 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
RCWarrior
Banned
| Joined: | Tue Mar 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 93 |
| First Name: | stefany | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | I am a Devout Roman Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23rd, 2007 04:42 pm |
|
Ok,, let's talk about The Catholic's Bible.
What was the Catholic church doing all this time? Well, she was in a state of persecution in England, and could not do very much except suffer.
Many of her best sons went abroad to more favourable lands. The circumstances had assuredly been most unsuitable for bringing out a Catholic version of the Scriptures. She was rather content, indeed compelled, to sit still and from her majestic height look down and watch the rise and fall, the publication and withdrawal, the appearance and disappearance of dozens of different versions, heretical and corrupt, grotesque in their blunders and bitter in their sectarinism, that had been issued by the various bodies.
By the end of the sixteenth century no less than 270 new sects had been enumerated, and some that had been extinct for centuries, like Arianism, revived under the genial influence of Luther. Dr. Walton, Bishop of Chester, and author of the famous Polyglott Bible that bears his name, laments this fact in his preface about the end of the seventeenth century. "There is no fanatic or clown" says he, "From the lowest dregs of the people who does not give you his own dreams as the Word of God. For the bottomless pit seems to have been set open from whence a smoke has risen which has obscured the heavens and the stars, and locusts are come out with wings--a numerous race of sectaries and heretics, who have renewed all the old heresies, and invented monstrous opinions of their own. These have filled our cities, villages, camps, houses--our churches and pulpits too, and lead the poor deluded people with them to the pit of perdition". Doubtless the poor bishop, being a self-complacent Anglican, failed to perceive that he himself was as much of a deluded sectary and heretic as any of them. It was not till 1582 that a Catholic New Testament appeared, and that was not in England, but in France, at Rheims, when a colony of persecuted Catholics had fled, including Cardinal Allen, Gregory Martin, and Robert Bristow, who were mainly responsible for this new translation. William Allen, formerly Canon of York, later Archbishop of Mechlin, and lastly cardinal, had founded a college at Douai for the training of priests for the English mission in 1568. He was compelled to remove it to Rheims in 1578 owing to Huguenot riots, and there, as said, in 1582 they issued the New Testament in English for Catholics. It was a translation of course from the Latin Vulgate, which had been declared by the Council of Trent to be the authorised text of Scripture for the church. Martin was the principal translator, while Bristow mainly contributed the notes, which are powerful and illuminative. The whole was intended to be of service both to priests and people, to give them a true and sund rendering of the original writings, to save them from the numberless false and incorrect versions in circulation, and to provide them with something wherewith to refute the heretics who then, as ever, approached with a text in their mouth.
Needless to say, the appearance of this New Testamet, with its annotations, at once aroused the fiercest opposition. Queen Elizabeth ordered the searchers to seek out and confiscate every copy they could find. If a priest was found in posession of it, he was forthwith imprisoned. Torture by rack was applied to those who circulated it, and a scholar, Dr. Fulke, was appointed to refute it. All these measures my friends were taken by parties who advocated loudly the unlimited right of private judgement. In 1593 the college returned to Douai, and there in 1609 the Old Testament was added, and the Catholic Bible in English was complete, and is called the Douai bible. Complete we may well call it; it is the only real complete bible in english, for it contains those seven books of the Old Testament which I pointed out before were, and are, omitted by the Protestants in their editions. so that we can claim to have not only the pure, unadultered bible but the whole of it, without addition or subtraction; a translation of the Vulgate, which is itself the work of St. Jerome in the fourth century, which again, is the most authoritative and correct of all the early copies of Holy Scripture. At a single leap we arrive at that great work, completed by the greatest scholar of his day, who had access to manuscripts and authorities that now have perished, and who, living so near the days of the Apostles, an, as it were, close to the fountainhead, was able to produce a copy of the inspired writings which, for correctness, can never be equalled.l
____________________
I know God won't give me anything I can't handle; I just wish he didn't trust me so much---Mother Teresa
If you invoke The Blessed Virgin when you are tempted, she will come at once to your help, and Satan will leave you----St. John Vianney
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24th, 2007 03:45 pm |
|
Talithacumi wrote: Darlene wrote: Can someone give me an explanation as to why the Protestant reformers tossed out these books? I never knew they tossed out verses in the book of Esther. Did this "tossing out" occur immediately after the schism or did it take several years for that to happen? What were the criticisms of Luther, Calvin and Zwingli regarding these 7 books that they did away with? Can you point me to any reliable resources that would be enlightening to this regard?
As always, thanks for all of your comments.
Love in Christ,
Darlene
Wow! Lots of stuff on this topic - er... topics.  Lots to say, but I thought I'd try to address part of Darlene's question here since I don't think that anyone really addressed this particular point that I'm about to... at least I didn't see it if anyone did.
Thanks for replying Cheri.
Now, also from what I understand, Jesus Himself and His Disciples, along with many of the Jews in His time, did not hesitate to use these 7 Books as part of the Jewish Canon. So... if it's good enough for Jesus! - well, then I think it's good enough for us, eh?
In Josh McDowell's book, "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" he says the reason why the Reformers did not include the 7 books is because in fact Jesus nor the Apostles ever quoted from or referred to any of them, casting doubt on their validity. So his claim is in oppostion to your comment above. Now being the inquisitive person that I am, and being that my husband is currently reading McDowell's book, I would like to know the truth about this. Whoever can help, I would really appreciate it.
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
Vicki
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| First Name: | Vicki | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Assembly of God; Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24th, 2007 04:54 pm |
|
I found a link that I think will help you find quotes and other very useful info on how we received the Bible.
It is http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/canon.htm
I did a google search on "mother of the Bible" and there are many links. This particular one has many quotes.
I hope this is useful to you.
Vicki
|
|
|
Steven Barrett
Member
| Joined: | Tue Nov 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | Hadley, Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 1394 |
| First Name: | Steven | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, Episcopal communicant, Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24th, 2007 05:04 pm |
|
I haven't had the chance to check out this great list of links, sources, etc., but it all comes down to one simple -- yes, simple -- explanation.
The Catholic Church put the Bible together.
History proves it.
That settles it!
____________________
James Michael Curley to a young Thomas “Tip” O’Neill -- “Son, it’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”
|
|
|
RCWarrior
Banned
| Joined: | Tue Mar 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 93 |
| First Name: | stefany | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | I am a Devout Roman Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24th, 2007 05:30 pm |
|
As I have already stated, before the collection of New Testament books was finally settled at the Council of Carthage, 397, we find that there were three distinct classes into which the Christian writings were divided. This we know (and every scholar admits it) from the works of early Christian writers like Eusebius, Jerome, Epiphanius, and a whole host of others we could name. these classes were (I) the books 'ackowledged' as Canonical, (2) books 'disputed' or 'controverted', (3) books declared 'false'. Now in class I i.e., those acknowledged by Christians everywhere to be genuine and authentic, and to have been written by Apostolic men, we find such books as the Four Gospels, 13 Epistles of St. Paul, Acts of the Apostles. These were recognized east and west as 'Canonical', genuinely the works of the Apostles and Evangelists whose names they bore, worthy of being in the 'Canon' or Sacred collection of inspired writings of the church, and read aloud at Holy Mass. But there was (2) a class---and Protestants should particularly take notice of the fact, as it utterly undermines their rule of Faith 'the Bible and the Bible only'---of books that were disputed, controverted, in some places acknowledged, in others rejected; and among these we actually find the Epistle of St. James, Epistle of St. Jude, 2nd Epistle of St. Peter, 2nd and 3rd of St. John, Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Apocalypse of St. John. These were doubts about these works; perhaps it was said that they were not really written by Apostles, or Apostolic men, or by the men whose names they carried; in some parts of the Christian world they were suspected, though in others unhesitatingly received as geniuine. There is no getting out of this fact, then; some of the books of our Bible, which we, Catholic and Protestant alike, now recognize as inspired and as the written Word of God, were at one time, and indeed for long, viewed with suspicion, doubted, and disputed, as not posessing the same authority as the others. (I am speaking only of the New Testament books; the same could be proved, if there were space, of the Old Testament; but the New Testament suffices abundantly for the arguement). but further still--what is even more striking, and is equally fatal to the Protestant theory--in this (2) class of 'controverted' and doubtful books some were to be found which are not now in our New Testament at all, but which were by many then considered to be inspired and Apostolic, or were actually read at the public worship of the Christians, or were used for instructions to the newly converted.
Lastly (3) there was a class of books floating around before 397A.D., which were never acknowledged as of any value in the church, nor treated as having Apostolic authority, seeing that they were obviously spurious and false, full of absurd fables, superstitions, puerilities, and stories and miracles of Our Lord and His Apostles which made them a laughing stock to the world. Of these some have survived, and as we have them today, to let us see what stamp of writing they were; most have perished. But we know the names of about 50 Gospels (such as the Gospel of James, the Gospel of Thomas and the like) about 22 Acts (like the Acts of Pilate, Acts of Paul and Thecla, and others), and a smaller number of Epistles and Apocalypses. These were condemned and rejected wholesale as 'Apocrypha'--that is, false, spurious, uncanonical.
I can tell you more if you'd like...
____________________
I know God won't give me anything I can't handle; I just wish he didn't trust me so much---Mother Teresa
If you invoke The Blessed Virgin when you are tempted, she will come at once to your help, and Satan will leave you----St. John Vianney
|
|
|
CajunRick
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24th, 2007 05:47 pm |
|
Vicki wrote: I found a link that I think will help you find quotes and other very useful info on how we received the Bible.
It is http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/canon.htm
I did a google search on "mother of the Bible" and there are many links. This particular one has many quotes.
I hope this is useful to you.
Hi, Vicki, that's a good link. Welcome to CHN and our forums. We're glad to have you here with us. I hope you'll be a frequent visitor and contributor, and we look forward to hearing your faith story when you're ready to share it with us. You can post a little more about yourself in Fellowship Hall if you like, so we can get to know you better.
Once again, welcome to CHN and to the Catholic Church.
|
|
|
DrDave
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Mildura, Australia |
| Posts: | 273 |
| First Name: | Dave | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Cradle - Lapsed - Renewed Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25th, 2007 03:59 am |
|
Darlene wrote: In Josh McDowell's book, "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" he says the reason why the Reformers did not include the 7 books is because in fact Jesus nor the Apostles ever quoted from or referred to any of them, casting doubt on their validity. So his claim is in oppostion to your comment above. Now being the inquisitive person that I am, and being that my husband is currently reading McDowell's book, I would like to know the truth about this. Whoever can help, I would really appreciate it.
another couple of links for you
Deuterocanonical References in the New Testament by James Akin http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/deutero3.htm (Please note that he notes that this is a "work in progress")
Defending the Deuterocanonicals by James Akin http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/deuteros.htm
The Old Testament Canon from Catholic Answers http://www.catholic.com/library/Old_Testament_Canon.asp (Examples of early church fathers quoting from the Deuterocanonical books From A.D. 70 - A.D. 408)
Hope these help
Regards Dave
____________________
NB: 'DrDave' is a nickname from college not and indication of academic achievement.
|
|
|
Talithacumi
Member
| Joined: | Sat Sep 30th, 2006 |
| Location: | Eastern Ohio, USA |
| Posts: | 306 |
| First Name: | Cheri | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic - Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25th, 2007 04:51 am |
|
Darlene wrote: Talithacumi wrote: Darlene wrote: Can someone give me an explanation as to why the Protestant reformers tossed out these books?
Darlene
Thanks for replying Cheri.
Now, also from what I understand, Jesus Himself and His Disciples, along with many of the Jews in His time, did not hesitate to use these 7 Books as part of the Jewish Canon. So... if it's good enough for Jesus! - well, then I think it's good enough for us, eh?
In Josh McDowell's book, "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" he says the reason why the Reformers did not include the 7 books is because in fact Jesus nor the Apostles ever quoted from or referred to any of them, casting doubt on their validity. So his claim is in oppostion to your comment above. Now being the inquisitive person that I am, and being that my husband is currently reading McDowell's book, I would like to know the truth about this. Whoever can help, I would really appreciate it.
Darlene
Darlene,
I'm so glad Dr. Dave answered and gave this link: Defending the Deuterocanonicals by James Akin http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/deuteros.htm.
Well, maybe I wasn't completely correct about all my facts :?. But then I did warn that I might not be. I was only spitting out some vague info that I'd had in the back of my mind that I'd heard or read about somewhere, and I was really hoping someone would clear things up for me. (So thanks, Dr. Dave!  ). Anyway, just wanted to say that if you haven't read this link, I think it explains things pretty well, though I still have a vague memory of reading something about how the controversy over the Jewish Canon had something to do with the Diaspora Jews. But anyway, if I was a little off on the historical facts, I do hope I did at least give some insight into the basic idea that Martin Luther cut out the Seven Books in part because of the Jewish controversy over their importance or authenticity. That was my main intent. I apologize if I didn't get my facts completely straight, though.
JMJ
- Cheri
Last edited on Wed Apr 25th, 2007 05:01 am by Talithacumi
____________________
“We do not want a Church that will move with the world; we want a Church that will move the world.”
- G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25th, 2007 03:13 pm |
|
Thanks so much Vicki for the website you gave. I have been reading it with such zeal that I find it difficult to pull myself away. Such joy has filled my heart in reading about the history of the Catholic Church and the Councils that gave us our Sacred Scriptures, that I have found it very difficult to contain myself around my Protestant husband. He too, is reading about the history of the Church, but from a Protestant source.  But I truly believe this is the beginning of a discovery, which he will find, as we on this forum have found. That is the discovery that the Catholic Church is the one Christ entrusted His holy apostles to, founded on St. Peter. And that it is from the Catholic Church that all Christians have received the Word of God. And that if the Catholic Church had not guarded that precious Word, the Sacred Scriptures, even Protestants would not have the Bible, on which they exclaim, "Sola Scriptura!" And had the Catholic monks not worked diligently to faithfully preserve the Holy Scriptures, there would be no Bible in any Protestant pew or pulpit anywhere.
I am now more convinced than ever before that I must join myself to the one, holy, apostolic, Catholic Church. And I must defend this beautiful bride of Christ who is dearly beloved by our Lord Jesus.
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
Current time is 11:23 pm | Page:   1 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
