Wednesday, February 6, 2013
New Line of CTS Bibles
They include the following:
New Testament and Psalms
Book of Psalms
New Catholic Bible Compact Flexi-Bound
New Catholic Bible Flexi-Bound Blue
New Catholic Bible Flexi-Bound Red
New Catholic Bible Paperback
Friday, July 1, 2011
A Reconsideration of the CTS Catholic Bible
In my recent review of the CTS edition of the Jerusalem Bible, I was very negative about the commentaries contained therein. After receiving criticism for this, I decided to conduct more research into acceptable Catholic views on Holy Scripture. I've learned so much over the past month on this subject, and while the historical opinions expressed in the CTS Bible may not be to everyone's personal liking, there is nothing in them contrary to the Catholic Faith.
Fr. Henry Wansbrough, the man responsible for the commentaries, was kind enough to correspond with me by email and clear up some of my confusion. He is a very good and holy priest. I therefore retract my criticism of his historical commentaries. While I do not agree with everything he says, I cannot deny that his work is insightful, even masterful, and certainly orthodox by the judgment of the Church.
Moreover, I must amend my recommendations. The people I've begun teaching in an introductory Bible class love the CTS Bible! Contrary to my previous judgment, it appears to work great for catechesis and evangelism. I kindly ask Tim's readers to forgive my rash assessment of this fine Bible.
Below is a sample of Geoff's correspondence with Fr. Wansbrough, printed with permission fom Geoff:
****
Dear Fr . Henry,
Thank you so much for editing such a wonderful Bible! I have a question concerning the footnote for Luke 2:2. I've heard a lot of different theories about the census, such as maybe it took place over a period of years and ended once Quirinius became governor of Syria . But the issue ties into a larger inquiry of mine. What is the historical character of the infancy narratives, are they reliable, and is the Church's belief in events such as Jesus' virgin birth and the perpetual virginity of Mary well-founded? Or should there be discussion on re-evaluating our stance on these matters?
Thank you once again for your time and generosity!
Pax Christi,
Geoffrey
***
Dear Geoffrey,
Thank you for your message. Do you expect me to answer all those questions in a quick email?
Briefly, I personally go for the literary solution. Lk wanted to integrate Jesus into contempoarary history, or rather the history of a couple of generations ago, but was not to clear about the details. Pretty good, knowing about the census under Quirinius; he used this to get the holy family to Bethlehem , but got it slightly wrong. Perhaps he confused it with a census when King Herod had blotted his Roman copybook and was no longer exempted from Roman taxes.
It is the firm tradition of the Church that Mary was a virgin and that Jesus had no human father, and that I accept because it is the tradition, going right back behind Mt and Lk. But I do not see that being ‘son of God’ in the biblical sense would be incompatible with having a human father. Furthermore, I think that the important sign value of Mary’s virginity is her total dedication to her Son and to the Lord.
I hope that helps.
Yours,
Henry
Friday, June 10, 2011
Guest Review: CTS Bible

Many thanks to reader Geoffrey for the following review of the CTS Bible:
The Jerusalem Bible, literarily speaking, is perhaps one of the best English translations available (and the fact that Tolkien worked on it adds bonus epic-awesome-points). Obtaining its text is worth any deficiencies a certain printing has, especially if said printing contains the Grail Psalter. And make no mistake, the Catholic Truth Society edition has many deficiencies.
Rather than presenting the full document of Dei Verbum, this Bible contains only a resume which at certain points raises the reader's concern that biases of the editor are seeping through. Even though I tend to share the editor's views on a more limited inerrancy pertaining to Scripture, it is improper to force such an opinion on the common faithful or project it onto Vatican II documents, which are at best ambiguous concerning the subject.
Matters degrade even faster when it comes to the historical commentaries and book introductions. Often, the editor (or commentator, or whatever you wish to call him) dates books by assuming their prophecies were always made after the fact. Especially annoying is his continual insistence that the historical basis of the Bible may be unreliable in the most basic sense. In the introduction to the books of Samuel he suggests Saul might have been an "important innovator" whose reputation was blackened by David. Later, he accuses the Chronicler of blatantly re-writing and misrepresenting history, offering little or no thought to justify his accusations or relate them to Christian tradition. Moreover, he seems rather tone death to the actual portrayal of Biblical characters in the text, suggesting substantial differences in perspective between authors where none exist (cf. 2 Kings 15:1-7 and note 26b on 2 Chronicles 26).
Although the footnotes sometimes offer insight, this a rare occasion. Typically, the editor's hubris derails him at the exact moment he is about to enter into an interesting topic. Take, for example, note 2b of Luke 2. Rather than discussing the fascinating debate involving Luke's famous/infamous census passage, he simply asserts that Luke got his dates wrong and then almost jeeringly offers the possibility that Mary and Joseph always lived in Bethlehem as a solution to getting them to the City of David. He clearly rejects the historicity of much of Luke, a fact to which he alludes in the introduction by mentioning his belief that Luke changed certain details of the Jesus narrative specifically to cull favor with Rome (i.e. clearing Pilate and Herod of guilt, which for the life of me I can't see in the actual text). Now, if I stretch my mind and heart enough, I can imagine how one might possibly still adhere to Christianity and reject one of the two birth narratives of Christ (and to our editor's credit he seems to believe Matthew). But this is not a view one should impose on a Bible for the common faithful. The editor is just hotdogging and strutting his historical-critical chops, not providing the reader with any useful material to understand the text. He has not created a scholarly work here. For a good example of how historical critical methods should be used in Christian scholarship, see the NIV Archeological Study Bible.
Not everything about this Bible is bad. The one column format is very attractive, the maps are useful, the text is clear and easy to read, the Divine Name has been removed (the use of YHWH is extremely offensive to the Jews and it's an ecumenical travesty we ever used it), the liturgical notes are expertly done, and the theological commentary is solid and very insightful. There is little business to distract from meditative reading. The book is a pleasure to peruse.
I would recommend the CTS Bible to those who wish to obtain the text of the Jerusalem Bible or want a text that's in a format conducive to meditation. For people looking for a good study Bible, look elsewhere. For those seeking tools to share their faith, be forewarned that the missionary imperative of Dei Verbum has once again gone unheeded. The CTS Bible has almost nothing to offer people wanting to learn more about Christ and Catholicism. I cannot see it being useful in the field of evangelism or apologetics. If the Catholic Truth Society was trying to make a Bible for the everyday believer, they failed. But God bless them anyway, cause it sure looks pretty!
If you would like to see some of my previous comments on the CTS Bible, go here.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
The CTS Bible: A Second Look

In a previous post back in November of 2008, I gave some of the details of the CTS New Catholic Bible. At the time, I had received the small travel edition which was even smaller than I had anticipated. For me, it was a little tough to read, and last time I checked I had 20/20 vision. Therefore, I sort of pushed it aside and never gave it a proper review. Well, during my honeymoon in Roma, I stopped in a Catholic bookstore and spotted the larger, presentation edition of the CTS Bible on the shelf. I figured that it would be a shame if I didn't buy at least one Catholic Bible while in Rome, so I made the purchase. I am very glad I did!
The standard size is very similar to the size of a typical Liturgy of the Hours or Christian Prayer volume. This means it isn't too small to be considered compact, yet is not as large as a standard medium sized Bible either. Overall, the size is very portable, yet big enough to be used as an everyday/every occasion Bible. The page format is also well designed, much like most editions of the Jerusalem or New Jerusalem Bibles. It is single column, with cross-references on the sides, paragraph headings, and commentary at the bottom. In many ways, I think this is the best page layout that I have seen in any recently published Catholic Bible. The page layout truly invites the person to read and stay with the text.
The main text of the CTS Bible is the Jerusalem Bible, with two exceptions. First off, the Psalms are not from the Jerusalem Bible, but are rather the Grail Psalms. Most of you in the United States who pray the Liturgy of the Hours will be familiar with them. Secondly, by request of the Pope, all references to "YHWH", which was one of the unique features of the Jerusalem Bible, have been changed back to "the LORD". What does all this mean? Well, basically this Bible is exactly the what one would hear at Mass in the English speaking world outside of North America, where the NAB and NRSV are used. Nice concept huh?
The CTS Bible also comes with multiple study helps, including four Bible maps, full book introductions, including when a book is read during the liturgical year and why it is important in Christian liturgy, and verse commentary/notes. The book introductions and commentary were newly produced by NJB editor Henry Wansbrough OSB, member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission. The commentary notes often highlight historical-critical issues and they are not as plentiful as in the standard edition of the NJB. There is also a very helpful appendix with information on historical framework of the Bible, weights and measures, Sunday and Weekday Mass readings, and Psalms/Canticles for 4 week Breviary cycle with Office of Readings. Also, they added the nice touch of including not one, but three ribbon markers. Thank you very much! Overall, the CTS Bible has within it plenty of information, both scholarly and liturgically, to keep you satisfied.
The CTS Bible is a fine Catholic Bible. Although the translations used are over forty years old, the presentation and tools included within its covers are very up-to-date and most welcome. If you are looking for an all-purpose Bible, this is definitely a top contender. If you live in the UK, then it is a necessity, since you can feel comfortable bringing this Bible to both Mass and Bible study. If you are living in the USA or Canada and want a new edition of the Jerusalem Bible or if you really like the Grail Psalms, then this Bible is for you. In my opinion, I think it would be a very good thing to see publishers of the NRSV, RSV, or NAB learn from what the CTS has done for future publications.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
I have returned!

Tuesday, November 25, 2008
CTS New Catholic Bible

-New specially commissioned introductions, one for each book, giving the biblical and historical context
