Knox:
"Meanwhile, the Lord said to Abram, Leave thy country behind thee, thy kinsfolk, and thy father’s home, and come away into a land I will shew thee. Then I will make a great people of thee; I will bless thee, and make thy name renowned, a name of benediction; those who bless thee, I will bless, those who curse thee, I will curse, and in thee all the races of the world shall find a blessing.[1] So Abram went out, as the Lord bade him."
Knox Note:
[1] ‘Shall find a blessing’; some commentators would interpret this, ‘shall bless themselves in thy name’, that is, use it as a proverbial instance of prosperity.
NAB:
"The LORD said to Abram: 'Go forth from the land of your kinsfolk and from your father’s house to a land that I will show you. 'I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you. *All the communities of the earth shall find blessing in you.' Abram went as the LORD directed him."
NABRE:
* v. 3: "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you. All the families of the earth will find blessing in you."
NABRE Note:
* [12:3] Will find blessing in you: the Hebrew conjugation of the verb here and in18:18 and 28:14 can be either reflexive (“shall bless themselves by you” = people will invoke Abraham as an example of someone blessed by God) or passive (“by you all the families of earth will be blessed” = the religious privileges of Abraham and his descendants ultimately will be extended to the nations). In 22:18 and 26:4, another conjugation of the same verb is used in a similar context that is undoubtedly reflexive (“bless themselves”). Many scholars suggest that the two passages in which the sense is clear should determine the interpretation of the three ambiguous passages: the privileged blessing enjoyed by Abraham and his descendants will awaken in all peoples the desire to enjoy those same blessings. Since the term is understood in a passive sense in the New Testament (Acts 3:25; Gal 3:8), it is rendered here by a neutral expression that admits of both meanings.
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Friday, March 14, 2014
More on the Death of the ESV Lectionary
For more, go here.
Here is the key section:
So, there you have it. Those who hoped for an ESV-CE can put that dream to rest. So, what does that leave us with? Well, from the article above, I would imagine that those other English speaking areas will follow suit and adapt the Jerusalem Bible. My first question is why not spend a little more time and adapt the NJB. It is better in almost every way compared to the original. Also, I do find it interesting that the Revised Grail Psalms had "lost support." I wonder if that is just in Australia or other places as well, like the UK? So, then, it is quite possible that at some point we could have a different Psalter being used in the various English speaking territories. That is just weird, and really I can't find another word to describe this situation.
What about that ever elusive dream of having a Bible, in hand, that actually matches what is read at Mass. Will the Catholic Truth Society in London create a "new" CTS Bible after the UK bishops adapt the JB? Will it include the original or revised Grail Psalms? Is it possible, particularly after all the complaining here in the US, that the American bishops are the ones who actually pull off the unimaginable task of giving us a Bible that matches the lectionary? It seems clear that the American Bishops are moving forward with the Revised Grail Psalms for future liturgical books, as well as the upcoming revised NABRE. The revised NABRE NT provides the opportunity to do this. Let's pray.
Here is the key section:
After 10 years of unsuccessful efforts by ICPELL, it became apparent that the whole lectionary project was in serious jeopardy. It had proved impossible to find a lectionary that suits the Holy See, the copyright holders of the scripture translations, and bishops’ conferences. Another issue was that the Revised Grail psalms, which were planned to be part of the revised lectionary, have also lost support in some quarters.
At the end of 2013 the decision was made to dismantle ICPELL and leave each conference of bishops to make its own decision regarding a lectionary for Mass. Consequently, the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference agreed to discontinue its involvement in the international lectionary project and to reprint the existing lectionary. It would contain a slightly modified version of the Jerusalem Bible currently in use and the Grail translation of the responsorial Psalms.
The general opinion is that some poor translations in the Jerusalem Bible are easily remedied and that other required changes to the text can be made fairly quickly.
What about that ever elusive dream of having a Bible, in hand, that actually matches what is read at Mass. Will the Catholic Truth Society in London create a "new" CTS Bible after the UK bishops adapt the JB? Will it include the original or revised Grail Psalms? Is it possible, particularly after all the complaining here in the US, that the American bishops are the ones who actually pull off the unimaginable task of giving us a Bible that matches the lectionary? It seems clear that the American Bishops are moving forward with the Revised Grail Psalms for future liturgical books, as well as the upcoming revised NABRE. The revised NABRE NT provides the opportunity to do this. Let's pray.
Thursday, March 13, 2014
Review: The Catholic Study Bible NABRE
The Catholic Study Bible (CSB) from Oxford University Press has a history going back to 1990, just before the publication of the '91 NAB Revised Psalms. I have genuine leather edition of that volume, which was unique due to the 500+ pages of reading guides that preceded the Biblical text and the generous 2 inch margins. Needless to say, the combination of those two things made that first edition a bit of a beast. Perhaps in a desire to reduce its size, later editions, including the most recent NABRE one, got rid of the large margins. The same thing happened if you compare the 1991 New Oxford Annotated Bible NRSV with its subsequent revisions. I kind of liked the larger margin editions though. I will be reviewing here The Catholic Study Bible NABRE 2nd Edition (black bonded leather).
It must be said straight away that the biggest issue I have with this edition of the CSB is the fact that the reading guides have not been updated since the release of the NABRE. For example, if you are looking up the reading guide section (p. 128) on the topic of the Levitical sacrifices in Leviticus 1-7, it will mention that in Lv 2 the NAB calls this the 'cereal offering' when in fact it is called a "grain offering" in the NABRE. Look down one more paragraph which discusses the often translated "Peace offering" of Lv 3 which is now "communion offering" in the NABRE. There are also issues when we get to the prophets, where mention is made of how the NAB rearranged verses. However, the NABRE restored many of them to their proper order. Then there is the embarrassing fact that one of the introductory articles called "The Challenges of Biblical Translation" talks about the "proposed NAB Old Testament" which is of course the translation found in this study Bible. The reading guides need to be updated. This is an issue that has been mentioned before on this blog, including some helpful comments by reader and blogger Theophrastus. One wonders if this will be corrected only when the NABRE NT is published. I hope it will be sooner.
After getting that out of the way, let me move to its overall feel and appearance. The CSB scores high marks here, due to the quality sewn binding and its classic look and feel. The sewn binding is well done, which assures longevity for this volume. Attached to the binding are two gold ribbon markers. The gold gilt-edged is a nice touch, which works well with thumb indexed pages. I know some people don't like thumb indexed pages, but I find them to be helpful in a study bible of this size. Now, my 1990 edition of the CSB was covered in genuine leather, which the current edition is not available in. The bonded leather is ok, nothing special really. Would have preferred a genuine leather cover like the NOAB 4th Edition, but if I continue to use this edition as much as I have in past months, I may have to give Leonard's a call.
Now on to the content that is found within its bonded leather cover. I have truly grown to love the page layout. The type is large enough to read for study and to use when teaching. Personally, I always have a bit of a hard time finding a Bible that fits both the at home and in the classroom setting. This one seems to meet both needs. The print itself is quite dark, and while the paper used is a fairly thin Bible paper, I don't feel the ghosting is any where near the problem as found in the HarperCollins Bibles. The paragraph headings are in a clear bold from the rest of the biblical text, while the NABRE notes and cross-references are distinguishable from the text. In sum, the page layout is easy on the eyes and is inviting to read.
The one thing I think the CSB excels at is in the fact that it contains a whole lot of additional study helps, which not all Catholic study bibles include. Part of this is due to the NABRE itself, which comes with study notes and cross-references built into the translation. The CSB goes above and beyond this with the reading guides, which I will discuss later, but more importantly it includes a considerable amount of material in the appendix. First, we find probably my favorite set of Bible maps, the 14 New Oxford maps which are large, highly detailed, and indexed. Also included is an almost 100 page concise concordance, which most of you indicated in one of my recent polls was a mandatory element of a good study bible. There is also a small glossary, a table of measures and weights, and an index to the reading guides. Rounding out what is found in the appendix is a full listing of lectionary readings for Sundays, Holy days, and weekdays. It still amazes how many Catholic bibles are missing this. The Mass and the Bible are tied together, shouldn't all Catholic bibles reflect this?
Having looked at the appendix, let's go back to the beginning of the CSB. This section has two main parts: the introductory articles and the reading guides. There are eight introductory articles than cover issues related to Biblical history and archaeology to Catholic interpretation and the lectionary. The authors are well known Catholic biblical scholars, including CSB co-editor Donald Senior, Ronald Witherup, and the recently deceased Daniel Harrington.
The over 450 pages of reading guides are authored by many of the most prominent biblical scholars of the post-Vatican II Church. The late Lawrence Boadt composed the reading guides concerning the Pentateuch. Leslie Hoppe composed the ones for the books of the Deuteronomistic histories, as well as 1&2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther and both Maccabees. The Old Testament reading guides are rounded out with Diane Bergant's treatment of the Wisdom books, Richard Clifford's guides on the Major Prophets, and John J. Collins who does the guides for Daniel and the Minor Prophets. The New Testament reading guides are anchored in the Gospels and Acts jointly composed by Donald Senior and Pheme Perkins. Mary Ann Getty and Carolyn Osiek completed the guides on the Pauline corpus, with Luke Timothy Johnson concluding the reading guides with the Catholic Letters and the Book of Revelation. These reading guides are generally quite helpful at giving an overall walk through each book. They are more academic in orientation, being primarily concerned with historical, literary, and textual issues. While the reading guides do address theological issues, I would not say that it is of its primary concern. I find that most of the guides help to fill in the gaps of the NABRE notes. There are particular areas in the NABRE's Old Testament, I am thinking here of Chronicles and some of the Wisdom books, where more notes would be helpful. The reading guides give that additional background and exposition. Those who have issues with the NABRE notes may not appreciate the tone and focus of the information found in the reading guides. I should add that at the end of each book in the reading guide, there are recommendations for further reading. These have been updated since the first edition came out in 1990, and I would expect to see a further updating whenever a third edition is published.
Finally, incorporated into the NABRE text are 52 in-text maps and 18 side-bar essays and charts. These are placed in their appropriate location within the biblical text, which makes them quite helpful. Would love to see more of these in future editions. How about maps and charts in color? Perhaps that is asking too much.
In conclusion, when I consider the entire package, the CSB is a serious candidate for best Catholic study bible, with one major caveat being the desperately needed updating of the OT reading guides. Oxford should really fix this. Perhaps they could come out with an "augmented" edition, much like they did with the NOAB 3rd Edition. Some will not like this Bible because of its focus on historical-critical issues. I think if you know that ahead of time, you will find that this study bible contains a wealth of helpful information. The fact that the translation is the NABRE, with its much improved OT and Psalms, make this an upgrade over all the previous editions. I look forward to seeing what might be produced in the coming years as the NABRE NT is revised.
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Benedict on Wednesday
After a week off do to Ash Wednesday, we return to Biblical Interpretation in Crisis: On the Question of the Foundations and Approaches of Exegesis Today
In order not to let the
general rules of the method and their presuppositions remain altogether
abstract, I would like to try to illustrate what I have been saying thus far
with an example. I am going to follow here the doctoral dissertation written by
Reiner Blank at the University of Basel, entitled “Analysis and Criticism of
the Form-Critical Works of Martin Dibelius and Rudolph Bultmann.” This book
seems to me to be a fine example of a self-critique of the historical-critical
method. This kind of self-critical exegesis stops building conclusions on top
of conclusions, and from constructing and opposing hypotheses. It looks for a
way to identify its own foundations and to purify itself by reflections on
those foundations. This does not mean that it is pulling itself up by its own
bootstraps. On the contrary, by a process of self-limitation, it marks out for
itself its own proper space. It goes without saying that the form-critical
works of Dibelius and Bultmann have in the meantime been surpassed and in many
respects corrected in their details. But it is likewise true that their basic
methodological approaches continue even today to determine the methods and
procedures of modern exegesis. Their essential elements underlie more than
their own historical and theological judgments and, to be sure, these have
widely achieved an authority like unto dogma.
For Dibelius, as with Bultmann, it was a matter of overcoming the arbitrary manner in which the preceding phase of Christian exegesis, the so-called “Liberal Theology,” had been conducted. This was imbued with judgments about what was “historical” or “unhistorical.” Both these scholars then sought to establish strict literary criteria which would reliably clarify the process by which the texts themselves were developed and would thus provide a true picture of the tradition. With this outlook, both were in search of the pure form and of the rules which governed the development from the initial forms to the text as we have it before us today. As is well known, Dibelius proceeded from the view that the secret of history discloses itself as one sheds light on its development. But how does one arrive at this first premise and to the ground rules for further development? Even with all their particular differences, one can discover here a series of fundamental presuppositions common to both Dibelius and Bultmann and which both considered trustworthy beyond question. Both proceed from the priority of what is preached over the event in itself: in the beginning was the Word. Everything in the Bible develops from the proclamation. This thesis is so promoted by Bultmann that for him only the word can be original: the word generates the scene. All events, therefore, are already secondary, mythological developments.
A further axiom is formulated which has remained fundamental for modern exegesis since the time of Dibelius and Bultmann: the notion of discontinuity. Not only is there no continuity between the pre-Easter Jesus and the formative period of the church; discontinuity applies to all phases of the tradition. This is so much the case that Reiner Blank could state, “Bultmann wanted incoherence at any price.”
To these two theories, the pure originality of the simple word and the discontinuity between the particular phases of development, there is joined the further notion that what is simple is original, that what is more complex must be a later development. This idea affords an easily applied parameter to determine the stages of development: the more theologically considered and sophisticated a given text is, the more recent it is, and the simpler something is, the easier it is to reckon it original. The criterion according to which something is considered more or less developed, however, is not at all so evident as it first seems. In fact, the judgment essentially depends upon the theological values of the individual exegete. There remains considerable room for arbitrary choice.
For Dibelius, as with Bultmann, it was a matter of overcoming the arbitrary manner in which the preceding phase of Christian exegesis, the so-called “Liberal Theology,” had been conducted. This was imbued with judgments about what was “historical” or “unhistorical.” Both these scholars then sought to establish strict literary criteria which would reliably clarify the process by which the texts themselves were developed and would thus provide a true picture of the tradition. With this outlook, both were in search of the pure form and of the rules which governed the development from the initial forms to the text as we have it before us today. As is well known, Dibelius proceeded from the view that the secret of history discloses itself as one sheds light on its development. But how does one arrive at this first premise and to the ground rules for further development? Even with all their particular differences, one can discover here a series of fundamental presuppositions common to both Dibelius and Bultmann and which both considered trustworthy beyond question. Both proceed from the priority of what is preached over the event in itself: in the beginning was the Word. Everything in the Bible develops from the proclamation. This thesis is so promoted by Bultmann that for him only the word can be original: the word generates the scene. All events, therefore, are already secondary, mythological developments.
A further axiom is formulated which has remained fundamental for modern exegesis since the time of Dibelius and Bultmann: the notion of discontinuity. Not only is there no continuity between the pre-Easter Jesus and the formative period of the church; discontinuity applies to all phases of the tradition. This is so much the case that Reiner Blank could state, “Bultmann wanted incoherence at any price.”
To these two theories, the pure originality of the simple word and the discontinuity between the particular phases of development, there is joined the further notion that what is simple is original, that what is more complex must be a later development. This idea affords an easily applied parameter to determine the stages of development: the more theologically considered and sophisticated a given text is, the more recent it is, and the simpler something is, the easier it is to reckon it original. The criterion according to which something is considered more or less developed, however, is not at all so evident as it first seems. In fact, the judgment essentially depends upon the theological values of the individual exegete. There remains considerable room for arbitrary choice.
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Previous Study Bible Reviews
Below are links to the reviews I have done, or done by guest reviewers, concerning the various study Bibles available today. They are organized by translation. (There may be a few more on this blog somewhere, but these are the main ones I could find.)
RSV:
Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament
Navarre Bible New Testament
New Oxford Annotated Bible- RSV Extended Edition
NABRE:
Little Rock Catholic Study Bible Deluxe Edition
Little Rock Catholic Study Bible (guest review Rolf)
Little Rock Catholic Study Bible (guest review Eric)
The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (guest review by Geoffrey)
The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (my own additional comments)
NJB:
New Jerusalem Bible (This one could have been better. Maybe I'll update it one day.)
NRSV:
The Discipleship Study Bible
Life with God
New Interpreters Study Bible vs. New Oxford Annotated Bible (4th) (guest post by Diakonos09)
RSV:
Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament
Navarre Bible New Testament
New Oxford Annotated Bible- RSV Extended Edition
NABRE:
Little Rock Catholic Study Bible Deluxe Edition
Little Rock Catholic Study Bible (guest review Rolf)
Little Rock Catholic Study Bible (guest review Eric)
The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (guest review by Geoffrey)
The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (my own additional comments)
NJB:
New Jerusalem Bible (This one could have been better. Maybe I'll update it one day.)
NRSV:
The Discipleship Study Bible
Life with God
New Interpreters Study Bible vs. New Oxford Annotated Bible (4th) (guest post by Diakonos09)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)