English Translation Of The Latin Vulgate.

[kafka]

heck why dont someone take an hour and read his commentary on the Song of Songs which I published for free in 2006 and comment on that like Innocent did above.

His works stand or fall on their own just like any other private theologian.

Edited May 2, 2009 by kafka

[Noel's angel]

I understand that this man is your friend and therefore you are going to be sensitive towards criticism, however I think it is important to get a balance. It seems that sometimes you put more weight and belief in what he says than in what the Magisterium teaches (although the two may not clash). It is important that people coming into this thread don't just get 'oh he's great because he's my friend etc. etc.' I personally think that what he writes is crazy-talk. You are entitled to put all your trust in him but I shall refrain from doing so. I think an hour would be better spent reading up on the actual teachings of the Church rather than delving into this sort of speculative theology. I doubt anyone here is so well-versed in Scripture and the teachings of the Church throughout time, as to be able to jump into this man's writings without extreme caution. Infact, I would go as far as saying that some people probably shouldn't read it at all.

[kafka]

[quote name='Noel's angel' post='1855826' date='May 2 2009, 07:40 PM']I understand that this man is your friend and therefore you are going to be sensitive towards criticism, however I think it is important to get a balance. It seems that sometimes you put more weight and belief in what he says than in what the Magisterium teaches (although the two may not clash). It is important that people coming into this thread don't just get 'oh he's great because he's my friend etc. etc.' I personally think that what he writes is crazy-talk. You are entitled to put all your trust in him but I shall refrain from doing so. I think an hour would be better spent reading up on the actual teachings of the Church rather than delving into this sort of speculative theology. I doubt anyone here is so well-versed in Scripture and the teachings of the Church throughout time, as to be able to jump into this man's writings without extreme caution. Infact, I would go as far as saying that some people probably shouldn't read it at all.[/quote]
You turned this thread into an off topic criticism of some of his minor and insignificent articles. I thought it unjust, since you disagree with some of his assertions which were completely off topic. And yes I fell for the trap of being personal again. Thank God I'm not called to academia or in the high exalted places of the Magisterium.

I had already mentioned I had read almost all of his works, and judged them well in light of the fact I have also read many other theologians such as Aquinas, Augustine, Rahner, Dulles, Kreeft, Lagrange and many others. The fact that I mentioned personal things is that this is more of a family atmosphere here. I'm not worried about public opinion or public thought. I mean its just absurd, maybe I am imprudent, but its ridiculous how stuff like this happens.

Anyone who is sincere and interested in his writings may find all of his works publicly on his websites and may decide for themselves. He has nothing to hide, and I doubt you've even read a quarter of his works.

If you want to spend time merely reading Magisterial writings that is your business, yet it is a vocation for some of the Faithful to write private speculative theology and it has a place in the Church. Even the Pope Benedict writes private speculative theology independent of his charism of Magisterium.

Oh well. What can I say. I fell for the bait again. I'll probably fall into this trap forever, but just note, I'm not the one who started this thread.

I dont really care anymore:

{1:18} But what does it matter? As long as, by every means, whether under pretext or in truthfulness, Christ is announced. And about this, I rejoice, and moreover, I will continue to rejoice.

[Aloysius]

I wonder if it's possible to get an Imprimatur or a Nihil Obstat for an online publication? It is always important that any translation of the scriptures themselves should have that, but I don't know if it's possible with his project. He should write to his local bishop to ask if it is possible for it to be thusly reviewed.

... I just looked at his 7 volume set to the copyright pages and such and I see no mention of ecclesiastical approval. In any book dealing with "questions pertaining to sacred scripture, theology, canon law, ecclesiastical history, and religious or moral disciplines" it is recommended that they be submitted for approval (cf. canon 827 §2 and §3), but especially for texts/translations of the Sacred Scriptures themselves...

canon law:
[quote]Canon 825 §1. Books of the sacred scriptures cannot be published unless the Apostolic See or the conference of bishops has approved them. For the publication of their translations into the vernacular, it is also required that they be approved by the same authority and provided with necessary and sufficient annotations.[/quote]

does this apply if it's an online version?? I don't know, but I really think the man should seek out the review of a bishop for his translation.

here's all the pertinent aspects of canon law:
[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2Q.HTM"]http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2Q.HTM[/url]

I honestly don't know... have any dubiums (dubia if you wanna be grammatical I guess) been sent to Rome on issues of online publications of things that are required by canon law to have imprimaturs?

I'm not trying to be anal or legalistic... it's just the idea that the Church must approve of translations/versions of the scriptures has caused a lot of problems over Church history... translations of the Bible weren't burned throughout history for no reason... mistranslations of the most supremely authoritative text of Christian belief, whether accidental or purposeful, can lead to false beliefs.