Imprimatur and Scripture Commentaries

I noticed that the SACRA PAGINA Bible Series does NOT have the Imprimatur and this surprised me and has me greatly worried and concerned.

I understood that the Imprimatur is required on any matter pertaining to faith and morals. This would apply most especially to scriptural matters.

Can anybody provide further information on this matter? I would most especially appreciate CIC reference if available or other authority.

Most appreciated,

Jim

Hi Jbmc,

The imprimatur passes no judgment on the quality of a translation. It means that, in the opinion of the one giving the imprimatur, the book does not contain matter that is contrary to faith or morals. Mistakes can be made however. If you think the imprimatur was too lightly given, write to the bishop who gave it.

Verbum

…probably not a major issue, but i personally recommend an imprimatur just to make sure of accuracy, and after all, who are to assume… the imprimatur 99% of the time can save you embarrassment not to mention maybe your faith…

…maybe not:confused:

http://img.shopping.com/images1/di/61/65/54/33/71/6e7a5056497176746b68394b66424f6367-100x100.jpg

I appreciate these responses.

Verbum is correct that it does not guarantee the subject matter, however is a statement that nothing contained within violates Church teachings with regard to Faith or Morals (ONLY). There can be factual errors and even opinions, however these may not express error with regard to Faith or Morals.

Now, the subject matter at hand is a scriptural study reference. Sacred Scripture is most definitely a matter of Faith. Therefore, it would appear that the Imprimatur is required under this situation. This particular study series appears extensive and I would like to get into it, however I will not want to waste my time if it is unworthy of the Imprimatur.

I realize that it is possible that no Imprimatur is required. For example, the CA tracts did not always have the Imprimatur and they also taught with authority with regard to Faith and Morals. The only difference here is that the Sacra Pagina is specifically and exclusively dealing with the Word of God directly as its subject matter and the CA tracts mostly dealt with modern and current issues.

I eagerly await an answer. :slight_smile:

Jim

p.s. Space Ghost, you pretty much summarized my concern in much better language. Thanks. :slight_smile:

I’m not a canon lawyer but I think Canons 822-832 apply, especially Canon 827, section 3.

I looked through that material and I really appreciate the direct citation, Todd.

There is no specific mention of the “Imprimatur” or “Nehil Obstat”. It specifies what is required for review and approval and what is not required. I don’t know if that is the legal language for the Imprimatur or not.

Hopefully someone can clarify this point. If it is the same thing, then it appears that the Sacra Pagina is not an approved work. I would find that somewhat strange considering it is so widely available and is published under the impression of being an approved document.

Jim

heh. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary has imprimaturs and Nihil Obstat, but look at what THAT’s feeding us. :frowning:

[quote=jbmccormick]I looked through that material and I really appreciate the direct citation, Todd.

There is no specific mention of the “Imprimatur” or “Nehil Obstat”. It specifies what is required for review and approval and what is not required. I don’t know if that is the legal language for the Imprimatur or not.

Jim
[/quote]

Speaking of which I picked up a Catechism (1994 ed.) at a library sale this weekend and was surprised to see it had neither Imprimatur nor Nihil Obstat. Then I looked closer & saw it had “Iprimi Potest” (never heard of that before) from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, so it must be OK!

[quote=jbmccormick]I looked through that material and I really appreciate the direct citation, Todd.

There is no specific mention of the “Imprimatur” or “Nehil Obstat”. It specifies what is required for review and approval and what is not required. I don’t know if that is the legal language for the Imprimatur or not.

Hopefully someone can clarify this point. If it is the same thing, then it appears that the Sacra Pagina is not an approved work. I would find that somewhat strange considering it is so widely available and is published under the impression of being an approved document.

Jim
[/quote]

My reading of Canon 827, sections 2 and 3, is that, unless the Scripture Commentary in question is used for instruction in a Catholic school, the approbation of the competent ecclesiastical authority (which I take to mean an imprimatur) is not absolutely needed but it is recommended.

I spoke with the editor for Liturgical Press, the publisher for the Sacra Pagina series today. I was told that this is an “academic” work and they do not seek the Imprimatur for any of their “academic” works, but only for “catechical” works. The editor assures me that they publish under the authority of St John’s Abbey and that all of their published works are orthodox and in keeping with the teachings of the Church. He also stated that the Imprimatur is not required except for catechical works.

I appreciated his time. I am still reserved because I am not satisfied that an Imprimatur is not required for works pertaining to Sacred Scripture.

Jim

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.