Hananiah Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 While I agree with Catholic Culture's appraisal of Fr. Brown, they are a bit too quick to hand out yellow and red ratings. They give out yellow just for things linking to Catholic Apologetics International, or citing the works of Fr. Brown in an essay. I'm afraid I'm going to get a red when and if they ever review my site, since I plan on writing an essay against the NAB (mostly just the commentary, but also the translation). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 Raymond Brown is worse than Hans Kung and probably led many more people outside the Church, simply because he wasn't so obvious. Catholic Culture would not argue with your essay Hananiah, the NAB is problematic. I personally will not use it. Its footnotes are less than Catholic. RSV-CE Navarre or St Ignnatius Study Bible are faithful to church teachings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhatPhred Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 (edited) Fr. Raymond Brown was twice appointed to the Pontifical Biblical Commission, in 1972 by Pope Paul VI, and in 1996 by Pope John Paul II. In 1972, he was the only American scholar to receive this honor. Professor Hans Küng was repeately disciplined by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and in 1979 was stripped of his ability to teach as a Catholic theologian. While I respect everyone's right to hold their own personal opinions, as far as Catholic Culture is concerned, it is clear that they are trying to be more Catholic than the Pope. This is not a good thing. Edited February 11, 2004 by PhatPhred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 Can I get more info on the NAB issue? I wasn't aware of anything wrong with it and I use it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 THe NAB could have better footnotes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 (edited) Fr. Raymond Brown was twice appointed to the Pontifical Biblical Commission, in 1972 by Pope Paul VI, and in 1996 by Pope John Paul II. In 1972, he was the only American scholar to receive this honor. Professor Hans Küng was repeately disciplined by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and in 1979 was stripped of his ability to teach as a Catholic theologian. While I respect everyone's right to hold their own personal opinions, as far as Catholic Culture is concerned, it is clear that they are trying to be more Catholic than the Pope. This is not a good thing. Have you read New Bible Theorists: Raymond E Brown and Beyond by George E Kelly? I don't recall mentioning Catholic Culture. Edited February 11, 2004 by cmotherofpirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.SIGGA Posted February 11, 2004 Author Share Posted February 11, 2004 THe NAB could have better footnotes. are you talking about the St. Joseph Edition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicole Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 Many Pauline Press books aren't completely reliable. Usually, when looking at a Catholic book, I look at the imprimatur as well as the publisher. Ignatius Press is always good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 My NAB Bible has 4 NIHIL OBSTATs and 4 IMPRIMATURs. It's by "Catholic World Press". Is my newly bought bible, corrupt? :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.SIGGA Posted February 12, 2004 Author Share Posted February 12, 2004 The St. Joseph Edition NAB is great and there is a very helpful doctrinal index and tons of good Catholic footnotes - it's like the Most Catholic looking Catholic Bible. My Good News Bible w/ the Deuterocanical and Apocrypha, by Catholic Extension lacks Catholic footnotes, but also has the Imprimatur and approval from the NCCB - so this might be what Cmother is talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hananiah Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 My NAB Bible has 4 NIHIL OBSTATs and 4 IMPRIMATURs. It's by "Catholic World Press". Is my newly bought bible, corrupt? Genesis 21:14, NAB Early the next morning Abraham got some bread and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. Then, placing the child on her back, he sent her away. footnote: placing the child on her back: the phrase is translated from an emended form of the Hebrew text. In the current faulty Hebrew text, Abraham put the bread and the waterskin on Hagar's back, while her son apparently walked beside her. This reading seems to be a scribal attempt at harmonizing the present passage with the data of the Priestly source, in which Ishmael would have been at least 14 years old when Isaac was born; compare Gn 16,16 with 21,5; cf 17,25. But in the present Elohist story Ishmael is obviously a little boy, not much older than Isaac; cf vv 15,18. So, in other words, the translators changed the meaning of the text in order to reinforce their percieved contradiction. Unbelievable. Another example; the "how to read your Bible" section contains some incredibly poisonous advice. 4. Inspiration and Revelation God Himslf guided (inspired) the Hebrew genius in its searching out of the mysteries of the human condition. This guidance is called inspiration. When this restless searching for truth and meaning culminates in unfolding one of God's mysteries, we speak of divine revelation. This means that God reveals some aspect of Himself or the human condition in and through man's endevors to find out. Hence, "everything in the Bible is inspired, but not everything is revealed" (Pierre Benoit). Sometimes inspired searching for meaning leads to conclusions which cannot be qualified as revelation from God. Think of the "holy wars" of total destruction, fought by the Hebrews when they invaded Palestine. The search for meaning in those wars centuries later was inspired, but the conclusions which attributed all those atrocities to the command of God were imperfect and provisional. See Judges 1, 1-8. It's a sad day in the Church when bishops grant Imprimaturs to blatant modernism such as this. The commentators would have us believe that the wars which the Bible plainly states were commanded by God were not in fact commanded by God, but rather were crimes against humanity perpetated by Hebrew murderes. Then, centuries later, their descendents attempted to justify the crimes of their forefathers by ascribing the wars to the command of a deity. "Oh, it was ok for our ancestors to kill all those people because God told them so." I'm sorry, but justifying murder by ascribing it to the command of a deity is a moral abomination, and I refuse to worship the god of these commentators, a god who apparently has no problem with inspiring people to write the moral equivaelent of Nazi apologetics. God did not inspire people to ascribe unjust wars to His command. Logic and conscience leave us with only two options; (1) God excercised his prerogative as the just judge and giver and taker of life and actually commanded these wars, or (2) the Bible is a lie, a fabrication of the apologists for Hebrew war crimes. Also, the commentators seen to define inspiration as divine dabbling. He guided the writers, let them make atrocious mistakes along the way, and revealed a bit of truth to them every once in a while. This definition has no basis in Scripture or Tradition. The word Paul used which is translated as inspired in English Bibles is theopnuestos, literally, God-breathed. God may have used human instruments in writing Scripture, and may have worked with their individual styles and used their own thoughts, but He was always the primary author. This is how the Catholic Church has viewed Scripture for the past 2,000 years. See the following authentic expressions of Catholi Tradition. For all the books which the Church receives as Sacred and Canonical are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can coexist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the Supreme Truth, can utter that which is not True. This is the ancient and unchanging Faith of the Church. (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter on the Study of Sacred Scripture Providentissimus Deus (1893)) The Books of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire, with all their parts, as enumerated in the Decree of the same Council (Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are to be received as Sacred and Canonical. And the Church holds them as Sacred and Canonical not because, having been composed by human industry, they were afterwards approved by her Authority; nor only because they contain revelation without errors, but because, having been written under the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their Author. (Vatican Council I, Sess. III, cap. ii, DE REV.) On my own part I confess to your charity that it is only to those books of Scripture which are now called canonical that I have learned to pay such honor and reverence as to believe most firmly that none of their writers has fallen into any error. And if in these books I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand. (Augustine, Epistolae, lxxxii, 1, et alibi.) Well, that's about 1/3 of my essay I just finished! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hananiah Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 Such a liberal view of Biblical "inspiration" inevitably leads to the shopping-cart mentality. Since only parts of the Bible are the Word of God, and other parts are immoral human inventions, one is free to pick and choose which parts to believe and which to discard. Ya like this part; it's in. Ya don't like that part; it's out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce S Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 In my denomination, we look at the price, and the contents, some are good, some are bad, we don't have official overlords telling us what is Kosher. They actually trust us to think for ourselves. Hey, didja miss me, the heretic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 (edited) In all honesty, No. We did not miss your myopic bias who lies about the Catholic Church and can't make a simple post without throwing in a negative. You are wrong to call Authority in the Catholic Church 'overlords'. The Catholic Church itself, teaches that man must follow his own conscience OVER the teaching of the Church. It of course, does not teach us to do so without due respect and openess to the Grace God has provided for mankind through the ages, including what is taught by the Church. Please go away, spouter of misleading falsehoods. :( Edited February 12, 2004 by jasJis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted February 12, 2004 Share Posted February 12, 2004 Interesting Hananiah. But the thing I don't understand is, why is it an endorsed Bible in the United States amongst Catholics? Now I need to go buy another Bible. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now