Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Rebound RSV-2CE (Leonard's)
Thanks to Corey for the following guest post:
My Christmas present this year was a
Leonard's Book Restoration rebind of my "daily" Ignatius RSV-2CE hardback (Ignatius
RSV-2CE). If you remember, my "test run" of Leonard's work was a
rebind of my RSV-2CE Ignatius pocket NT-Psalms, which came out very nice (NT-Psalms
rebind). I have since enlisted the aid of Leonard's to do a number
of rebinds of that pocket NT-Psalms as nicer Christmas presents for people very
close to me. They have been VERY well received.
But it simply did not make much sense for me
to not get my full size RSV-2CE rebound. Because my full size RSV is my daily
"read and underline/highlight" bible, I wanted that daily bible to be upgraded.
I chose Leonard's "Circuit Rider" style from their "Historical Series" (Leonard's
"Circuit Rider"). I loved the look and history of the style. True,
it is technically a "Protestant" bible style, but I like to believe that
rebinding a "Catholic" Bible in a "Protestant" historical binding is at the height of bible ecumenism and evangelism
;) !
I am extremely pleased with the product.
Leonard's puts these historical styles through a "process" (as Margie says)
that gives the final product an antiqued look without damaging the leather at
all. The bible came to me feeling well "loved", yet perfectly taken care of.
The craftsmanship is top notch. It is a perfect paring of a good Catholic
translation used by the Catechism and a wonderful binding.
This style is clearly designed to travel well, per Leonard's site:
"This style is made of thick glossy chocolate
soft-tanned goatskin as a stiff flex-cover and still includes raised ribs and
“Holy Bible” in the Wedding Text font on the spine, and an old-fashioned
wraparound tab closure. It’s great for backpacks and suitcases, saddle bags and
satchels, making a neat package without ribbons." Leonard's does not demand
that you use the "marbled" end pages. But they are historically
accurate (per
Leonard's). You can substitute their nice "hand milled"
paper end pages if you prefer (or probably others). Also you can use ribbons,
but those are not historically accurate (again, per Leonard's) because of their
propensity of getting caught, pulled and/or soiled with heavy
travel.
The style opens well
and the tab does not get in the way of reading/working in the Bible. I could go
on and on. I highly recommend this style and I'm sure the other historical
styles are of equal quality. This style probably runs you about $50 or so more
than doing one of the Leonard's more typical rebinds. I can't recommend
Leonard's enough.
Peace of Christ to you all. ~
Corey
Monday, January 7, 2013
Mondays with the New Psalms: Psalm 150
Haven't done one of these in a while. At this point, I am not sure if I will bring this series back on a regular basis or not. We shall see.
Revised Grail:
1 Alleluia!
Praise God in his holy place;
praise him in his mighty firmament.
2 Praise him for his powerful deeds;
praise him for his boundless grandeur.
3 O praise him with sound of trumpet;
praise him with lute and harp.
4 Praise him with timbrel and dance;
praise him with strings and pipes.
5 O praise him with resounding cymbals;
praise him with clashing of cymbals.
6 Let everything that breathes praise the LORD!
Alleluia!
NABRE:
1 Hallelujah!
Praise God in his holy sanctuary;*
give praise in the mighty dome of heaven.
2 Give praise for his mighty deeds,
praise him for his great majesty.
3 Give praise with blasts upon the horn,
praise him with harp and lyre.
4 Give praise with tambourines and dance,
praise him with strings and pipes.
5 Give praise with crashing cymbals,
praise him with sounding cymbals.
6 Let everything that has breath
give praise to the LORD!
Hallelujah!
* [Psalm 150] The Psalm is a closing doxology both for the fifth book of the Psalms (Ps 107–149) and for the Psalter as a whole. Temple musicians and dancers are called to lead all beings on earth and in heaven in praise of God. The Psalm proclaims to whom praise shall be given, and where (Ps 150:1); what praise shall be given, and why (Ps 150:2); how praise shall be given (Ps 150:3–5), and by whom (Ps 150:6).
* [150:1] His holy sanctuary: God’s Temple on earth. The mighty dome of heaven: lit., “[God’s] strong vault”; heaven is here imagined as a giant plate separating the inhabited world from the waters of the heavens.
Revised Grail:
1 Alleluia!
Praise God in his holy place;
praise him in his mighty firmament.
2 Praise him for his powerful deeds;
praise him for his boundless grandeur.
3 O praise him with sound of trumpet;
praise him with lute and harp.
4 Praise him with timbrel and dance;
praise him with strings and pipes.
5 O praise him with resounding cymbals;
praise him with clashing of cymbals.
6 Let everything that breathes praise the LORD!
Alleluia!
NABRE:
1 Hallelujah!
Praise God in his holy sanctuary;*
give praise in the mighty dome of heaven.
2 Give praise for his mighty deeds,
praise him for his great majesty.
3 Give praise with blasts upon the horn,
praise him with harp and lyre.
4 Give praise with tambourines and dance,
praise him with strings and pipes.
5 Give praise with crashing cymbals,
praise him with sounding cymbals.
6 Let everything that has breath
give praise to the LORD!
Hallelujah!
* [Psalm 150] The Psalm is a closing doxology both for the fifth book of the Psalms (Ps 107–149) and for the Psalter as a whole. Temple musicians and dancers are called to lead all beings on earth and in heaven in praise of God. The Psalm proclaims to whom praise shall be given, and where (Ps 150:1); what praise shall be given, and why (Ps 150:2); how praise shall be given (Ps 150:3–5), and by whom (Ps 150:6).
* [150:1] His holy sanctuary: God’s Temple on earth. The mighty dome of heaven: lit., “[God’s] strong vault”; heaven is here imagined as a giant plate separating the inhabited world from the waters of the heavens.
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Check Our Geoffrey's New Column
From Geoffrey:
"I've started writing columns for Austin Catholic New Media, and I was wondering if you wanted to link to my newest post from your Bible blog. At the very end, I provide my top two picks for the best Catholic Bibles. It would be interesting to get you and your readers' feedback."
http://www.austincnm.com/index.php/2013/01/reading-the-bible-and-having-a-bear-of-a-time/
"I've started writing columns for Austin Catholic New Media, and I was wondering if you wanted to link to my newest post from your Bible blog. At the very end, I provide my top two picks for the best Catholic Bibles. It would be interesting to get you and your readers' feedback."
http://www.austincnm.com/index.php/2013/01/reading-the-bible-and-having-a-bear-of-a-time/
Friday, January 4, 2013
Chrysostom's Commentary for January
Frequent commentator Chrysostom will be contributing a monthly column to this blog. Here is his inaugural post:
"Full of Grace": A Popular Exegetical and Theological Inquiry
A controverted rendering, and a lynchpin of Roman Catholic Mariology. As was recently written by Michael Brendan Dougherty over at The American Conservative, the RSV-CE - Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition - is "the mainstream option for believing Catholics", which, in the next clause, he scathingly criticizes as "descended from the King James, but [with] a few Romish flourishes like 'Hail Mary, full of grace' in Luke."
Why is this phrase - one word in the Greek - so important to Catholics, and, it would seem, to Protestants as well? (Ne'er has a Protestant Bible been seen by these shores, that containeth within it the words "full of grace" in According to Luke, Chapter 1, Verse 28.) Why is this the one "Romish flourish" that is nearly mandatory in any Bible that wishes to be called Catholic? Like the RSV-CE, all prophecy can be translated right out of the Old Testament, and typology eliminated through conjectural emendation: but, when the magic words, "hail, full of grace" are added in the right place, it becomes a Catholic version. This one word, κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitomenê) - a Biblical hapax legomenon, or word occurring only once in a given corpus, so that various uses can not be compared to draw out the likely meaning - exists in all manuscript traditions of the Greek NT: it is given the highest rating of certainty in the Nestle-Aland 27th edition. Whether using the Textus Receptus, the Nestle-Aland text, Westcott-Hort, Tischendorf, or the Byzantine Patriarchal text, the same word is translated: it is the translation itself that is in question. Next to the "עלמה-παρθένος [almah-parthenos] controversy" at Isaiah 7:14 (where the controversy is, perhaps, as much about which word to translate as how to translate a word) is possibly the most commonly- and popularly-debated translation choice in Scripture.
In many textual and translational debates, the lines are drawn between liberals, whether Protestant or Catholic, and conservatives and traditionalists, whether Protestant or Catholic: this is the case, in, say, Isaiah 7:14, in Genesis 1:1-2, in Psalm 22/23, so on and so forth - in virtually every passage that teaches or defends a traditional Christian claim or is purported to prophesy Christ - as is it in the vast majority of debates of the correct manuscript tradition (although, in the latter case, the Trads may come out swinging on the side of the Vulgate, and sidestep the critical text-textus receptus axis completely), or between high church and low church, as in the translation of ἐπίσκοπος as "bishop" or "overseer". At least in this last case, each side can attempt to muster an historical argument for their translation: in translating κεχαριτωμένη, there is no such luxury, only ideas duking it out in timeless manner.
This - the elusive translation of the elusive word κεχαριτωμένη - is a debate where the lines are drawn between conservatives and conservatives: conservative "Bible-believing" Protestants who want no Papism in their book, and conservative Catholics who want tradition and the testimony of the Fathers to bear out: the translation of the passage has incredible implications for the defense or lack thereof of Catholic Mariology by those who don't read the Greek - and the passage itself has incredible implications for the same by those who do read Greek but debate the word's meaning.
Thus I propose that the meaning of the hapax legomenon κεχαριτωμένη can not be puzzled out with certainty, or even likelihood, by purely exegetical considerations, nor even with the addition of naturalistic "historical" considerations, but only by the addition of theological considerations. The Annunciation is not amenable to modern "scientific history" even in theory, as, again, in theory, the structure of the early Church is. Even if it were, there is no recording of it outside of the Gospel of Luke: this is what we have, and on this signal word we must stand, etc. etc.
"Full of Grace": A Popular Exegetical and Theological Inquiry
A controverted rendering, and a lynchpin of Roman Catholic Mariology. As was recently written by Michael Brendan Dougherty over at The American Conservative, the RSV-CE - Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition - is "the mainstream option for believing Catholics", which, in the next clause, he scathingly criticizes as "descended from the King James, but [with] a few Romish flourishes like 'Hail Mary, full of grace' in Luke."
Why is this phrase - one word in the Greek - so important to Catholics, and, it would seem, to Protestants as well? (Ne'er has a Protestant Bible been seen by these shores, that containeth within it the words "full of grace" in According to Luke, Chapter 1, Verse 28.) Why is this the one "Romish flourish" that is nearly mandatory in any Bible that wishes to be called Catholic? Like the RSV-CE, all prophecy can be translated right out of the Old Testament, and typology eliminated through conjectural emendation: but, when the magic words, "hail, full of grace" are added in the right place, it becomes a Catholic version. This one word, κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitomenê) - a Biblical hapax legomenon, or word occurring only once in a given corpus, so that various uses can not be compared to draw out the likely meaning - exists in all manuscript traditions of the Greek NT: it is given the highest rating of certainty in the Nestle-Aland 27th edition. Whether using the Textus Receptus, the Nestle-Aland text, Westcott-Hort, Tischendorf, or the Byzantine Patriarchal text, the same word is translated: it is the translation itself that is in question. Next to the "עלמה-παρθένος [almah-parthenos] controversy" at Isaiah 7:14 (where the controversy is, perhaps, as much about which word to translate as how to translate a word) is possibly the most commonly- and popularly-debated translation choice in Scripture.
In many textual and translational debates, the lines are drawn between liberals, whether Protestant or Catholic, and conservatives and traditionalists, whether Protestant or Catholic: this is the case, in, say, Isaiah 7:14, in Genesis 1:1-2, in Psalm 22/23, so on and so forth - in virtually every passage that teaches or defends a traditional Christian claim or is purported to prophesy Christ - as is it in the vast majority of debates of the correct manuscript tradition (although, in the latter case, the Trads may come out swinging on the side of the Vulgate, and sidestep the critical text-textus receptus axis completely), or between high church and low church, as in the translation of ἐπίσκοπος as "bishop" or "overseer". At least in this last case, each side can attempt to muster an historical argument for their translation: in translating κεχαριτωμένη, there is no such luxury, only ideas duking it out in timeless manner.
This - the elusive translation of the elusive word κεχαριτωμένη - is a debate where the lines are drawn between conservatives and conservatives: conservative "Bible-believing" Protestants who want no Papism in their book, and conservative Catholics who want tradition and the testimony of the Fathers to bear out: the translation of the passage has incredible implications for the defense or lack thereof of Catholic Mariology by those who don't read the Greek - and the passage itself has incredible implications for the same by those who do read Greek but debate the word's meaning.
Thus I propose that the meaning of the hapax legomenon κεχαριτωμένη can not be puzzled out with certainty, or even likelihood, by purely exegetical considerations, nor even with the addition of naturalistic "historical" considerations, but only by the addition of theological considerations. The Annunciation is not amenable to modern "scientific history" even in theory, as, again, in theory, the structure of the early Church is. Even if it were, there is no recording of it outside of the Gospel of Luke: this is what we have, and on this signal word we must stand, etc. etc.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
The Mother of God
"In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.” -Luke 1:39-45
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)