Gratia Plena, Luke 1:28, the Spirit and Genesis 1:2 and the New American Bible
I came across a video on youtube that helped me appreciate that, while Protestants have a King James Only movement, it appears that Catholics have something similar in regards to the Douay-Rheims Bible. These are Traditional Catholics (TradCath's) that, from what I gather from reading the comments section and occasionally listening to Ann Barnhardt, reject much of Catholicism since the Vatican II Council in the 1960's. This appears to include the New American Bible. Little mention is made of the Jerusalem Bibles, but I suspect that those Bibles are use mostly outside the USA.
The primary complaint was that the New American Bible did not have "Hail, full of grace" at Luke 1:28 as it reads in the Douay Rheims Bible (see also Knox and the Confraternity Bible).
The Douay-Rheims Bible uses the Latin Vulgate which has Gratia Plena here, of which "full of grace" is a proper translation. But the NAB Bible text of Luke, like most modern Bibles, are made from the Greek, and the Greek word here is KECARITWMENH which most Bibles translate as "favored." The Douay Bible does though often translate Gratia(m) as "favor" (see Acts 2:47, 7:10, 25:3 and numerous times in the Old Testament).
The NAB does however have "full of grace" at Acts 6:8, but, this reading is different in the Greek than it is at Luke 1:28. Acts 6:8 has PLHRHS CARITOS* while Luke 1:28 has KECARITWMENH. From even a cursory examination PLHRHS CARITOS lends itself better as a translation of "full of grace" which leads one to wonder why those two words were not used at Luke 1:28 if the text was really meant to say "full of grace" in regards to Mary.
Additionally, the closing words at Luke 1:28, "blessed art thou among women" (Douay, KJV) appear to be a later interpolation. To go even further, many do not even consider the first 2 chapters of Luke authentic at all:
"The first two chapters of Luke were wanting in the gospels of the first century. They were also wanting in the Gospel of the Hebrews, or Nazarenes, about A. D. 125, as well as in the Gospel of Marcion, A. D. 145. They first appeared in the Protevangelion, about A. D. 125, and were probably not deemed by Marcion, authentic." History of the Christian Religion By Charles Burlingame Waite 1881
Perhaps it is best not to hang too much weight or doctrine on such a flimsy foundation.
The next criticism in the video is how the NAB translates Genesis 1:2, "the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss, while a mighty wind swept over the waters" as opposed to the text in the Douay Bible: "And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters." The video complained that there was "no insinuation of the Trinity here."
Well, there is actually no "insinuation of the Trinity here" no matter which translation you use. A Trinity requires THREE (Father, Son and Holy Ghost, see Matt. 28:19 Douay) to make a Trinity. Did you notice that the word "spirit" here in the Douay-Rheims Bible is not capitalized. Why is this? Becomes something other than the Holy Ghost is referred to here.
John L. McKenzie S.J., who was once regarded as "the best Catholic theologian...in the United States" wrote of the Spirit:
"In summary, the spirit in the OT [Old Testament], originally the wind and the breath, is conceived as a divine dynamic entity by which Yahweh accomplishes his ends, it saves, it is a creative, charismatic power, and as an agent of His anger it is a demonic power. It remains impersonal. Like the wind, neither its origin nor its course can be discovered..." Dictionary of the Bible by John L. McKenzie S.J. (1965) It has the Imprimatur and the Nihil Obstat
If this is too close to Vatican II for you, then let's go back in time to William Francis Barry.
In the book, The Tradition of Scripture: its origin, authority and interpretation by William Francis Barry, which was published in 1908 (which also has the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat) he writes:
"Human language, therefore, according to St. Thomas, who follows Dionysius Areopagita in his deep exposition, represents the Divine Simplicity by throwing it into facets, and names these from their finite results or manifestations. To bring out the influence which is here in question, as it affects its human subjects, Holy Scripture reveals to us that the 'Spirit of God' moves, overshadows, guides, and controls them for the office which they fulfil. The word 'Spirit' is plainly metaphorical; but in this higher sense it has been adopted by races and literatures which did not borrow it from Israel.
We must assume all this and confine ourselves to the Bible. In Genesis i. 2. we read, 'Darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God {ruach Elohim) moved (or was brooding) upon the face of the waters'. But in LXX. this Hebrew word (ruach) is translated in sixteen different ways; some equivalent to the physical meaning, breath or wind; others denoting intelligence; more again laying stress on the agitation which often accompanies the divine contact. Literally, we may render inspiration as the 'breath of God in Man'. It has a superhuman origin; it is known by human actions, the scope of which goes beyond what they could in themselves accomplish."
William Francis Barry, in a footnote here added: "Spiritus spirat ubi vult" represents in Vg. John iii. 8, which A.V. [King James Bible] translates "The wind bloweth where it listeth," while Douay has "The Spirit breatheth where he will". A.V. agrees with context.
This is why Monsignor Ronald A. Knox, who translated from the Latin Vulgate renders Genesis 1:2 as "Earth was still an empty waste, and darkness hung over the deep; but already, over its waters, stirred the breath of God."
All of this demonstrates the superiority of the New American Bible. The NAB seemingly translated texts that went contrary to their own theology but retained a fidelity to the best Greek Testaments at hand.
.................
I came across a video on youtube that helped me appreciate that, while Protestants have a King James Only movement, it appears that Catholics have something similar in regards to the Douay-Rheims Bible. These are Traditional Catholics (TradCath's) that, from what I gather from reading the comments section and occasionally listening to Ann Barnhardt, reject much of Catholicism since the Vatican II Council in the 1960's. This appears to include the New American Bible. Little mention is made of the Jerusalem Bibles, but I suspect that those Bibles are use mostly outside the USA.
The primary complaint was that the New American Bible did not have "Hail, full of grace" at Luke 1:28 as it reads in the Douay Rheims Bible (see also Knox and the Confraternity Bible).
The Douay-Rheims Bible uses the Latin Vulgate which has Gratia Plena here, of which "full of grace" is a proper translation. But the NAB Bible text of Luke, like most modern Bibles, are made from the Greek, and the Greek word here is KECARITWMENH which most Bibles translate as "favored." The Douay Bible does though often translate Gratia(m) as "favor" (see Acts 2:47, 7:10, 25:3 and numerous times in the Old Testament).
The NAB does however have "full of grace" at Acts 6:8, but, this reading is different in the Greek than it is at Luke 1:28. Acts 6:8 has PLHRHS CARITOS* while Luke 1:28 has KECARITWMENH. From even a cursory examination PLHRHS CARITOS lends itself better as a translation of "full of grace" which leads one to wonder why those two words were not used at Luke 1:28 if the text was really meant to say "full of grace" in regards to Mary.
Additionally, the closing words at Luke 1:28, "blessed art thou among women" (Douay, KJV) appear to be a later interpolation. To go even further, many do not even consider the first 2 chapters of Luke authentic at all:
"The first two chapters of Luke were wanting in the gospels of the first century. They were also wanting in the Gospel of the Hebrews, or Nazarenes, about A. D. 125, as well as in the Gospel of Marcion, A. D. 145. They first appeared in the Protevangelion, about A. D. 125, and were probably not deemed by Marcion, authentic." History of the Christian Religion By Charles Burlingame Waite 1881
Perhaps it is best not to hang too much weight or doctrine on such a flimsy foundation.
The next criticism in the video is how the NAB translates Genesis 1:2, "the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss, while a mighty wind swept over the waters" as opposed to the text in the Douay Bible: "And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters." The video complained that there was "no insinuation of the Trinity here."
Well, there is actually no "insinuation of the Trinity here" no matter which translation you use. A Trinity requires THREE (Father, Son and Holy Ghost, see Matt. 28:19 Douay) to make a Trinity. Did you notice that the word "spirit" here in the Douay-Rheims Bible is not capitalized. Why is this? Becomes something other than the Holy Ghost is referred to here.
John L. McKenzie S.J., who was once regarded as "the best Catholic theologian...in the United States" wrote of the Spirit:
"In summary, the spirit in the OT [Old Testament], originally the wind and the breath, is conceived as a divine dynamic entity by which Yahweh accomplishes his ends, it saves, it is a creative, charismatic power, and as an agent of His anger it is a demonic power. It remains impersonal. Like the wind, neither its origin nor its course can be discovered..." Dictionary of the Bible by John L. McKenzie S.J. (1965) It has the Imprimatur and the Nihil Obstat
If this is too close to Vatican II for you, then let's go back in time to William Francis Barry.
In the book, The Tradition of Scripture: its origin, authority and interpretation by William Francis Barry, which was published in 1908 (which also has the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat) he writes:
"Human language, therefore, according to St. Thomas, who follows Dionysius Areopagita in his deep exposition, represents the Divine Simplicity by throwing it into facets, and names these from their finite results or manifestations. To bring out the influence which is here in question, as it affects its human subjects, Holy Scripture reveals to us that the 'Spirit of God' moves, overshadows, guides, and controls them for the office which they fulfil. The word 'Spirit' is plainly metaphorical; but in this higher sense it has been adopted by races and literatures which did not borrow it from Israel.
We must assume all this and confine ourselves to the Bible. In Genesis i. 2. we read, 'Darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God {ruach Elohim) moved (or was brooding) upon the face of the waters'. But in LXX. this Hebrew word (ruach) is translated in sixteen different ways; some equivalent to the physical meaning, breath or wind; others denoting intelligence; more again laying stress on the agitation which often accompanies the divine contact. Literally, we may render inspiration as the 'breath of God in Man'. It has a superhuman origin; it is known by human actions, the scope of which goes beyond what they could in themselves accomplish."
William Francis Barry, in a footnote here added: "Spiritus spirat ubi vult" represents in Vg. John iii. 8, which A.V. [King James Bible] translates "The wind bloweth where it listeth," while Douay has "The Spirit breatheth where he will". A.V. agrees with context.
This is why Monsignor Ronald A. Knox, who translated from the Latin Vulgate renders Genesis 1:2 as "Earth was still an empty waste, and darkness hung over the deep; but already, over its waters, stirred the breath of God."
All of this demonstrates the superiority of the New American Bible. The NAB seemingly translated texts that went contrary to their own theology but retained a fidelity to the best Greek Testaments at hand.
.................
*Many Greek mss have PISTEWS here instead of CARITOS, but the NAB remained true to better Greek texts.
You cannot go wrong with the Doauy-Rheims Sacred Bible.
ReplyDeleteThe author of this article is a pernicious person that would attack the work of St Jerome for a Protestant Bible.
ReplyDeleteThe first two chapters of Luke are authentic. They are in every manuscript of Luke and every translation. Marcion took scissors and paste to the Bible, much like Jefferson after him. Polycarp, the disciple of the apostle John, called Marcion the firstborn of Satan. It is perverse to appeal to the firstborn of Satan in redaction criticism.
ReplyDelete