Transgendered Scripture readings

Liturgiam authenticam is in force. We have receive a revision of the euchological formulae for Holy Mass in the Novus Ordo. What about the lectionary? Does anyone think the Lectionary needs some work?

An irritated priest friend sent about the Lectionary in the USA:

Today’s (27 OCT) reading from the NAB (USCCB Transgendered Bible) reads:
Luke 13: 6 And he told them this parable: “There once was a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard, and when he came in search of fruit on it but found none,

Any fifth grader in my CCD knows that “τις” is “a certain man.” Even the episcopal castrators cannot avoid the fact that the orchard was “his.” Does anyone in his right mind think that our Lord spoke of “a person?”

Usequequo Domine? How long before this absurd Lectionary translated is trashed?

6 Ἔλεγεν δὲ ταύτην τὴν παραβολήν• συκῆν εἶχεν τις πεφυτευμένην ἐν τῷ ἀμπελῶνι αὐτοῦ καὶ ἦλθεν ζητῶν καρπὸν ἐν αὐτῇ καὶ οὐχ εὗρεν.

From the USCCB’s website:

Is the New American Bible the only translation of Scriptures we can read from at Mass?

Since May 19, 2002, the revised Lectionary, based on the New American Bible is the only English-language Lectionary that may be used at Mass in the dioceses of the United States, except for the current Lectionary for Masses with Children which remains in use.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, New Evangelization, WDTPRS and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Transgendered Scripture readings

  1. Thank God my Canadian Bishops were wizer and revised the Lectionary to the NSRV-CE in 2008. That’s what we read from since that time at Mass.

  2. St. Louis IX says:

    Would it be a sin to email the USCCB and tell them there translations suck?

  3. St. Louis IX says:

    Happily I don`t work for them : above should read: Their

  4. Daniel says:

    I was thinking that the initial approval for the Children’s lectionary had been conditional and had expired. The bishops approved a new translation of it in 2005, but the Vatican never took action on it. The Vatican did extend approval on the use of the original? It’s been out of print for years while publishers wait to see if the new version ever gets approved.

  5. wmeyer says:

    We recently attended the local “family Mass” and heard the most amazingly dumbed down readings I could have imagined, read by 9-11 year old children. I assume this is all approved, but I think it is just horrible. A little additional work by the catechists would be sufficient to aid their young charges in comprehending the meaning of the readings. And if there is another way to imagine a child of that age viewing his own reading than as “look at me”, I am sure I don’t know what it might be.

    As to the real Lectionary, yes, I think it is overdue for attention. Not only the wording, but the places they have chosen to break the text are often bizarre, and damaging to context.

    And can we please soon get some attention from Rome to the matter of the evils which are done to the Psalms in the name of musicality? Does anyone really believe that a Marty Haugen can improve on the words used by the Psalmist?

  6. Clinton R. says:

    Does anyone remember this gem we heard in the Gospel last month? (25th Sunday in Ordinary Time)

    “Taking a child, he placed it in their midst,
    and putting his arms around it, he said to them…” Mark 9:36

    Since when is a child an it?
    What would have been wrong with the American Standard Version?:

    “And he took a little child, and set him in the midst of them: and taking him in his arms, he said unto them..”

  7. BaltDeacon says:

    I am all for authentic translations, but I look up ??? in my Greek dictionries/lexicons, all respected ones, and they disagree that this is an obvious translation to man. Am I missing something?:

    Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. — a ref. to someone or something indefinite, anyone, anything; someone, something; many a one/thing, a certain one

    Liddell, Henry George, Robert Scott, Henry Stuart Jones, and Roderick McKenzie. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996 – Indef. Pron. any one, any thing

    Arndt, William, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature : A Translation and Adaption of the Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schrift En Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979 – indefinite pronoun; anyone, anything; someone, something; many a one or thing.

  8. Dave N. says:

    @Clinton. A child (paidion) is an “it” (neuter) in Greek.

  9. Matt R says:

    I’m not a Scripture expert, so I have a question: How accurate is the Douai-Rheims version compared to a more recent translation? I am of the opinion that the DR Bible should form the Lectionary, because of the style of the language.
    Yes, I agree wmeyer. The Psalms are completely butchered…

  10. Margaret says:

    I could be wrong, but I believe that the reason for the dreadful paraphrasing of the psalms has to do with copyrights and money. It would cost the music publishers more if their composers used the actual NAB texts. The paraphrasings the composers jig up are, naturally, not copyrighted to any other agency. How on earth such a situation ever arose just boggles the mind.

    Which now brings to mind something related– since in practice there is apparently no issue in the US with the psalms sung at Mass NOT being the literal text of the approved translation, then there would be nothing at all to stop an intrepid composer from using, say, the Douay-Rheims or some other beautiful, royalty-free translation…. Hmmm…

  11. wmeyer says:

    I could be wrong, but I believe that the reason for the dreadful paraphrasing of the psalms has to do with copyrights and money.

    All the more reason to dispense with the (usually banal) compositions, and simply, reverently, read the psalms.

  12. Gregorius says:

    Well, we could always just use Latin…

  13. frjim4321 says:

    Hmmm, something is missing here.

    Our ordinary wrote us several years ago and advised us that the Children’s Lectionary was no longer approved.

    I am hardly an expert on this, I am just passing along what the ordinary said to us.

    That having been said, the Canadians have a pretty decent Lectionary, and if its okay 325 miles to the north, how wrong can it really be to use it here?

    Think it is the NRSV . . . not a bad translation.

    wmeyer raises an interesting point re: the psalms . . . it can be very challenging to sing the using the unsingable translation in the breviary.

  14. I guess the solution is to just celebrate Mass in Latin, and dispense with the rotten English translations. No muss, no fuss.

    wmeyer says: We recently attended the local “family Mass” and heard the most amazingly dumbed down readings I could have imagined, read by 9-11 year old children. I assume this is all approved, but I think it is just horrible. A little additional work by the catechists would be sufficient to aid their young charges in comprehending the meaning of the readings.

    Exactly. That this is not done is a sign that catechesis is in the hands of those who do not love the Church, the Mass, Scripture or Tradition — or, for that matter, those they are supposed to be teaching. What you love, you want others to love, too, and you’ll do what it takes to raise them up to that level; and if you love others, you want them to share in the good things that enrich your life. You can’t love what you want to remake, since you don’t appreciate it for what it is; and you don’t love others by lowering your expectations of them to the point they’re already met.

    @Clinton: yes, a child is an “it,” even in English. Look at English literature more than about 50 years old and you’ll see the neuter pronoun commonly used for a child.

  15. frjim4321 says: wmeyer raises an interesting point re: the psalms . . . it can be very challenging to sing the using the unsingable translation in the breviary.

    Yes, the current translation of the breviary leaves much to be desired. In fact, I will go so far as to say I think it stinks. But even if we had a decent translation, English and chant are really a poor fit anyway.

  16. wmeyer says:

    Miss Anita Moore, I agree: we should return to the use of Latin, and not so coincidentally, return to making it commonly available in the schools.

    As to the “family Mass”, and the parish in question, I am new to the parish, but there is a priest there who I like very much. He was ordained just over a year ago, is from Nigeria, and gives excellent homilies, each with a clear message on the teachings of the Church. I do what I can to encourage him, and hope that my support may be of help.

    Catechesis is in grave disorder in many parishes; certainly in those familiar to me locally. I have read Msgr. Wrenn’s books on that topic, and I believe his analysis was exactly correct. It is time, and past time, to remove the “liturgists” and “theologians” from power who contend that there is a second authority, a second magisterium. The Baltimore Catechism would be a far better tool for RCIA and CCD than most of the materials in current use. In particular, adults in RCIA have a right to be taught in complete accord with the teaching of the Church — how else may they make an informed decision about their own conversion?

  17. wmeyer says:

    …English and chant are really a poor fit anyway.

    They are, but there’s nothing essential in the use of the vernacular. ;)

  18. Daniel says:

    After the NRSV was first approved for use in Canada, it was rejected for use in the U.S. Did they revise the NRSV lectionary to make it a NNRSV? The NRSV has a good deal of inclusive language as well, such as “Let us make humankind in our image” and ” Happy are those who do not follow the advice of the wicked”.

  19. frjim4321 says:

    wmeyer, i appreciated latin in high school because it resulted in my doing quite well on the MAT for entrance to grad school – so latin did have some very important utility for me, in fact changing my life for the better … other than acing the MAT i never had much use for it . . . but I encourage my dear niece and neph to take latin because it will help them a LOT with standardized tests.

    It is time, and past time, to remove the “liturgists” and “theologians” from power who contend that there is a second authority, a second magisterium.

    Yes, that’s good, disempower the people who really have some competence in their fields and let the guys with the pointy hats and honorary degrees mindlessly pass down edicts from higher-ups.

    Daniel, think NRSV was favored because it was more appropriate for proclamation.

  20. frjim4321 says:

    “acing” – by that I meant doing a lot better than anybody expected, shocking the faculty . . . indeed people do better on it than I did . . . i apologize, I overspoke…

  21. BillyHW says:

    The NRSV used in Canada has plenty of gender-neutered language, which is why it was rejected by the Vatican. The Canadian bishops never corrected this, as they were ordered to, in an act of disobedience against rightful authority in the Church, using the lame excuse that it would cost too much money now that they bought all the new lectionaries (before they got approval for them).

  22. amsjj1002 says:

    I was interested to hear during the USCCB’s 2012 Spring General Assembly about revision of the Lectionary and the NAB. The 6th link (the last one) of the USCCB Video On-Demand has the presentation of Archbishop Aymond of New Orleans and Cardinal Wuerl, starting around 1.31.00
    http://usccb.org/about/leadership/usccb-general-assembly/2012-june-meeting/video-on-demand.cfm

  23. Michelle F says:

    I grew up as a generic Protestant. When I was 7 years old (1975), my mother gave me a King James (Authorized 1611) version of the Bible. I was expected to read it, to understand it, and to believe it – all of which I did, using a dictionary when necessary.

    If Protestants can expect and get a 7-year-old to comprehend Elizabethan English, why can’t Catholics expect and get their children (and adults) to grasp Bishop Challoner’s 19th century update of the Douay-Rheims?

    The Douay-Rheims is, if I understand correctly, the only English translation of the Roman Catholic Church’s only official Bible, the Vulgate. None of the original letters or books of the Bible exist, so why do modern Catholics insist on modern translations of the non-existant “original” languages? St. Jerome had access to documents that no longer exist, and he double-checked the meanings of various words by traveling to the places where those words were used. No modern scholar can do that type of research. It isn’t possible to come up with a translation more accurate than St. Jerome’s.

    When Bishop Challoner updated the Douay-Rheims, he made extensive use of the King James Bible to give us an English translation that is not only accurate, but flows well and is easy to memorize. (I find it very amusing that for all of the liturgical damage done during the past 40+ years, the innovators have not been able to stamp out the Elizabethan Our Father, with all of its Thees and Thous.)

    So back to my original question: Why can’t Catholics just use the Douay-Rheims translation for Missals, Breviaries, and good old daily reading?

    After all, the fact that I understood what the King James Bible said is why today I am Roman Catholic instead of Protestant.

  24. Geoffrey says:

    I wish the Revised Standard Version (Second Catholic Edition) would be the version to use in all English-language liturgies throughout the world. We now all use the same translation of The Roman Missal and soon The Revised Grail Psalms. The same should go with the Lectionary (which, of course, is part of The Roman Missal).

  25. Daniel says:

    The RSV is actually approved for use in Anglican Use parishes, whether those that are diocesan under the Pastoral Provision or Personal Ordinariate.

  26. Matt R says:

    Also on the Psalms-that’s one more reason to use the Gradual, in either the approved vernacular or the Latin. I prefer chanted Latin propers and ordinaries so that gets my vote…
    Yup, I think the breviary stinks too…but the 1962 BR is problematic too, since it’s incredibly long and it’s mighty expensive. I don’t think all-Latin is a good solution to this problem.
    Does anyone else find the various copyright restrictions on different translations of the Bible to be problematic?

  27. Jenice says:

    The NAB is awful, clunky, impossible to memorize, full of plain, ordinary prose rather than the exalted language that should be used to speak of the God of the Universe. The horizontal “inclusive” language is idolatry; the compilers put the feminist agenda ahead of the Word of God. The late Fr. Neuhaus argued repeatedly that the NAB should be dropped, as did Anthony Esolan in a great article in a past issue of First Things.

    I like the RSV-CE, although one of my professors in Ave Maria’s IPT made a good argument that it has a Protestant bias in the book of Romans. I also found out from Fr. Mitch Pacwa that the orginal 1611 King James was published with ALL the books in it. Only later did a Protestant publisher throw out the Deutero-canon.

    The Douay seems good to me, but (personal preference), I find the Psalms to be too graphic–things like “in my bowels” etc.

    I’m not familiar with some of the older English translations from Great Britain.

    I’m not sure what the answer is. I almost wish there were a Catholic KJV available. The language is exalted, and this translation is part of our patrimony as English speakers. Besides, everyone knows Psalm 23 in the KJV version.

  28. PaterAugustinus says:

    Any fifth grader in my CCD knows that “???” is “a certain man.”

    Coming from this fella who just finished his degree in Greek (and Latin), “tis” is both masculine and feminine; “ti” is the neuter form. Most Greek grammars define the term as “someone” or “anyone,” precisely because it avails for both genders.

    To be clear, I’m not trying to shoot down the overall point. I always use “he” as the generic pronoun (unless I’m speaking abstractly about somebody doing something foolish or wicked, in which case I use the feminine – just to irk the pc police), and am NOT a fan of gender-neutral translations. All the more so, when the rest of the sentence makes the subject’s masculinity known. But none of that is an excuse for the malformation of 5th graders’ Greek skills! They have a right to know that “tis” is a gender- ambivalent (though precisely NOT gender-neutral), term.

  29. gracie says:

    Perhaps one of you could help me with a problem I have concerning the Bible. For years I read the New American Bible and fell in love with the fact that there are so many explanatory footnotes on each page. These footnotes are quite good both at providing historical contexts as well as linking passages to relevant Old Testament verses.

    A couple of years ago, after reading the rave reviews of how superior the RSV Bible is, I bought one and honestly found myself a bit disappointed. The text may be more accurate but the new English translation comes across to me as at times a bit stilted as if they were trying so hard to get every word so perfectly accurate that they lost the forest of the narrative flow among all the trees of each “perfect” word. Secondly, there’s hardly any footnotes to put things in context for readers who aren’t biblical scholars and as a result I find myself reading the RSV with the NAB open alongside for the footnotes. This means that in the end I often revert back to the NAB – even though I know there’s some inaccuracies in it – because it gets unwieldy using two Bibles at once; especially if I’m trying to read comfortably while sitting in a chair.

    Has anyone else run into this problem and if so, may I ask how you’ve dealt with it?

  30. Gracie, Douay-Rheims has commentary in it. Perhaps not as voluminous as NAB, but pretty good.

  31. Dave N. says:

    @ Michelle. The difference is that we now have access to copies of the biblical text that pre-date Jerome. Also, as Jerome himself indicates in his Hebrew Questions on Genesis, he sometimes chooses to translate from the Septuagint and sometimes from Hebrew text, so the Vulgate ended up as kind of a “pick and choose” mish-mash that doesn’t match either the Hebrew or Greek sources—thus making the Douay-Rheims (at least in part) several steps removed from what is likely closer to the original text. And even the Vulgate itself has gone through a number of revisions.

  32. the NAB footnotes drive me crazy….I skip them, I’d prefer the DRB in English. I like reading the Bible in Russian though.

  33. leonugent2005 says:

    This is the valid complaint about the new lectionary as well as the readings in the breviary. I prefer the RSV and I hope they go to it some day. For now by God’s grace I will try to bear it patiently.

  34. Time for the Knox translation.

  35. The Masked Chicken says:

    “A child (paidion) is an “it” (neuter) in Greek.”

    A note about translating from a foreign language:
    yes, paidion (p?-d?’-on) is a neutral noun, but one, ordinarily, in a narrative, chooses a gender and uses it consistently as long as the authorizing noun is in effect. One could have written:

    “Taking a child, he placed he/she in their midst,
    and putting his arms around him/her, he said to them…” Mark 9:36

    but this goes against common sense. The use of the word, “it,” is inappropriate for an animate object. The neuter noun is used as a generic referent, because it really means any child, but no child is an “it,” so this is just foolishness or agenda-driven nonsense for a translator. That this passed scrutiny by the Holy See is astounding.

    As for the actual section in question, when the vine dresser (who would have been male) is said to answer that he would put manure around the tree, the verb is: ??????????? apokrinomai, which only occurs in Scripture other than this passage, when Jesus, a male, is talking. The probability is high that this is a male talking. Even when, “???” is used, context determines subsequent use. For example, “man,” used to be a generic referent, but when we describe a musical prodigy, for instance, one might say: “never has there been such an offspring of man…” This does not mean that men are having babies. That would be a prodigy!

    I thought the Vatican took a hard stance on such inclusive nonsense.

    The Chicken

  36. The Masked Chicken says:

    How does one get foreign (Greek, Russian, etc.) alphabets to is play?

  37. The Masked Chicken says:

    To display..stupid iPad auto spell. :(

  38. wmeyer says:

    Yes, that’s good, disempower the people who really have some competence in their fields and let the guys with the pointy hats and honorary degrees mindlessly pass down edicts from higher-ups.

    Yes. When those who claim that competence claim also that they have no need to teach what the Church teaches, and instead substitute unbridled Modernism, remove them. Get them away from our children and our converts. What they are and have been teaching is not Catholic.

  39. jhayes says:

    the Masked Chicken wrote:

    How does one get foreign (Greek, Russian, etc.) alphabets to is play?

    General>International>Keyboards>Add New Keyboard>Greek

    Once you have done that, you can use the button to the left of the space bar to select E??nviká or English

    Add Russian, etc. the same way.

  40. wmeyer says:

    General>International>Keyboards>Add New Keyboard>Greek

    Display is separate from entry. Display support (including fonts) is easily added from Windows Update, where the languages are presented under options. Keyboard support is as you describe, but depending on the language, there may be multiple choices for entry. Such is the case for Chinese, for example, where you will find both Traditional and Simplified, and on Simplified, I believe there are at least three choices for entry method.

  41. St. Epaphras says:

    A few comments which may be useful to someone:
    1. There is a volume published by Cambridge entitled KJV Apocrypha (Deuterocanonicals plus 1 and 2 Esdras). I got mine at Books a Million.

    2. The Confraternity version of the Douay-Rheims is in print — New Testament. The notes are not Modernist, the print is good, the language is clear but exalted and there is no “neutered” language. Around $10.00. I love this New Testament.

    3. There are still copies of the Douay/Confraternity Bible, often called New Catholic Bible, out there. All the New Testament and part of the Old (including Psalms) had been revised but the rest of the Old T. is D-R. Notes NOT Modernist, but plenty of notes. The translation stopped when it was decided that a new Bible be translated from “the original languages”, the NAB being the result.

    4. Sometimes the KJV and D-R are identical or nearly so. At other times, I am thinking “What???” (as a convert who read, studied and memorized from the KJV all my life).

    5. There are some D-R Concordances still out there, so you can find where in the Bible is this passage (if you remember a key word of it).

    6. (Warning — strong opinion): Many of the notes in the NAB are from a “school of thought” I absolutely flee from, and they scandalize me. Likewise I have no use at all for the neutered language. But the notes alone make me want to weep sometimes, as I think “It’s no wonder…”

  42. Sissy says:

    frjim4321 said: “Yes, that’s good, disempower the people who really have some competence in their fields and let the guys with the pointy hats and honorary degrees mindlessly pass down edicts from higher-ups.”

    Father Jim, those who are teaching things contrary to the CCC are by definition without “competence in their fields”. Is teaching the faith handed down from the Apostles “mindlessly pass[ing] down edicts from higher ups”? That’s a very hostile way to describe the teaching authority of the Magisterium, especially coming from a Catholic.

  43. robtbrown says:

    frjim4321 says:

    It is time, and past time, to remove the “liturgists” and “theologians” from power who contend that there is a second authority, a second magisterium.

    Yes, that’s good, disempower the people who really have some competence in their fields and let the guys with the pointy hats and honorary degrees mindlessly pass down edicts from higher-ups.

    Competence in their fields is one thing, but many of them have an agenda. And that agenda usually means including texts that favor their project and excluding those that don’t–an exercise in dishonest scholarship.

  44. acardnal says:

    The Lectionary needs to be revised. I just hope they do NOT go to the USCCB’s New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE). The Old Testament is completed and they are working on the N.T. now. +Cdl. Wuerl of Washington, DC made a speech at the Nov. USCCB convention about it, and I think he wants it to be used in the new Lectionary. I hope not.

    As for me, I prefer the RSV-Catholic Edition.

  45. dominic1955 says:

    “It is time, and past time, to remove the “liturgists” and “theologians” from power who contend that there is a second authority, a second magisterium.

    Yes, that’s good, disempower the people who really have some competence in their fields and let the guys with the pointy hats and honorary degrees mindlessly pass down edicts from higher-ups.”

    It would be a bad idea if many of the people who claim competence in the fields of liturgy and theology actually had it. The “seats of authority” in these fields have largely been attained by usurpers. A warm body in a cathedra does not make one a bishop. Same with these people. They might have titles that were once prestigious and authoritative but that authority doesn’t automatically descend upon anyone that happens to hold the title.

  46. JKnott says:

    Michelle F: Excellent comment!

    FrJim4321: The only “competence” that has any worth to one’s eternal salvation or to the Mystical Body of Christ, is humble obedience, submission to, and love of the teachings of Christ as handed on to us through “the guys with the pointy hats and honorary degrees mindlessly pass down edicts from higher-ups.” I certainly hope I am wrong but you almost make pride and blind worldly arrogance sound like a virtue.
    The only “competence” that matters is growth in holiness. Disobedience breeds in the fallen.
    I agree with Sissy and robtbrown.

  47. Michael_Thoma says:

    The Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Churches in India, and I think the Latin Church in India uses the RSV-CE for English readings. I think the norm extends to their US extensions as well, although the NAB is ‘tolerated’.

  48. Michael_Thoma says:

    Regarding the “competence” comment.. it would be nice if the institutions that gave them their degrees actually adhered to Catholic doctrine.. and also made sure their alumni practiced as taught. If the Vatican is expected to remove an honorary from a dead man for uncovered sins, why not expect these institutions of higher learning to retract the titles “Master” and “Doctor” for spiritually dead liturgists and canonists who purposely misread and circumvent ecclesial law?!

  49. wmeyer says:

    Regarding the “competence” comment.. it would be nice if the institutions that gave them their degrees actually adhered to Catholic doctrine.. and also made sure their alumni practiced as taught.

    Excellent point! Their competence is only as true as was their instruction. If the school(s) which conferred the degree(s) were far from Church dogma in their teaching (as seems to be a point of pride in such cases), then the “competence” is questionable, with respect to their possible role in delivering Catholic teaching.

  50. The Masked Chicken says:

    As a humor expert, I could be a consultant on clown Masses :)

    The Chicken

  51. The Masked Chicken says:

    “None of the original letters or books of the Bible exist, so why do modern Catholics insist on modern translations of the non-existant “original” languages? ”

    I do not understand this sentence. We don’t have the originals in our possession, but that oes not prove that they don’t exist. No one knows if they are still in existence. Also, the original languages are captured within the biblical manuscript tradition. They are not non-existent. I think everyone should learn to read Scipture in the original unpointed Hebrew and Koine Greek. It would save a lot of confusion :)

    The Chicken

    The Chicken

  52. The Masked Chicken says:

    I want to know how to display foreign characters in the combox, not enable them in Windows, which I seldom use. I think I have to use Unicode.

    The Chicken

  53. wmeyer says:

    I want to know how to display foreign characters in the combox, not enable them in Windows, which I seldom use. I think I have to use Unicode.

    Yes, that would be correct. I misunderstood your original question.

  54. acardnal says:

    Young Canadian RC Male says:
    29 October 2012 at 4:38 pm
    Thank God my Canadian Bishops were wizer and revised the Lectionary to the NSRV-CE in 2008. That’s what we read from since that time at Mass.

    Did you mean to say “NRSV-CE”?

    I hope you were being sarcastic because that version is completely neutered and uses gender neutral, inclusive language to the point where the link between the prophecy of a male messiah foretold in the O.T. has been obfuscated.

    In 1994, the Cong. for Divine Worship and the Sacraments withdrew approval for use of the NRSV of the Bible in the liturgy and catechetical tests on request of the CDF. The CDF indicated that the NRSV’s inclusive language posed serious doctrinal problems. The NRSV is NOT faithful to the inspired texts.

    A nice critique was done by Dr. Thaddeus W. Pruss in Catholic Insight January/February 1995, Toronto, ON.

  55. jhayes says:

    Just wondering if the greek problem is in the combox itself:

    ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????????• ????? ????? ??? ???????????? ?? ?? ???????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????.

    That’s a quote from the OP above,

  56. jhayes says:

    Yes, it is. I copied and pasted the line of Greek text after this line in the OP

    “Usequequo Domine? How long before this absurd Lectionary translated is trashed?”

    Although it appears in Greek characters in the OP, it is just a series of question marks when quoted in the combox.

  57. ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????????• ????? ????? ??? ???????????? ?? ?? ???????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????.

  58. Okay, cutting and pasting it into Notepad, and then copying it from there to the combox does not work.

  59. robtbrown says:

    Miss Anita Moore, O.P. says:

    ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????????• ????? ????? ??? ???????????? ?? ?? ???????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????.

    You’ve asked a good question.

  60. robtbrown says:

    wmeyer says:
    30 October 2012 at 11:33 am

    Regarding the “competence” comment.. it would be nice if the institutions that gave them their degrees actually adhered to Catholic doctrine.. and also made sure their alumni practiced as taught.

    Excellent point! Their competence is only as true as was their instruction. If the school(s) which conferred the degree(s) were far from Church dogma in their teaching (as seems to be a point of pride in such cases), then the “competence” is questionable, with respect to their possible role in delivering Catholic teaching.

    I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, but it’s a bit more complicated than that. The likes of Rahner, Schillebeeckx, Häring, and Raymond Brown all had doctrinally sound educations. (Brown was never really a doctrinal dissenter but never really found his way out of the Christ of Faith/Jesus of History maze.)

    Although theology can never contradict Church doctrine, it is more than just repeating it (Positive Theology).

  61. Pingback: Halloween Hurricane Sandy New American Bible is Not A Bible | Big Pulpit