Vatican II edition which one?
#1
I am planning on getting a print version of the documents of Vatican II but I don't know which edition is best.

I am currently deciding between the Flannery edition without the inclusive language or the Abbot 1966 edition.
Reply
#2
(12-17-2013, 03:45 AM)ArturoOrtiz Wrote: I am planning on getting a print version of the documents of Vatican II but I don't know which edition is best.

I am currently deciding between the Flannery edition without the inclusive language or the Abbot 1966 edition.

The "Toilet Paper Roll Edition" is the best!. Then when your done with it. You can flush it down the toilet. Like what is happening the Church right now after Pope Benedict XVI resigned.
Reply
#3
(12-17-2013, 03:45 AM)ArturoOrtiz Wrote: I am planning on getting a print version of the documents of Vatican II but I don't know which edition is best.

I am currently deciding between the Flannery edition without the inclusive language or the Abbot 1966 edition.

It's hard to decide, I think Abbot is a good choice though. Norman Tanner put together all the ecumenical councils in Latin and English in two volumes on facing pages but it's $150 and he ruined it by using inclusive language.

C.
Reply
#4
(12-17-2013, 03:45 AM)ArturoOrtiz Wrote: I am planning on getting a print version of the documents of Vatican II but I don't know which edition is best.

I am currently deciding between the Flannery edition without the inclusive language or the Abbot 1966 edition.

Abbot 1966 is the one I have, thanks for reminding me to get the feather duster out.
Reply
#5
You may burn either edition for the damage it did to the Church!
Reply
#6
An interesting comment in Philip Trower's book on how the Abbot edition left out what John XXIII actually said:
"The second point concerns the famous passage in Pope John's opening speech at the Council. The Church's "unchangeable doctrine", he said "has to be presented in a way that is demanded by our times. One thing is the deposit of faith, which consists of the truths contained in sacred doctrine; another is the manner of presentation, however always with the same signification and meaning"

"The first English translation of the Council documents (Abbott-Gallagher) omits the crucial phrase,"always with the same sense and meaning". and it was later claimed that Pope John never used it; it is said to have been smuggled into the official printed text by unprincipled Vatican officials after the speech was given. The claim was effectively refuted by Professor John Finis of Oxford in the correspondence columns of The Tablet (Jan.-Feb. 1992). The main point is, why would Catholics be anxious for the Pope not to have said "always with the same sense and meaning" unless they did want a change of meaning?"

Trower, Turmoil and Truth, chapter one. Online edition: http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/trower/turmoil&truth.htm

C.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)