Where does one find the "OFFICIAL" biblical interpretation of the Catholic Church?

[Freddy_Medina]

I hear about the NAB, the RSV-CE, and the Douay-Rheims bibles. But where do I find the ultimate resource that tells me the official (as of 2004) intepretation of the Bible? Where do I find out which interpretations are just someone’s speculations or where do I find that the certain interpretations are no longer officially accepted. Something that I can sit down with and learn the official teaching on say, “the parting of the red sea by Moses”?

I am really tired of all the different groups each with their own bible and commentary.

Thank you.

 

[Nun_ofthe_Above]

Hi Freddy,
I’ve had a scout around, and from what I can gather, the Latin Vulgate is the official and approved Catholic version, of which the Douay-Rheims stems. I found a site citing The Douay-Rheims Bible with a Comprehensive Commentary compiled by Reverend Father George Leo Haydock as a wonderful set, comprising three books or there is this site with a set of 2.
catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/11050.html

I hope this helps.

 

[dennisknapp]

I hear about the NAB, the RSV-CE, and the Douay-Rheims bibles. But where do I find the ultimate resource that tells me the official (as of 2004) intepretation of the Bible? Where do I find out which interpretations are just someone’s speculations or where do I find that the certain interpretations are no longer officially accepted. Something that I can sit down with and learn the official teaching on say, “the parting of the red sea by Moses”?

I am really tired of all the different groups each with their own bible and commentary.

Thank you.

You find the official interpretation of the Bible in the Magisterium thru Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[BayCityRickL]

I don’t recommend the New Jerome Biblical Commentary, but I won’t go deeply into the reasons for that. Nevertheless, the NJBC has a section or two on “Church Pronouncements” or like topics.

The NJBC is the source of a “fact” that you may hear that the Church has officially interpreted only about one percent of the Bible. From reading parts of the NJBC, the “one percent” is not to mean a mathematical fraction precisely. It is just a way of saying that the Church has NOT officially interpreted the Bible, for the most part.

The NJBC also takes a position that about 60% of the bible can be understood by the average person without difficulty. 25% of the Bible probably requires some expert assistance. and, 15% of the bible is just too hard to understand – for what it’s worth.

The Pontifical Biblical Commission put out a statement or guide to the interpretation of the Bible over ten years ago. That document says it is incorrect to look for a single interpretation of the Bible. Fr. Ronald Witherup, S.S., had an article ten years ago in THE BIBLE TODAY expanding on that.

That presents an obvious dilemma, about what we’re supposed to do with the Bible. Does that mean that everyone’s interpretation is right? Obviously not, and that’s where the Catechism comes in to resolve matters of faith. Of course, the Catechism is not a Bible commentary by design, but it does mesh in a squishy way with the Bible.

The PBC’s statement should (but hasn’t yet) put to rest the fear a lot of ordinary Catholics have about misinterpreting the Bible. The PBC is echoing the Vatican II’s Dei Verbum (which it influenced) that the Bible is a constant and continuing source of inspiration, and that it will not cease to be such a source of inspiration in the future.

The NJBC says that group Bible study should be done under the guidance of somebody with a master’s degree level of study of Scripture. Of course, that is self-serving to the interests of biblical scholars. That would make everybody since Christ up to about 1985 unqualified in Biblical matters.

Catholic Bible interpretation is squishy. And, thank God that it is, that we won’t be ruled by any generation of “experts” and “scholars.”

 

[jpy15026]

Being a “fallen away” Catholic and returning to the Catholic Church 30 yrs. ago I have been reading the scriptures for quite a while now, immersing myself into The New American Bible. I recently experienced a ‘Renewal’ into my Catholic faith and what an exciting renewal it is! I ‘discovered’ The Early Church Fathers and a whole new light has come on concerning my Catholic faith. I now read the scriptures through Catholic Glasses and see things that I never saw before in the Scriptures!

I had to replace my New American Bible (that I used for 30 years),and since then also purchased The Navarre Gospels and Acts, The Navarre Bible Pentateuch ,The New Jerusalem Bible , and The Ignatius RSV-CE. Then I discovered The Douay Rheims Bible and everything changed!

The Douay-Rheims Bible is an English translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible, a version universally used in the Church for over 1500 years, itself meticulously translated from the original Hebrew and Greek by St. Jerome (A.D. 340-420).

The argument that it is a “translation of a translation” is bogus! Since we don’t have the “original” Greek and Hebrew Manuscripts and we do have the Vulgate in the Vatican Archives, this is the only true Bible in my opinion that we Catholics should read.

This is what the Catholic Church used for 1500 years; everything we believe is contained in these Scriptures, without corruption. I am amazed as I read the Douay Rheims just how much is conveniently changed in other versions of scripture to ‘fit’ protestant arguments. The root word of Protestant of course is to “Protest”… Protest what? Protest the Catholic Church!

I now fully understand why non Catholics base their whole faith on Sola Scripture (Bible only theology) this has put a new twist to the quote from Bishop Newman “To immerse oneself in history is to cease to be Protestant”

I say:

“To read and Study the Douay Rheims Bible is to cease to be Protestant!”

Please excuse my rant, but after discovering this, I’m really fired up over it!

John

 

[serendipity]

Does anyone have any idea when the Ignatius Study Bible will be completed? Has a date ever been officially mentioned as a target?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I hear about the NAB, the RSV-CE, and the Douay-Rheims bibles. But where do I find the ultimate resource that tells me the official (as of 2004) intepretation of the Bible? Where do I find out which interpretations are just someone’s speculations or where do I find that the certain interpretations are no longer officially accepted. Something that I can sit down with and learn the official teaching on say, “the parting of the red sea by Moses”?

I am really tired of all the different groups each with their own bible and commentary.

Thank you.

There is no single complete and official (by which I take you to mean, Vatican-sponsored) interpretation of the whole Bible.​

A handful of verses in James 5 or Matthew 16 or elsewhere have been given an “official” interpretation by General Councils or Popes, but this in no way hinders Catholic scholars from commenting on them - they merely have to avoid denying the interpretations in question.

The way to get at the sense of a passage, is to get a decent commentary, by someone qualified to write it - the Magisterium does not, and cannot, replace an encounter with the text, or with the work of thinking. And sometimes, even the very learned differ. This is part of life - it’s not cancelled by being Catholic, or by the fact that one is interpreting the Bible. There are uncertainties, many of them, for very good reasons, ranging from defective or uncertain text to obscurities of expression to grammatical ambiguities (for example): and there is no easy way to avoid this uncertainty. This is largely because the Bible is not a recent book, but a very old one, and there are many gaps in our knowledge of the “Biblical world”.

Some interpretations are better based than others - some are based on better acquaintance with the meaning of the text, & with its background, than others. The better an interpreter knows what he (or she) is taking about, the more trustworthy, generally speaking. So not all interpretations are equally valid.

I’m sorry things can’t be simplified as much as might be wished. The important thing is not to lose heart - the Bible is worth all the time we spend on it, and richly repays all the attention it gets. ##

 

[Malachi4U]

dennisknapp:

You find the official interpretation of the Bible in the Magisterium thru Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Gosh darnit! You beat me to it!

 

[morey]

dennisknapp:

You find the official interpretation of the Bible in the Magisterium thru Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Excellent !!

Here is also a useful definition from Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : “A dogma is by definition nothing other than an interpretation of Scripture”.

 

[Bobby_Jim]

## There is no single complete and official (by which I take you to mean, Vatican-sponsored) interpretation of the whole Bible.

A handful of verses in James 5 or Matthew 16 or elsewhere have been given an “official” interpretation by General Councils or Popes, but this in no way hinders Catholic scholars from commenting on them - they merely have to avoid denying the interpretations in question.

The way to get at the sense of a passage, is to get a decent commentary, by someone qualified to write it - the Magisterium does not, and cannot, replace an encounter with the text, or with the work of thinking. And sometimes, even the very learned differ. This is part of life - it’s not cancelled by being Catholic, or by the fact that one is interpreting the Bible. There are uncertainties, many of them, for very good reasons, ranging from defective or uncertain text to obscurities of expression to grammatical ambiguities (for example): and there is no easy way to avoid this uncertainty. This is largely because the Bible is not a recent book, but a very old one, and there are many gaps in our knowledge of the “Biblical world”.

Some interpretations are better based than others - some are based on better acquaintance with the meaning of the text, & with its background, than others. The better an interpreter knows what he (or she) is taking about, the more trustworthy, generally speaking. So not all interpretations are equally valid.

I’m sorry things can’t be simplified as much as might be wished. The important thing is not to lose heart - the Bible is worth all the time we spend on it, and richly repays all the attention it gets. ##

Yes, I think this is a very well reasoned and important summary. For much of the Bible, there is a certain amount of latitude you can take and still be well within the realm of what is Catholic. On some specific points, e.g. the literal understanding of John 6, there is a very narrow reading that the Church insists on, because to deviate too far would be to deny specific Catholic dogma. On other questions, e.g. what is Jesus referring to in John 10 when he refers to “other sheep not of this fold that I will lead, and they will hear my voice”, there may be a certain consensus that makes sense and is popular among Catholic scholars (that he’s referring to the Gentiles), but you’re free to interpret this in some other way so long as you don’t come up with something that would contradict some essential element of the Catholic faith (e.g. you can’t decide that Jesus came separately as Krishna or to the Native Americans or something like that).

 

[Church_Militant]

Nun_ofthe_Above:

Hi Freddy,
I’ve had a scout around, and from what I can gather, the Latin Vulgate is the official and approved Catholic version, of which the Douay-Rheims stems. I found a site citing The Douay-Rheims Bible with a Comprehensive Commentary compiled by Reverend Father George Leo Haydock as a wonderful set, comprising three books or there is this site with a set of 2.
catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/11050.html

I hope this helps.

I have one of these and it is really great except that it’s two seperate volumes and BIG. But it’s a great Bible. I use the DRV in my own readings anyway, though I have all the rest.

 

[RobedWithLight]

dennisknapp:

You find the official interpretation of the Bible in the Magisterium thru Catechism of the Catholic Church.

I believe that just about says it all.

Gerry

 

[Exporter]

Nun_ofthe_Above:

Hi Freddy,
I’ve had a scout around, and from what I can gather, the Latin Vulgate is the official and approved Catholic version, of which the Douay-Rheims stems. I found a site citing The Douay-Rheims Bible with a Comprehensive Commentary compiled by Reverend Father George Leo Haydock as a wonderful set, comprising three books or there is this site with a set of 2.
catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/11050.html

I hope this helps.

Freddy, I have the Douay-Rheims Bible that the site above sells. I have the 2-volume set. I paid $99 and am well pleased. The commentary occupies at least one half of these volumes. It is an excellent bargin. In fact some commentary is by Bishops. It is a modern print of a photocopy of the origninal. You see on a page what they saw in 1588. Get it, you’ll treasure it. The commentary is Catholic. It is a copy of the Latin Vulgate…the Official Catholic Bible.

 

[romano]

Nun_ofthe_Above:

Hi Freddy,
I’ve had a scout around, and from what I can gather, the Latin Vulgate is the official and approved Catholic version, of which the Douay-Rheims stems. I found a site citing The Douay-Rheims Bible with a Comprehensive Commentary compiled by Reverend Father George Leo Haydock as a wonderful set, comprising three books or there is this site with a set of 2.
catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/11050.html

I hope this helps.

I think the “third book” you refer to is the Dictionary and that in this Catholic Treasures photo reproduction it’s been incorporated into the 2nd volume. But as for the Haydock - yes! I’ve been looking for a bargain copy for ages and only finally succeeded yesterday in finding one in a used book catalogue: v.1 Old Testament; v.2 New Testament + Bible Dictionary. I can hardly wait for it to get here.

 

[mtr01]

romano:

I think the “third book” you refer to is the Dictionary and that in this Catholic Treasures photo reproduction it’s been incorporated into the 2nd volume. But as for the Haydock - yes! I’ve been looking for a bargain copy for ages and only finally succeeded yesterday in finding one in a used book catalogue: v.1 Old Testament; v.2 New Testament + Bible Dictionary. I can hardly wait for it to get here.

I one of these sets for my birthday a month ago, and I’ve been completely delighted with them! It’s interesting, sometimes I’ll just look up a certain passage to see what the commentary is, and before I know it, I’ve spent a couple of hours reading the Scriptures and commentary. I can’t recommend this Bible enough.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

RobedWithLight:

I believe that just about says it all.

Gerry

The CCC gives a few theological principles relating to the Church’s doctrine and use of the Bible - what it does not give, because it is not designed to give it, is a commentary on the text of the Bible.​

It is no more a Bible commentary than a history of the Church, an introduction to Church law, an introduction to the study of the liturgy, or any thing else “Churchy” - except for being a catechism. That is all. It makes incidental remarks about other subjects - that does not mean that it is designed as a guide or introduction to them. It does not replace any of them - it is not intended to.

The thing is to read the Pope’s account of what it is intended to be - then we won’t expect it to do or to be what he and the 700 other bishops who produced it did not intend it to do or be ##

 

[CreosMary]

Dear Fred,
I use the RSV-CE as this is the official translation for the Lectionary in our Church. The best Idea I find is to read the Bible in conjuction with the Catechism of the Catholic Church and to get yourself a really good (orthodox) Spiritual Director. I have found the New Jerome Biblical Commentary useful and my Spiritual Director is happy with this. You could also contact the relevant Arch/Diocesan College and see what courses there on Scripture, however I would urge you to find out if they are Faithful to the Magisterium first

 

[FallenCatholic]

jpy15026:

The Douay-Rheims Bible is an English translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible, a version universally used in the Church for over 1500 years, itself meticulously translated from the original Hebrew and Greek by St. Jerome (A.D. 340-420).

The argument that it is a “translation of a translation” is bogus! Since we don’t have the “original” Greek and Hebrew Manuscripts and we do have the Vulgate in the Vatican Archives, this is the only true Bible in my opinion that we Catholics should read.

This is what the Catholic Church used for 1500 years; everything we believe is contained in these Scriptures, without corruption. I am amazed as I read the Douay Rheims just how much is conveniently changed in other versions of scripture to ‘fit’ protestant arguments. The root word of Protestant of course is to “Protest”… Protest what? Protest the Catholic Church!

I now fully understand why non Catholics base their whole faith on Sola Scripture (Bible only theology) this has put a new twist to the quote from Bishop Newman “To immerse oneself in history is to cease to be Protestant”

I say:

“To read and Study the Douay Rheims Bible is to cease to be Protestant!”

Please excuse my rant, but after discovering this, I’m really fired up over it!

John

After I read your post I decided to search for this version online. WOW!!! I must say! I went to the one scipture that I always compare amungst translations. When Jesus institutes the Eucharist. I haven’t read another translation that used the word “meat”. I just seems all the more clearer.

Oh, by the way, i am a fallen away Catholic as well, who is finding her way back home.

John 6:56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

 

[jpy15026]

If you want to see another “key” word that the Protestants had to change ,read Mat 6:11 in the Douay Rheims (The Lord’s Prayer) drbo.org/

Mat 6: 11 Give us this day our supersubstantial bread.

• “Supersubstantial bread”… In St. Luke the same word is rendered daily bread. It is understood of the bread of life, which we receive in the Blessed Sacrament*

FallenCatholic:

After I read your post I decided to search for this version online. WOW!!! I must say! I went to the one scipture that I always compare amungst translations. When Jesus institutes the Eucharist. I haven’t read another translation that used the word “meat”. I just seems all the more clearer.

Oh, by the way, i am a fallen away Catholic as well, who is finding her way back home.

John 6:56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

 

[puzzleannie]

There exists no one definitive Catholic Church interpretation and once for all explanation of the meaning of each and every book and verse of the bible, because the bible is divine revelation, transmitted through humans chosen and inspired by God, preserved by the Catholic Church with the protection of the Holy Spirit. Divine Revelation, the Word of God, is contained in the Bible, but is entire and complete only in the Person of Jesus Christ, Son of God, second Person of the Blessed Trinity. No human, earthly person or institution can fully comprehend, explain, or interpret the Word of God as long as it is inhibited by earthly limitations.

The Catholic Church does interpret and define so far as is humanly possible, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, those passages that have been called into questions by heretical theologians and exegetes. you may find these interpretations by subjecting yourself to the magesterial teaching authority of the Catholic Church, granted to its earthly leadership by Jesus Christ himself. You may safely rely on the texts given to us by the Church for liturgy and devotion.

A bible that footnoted every discussion of every point, word, definition, or source would be so mammoth as to be unusable. The example is the Talmud, the centuries of rabbinical argument, disputation, exhortation, interpretation of the law, preserved and studied to this day by Orthodox students of Jewish law and scripture. Even such a source would only have touched the surface of the Truth transmitted by God in His Revelation.