Can anyone suggest good New Testament commentaries. Probably not anything as lofty as Aquinas, although i love him i don’t have the time to read that much so am looking for something that marches along a bit if you know what i mean. Most commentaries i see are in Protestant Christian bookshops.
Maybe try the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: New Testament.
I purchased the 12 volume Navarre Bible set last Christmas
Only downfall, paperback, but at least if a volume becomes dogeared, its easily replaced.
D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:
Absolutely. Fabulous. Accessible, reasonably priced.
I highly recommend purchasing English translations of the Glossa Ordinaria, which are starting to be translated. It was one of St. Thomas Aquinas favorite commentaries on the Bible. The glosses are like footnotes of a study Bible, which are direct and usually concise, and draw mostly from the Early Church Fathers. So far there are translations of Ruth, Song of Songs, Jonah, Romans, the Epistles of John. The book of Revelation is about to be published very soon, and Galatians- Colossians are in the works. Just type in Glossa Ordinaria on Amazon and you will find them. For more information you can contact me, I will be happy to even send you a free PDF of a volume that I have had published. email@example.com
I disagree that this commentary is “Fabulous.”
The essays are outstanding but the footnotes themselves have many outright errors, stuff which seems like some guy just made it up.
I gave mine away.
Would you be willing to share some of those errors? I too have that study Bible and I’d be curious what kind of things it gets wrong.
Off the top of my head I can’t remember specifics.
I recall shaking my head enough that I stopped reading it and began reading my RSV-CE without footnotes again, eventually just giving the Bible away to a friend.
It was over a year ago that I gave it away.
I have been thinking of getting one or two of the commentaries in the Sacra Pagina series (link below), in particular the two by Luke Timothy Johnson on Luke and Acts. Has anyone here read any of the books in this series, or have anything to say about them, either for or against?
I have Sacra Pagina for Hebrews.
They are not pastoral commentaries but are academic, written for students and scholars and can be extremely dry at times. That isn’t to say that it is without value to ordinary Christians but they are not produced for the purpose of building up faith or bringing one closer to God. They go into translation theories, where in the other parts of the Bible the author was drawing from, semantics, and can have long lists of what various noted scholars (whom most of us outside of academia never heard of) think about a particular passage.
What I really want is “Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word” by Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis. This is a true pastoral commentary on Matthew’s Gospel in three volumes.
Thank you, Tim, for your helpful reply to my query. Yes, I agree that Fire of Mercy is very tempting. Adding up to well over 2,000 pages, the three volumes would keep me busy for a very long time. But isn’t that an academic textbook as well? Doesn’t it go into all the issues about alternative translations, conflicting interpretations, and so on?
I don’t know. Does it? I really don’t know but didn’t think it was too dry based on the reviews I had read.
It was recommended to me by a priest who to this day was the best preacher I have ever heard. He went on about how great it was.
Maybe someone will chime in.
First I will say the Didache Bible NABRE version that just came out is a great bible to have and it has some commentaries in it that are nice.
Another commentary that I am slowly adding to my library is the Catholic Commentary of Sacred Scriptures. They don’t have all the books of the NT out yet, but they are adding them. I have been happy with them as they are easy to read and understand.
One other I will throw out there, but I will all a word of caution to it. It was not written by a Catholic, but it has some excellent writings and was recommended by my deacon at my parish. You just need to make sure you pick out and discard the non-catholic view’s on some of the commentary. That comment
would you share some of the footnotes that you find to be erroneous and or made up.
As you’ll note, I also asked him the same, the response was,
In case you missed it.
That is a shame that you cannot remember the “many outright errors” in the footnotes. I am very interested in hearing your thoughts. While I may not agree with all of Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch’s interpretations, this is still an invaluable study Bible and I recommend it highly. The person you gave it to is very lucky.
If you do ever recall some “outright errors,” please let me know what you think they are.
On a side note to the general topic, though, I would classify this as a study Bible with footnotes/commentary rather than being an actual biblical commentary. Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture is a great source, though still being developed.
Thanks. It would seem to me if they were so glaring and obvious that you’d remember at least one–where you thought this is so bad, so outrageous that I’m just throwing this useless book out. It seems like something that would stick with you. I use this commentary along with several others–and nothing has jumped out at me–so I’d like to know what I’m missing and where my education is lacking so that I can work to remedy that.
I feel the same way; Scott Hahn is a top-notch, orthodox Biblical scholar and theologian, so I was rather surprised to read that. Also love this commentary.
I already wrote in this thread that I have long since given the Bible away. What am I supposed to do? Should I run up to Barnes & Noble and buy one so that I can look up errors? :shrug:
I seem to recall one that said “Jesus sat down at the right hand of God” was an indication that he had finished his work and so sat, as if he needed to rest. It completely ignored the fact that sitting was a rabbinic teaching posture and that judges, governors and leaders sat on the judgment seat. Honestly, I can’t remember if this was the NAB, Haydock or Ignatius and we would argue whether this is an error or a difference of interpretation. I find it arbitrary at best.
I said nothing about Scott Hahn. Anyone familiar with his work knows that he is an orthodox theologian but he did not write all of the commentary and having his name associated with the particular product does not guarantee that 100% of the contents are 100% accurate.
That is just an example of why I don’t like commentaries in general. They tend to pin the reader into one interpretation while the Holy Spirit may have something entirely different, very specific and quite useful to say to the individual reader. A good Lectio Divina practice is worth ten thousand commentaries.