Judith

[silverwings_88]

Since I have read as so far that the historicity of the book of Judith is not veritable (is that a word?), and yet it is an inspired book of God, is it necessarily wrong to believe that the book could have happened, and the “fictional” characters just fill in the function for anonymity?

More clearly, I tried searching about this book in the forums and found none. And not being close to any commentary (I don’t trust the NAB’s and money is an issue always with me), what does Mother Church verify about the book of Judith?

 

[NotWorthy]

Ummmmmm, that it is inspired. What is the problem you have with Judith?

NotWorthy

 

[oat_soda]

judith is great. you can see how judith for shadowed the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Blessed art thou, O daughter, by the Lord the most high God, above all women upon the earth. 24 Blessed be the Lord who made heaven and earth, who hath directed thee to the cutting off the head of the prince of our enemies.

31 Blessed art thou by thy God in every tabernacle of Jacob, for in every nation which shall hear thy name, the God of Israel shall be magnified on occasion of thee.

26 And chastity was joined to her virtue, so that she knew no man all the days of her life, after the death of Manasses her husband.

because thou hast loved chastity, and after thy husband hast not known any other: therefore also the hand of the Lord hath strengthened thee, and therefore thou shalt be blessed for ever.

and the Lord hath not suffered me his handmaid to be defiled, but hath brought me back to you without pollution of sin, rejoicing for his victory, for my escape, and for your deliverance.

Our Lady’s spouse was the Holy Spirit, hence, she was always kept pure.

 

[anawim]

silverwings_88:

Since I have read as so far that the historicity of the book of Judith is not veritable (is that a word?), and yet it is an inspired book of God, is it necessarily wrong to believe that the book could have happened, and the “fictional” characters just fill in the function for anonymity?

More clearly, I tried searching about this book in the forums and found none. And not being close to any commentary (I don’t trust the NAB’s and money is an issue always with me), what does Mother Church verify about the book of Judith?

If you read 1 Mac. 7 & 2 Mac. 15, along with Judith 13 - 15, you will see a parallel.

Holofernes, the general in the book of Judith, was a caricature of the Syrian general Nicanor, whose head was cutt off and put on display. cf. Judith 13:4 - 15:8; 1 Mac. 7:25 - 50; 2 Mac. 15:1 - 37.

The book of Judith was written as an fictionalized account of real life events in Jewish history.

 

[puzzleannie]

neither is there evidence that other books such as Tobit and Jonah describe real historical events and personages, but fictional stories can convey revealed truth, just as any other genre of writing. example: certain novels such as Little Women or Oliver Twist tell the truth about human relationships & culture by using fictional characters and events, set against a backdrop of actual historical times and places. They are not divine revelation, of course, but nevertheless resonate as true in human terms. Just so can fictional stories be the setting to communicate divinely revealed truths. Often these events and characters are metaphors or allegories of spiritual events and relationships. The description of Judith above seems to stand for a faithful Jewish people in relationship to God.

 

[mspencer]

“The Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture”(which some people here admire for its orthodoxy) comments on this, saying that there have been three opinions on this among modern critics.
1) The first view is that the Book of Judith is entirely fiction and was written, perhaps during the Maccabean fight for religious and political freedom, to encourage the Jews to resist during the period of the Maccabees. “We gather from a reply of the Catholic Biblical Commission on parts of Scripture historical in appearance that Catholics might hold this theory provided it could be proved by solid arguments that the sacred author was not intending to write history.”
2) The second opinion is that the author has made a historical event the basis of his story, but that he embellished the event. “He thus meant his word to be read as a free description of the past.”
3) The vast number of Catholic critics [at the time this commentary was published in 1952] regarded Judith as a record of fact and endeavored to answer the difficulties of apparent historical inaccuracies in the book, saying for example that Jewish and Christian tradition and all commentaries prior to the 16th century saw this book as a straightforward narrative of real events.
The author of these remarks (a Professor of the Old Testament at St. Patrick’s College in Ireland), for what is is worth, thought the second view is most probably correct.

 

[Psalm45_9]

On a side note, I would like to add that it is questionable if their was a historic figure called Esther. But anyways, I like to cosider these three books: Tobit, Judith, and Esther “historical parables.” In other words these books were based on historic events, but were written to emphasize a moral; faith, nationalism, and fortitude. The reason for the so called historic and geographical errors is because that was not the concern of these books, they were written to emphasize their moral.