Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete  (Read 4199 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hank Igitur Orate Fratre

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 56
  • Reputation: +20/-90
  • Gender: Male
Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
« on: July 12, 2018, 08:41:37 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!16
  • [Stupidity snipped by moderator]

    There is no excuse for Douay-Rheims "onlyists" to wallow in their own culpable ignorance for over 70 + years. Wake up.

    Offline JezusDeKoning

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2705
    • Reputation: +945/-1144
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #1 on: July 12, 2018, 09:27:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • I always apologize if I come off as flippant or rude, but this has to be said. Ahem:

    "HAIL MARY, FULL OF GRACE" IS BASIC CATHOLIC TEACHING! FROM THE VULGATE: "Et ingressus angelus ad eam dixit: Ave gratia plena: Dominus tecum: benedicta tu in mulieribus. And the Angel said to Her: Hail FULL (plena) of GRACE (gratia)."

    You cannot get a more authoritative source than the Vulgate, from which the Douay-Rheims is derived from.
    Tío Samuel, ven pa 'aca


    Offline X

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 605
    • Reputation: +605/-51
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #2 on: July 12, 2018, 09:29:20 PM »
  • Thanks!6
  • No Thanks!1
  • If the Douay-Rheims Bible is the best Catholic Bible, then what was the point of Pope Pius XII writing his 1943 encyclical "Divino Afflante Spiritu"?

    Pope Pius XII realized that the Latin Vulgate translation had many flaws because after its 16th-17th Century publications, older (and more accurate) Greek manuscripts were discovered that put St. Jerome's translations to shame.

    Later published Catholic bibles (thanks to "Divino afflante Spiritu") used the newly discovered older Greek manuscripts for their translation and hence the Douay-Rheims became obsolete. Again, if the Douay-Rheims Bible was not made obsolete, then why else would Pope Pius XII have written "Divino Afflante Spiritu?"

    For example, the Douay-Rheims Bible is the only Catholic bible that insists on continuing to erroneously translate Luke 1:28 as Mary being "full of grace" rather than the correct translation of "favored one." The correct translation does not affect the sacred Hail Mary prayer by any means, although Douay-Rheims "onlyists" may disagree.

    The Catholics who prefer the Douay-Rheims version of the Bible are the opposite side of the same coin as the Protestants who favor the (Authorized) King James Version of the Bible. Both sides refuse to acknowledge the errors of their own Bibles since the discovery of older extant Greek manuscripts. The only difference is that, fortunately, Catholics had a Pope who issued an encyclical to guide the faithful away from such erroneous translations with "Divino Afflante Spiritu."

    There is no excuse for Douay-Rheims "onlyists" to wallow in their own culpable ignorance for over 70 + years. Wake up.

    You are in favor, perhaps, of the ecumenically-inspired RSV-CE (in which Our Lady is no longer "full of grace," but only "highly favored"); an explicit attack by the modernists and rationalists on the dogma of the Immaculate Conception; a gesture to the Protestant collaborators who were delighted with this new "discovery."

    But let me revise your argument for you:

    It is not the Douay Rheims Bible which you are really arguing is obsolete, but the dogma of the Immaculate Conception (i.e., As though new "advances" in true biblical scholarship could weaken one of the foundations for a defined dogma of the Church).

    As for Divino Afflante Spiritu, it was a modernist document of Pius XII; like you, my modernist seminary professors rejoiced in it, because it gave the nod to a "Catholic version" of the Protestant-rationalist historico-critical method of Bultmann (his greatest protege being the grand-heresiarch Fr. Raymond Brown).

    We used Lawrence Boadt's modernist work "Reading the Old Testament," which includes on the inner frontispiece a quote from Divino Afflante Spiritu as justifying all that was later to poison our minds in those pages (the goal of which was to convince us that the biblical accounts of miracles all had natural explanations and causes, and that inerrancy only pertained to "moral truths," not the historical accounts of scripture; the same claim later made by the evolutionists now invading Tradition).

    I would posit you are already in the process of losing your faith (if you ever had it).

    The fruits of Divino Afflante Spiritu and the condemned modernist exegetes of Pascendi being partially rehabilitated by the transitional Pope Pius XII.

    Offline X

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 605
    • Reputation: +605/-51
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #3 on: July 12, 2018, 10:15:42 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!1
  • Please provide a list of the perceived deficiencies which render the Douay Rheims Bible "obsolete."

    PS: The Knox Bible is a terrible translation.  Can you read any Latin?  If so, look at this sidexsidexside of the Vulgate x Douay x Knox Bibles: The Know wants to be poetic, where the Douay wants to be literal.

    http://catholicbible.online/

    The Douay is CLEARLY the better translation.

    Offline X

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 605
    • Reputation: +605/-51
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #4 on: July 12, 2018, 11:04:45 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!1
  • You are incorrect here because you are ignoring the recent discoveries of older extant Greek manuscripts which were not available to St. Jerome during the time he was translating the Vulgate.

    You are also in error when you immediately jump to the conclusion that just because "favored one" (rather than "full of grace") is (correctly) translated into every single Bible save the Douay-Rheims, then that nullifies Mary as being "full of grace."

    The Virgin Mother has always been "full of grace"....that's a given. So when older and more reliable Greek manuscripts appear and state "favored one" instead of "full of grace," nobody should be upset and deny these modern (and more reliable) manuscript discoveries.

    Your logic is akin to saying that Catholics cannot believe the Virgin Mother is full of grace unless it is printed in the Bible. Pope Pius IX's 1854 Encyclical on the Immaculate Conception explains several ways in which Mary was "full of grace." Do not fall into the error known as "Sola Scriptura of Douay-Rheims" in the same way Protestants fall into the error of "Sola Scriptura of Authorized King James Version."    

    Nonsense:

    Ineffabilis Deus itself uses the translation "full of grace" as part of its proofs for the dogmatic definition:

    "When the Fathers and writers of the Church meditated on the fact that the most Blessed Virgin was, in the name and by order of God himself, proclaimed full of grace[22] by the Angel Gabriel when he announced her most sublime dignity of Mother of God..."
    http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9ineff.htm (Scroll down to the section titled "The Annunciation.")

    Consequently, if this translation is erroneous, the dogma is, in part, based and justified in reliance upon an erroneous scriptural foundation and translation (which is impossible).

    PS: As an aside, it is manifestly false to claim that the Douay Rheims is the only English Biblical translation to translate Luke 1:28 as "full of grace," as you claim above: The very edition you claim to prefer (i.e., the Knox Bible) uses the same translation: "full of grace."
    http://catholicbible.online/knox/NT/Lk


    Offline songbird

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3464
    • Reputation: +1272/-97
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #5 on: July 12, 2018, 11:26:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • She was made without Original Sin.  Therefore, She is Full of Grace.  Proof again, Still a Virgin at birth, She had no pain when Christ was born.  Proof again, she did not age as we do, for She was never touched with Original Sin.  Her body is not on this earth, because of no Original Sin.  One could go on and on.

    Offline songbird

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3464
    • Reputation: +1272/-97
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #6 on: July 12, 2018, 11:28:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Oh, yes, She told St. Bernadette, She was the Immaculate Conception.  To prove, many, many miracles by the waters of Lourdes.

    Offline X

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 605
    • Reputation: +605/-51
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #7 on: July 12, 2018, 11:36:12 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!1
  • I shall refer you to the document "Divino Afflante Spiritu" itself along with the following:

    When translating Luke 1:28, the Greek does not contain the name "Mary." Therefore the Greek word kecharitomene ("favored one") is the object of the Angel Gabriel's salutation. Therefore, the salutation literally says: "Hail, favored one." It does not say: "Hail Mary, full of grace." Every Bible has gotten this right except the Douay-Rheims.

    Also, as a Traditional Catholic, you know it is in error to mix the Latin language with the vernacular. This is why the Latin Mass contains no vernacular speech whatsoever and the Leonine Prayers said in English are not part of the Latin Mass. However, the Douay-Rheims ignores this error when it uses the English Language yet still retains the Latin names of many Old Testament books. Every other Bible correctly uses the original Hebrew names. It's only the Douay-Rheims who gets this important concept wrong.

    When reading the Bible in the vernacular, remember these facts:

    - It's "Joshua" not "Josue"
    - It's "Tobit" not "Tobias"
    - It's "Isaiah" not "Isaias"
    - It's "Jeremiah" not "Jeremias"
    - It's "Ezekiel" not "Ezechiel"
    - It's "Hosea" not "Osee"
    - It's "Obadiah" not "Abdias"
    - It's "Jonah" not "Jonas"
    - It's "Micah" not "Micheas"
    - It's "Habakkuk" not "Habacuc"
    - It's "Zephaniah" not "Sophonias"
    - It's "Haggai" not "Aggeus"
    - It's "Zechariah" not "Zacharias"
    - It's "Malachi" not "Malachias"

    Do you erroneously say that Jesus Christ is the "Messias" or do you correctly say that Jesus Christ is the "Messiah?"
    Do you correctly say that "Jonah" was swallowed by a fish or do you incorrectly say "Jonas" was swallowed by a fish?

    And as if all of this wasn't enough, the Douay-Rheims erroneously labels some Old Testament books. Remember:

    - It's "1 and 2 Samuel" not "1 and 2 Kings"
    - It's "1 and 2 Kings" not "3 and 4 Kings"
    - It's "1 and 2 Chronicles" not " 1 and 2 Paralipomenon"
    - It's "Ezra" not "1 Esdras"
    - It's "Nehemiah" not "Nehemias" or "2 Esdras" [a double error here]

    FYI, since you've most likely never read or even heard of Divino Afflante Spiritu and thus continue to bury your face inside a Douay-Rheims like the Protestants who bury their faces inside an Authorized King James Version, you will continue to wallow in your ignorance.

    This entire post is fluff and outright error:

    First, you begin by erroneously claiming that the Douay Rheims translation of Luke 1:28 says "Hail Mary, full of grace..."  

    It does not.  

    Mary's name is not mentioned in that verse: http://www.drbo.org/chapter/49001.htm

    Consequently, your straw man/hallucination about the Douay being the only version to contain Mary's name within the "full of grace" phrase goes right into the garbage pail.

    Secondly, it is only the Prots, schismatics, and rationalists who translate kecharitomene as "highly favored one."  The Fathers and Popes translate it as "full of grace" (as the use of this translation in the dogmatic definition Ineffabilis Deus irrefutably demonstrates).

    Thirdly, is your attempt to install as a principle the idea that there is some "error" to mix the Latin and vernacular, which is as gratuitous as it is erroneous: The Kyrie (Greek vernacular) is inserted into the TLM by the Church Herself.

    In other words, in order for you to be right, the Church has to be wrong (a conclusion which is quickly becomming a pattern with you, first in Ineffibilis Deus, and now in Her own liturgy).

    Finally, your example of names as errors in translation makes a very subtle, yet significant error:

    The reason for the differences is because the Douay Rheims did not translate names, but instead translitterated them (i.e., went slavishly letter for letter), instead or translating them with an equivalent in the vernacular (i.e., Once again, the Douay version is the more accurate of the two).


    Offline X

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 605
    • Reputation: +605/-51
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #8 on: July 13, 2018, 07:00:17 AM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ps: I forgot to address your claim that I had probably never even read or heard of Divino Afflante Spiritu:

    As I had previously stated that not only was I familiar with that encyclical, but studied it in the seminary within the context of scripture class, i hadn’t thought it necessary to rebut you yet again.

    Where did you “study” it?

    And if you are going to ignore my responses, then which of us is the one ignorantly clinging to our preconceived narrative here?

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22947
    • Reputation: +20086/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #9 on: July 13, 2018, 08:50:38 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Douay-Rheims is the most accurate translation of the Latin Vulgate -- which is actually superior to other translations because St. Jerome had access to Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that are no longer extant. So even though Latin seems further removed from "the original Hebrew", this is the exception that proves the rule. St. Jerome had access to copies from, say, 50 AD whereas today we can only get Greek copies from 700 AD. I'm making up the numbers here, but not the concept. Older is better when it comes to manuscripts.

    And every Traditional Catholic knows the Douay/Douay-Rheims is the best English translation of the Bible, being the most slavishly accurate.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4772
    • Reputation: +5554/-446
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #10 on: July 13, 2018, 08:52:05 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • You are in favor, perhaps, of the ecumenically-inspired RSV-CE (in which Our Lady is no longer "full of grace," but only "highly favored"); an explicit attack by the modernists and rationalists on the dogma of the Immaculate Conception; a gesture to the Protestant collaborators who were delighted with this new "discovery."

    But let me revise your argument for you:

    It is not the Douay Rheims Bible which you are really arguing is obsolete, but the dogma of the Immaculate Conception (i.e., As though new "advances" in true biblical scholarship could weaken one of the foundations for a defined dogma of the Church).

    As for Divino Afflante Spiritu, it was a modernist document of Pius XII; like you, my modernist seminary professors rejoiced in it, because it gave the nod to a "Catholic version" of the Protestant-rationalist historico-critical method of Bultmann (his greatest protege being the grand-heresiarch Fr. Raymond Brown).

    We used Lawrence Boadt's modernist work "Reading the Old Testament," which includes on the inner frontispiece a quote from Divino Afflante Spiritu as justifying all that was later to poison our minds in those pages (the goal of which was to convince us that the biblical accounts of miracles all had natural explanations and causes, and that inerrancy only pertained to "moral truths," not the historical accounts of scripture; the same claim later made by the evolutionists now invading Tradition).

    I would posit you are already in the process of losing your faith (if you ever had it).

    The fruits of Divino Afflante Spiritu and the condemned modernist exegetes of Pascendi being partially rehabilitated by the transitional Pope Pius XII.

    Speakest thou... Michael A. Hoffman ?
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi


    Offline X

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 605
    • Reputation: +605/-51
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #11 on: July 13, 2018, 08:59:19 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Speakest thou... Michael A. Hoffman ?
    I can assure you I am not Michael Hoffman.
    What made you think I was him?

    Offline Jaynek

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3240
    • Reputation: +1577/-912
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #12 on: July 13, 2018, 09:16:43 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • If the Douay-Rheims Bible is the best Catholic Bible, then what was the point of Pope Pius XII writing his 1943 encyclical "Divino Afflante Spiritu"?

    Pope Pius XII realized that the Latin Vulgate translation had many flaws because after its 16th-17th Century publications, older (and more accurate) Greek manuscripts were discovered that put St. Jerome's translations to shame.

    There is nothing in Divino Afflante Spiritu saying that the Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete.  That Bible translation is not even mentioned.  Since, however, it is a translation based on the Latin Vulgate (which is what gives it its great value) we can perhaps extrapolate from the encyclical's comments regarding the Vulgate.  It says the opposite of what you claim:

    Quote
    20. Nor should anyone think that this use of the original texts, in accordance with the methods of criticism, in any way derogates from those decrees so wisely enacted by the Council of Trent concerning the Latin Vulgate.[24] It is historically certain that the Presidents of the Council received a commission, which they duly carried out, to beg, that is, the Sovereign Pontiff in the name of the Council that he should have corrected, as far as possible, first a Latin, and then a Greek, and Hebrew edition, which eventually would be published for the benefit of the Holy Church of God.[25] If this desire could not then be fully realized owing to the difficulties of the times and other obstacles, at present it can, We earnestly hope, be more perfectly and entirely fulfilled by the united efforts of Catholic scholars.


    21. And if the Tridentine Synod wished "that all should use as authentic" the Vulgate Latin version, this, as all know, applies only to the Latin Church and to the public use of the same Scriptures; nor does it, doubtless, in any way diminish the authority and value of the original texts. For there was no question then of these texts, but of the Latin versions, which were in circulation at that time, and of these the same Council rightly declared to be preferable that which "had been approved by its long-continued use for so many centuries in the Church." Hence this special authority or as they say, authenticity of the Vulgate was not affirmed by the Council particularly for critical reasons, but rather because of its legitimate use in the Churches throughout so many centuries; by which use indeed the same is shown, in the sense in which the Church has understood and understands it, to be free from any error whatsoever in matters of faith and morals; so that, as the Church herself testifies and affirms, it may be quoted safely and without fear of error in disputations, in lectures and in preaching; and so its authenticity is not specified primarily as critical, but rather as juridical.

    According to the very encyclical which you cite, St. Jerome's Vulgate was not "put to shame" by later critical scholarship.  Rather the Vulgate retains its special authority in showing the sense in which the Church has understood and continues to understand Scripture.  It is free from error in matters of faith and morals and may thus be quoted freely in preaching and teaching without any fear of error.

    This authority belongs to the Vulgate alone, rather than to any of the works of critical scholarship.  None of them has been guaranteed free from error.  And this was affirmed by Divino Afflante Spiritu.

    While other, more recent, English translations try to incorporate the fallible results of critical scholarship, the Douay-Rheims has value as an excellent English translation of the Vulgate. Far from being made obsolete by scholarship, it remains the best choice for English speakers lacking the Latin necessary to read the Vulgate directly.

    The encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu is largely an instruction on the role of literary criticism in Bible scholarship.  It pertains to scholars and exegetes.  There is no good reason to pretend that it teaches laypeople to stop using the Douay-Rheims Bible.

    Offline Jaynek

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3240
    • Reputation: +1577/-912
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #13 on: July 13, 2018, 09:34:53 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
  • I also wanted to address Hank Igitur's fallacious claim that " as a Traditional Catholic, you know it is in error to mix the Latin language with the vernacular," but Matthew has already (quite understandably) deleted most of the nonsense.

    Scripture itself mixes in the vernacular.  For example, the Gospel according to St. Mark records Our Lord speaking Aramaic, the vernacular of that time and place, on three separate occasions. (Mk 5:41, Mk 7:34, Mk 15:34) Thus, in the Vulgate, we may observe a mix of Latin with the vernacular in these passages.  There is no general principle that it is an error to do this. 

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22947
    • Reputation: +20086/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Douay-Rheims Bible is obsolete
    « Reply #14 on: July 13, 2018, 12:33:55 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • "Hank Igitur" has been banned -- he seemed like a troll. Even his name was a bit ridiculous.

    I realize it's superficially similar to "Neil Obstat" (a pun on "Nihil Obstat" -- "nothing stands in the way" -- an expression used when a book receives ecclesiastical approbation).

    However, Hank's name seems to go a bit too far. He didn't just call himself "Hank Igitur" -- that would have been equivalent to Neil's screen name. But Hank juxtaposes it with improper Latin from a totally unrelated prayer, "Orate Fratre", as if he's being silly or flippant about phrases and words touching on the Catholic Faith -- like it's all the same "Catholic mumbo jumbo" to him.

    It sounds like a person making fun of the Catholic Faith and just jumbling a bunch of Catholic-sounding words in, with a bit of a joke twist.

    But I was going to let all that pass, until I saw his disdain for the revered, most accurate English translation of Holy Scripture a Catholic could ever hope to get his hands on and read.

    He seems to be infected with (in no particular order): pride in his own scriptural exegesis training, (maybe he went to a modern Catholic "university"?), Modernism, protestantism, or some combination of these.

    Every man (myself included) likes to feel like he hasn't been wasting his life, that his life thus far has made him better/more/greater in various ways, making him a better person today, superior in various ways over a new High School graduate, for example -- and that includes myself. Who (among men at least) wouldn't want to think they got ahead in SOME way, that their years lived haven't advanced them in some way? It's completely natural, at least for those with testosterone in their veins.

    But truth overrides this basic, male ego need. If you went to a modern Catholic university, sorry guy -- you pretty much did waste your time and money, and now you have to spend even more time studying the Faith to un-learn everything you learned at that modernist university!

    But Hank here is pursuing a different strategy -- insisting that he's better than all of us, letting his ego override the truth. Sorry guy -- not on my forum.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16