Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #16  
Old Jun 17, '11, 9:29 am
Garyjohn2 Garyjohn2 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2009
Posts: 1,547
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible? Do they think the US Bishops (I'm from the Philippines) didn't not study the commentaries before approving it? Are they more reliable and intelligent tha

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesus_123 View Post
+My original post on this thread was posted to illustrate the fact that the Vatican itself has had grave problems with the New American Bible . . .
This is good info, thank you. I appreciate the response, but I have to say your posts are a little hard to read, with all the sizings and colors and such. It's ok though.

In any case, what are we to do? Don't the US Bishops rigorously go through these translations and notes before they are approved? If they do, shouldn't we honor their decision? If they don't, are we to honor it anyways? Are we in a position to judge what is rigorous enough or not? I don't know the answers to these.

If the Vatican "rejects" these translations, but our more local Bishops approve them, what are we to do?

This post, and original post, is not about the NAB translation. It is about the authority of the Bishops, their education and competence when it comes to approving texts, our right to disagree with them, and our appropriate expression of that disagreement.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old Jun 17, '11, 9:52 am
laszlo laszlo is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: October 1, 2010
Posts: 2,511
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible? Do they think the US Bishops (I'm from the Philippines) didn't not study the commentaries before approving it? Are they more reliable and intelligent tha

The biggest fault of the NAB commentary is the modernist theory that the New Testament is not the testimony of eyewitnesses or writers under the supervision of eyewitnesses, but the result of community development.

The modernist principle is that no one, not even Jesus Christ can see the future. Mark 13 describes the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 586 BC (King Nabucodonosor destroys the city too) and applies this as preimage to the somewhat different destruction of the second Temple: no King and only the Temple is destroyed the city was saved. Consequently Mark had to be written on or after 70 AD, and the rest of the Gospels after that.

The tradition theory is: first is Matthews Logia (collection of Jesus' sermons) written 36 AD , this was used either by Mark (between 42 and 45 AD under the supervision of Peter) on the sixties Luke (under the supervision of Paul) and also the present second edition of Matthew. This theory completely explains the so called Synoptic problem (Logia and Mark as common source).
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old Jun 17, '11, 1:21 pm
Me1234 Me1234 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: March 14, 2011
Posts: 70
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible? Do they think the US Bishops (I'm from the Philippines) didn't not study the commentaries before approving it? Are they more reliable and intelligent tha

The Vatican corrected the NAB for the leactionary read during mass before they let it be used for if I remember right it was too inclusive and/or something? But the Vatican wouldn't use it as is without the their corrections in church.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old Jun 17, '11, 1:44 pm
Garyjohn2 Garyjohn2 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2009
Posts: 1,547
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible? Do they think the US Bishops (I'm from the Philippines) didn't not study the commentaries before approving it? Are they more reliable and intelligent tha

Quote:
Originally Posted by Me1234 View Post
The Vatican corrected the NAB for the leactionary read during mass before they let it be used for if I remember right it was too inclusive and/or something? But the Vatican wouldn't use it as is without the their corrections in church.
Why would the Vatican disapprove of this translation, but the American Bishops approve?
How can the American Bishops judgments be so different than the Vatican?
Doesn't the Vatican have something to say about this?
Should we still trust the Bishops?
These aren't leading questions...I'm just wondering. None of this makes any sense!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old Jun 17, '11, 4:50 pm
Thomas Casey's Avatar
Thomas Casey Thomas Casey is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Posts: 8,094
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible? Do they think the US Bishops (I'm from the Philippines) didn't not study the commentaries before approving it? Are they more reliable and intelligent tha

You may agree or disagree with the bishops. Spreading and promoting distrust of our bishops is a form of contempt for Catholicism and will be consequenced. This is a serious violation of charity.
__________________



Mary, Mother of Wisdom, be with us as we navigate through faith
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old Jun 17, '11, 7:00 pm
Kyrby Caluna Kyrby Caluna is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2011
Posts: 34
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

I find it illogical for "faithful" Catholics to trust the opinion of Mother Angelica than the recommendation of the Bishops to love and use the NAB. Did God gave Mother Angelica the authority to be more superior than the Bishops? Is she more reliable than the Bishops? To defend the Catholic Church is to defend the Bishops. Why? Because where the Bishop is, there let the multitude be for where the Bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old Jun 17, '11, 7:07 pm
Kyrby Caluna Kyrby Caluna is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2011
Posts: 34
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

Regarding the Vatican. The Vatican only has a problem with the NAB because it is UNFIT to be used in the Liturgy. So there is a modified version of the NAB as used in the Liturgy. Why? Because the Vatican has the AUTHORITY when it comes to the liturgy. But when it comes to which Bible translations are good for PRIVATE (not liturgical) study, devotion, or reading, the Bishops were given that authority directly from Christ for the Bishops are NOT the representatives of the Pope. The Bishops has the primacy in their own jurisdictions in UNION with the Pope. So the Bishops recommended the NAB and Paul VI gave his blessing for the NAB. And it is UNFIT for Catholics to criticize the Bishops. Recommending Bible translations to be used are the Bishops' authority. We (laity) don't have that authority. And we don't have any right to malign the USCCB. We are the Catholic Church so we are bound to submit ourselves to the Bishops.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old Jun 17, '11, 7:12 pm
Kyrby Caluna Kyrby Caluna is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2011
Posts: 34
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

I am a Filipino, and I also submit myself to the CBCP. I just find it hard why American Catholics are criticizing their bishops about a Bible translation. They must respect the Bishops because the Bishops were given the authority for Bible translations. If they continue to malign the USCCB, it's better for them to be their own bishops, and leave the Catholic Church.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old Jun 17, '11, 7:28 pm
VivaCristoRey27 VivaCristoRey27 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2011
Posts: 163
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

The USCCB, and that would apply to the CBCP and other bishops' conferences, does not have an actual authority. The individual bishops have authority over their diocese, of course, but as a collective, they do not actually rule a whole country.

Much of the commentary in the NAB is Modernist. For example,

Quote:
Originally Posted by NAB, Introduction to the Pentateuch
The grandeur of this historic sweep is the result of a careful and complex joining of several historic traditions, or sources. These are primarily four: the so-called Yahwist, Elohist, Priestly and Deuteronomic strands that run through the Pentateuch. (They are conveniently abbreviated as J, E, P and D.) Each brings to the Torah its own characteristics, its own theological viewpoint--a rich variety of interpretation that the sensitive reader will take pains to appreciate. A superficial difference between two of these sources is responsible for their names: the Yahwist prefers the name Yahweh (represented in translation as Lord) by which God revealed himself to Israel; the Elohist prefers the generic name for God, Elohim. The Yahwist is concrete, imaginative, using many anthropomorphisms in its theological approach, as seen, e.g., in the narrative of creation in Genesis 2, compared with the Priestly version in Genesis 1. The Elohist is more sober, moralistic. The Priestly strand, which emphasizes genealogies, is more severely theological in tone. The Deuteronomic approach is characterized by the intense hortatory style of Deuteronomy 5-11, and by certain principles from which it works, such as the centralization of worship in the Jerusalem temple.
This is solidly Modernist and implicitly denies the Holy Ghost as author of Scripture in favor of the idea that religion arises from an interior sense. There are other comments throughout the translation that are dubious but this just hits you as soon as you open it and sets the tone for how they treat the Bible based on the "historical-critical method", that is, treating the Bible like a human work rather than a Divine one.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old Jun 17, '11, 7:31 pm
Kyrby Caluna Kyrby Caluna is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2011
Posts: 34
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

Some "inspired" Catholics will say that the greatest FAULT of the NAB is this... and that one... oh this one also... and there's more. Hey! Who gave you the authority to determine the faults? God gave the bishops the authority to determine heresy and orthodoxy. It's not about you. It's about Christ promise to be faithful in leading the Church through the ministry of the Bishops. So you think you are more Spirit-filled and inspired than the Bishops? You can be the next Martin Luther or John Calvin then, right? Unless you humble yourself and accept that God gave the Bishops the authority on these matters than you. And then trust God. Not your head. Amen.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old Jun 17, '11, 7:42 pm
ProVobis ProVobis is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 28,537
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

It's in the nature of translations. No translation is perfect. You put 10 different scholars to work and you will get 10 different translations and maybe a consensus. One needs only accept the Bible which the Church has deemed its standard and that is the Vulgate. One can criticize or question translations in a scholarly way without disrespecting or criticizing their bishops. Their work does have pastoral value and is legitimate.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old Jun 17, '11, 7:44 pm
Corki's Avatar
Corki Corki is offline
Forum Master
 
Join Date: November 22, 2005
Posts: 13,948
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible? Do they think the US Bishops (I'm from the Philippines) didn't not study the commentaries before approving it? Are they more reliable and intelligent tha

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garyjohn2 View Post
Why would the Vatican disapprove of this translation, but the American Bishops approve?
How can the American Bishops judgments be so different than the Vatican?
Doesn't the Vatican have something to say about this?
Should we still trust the Bishops?
These aren't leading questions...I'm just wondering. None of this makes any sense!
It was disapproved for use at Mass primarily due to the inclusive language. That doesn't mean the Vatican disapproved the translation itself for personal reading or even for other public worship.

The Vatican and the Bishops have a long history of disagreeing on the specifics of translations. That's why it's taken over a decade to get the new translation for the Mass that we will see this Advent.

It's not a matter of trust. There are several "approved" translations of the Bible. The Vatican, and especially Pope Benedict XVI, has been critical of the over-dependence by some Biblical scholars on the historical-critical method of interpreting Scripture. The forward of the Pope's book, Jesus of Nazareth (II) is a good read on the topic.
__________________
“Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination.” Saint John Paul II

"It is not “progressive” to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life." Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old Jun 17, '11, 9:11 pm
Gregory I Gregory I is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: June 13, 2007
Posts: 827
Religion: Roman Catholic faithful to the Dogmas.
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

If no one would have criticized their bishops, the Catholic church would have become heretical long ago. THe church has often had heretical bishops, and often lay people and the occasional priest are what stand between the church and heresy, at least on the local level, or on the majority level.

Doesn't anyone remember Arianism? 80% of the bishops were heretics; either Arians or Semi-Arians, Eunomians. It's called defending the faith:

And we must not simply guard the faith against blatant heresies, but against TENDENCIES in thought that run COUNTER to the will of the Ordinary Magisterium (HUMANI GENERIS!) and TEND toward heresy. Satan isn't interested in blatant heresy much these days, he'd much rather have the slippery slope slop we call theology nowadays; that's perfectly sufficient to ruin the salvation of the majority, effective two, since whole MASSES of people slide right into it without ever thinking.

I am not saying the USCCB is heretical. I am saying the majority of our theologians are not faithful to the ordinary magisterium.

For example, most theologians say that the church needs to acclimate to modern times and express herself in modern terms and do away with scholastic nuance. ERROR!!! THis idea (which was really the entire basis of the second vatican council) was condemned by POpe Pius Xii in HUmani Generis: Virtually the entire encyclical is about why THIS IS WRONG.

It's funny what happens when you learn to distinguish between the ordinary magisterium and the slop of modern theology. The lines become drawn in the sand pretty quick.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old Jun 17, '11, 10:13 pm
pataburd pataburd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2010
Posts: 141
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyrby Caluna View Post
Some "inspired" Catholics will say that the greatest FAULT of the NAB is this... and that one... oh this one also... and there's more. Hey! Who gave you the authority to determine the faults? God gave the bishops the authority to determine heresy and orthodoxy. It's not about you. It's about Christ promise to be faithful in leading the Church through the ministry of the Bishops. So you think you are more Spirit-filled and inspired than the Bishops? You can be the next Martin Luther or John Calvin then, right? Unless you humble yourself and accept that God gave the Bishops the authority on these matters than you. And then trust God. Not your head. Amen.
K_C,
We Catholics have the Catechisms, papal encyclicals, council documents, writings of the Church Fathers and Doctors, etc., to safeguard us and keep us on orthodox paths for both reading and interpreting. (And we must be ever vigilant, lest we ourselves fall into presumption and error.)

Read St. Paul's admonition to the Ephesian church right before he embarks for Jerusalem (he addresses the bishops):

Acts 20:28-30 (D-R)
Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them [emphasis added].

Next, it may be worthwhile to note that every major heresy that has assailed the Church was begun by a cleric. Recall that Martin Luther was a priest. During the height of Arianism--originated by an Egyptian priest--a majority of bishops supported this heresy (re: St. Jerome's famous quote from 359: "the whole world groaned and marvelled to find itself Arian").

St. Pius X, in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, prophetically warned that modernist attacks would be waged from within the Church herself, by scholars, theologians and--yes--even the clergy.

My bishop, for example, has used diocesan monies to purchase and dispense syringes for local drug addicts; he publicly administers Holy Communion to a prominent state politician who openly supports abortion and boldly advances same-sex "marriage" legislation; the bishop also promotes a formation program whose "litmus test" requires that those entering into diocesan ministry support positions essentially inimical to Church teaching. (I have read some of the textbooks used for the formation program, which cite definitively heterodox teaching).

Others and myself have also repeatedly written and/or called the chancery to express our concern about chronic liturgical abuse in our parishes, but have been repeatedly stone-walled. In some instances we are told flatly that such practices will not change because that's just the way the bishop has elected to do them.

These are the bald facts, and they are plain for everyone in my diocese to see; some issues have even attracted regional and national media attention. My acknowledging the facts for what they are and expressing deep and--believe me--prayerful concern, makes me neither overly critical nor uncharitable.

Please understand: I am not being hyper-critical or malicious toward our bishops, or fomenting distrust. Rather, I am simply trying to be realistic and sober in light of Scripture, Church history, Her magisterial teaching and my own experience. We must pray daily, fervently for our bishops and priests, but when we see bishops and priests acting in complicity with evil we must address such actions candidly, in the Truth of Jesus Christ. A failure on the part of the laity to do either constitutes a genuine failure in charity.

Our Lady, Seat of Wisdom, Pray for Us!

Cordially,
PAB

Last edited by pataburd; Jun 17, '11 at 10:26 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old Jun 17, '11, 10:41 pm
pataburd pataburd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2010
Posts: 141
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: WHY DO "inspired" Catholics criticized the commentaries of the New American Bible? Do they think the US Bishops (I'm from the Philippines) didn't not study the commentaries before approving it? Are they more reliable and intelligent tha

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesus_123 View Post
+Mother Angelica of worldwide EWTN fame loved and used the . . . 1966 Jerusalem Bible
J_123,
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen also favored the (original) Jerusalem Bible. : )

Cordially,
Patrick
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8457Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: suko
5143CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: UpUpAndAway
4424Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: DesertSister62
4037OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: eschator83
3863SOLITUDE
Last by: beth40n2
3735Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
3320Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: Amiciel
3283Poems and Reflections
Last by: tonyg
3224Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: 4elise
3109For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: RevDrJBTDDPhD



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 2:32 am.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.