Which Bible?

[Vince1022]

The Douay Rheims with Challenor notes has excellent footnotes which explain the doctrines of the Catholic Church. Avoid the New American Bible, its footnotes put a lot of scripture in doubt.

Don’t avoid the NAB. The U.S. doesn’t, as it’s the basis for the Scripture proclaimed at liturgy.

 

[Cecilianus]

Not to hijack this thredad but, Jewish congregation? Why would Jews br part of a Byzantine Catholic parish? Also back on topic, to get a traditional commentary on scripture go Douay Rheims. It is most faithful to the Vulgate of St. Jerome, aside from that try the Knox version (Baronius press is publishing it soon) its more modern but still retains all the tradition of the Douay.

Dunno. Not a majority or anything, but a larger minority than I’ve ever seen in a Roman Catholic church. I think some of them might have married into Byzantine families, and others drawn by the fact that the parish is very traditional.

 

[Crusading_Canuk]

Dunno. Not a majority or anything, but a larger minority than I’ve ever seen in a Roman Catholic church. I think some of them might have married into Byzantine families, and others drawn by the fact that the parish is very traditional.

Because it is traditional? But they are Jews we are Christians wouldn’t they be (to say the least) more comfortable in a Synagogue than a Church?

 

[Phemie]

But Canada does use the NRSV, basically, for liturgy, right? Or do they use a different translation?

Just like the U.S. uses the NAB translation, though modified.

For a very short time, the NRSV had been allowed for the US and, Canadian Bishops, liking that translation and knowing about the US went ahead and published the Lectionary from that version. It was shortly after that that the Vatican decreed that the NRSV was never to be used for Liturgy but, since Canada already had its Lectionary in use, decreed that they were to have the translation changed within 5 years. Rather than simply use another translation, the CCCB decided to ‘fix’ the NRSV to make it acceptable to Rome.

Well, 17 years later we finally got a revised NRSV. Much of the inclusive language has been removed but Pauline letters still begin with ‘Brothers and sisters’; bad grammar has been allowed to avoid the use of his/her or simply ‘his’; many words have been translated differently; the psalms and their refrains were greatly changed, etc. etc.

The fact remains that Rome forbids use of the NRSV in liturgy for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the inclusive language.

 

[laszlo]

Because it is traditional? But they are Jews we are Christians wouldn’t they be (to say the least) more comfortable in a Synagogue than a Church?

As far as I know the Jewish Congregations are more divided that the Catholic churches.

Some Jewish congregation accept Jesus as the Messias.

If their other possibility is an modernist (no law at all) or a so called conservative (Moses gave 635 laws to keep only one) congregation than a Christian traditional community seems to serve better their spiritual needs.

They are not supposed to receive communion that the participation otherwise is free.

 

[Cecilianus]

Because it is traditional? But they are Jews we are Christians wouldn’t they be (to say the least) more comfortable in a Synagogue than a Church?

They are obviously Christians as well, except for some that have not been baptized yet.

 

[ProVobis]

Douay-Rheims is the best; not as elegant as the King James (which I grew up with, as a Lutheran), but much more faithful to the Vulgate.

It appears to be so.

Ecclesiastes 1:10

Latin:

Nihil sub sole novum nec valet quisquam dicere ecce hoc recens est iam enim praecessit in saeculis quae fuerunt ante nos.

Douay-Rheims:

Nothing under the sun is new, neither is any man able to say: Behold this is new: for it hath already gone before in the ages that were before us.

King James:

Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

Revised Standard Version:

Is there a thing of which it is said, “See, this is new”? It has been already, in the ages before us.

 

[Vince1022]

The fact remains that Rome forbids use of the NRSV in liturgy for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the inclusive language.

I wasn’t aware of this. Can you provide a reference? Thanks!

 

[Vince1022]

A

Some Jewish congregation accept Jesus as the Messias.

Seriously? You know Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah? Wouldn’t that make them Christrians? Can you clarify? Thanks! This sounds fascinating.

 

[Vince1022]

Douay-Rheims is the best; not as elegant as the King James (which I grew up with, as a Lutheran), but much more faithful to the Vulgate.

What is the importance, or significance, in your opinion, of a translation being faithful to the Vulgate?

 

[Phemie]

I wasn’t aware of this. Can you provide a reference? Thanks!

You can read an article here.

It doesn’t appear that the letter sent by the Vatican to the NCCB and the CCCB has been made public. At least I can’t find any but the CCCB did say it had received such a letter in its explanation of why we were getting a new Lectionary at Pentecost 2009.

 

[Cecilianus]

What is the importance, or significance, in your opinion, of a translation being faithful to the Vulgate?

Because I know the Vulgate is an accurate, reliable version of the Bible. The Council of Trent declared that “the entire books with all their parts, as they have been wont to be read in the Catholic Church and are contained in the old vulgate Latin edition, are to be held sacred and canonical”, and I remember reading some encyclical by Pius XII confirming that the Vulgate is inerrant in matters of faith and morals. I tried looking for it just now and couldn’t find it; Divinio Afflante Spiritu quotes Trent on the Vulgate but goes on to encourage scholars to go back to the primary sources.

I can read the Vulgate (sort of), but I can’t read Greek, so I’m the most comfortable when I see a translation sticking to the Vulgate, which I know is accurate.

 

[chosen_people]

Seriously? You know Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah? Wouldn’t that make them Christrians? Can you clarify? Thanks! This sounds fascinating.

According to Judaism it is easier for the Gentile than for the Jew to get into the world to come. However, according to Judaism, any Jew who breaks his eternal covenant with God and adopts the precepts of Christianity, is cut off forever from God and the Jewish people.

 

[Cecilianus]

Seriously? You know Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah? Wouldn’t that make them Christrians? Can you clarify? Thanks! This sounds fascinating.

Not unless they acknowledge that Jesus is consubstantial with God the Father, which “messianic Jews” don’t - otherwise they are just Ebionites.

 

[ProVobis]

Because I know the Vulgate is an accurate, reliable version of the Bible. The Council of Trent declared that “the entire books with all their parts, as they have been wont to be read in the Catholic Church and are contained in the **old vulgate Latin **edition, are to be held sacred and canonical”,

Not to be confused with Vetus Latina, which predated St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, the Latin counterpart to the Greek Vulgate.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate

I can read the Vulgate (sort of),

That pushes you to the head of the class.

 

[MusicforMovies]

Personally, I like the Navarre Bible with RSV English, Vulgate Latin, and commentary derived from the Fathers, and Church Documents.

Most of the Bible Commentary found in other Catholic Bibles makes me want to rip my hair out in frustration. (Liberal ‘Theologians’)

 

[Cecilianus]

That pushes you to the head of the class.

I didn’t say I could read it well!

 

[Vince1022]

You can read an article here.

It doesn’t appear that the letter sent by the Vatican to the NCCB and the CCCB has been made public. At least I can’t find any but the CCCB did say it had received such a letter in its explanation of why we were getting a new Lectionary at Pentecost 2009.

Thanks. Interesting!

But the author is Helen Hull Hitchcock, right? My question was where or when the Church has denied the NRSV can be used at liturgy. Was her article used by the Church for something? Thanks again.

 

[Vince1022]

Because I know the Vulgate is an accurate, reliable version of the Bible.

The Vulgate has its share of inaccuracies, which modern translations have corrected. And given the discoveries of the 19th and 20th centuries, many would say we know more about the text of Scripture in Jesus’ time than was known in the later 4th century.

The Council of Trent declared that “the entire books with all their parts, as they have been wont to be read in the Catholic Church and are contained in the old vulgate Latin edition, are to be held sacred and canonical”,

Yes, of course, the books in the Vulgate are canonical. Trent was responding to those who denied certain books were in the Bible. That is a separate question of the quality of translation compared to the original source for a given book.

and I remember reading some encyclical by Pius XII confirming that the Vulgate is inerrant in matters of faith and morals. I tried looking for it just now and couldn’t find it; Divinio Afflante Spiritu quotes Trent on the Vulgate but goes on to encourage scholars to go back to the primary sources.

Please let us know if you can find what you are referring to, sounds interesting.

 

[Vince1022]

Not unless they acknowledge that Jesus is consubstantial with God the Father, which “messianic Jews” don’t - otherwise they are just Ebionites.

Ebionites still exist? Really? Can you say more? Thanks.