What is a good bible that Roman Catholics use?

  • Thread starter Thread starter php111
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
fred_conty said:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=625668
From EWTN:
Bible Versions and Commentaries

4.4 Modified NAB with Revised Psalms and Revised New Testament (2000-2002). This title is of my own invention. It does not refer to any currently available Bible, but to the NAB with Revised Psalms and Revised NT, as modified by a committee of the Holy See and the Bishops for use in the liturgy. It is the text found in all current Lectionaries in the U.S… The Holy See accepted some use of inclusive language, where the speaker/author intended a mixed audience (e.g. “brothers and sisters”, instead of the older “brethren”), but rejected it in references to God or Christ, and man, where the word has anthropological and theological significance (e.g. Psalm 1:1, with reference to Adam and Christ). Whether a Bible will be made available having these modified NAB texts is not known at this time. Since they do not extend to the entire Bible, it is possible that none will be, as that would require further editing of the underlying NAB text.
Click to expand...
New American Bible (NAB) Revised Edition was approved in 2010 and is now available. I bought one last year. Saint Benedict Press. It contains: Family record pages, Succession of Popes, Collaborators on the Old Testament - revised Psalms and revised New Testament, Old and New Testaments with footnotes, Christ’s words in red, Calendar of Readings, Favorite Catholic Prayers, Prayers to Jesus, Prayers to Mary, Prayers to and with the Saints, Works of religious art and maps of the Holy Lands and St. Paul’s journeys. It measures about 8 1/2 x 6 1/2 inches.
 
po18guy said:
And here is a huge problem: It was the remnants of the Pharisees, after the destructon of the Temple in 70 AD that decided these books were not inspired and excluded them from their “canon”. But, not all Jews hold to that canon. In fact, some hold only to the Pentateuch, or first five books of Moses, while others hold also to the wisdom books, but not to the prophets. The 39 book OT is of the Pharisees - thus, the reformers used the Pharisee’s OT canon! As a Christian, one need not be degreed in ancient history, or a scriptural scholar to see the the error in that.
Click to expand...
So, in other words you are saying the pharisees are Christians? They were not a Jewish council convened to review their Holy Canon thus removing the Apocrypha books.
You know, it really is a wonder these books are still in our Catholic Canon. St Jerome did not want them, but went along with the majority. St. Augustine only wished them included for the unity of the Church; East and west. They were only to be for inspirational reading and they were not canonical until the reformation period. It must be the work of the Holy Spirit that keeps these books in the Canon of the Holy Catholic Church.
Protestants will tell us nothing is derived from them in the New or Old Testaments. I guess they have never read 2 Maccabees. Protestants will also say there is no evidance they were ever included in early Christian Canons. I guess they don’t keep up with the archaeological discoveries were these books some written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek have been found with many pre and early Christian Canons.
 
DavidWJackson said:
They were only to be for inspirational reading and they were not canonical until the reformation period.
Click to expand...
I can’t tell if you are being serious with this comment. The deuterocanonical books have been on every Church list of the canon since the 4th century. The name deuterocanonical dates from the Reformation.
 
DavidWJackson said:
So, in other words you are saying the pharisees are Christians? They were not a Jewish council convened to review their Holy Canon thus removing the Apocrypha books.
You know, it really is a wonder these books are still in our Catholic Canon. St Jerome did not want them, but went along with the majority. St. Augustine only wished them included for the unity of the Church; East and west. They were only to be for inspirational reading and they were not canonical until the reformation period. It must be the work of the Holy Spirit that keeps these books in the Canon of the Holy Catholic Church.
Protestants will tell us nothing is derived from them in the New or Old Testaments. I guess they have never read 2 Maccabees. Protestants will also say there is no evidance they were ever included in early Christian Canons. I guess they don’t keep up with the archaeological discoveries were these books some written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek have been found with many pre and early Christian Canons.
Click to expand...
Not at all! What I am saying is that the protestant reformers rejected the Catholic canon of OT scripture, for whatever reason. So, to have some sense of the OT scriptures which they might use, they consulted with the Jewish authorities and decided to employ the canon which was handed down from the Pharisees.

Why would a Christian - any Christian - hold to the canon of scripture adopted by the group which specifically rejected Christ, and whose behavior was condemned sevenfold by Christ?

The reformers made come overtures to the Orthodox Church(es) during the reform, but were rebuffed. Did those reformers adopt the Orthodox canon? No. They kept the Pharisaic OT canon. This is amazing to me.
 
Cranch said:
I can’t tell if you are being serious with this comment. The deuterocanonical books have been on every Church list of the canon since the 4th century. The name deuterocanonical dates from the Reformation.
Click to expand...
I agree with you there even many libraries and centers of learning started before that period in history. Many of them were solely started to promulgate God’s word.

Shalom
God bless
 
aragonjohn1 said:
I agree with you there even many libraries and centers of learning started before that period in history. Many of them were solely started to promulgate God’s word.

Shalom
God bless
Click to expand...
By The Catholic Church through Jesus Christ and with Him through many other members of the Church Militent.
 
Cranch said:
I can’t tell if you are being serious with this comment. The deuterocanonical books have been on every Church list of the canon since the 4th century. The name deuterocanonical dates from the Reformation.
Click to expand...
Sorry. I should have said. Doctors within the Catholic Church thought these books should not be included in the Canon of the Church. But, they went along with keeping the books without boosting arguments for reasons outside of doctrinal teaching. They held the books not of any great doctrinal value, but of inspirational value. It wasn’t until the council of Trent reaffirm the books to be Canonical and by doing so laid down the law, so to say, commanding these books to be read and taught from, by the whole Church. However, that should have always been the case. Should it not have been? Because, they were always part of the Christian Canon. But they were probably silently ignored by many who should have been giving them there due respect and teaching from these books. I believe these books have been a part of our Church from the beginning, before our Canon was formally composed and before the Gospels were written. I also believe they should be read and taught from.
 
I realize that this is about two weeks late, but if nobody has mentioned it, you can get the Douay-Rheims free for e-sword (windows software), along with the study notes from the Haydock Bible and the Catena Aurea, but you’ll have to do a search for the notes. I don’t think they’re available from the e-sword site. There are also iPhone/iPad apps, and probably Android apps that have the text of the Douay-Rheims. You can get it for the kindle as well. They’ll be cheap, or sometimes possibly free.

As for which translation to use, the RSV-CE (and variants) seems to be popular at the CA forums, but in ordinary Catholic life in the US you may find the NAB being used frequently around the parish, since it’s the translation used for the Liturgy in the United States. In other English speaking countries you may see more people reading the NJB or NRSV.
 
fred_conty said:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=625668
From EWTN:
Bible Versions and Commentaries
Click to expand...
I had seen this list in the past, but cannot locate the source document in the time I have today (and I have frequently had rotten results with EWTN’s search engine).

As I recall, this list pre-dates the current USCCB list.

Although I love EWTN, they are not the ultimate authority on approved translations, so I assume that the EWTN list was taken from a previous list provided by the USCCB or other authoritative document. My question/concern is why the RSV-CE has been removed from the USCCB list.
 
Well, I decided to ask the USCCB themselves. I posted the question in their “Doctrine” department. I hope I get an answer, as they post the typical “We get a lot of emails, and can’t respond to them all” caveat.
 
Larry1700 said:
Although I love EWTN, they are not the ultimate authority on approved translations, so I assume that the EWTN list was taken from a previous list provided by the USCCB or other authoritative document. My question/concern is why the RSV-CE has been removed from the USCCB list.
Click to expand...
Fair point. Though, it should be mentioned that, in reality, neither is the USCCB. I am not for one minute suggesting that we ignore the guidance of the USCCB. However, it is important to note, particularly with some of the things which have come out that were largely the constructions of lay committees and one or two Bishops, that documents from the USCCB are not necessarily Magisterial in authority.

Having said that, I will be very curious to see the response you get from them per your inquiry.

Peace,
 
jwinch2 said:
Fair point. Though, it should be mentioned that, in reality, neither is the USCCB. I am not for one minute suggesting that we ignore the guidance of the USCCB. However, it is important to note, particularly with some of the things which have come out that were largely the constructions of lay committees and one or two Bishops, that documents from the USCCB are not necessarily Magisterial in authority.

Having said that, I will be very curious to see the response you get from them per your inquiry.

Peace,
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree about most of your post, but it is my understanding that they do have the authority over liturgical matters in the United States. Am I incorrect?
 
Larry1700 said:
Absolutely agree about most of your post, but it is my understanding that they do have the authority over liturgical matters in the United States. Am I incorrect?
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that those things are still subject to approval by the Vatican but other than that, I believe you are correct. In addition, it is my understanding that when something is endorsed by ALL of the bishops in a given country’s conference, it does imply a certain amount of authority. However, I am unsure as to the ins and outs of that situation, or to what level the authority rises.

Peace,
 
php111 said:
Hello everyone,

I’m new to this forum. What is a good bible that Roman Catholics use? I do have a King James Bible that is Seniors’ Devotional. Would there be any bibles similar to the one I have, but would be a Roman Catholic Verison only?

Thank you if someone could help me!
Click to expand...
I don’t think there are any versions which are condemned by the Church, so for your own spiritual advantage use the one you have if you like it and don’t have other resources.

Personally I like a side-by-side Latin-English Kindle version; I don’t even know which English translation it uses because I’m not in it to adore English words. That I reserve for Shakespeare. 🙂
 
I have not found any free Bibles around but am looking in thrift shops and asking in Freecycle sites. If you find any can you let me know? Right now I am using the New American Bible from the library.
 
I just purchased the Pope’s new book: “The Infancy Narratives”, and he uses the RSV in scriptural quotations. Based on that, I’m assuming it’s still acceptable. 😉

Still waiting on a response from the USCCB as to why it was removed from their list.
 
misscath007 said:
I have not found any free Bibles around but am looking in thrift shops and asking in Freecycle sites. If you find any can you let me know? Right now I am using the New American Bible from the library.
Click to expand...
If possible, you should reach the Knights of Columbus in your area. I am fairly certain they will make every possible effort to get you a Catholic Bible.

Peace.
 
misscath007 said:
I have not found any free Bibles around but am looking in thrift shops and asking in Freecycle sites. If you find any can you let me know? Right now I am using the New American Bible from the library.
Click to expand...
I sent you a PM. Just an FYI.

Peace,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top