xarto
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by xarto on Jan 27, 2019 23:30:10 GMT
There is a thread on Catholic Answers Forum on what we can learn from Protestantism and I said to read the Bible more. I was surprised when someone basically said not this stereotype again. I posited that being American they had probably absorbed the habit of reading the bible from their protestant neighbours, whereas here in Ireland it was different.
I was always under the impression (and my parents shared this view) that Catholics reading the Bible were frowned upon by the Church as it could lead to misinterpretation, especially as most were probably the King James version and obviously not Catholic. My own family only bought their first Bible (Jerusalem Bible) in the 70s, which is obviously post Vatican II when everything changed.
Do you know if there are any links to back-up the Church frowning on laity reading the bible pre-Vatican II?
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Jan 29, 2019 9:39:54 GMT
Catholics never gave up on the bible and and the five popes immediately before the Council called for wider reading of scripture.
You need to be careful of translation. The best in English is the RSV, and though not very elegant, the New American Bible is faithful. The Jerusalem Bible is best avoided and versions like the Good News, New International or Living Bible are worse. Douai Rheims, Challoner and Knox have their charm but don't necessarily follow the most reliable manuscripts. Neither did the King James version. Neither did Martin Luther.
The Irish version, the Bíobla Mhá Nuad, is good. The main modern models it used were the RSV and the German Einheutuebersetzung. The Jerusalem Bible and the French Bible de Jerusalem were explicitly disregarded by the late Monsignor Ó Fiannachta during the work.
|
|
xarto
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by xarto on Jan 30, 2019 23:52:03 GMT
Thanks for that. I was more thinking about culture among Catholics that reading the Bible isn't as big a thing as it is for Protestants and where that came from.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Jan 31, 2019 9:01:16 GMT
A couple of generations after the reformation, Catholics developed a shyness towards the Bible, principally in reaction to Protestantism. Beforehand, literacy was less common and prior to the printing press, books were a luxury. And the Church still only regards two translations, the Vulgate and the Septuagint as inspired.
Against that the Douai-Rheims is older than the King James Bible and in the east, Orthodox read both Bible and Church fathers. Catholics were never forbidden to read the Bible, only to interpret it.
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Sept 16, 2020 20:46:12 GMT
There's a relatively new channel on youtube called Catholic Productions that explains mass readings very well. The guy that commentates is Brant Pitre and he comes across as knowledgeable and as a good communicator. Below is a commentary on a parable from Luke 12, which he interprets as Jesus talking about a punishment short of heaven and short of Hell, something we would call purgatory. Interesting stuff: www.youtube.com/watch?v=YesD9TjrUes
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 18, 2020 20:45:10 GMT
One thing that strikes me inceasingly is that the Bible itself is to a considerable extent a liturgical book, primarily meant for use in services rather than to be read cover-to-cover. (Many of the Psalms, for example, are meant to be recited in Temple services.)
|
|