The Church has two types of authorityHow can Bishops’ approval of a Scripture translation/publishing NOT be an exercise of the Magisterium? Just because something has not been declared as taught infallibly does not mean it’s not an exercise of the Magisterium.
The older translations to which you refer were approved by individual Bishops under the old system. Currently, individual Bishops no longer are permitted to approve of a translation of the Bible. See the list of approved translations on the USCCB site.Also, regarding a later post, Canon 825; Bishops can and do still give imprimaturs individually, Canon 825 is requiring Vatican or Conference approval; related, but distinct issues (I checked my copies of the NAB and NJB to make sure they in fact had imprimaturs from individual bishops).
Thanks. Never heard of that distinction before. Is this written anywhere that the Church describes Her teaching authority like this? Just curious, I’d like to read more about it.The Church has two types of authority
A judgment as to which translations or books should be approved for publication is of the temporal authority. The Magisterium teaches from Tradition and Scripture. The temporal authority judges and rules.
- teaching authority (Magisterium)
- temporal authority (judgments, rules, approvals, practices, etc.)
No, both translations I looked at were for editions following the promulgation of the 1983 Code. I’m aware that Bishops, individually, cannot solely authorize publication of Scriptures, I was only referring to the imprimatur.The older translations to which you refer were approved by individual Bishops under the old system. Currently, individual Bishops no longer are permitted to approve of a translation of the Bible. See the list of approved translations on the USCCB site.
This is a rich sentiment, Jerry-Jet, and I celebrate it. A presumption exists in the sola scriptura line of thinking. That presumption eventually takes the form of an accusation, which is the sense that the Bible is a secondary thing in the Catholic philosophy. But that is simply not true. The Bible is a primary, essential thing and you cannot distill it away from the Catholic faith, ever. We are wed to it at the hip, just as the fundamentalist Protestants are. They can’t see that, some of us can’t see that, but our faith stands or falls on the Bible.The Bible’s truth can be as perfect as the magisterium’s interpretation of it.
Don’t get me wrong–I do believe that the Bible must be understood with the understanding of the Catholic church.
All I’m saying is that it’s not an either/or proposition.
The bible is perfect–the magisterium’s interpretation of it is perfect–not either/or but BOTH are true.
The bible came from the church–that’s why it is perfect.
Sometimes I think that Catholics work so hard at emphasizing the role of the magisterium and of sacred tradition’s importance in viewing the bible that they forget what high esteem the Catholic Church has always had for the bible.
Catholics wrote it–Catholics decided what books were in it–Catholics used it in the liturgy–and Catholics taught the Fullness of Truth that begat the bible in the first place.
Most Catholics would think it would be a bad thing if they were referred to as a “Bible Church”.
But just go to mass anywhere and go to most protestant churches and you’ll find that you hear much more PURE BIBLE at Mass than at any Protestant service.
By all means listen to what the Catholic Church teaches about the bible.
But love it and read it everyday like most of the saints have done.
It’s OK to be Catholic and LOVE the bible and LOVE the One who gave it to us!
Ah, Jerry, Catholic’s didn’t write the Bible, they only compiled it. It was actually written way before the “Church” began. The only Church until the Acts of the Apostles was the Jewish Synagogue.Catholics wrote it–(The Bible) Catholics decided what books were in it–Catholics used it in the liturgy–and Catholics taught the Fullness of Truth that begat the bible in the first place.
Ummm…New Testament?Jerry-Jet said:
Ah, Jerry, Catholic’s didn’t write the Bible, they only compiled it. It was actually written way before the “Church” began. The only Church until the Acts of the Apostles was the Jewish Synagogue.
DesertSister62
Ah, Jerry, Catholic’s didn’t write the Bible, they only compiled it. It was actually written way before the “Church” began. The only Church until the Acts of the Apostles was the Jewish Synagogue.
I don’t actually know when the formal Liturgical Church began, but it was sometime after the time of Jesus. As I had a Nun point out to me in a Scripture Class one time, Jesus didn’t come to set up a Church. He left that to His followers. Yes, he appointed Peter as the first “Pope,” and he was looked up to by all the followers but it wasn’t like our modern Pope’s with all the liturgical ceremonies etc.diggerdomer said:
Ummm…New Testament?
I was simply and entirely confused by your statement that the Bible was written way before the Church began.Jerry-Jet said:
I don’t actually know when the formal Liturgical Church began, but it was sometime after the time of Jesus. As I had a Nun point out to me in a Scripture Class one time, Jesus didn’t come to set up a Church. He left that to His followers. Yes, he appointed Peter as the first “Pope,” and he was looked up to by all the followers but it wasn’t like our modern Pope’s with all the liturgical ceremonies etc.
Go through the New Testament and you will see that most of the Jewish Apostles met with the Jewish people either in synagogues or private homes. The Jewish “Christians” didn’t give up being Jewish. It was Paul’s influence with the Gentiles that probably bore the most fruit in regards to the formal Church coming into being. Just when that was, I have no idea, but from what I have read in the Scriptures, the Church as we know it did not really exist back then until much later.
DesertSister62
This is a rich sentiment, Jerry-Jet, and I celebrate it. A presumption exists in the sola scriptura line of thinking. That presumption eventually takes the form of an accusation, which is the sense that the Bible is a secondary thing in the Catholic philosophy. But that is simply not true. The Bible is a primary, essential thing and you cannot distill it away from the Catholic faith, ever. We are wed to it at the hip, just as the fundamentalist Protestants are. They can’t see that, some of us can’t see that, but our faith stands or falls on the Bible.
I really hate to bring this up as it will certainly date me, but I have had occasion to speak with many older Cradle Catholics and much as I would like to agree with you, you are sadly mistaken. Until fairly recently, the Bible has been a secondary issue in the Catholic Church! (Among the people themselves!)Thankfully. It is the inspired word of God.
mystagogia said:I was simply and entirely confused by your statement that the Bible was written way before the Church began.
No matter what you say, the first five books of the Bible was called the Pentateuch, and it was Moses that was credited with writing those books. Then the Jews had scrolls from each of the Prophets etc.I have no idea how to understand or interpret that statement.
DesertSister62, describe the process however you like, but the fact remains that the Christian Bible did not exist until the Catholic Church put it forward.
Jesus did not start a Church. He came to provide the Atonement for our sins and while He was here He taught us about the Kingdom of God.I don’t know what that nun who told you Jesus didn’t found a Church was thinking. Whose church did she think she was a part of?
The 12 Apostles were Jews. Jesus was a Jew.diggerdomer said:
mystagogia said:
No matter what you say, the first five books of the Bible was called the Pentateuch, and it was Moses that was credited with writing those books. Then the Jews had scrolls from each of the Prophets etc.
Folks, these were JEWS,…not Catholics. I am sorry, but the Church has not been around since the dawn of time! We compiled the Bible, but Catholics did NOT write it!
Jerome translated the Old Testament into Latin about AD 390-405, apparently using as a base text that was a form of the Hebrew text. …And I believe that was the first Catholic Scriptures; The Latin Vulgate.
DesertSister62
I did NOT say that the New Testament was not a Christian Scripture. What I said was that it was NOT CATHOLIC. However, it WAS compiled by Catholics. We made the original choices as to which books were considered canonical.The 12 Apostles were Jews. Jesus was a Jew.
So?
Are you saying that the New Testament is a Jewish Scripture?
Yikes!!
The New Testament is entirely Christian and not Jewish Scripture. It was written LONG before St. Jerome.
Sorry if I misunderstood, thanks for clarifying.diggerdomer said:
I did NOT say that the New Testament was not a Christian Scripture. What I said was that it was NOT CATHOLIC. However, it WAS compiled by Catholics. We made the original choices as to which books were considered canonical.
As to what language it was written in; it was either Aramaic or Greek, with Greek being the predominant choice. Here again,…the Greek Christians were exactly that; Christian…
*"According to the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, about the year 33 C.E., the structure of the Church was set up by Jesus Christ before His Ascension and then the early Christian Church was born on Pentecost when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and disciples.
This same Church has referred to itself as the “Catholic Church” at least since 107 C.E.* (about 10 years after the last book of the New Testament was written), when the Greek term “Katholikos” (meaning universal) appears in the Letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Smyrnaeans."
DesertSister62
Every Apostle who was a Jew was also a Catholic.
Every book written in the New Testament was written by someone who belonged to the Catholic Church.
I know that you get tired of me saying this but the Church was called “Christian” from the time of the Church in Antioch. Not Catholic, but Christian. There was NO Eucharist,…NO Precious Blood, No Crucifix…nothing that identifies us as Catholic until AFTER the Crucifixion and death of Christ. It did not exist before that.For that matter all the righteous before Jesus also belonged to the Catholic
Church but didn’t know it at the time!
I will reiterate:what difference does it make? it’s the same church isn’t it? The same church Christ founded, the same Church that has Peter as the head (and his successors) here on Earth!