the bible you have is probably far better than any you’ll find on the shelf today. I own several different variations of these bibles, so I’m somewhat biased. 😁
 
Last edited:
Bible acceptability is akin to the old question, “which diet is the best one?”
  • The diet that someone follows is the best one.
These are the kinds of posts that I wish there were more of on Catholic Answers.

It’s wonderful that more and more Catholics are studying and reading Sacred Scripture. Whatever translation that keeps you reading and studying God’s word is the best for you.

In technical terms, there are significant differences in translations, and important distinctions, but they matter more for scholarly work and more advanced bible studies, and so on.

I have many translations of the Bible and personally favor the RSV-CE 2nd Edition. Ironically, my least favorite is the NAB, which is what Americans hear proclaimed at Mass each Sunday.

For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Hb 4:12

What a blessing it is to study God’s Word on this, His day,
Deacon Christopher
 
Diaconia said:
Whatever translation that keeps you reading and studying God’s word is the best for you.
Click to expand...
I presume that as a deacon, you mean, “whatever Catholic translation that keeps you reading…”. There are quite a few Catholic editions, such as the ones you mentioned, RSVCE and NAB, and also the Douay-Rheims, Haydock, etc.

I presume that as a deacon you are not saying it’s okay for Catholics to just go grab some Protestant Bible and read that.
 
Particularly so when they keep flipping and flipping and flipping, where is Tobit? Why can’t I find Maccabees!?
 
Sure, its acceptable. The one I would be careful with is the Protestant Bible, only because the foot notes probably won’t agree with Catholic teaching. Other than that and it is missing a few books from the O.T. there is nothing wrong with having that bible. Just keep in mind what I said about the commentary/footnotes. I have a NKJV, for apologetics use of I am working with a Protestant and we are doing a study or something. Otherwise I stick to my douay-rheims NAB.

P.S. note there are some bad commentary in the NAB though. Off the top of my head I don’t remember where but defentley a Protestant and not Catholic beliefs on some of those footnotes. I really trust the douay rheims when it comes to that.
 
Last edited:
Hereiam said:
Whether we prefer “full of grace” to “favored one” the spiritual meaning is consistent.
Click to expand...
As I understand it ‘highly favoured’ is what the original Greek manuscripts are best translated as. ‘Full of grace’ comes from the Vulgate.

(I use a NRSV, Catholic Edition, myself).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top