What’s the proper way to dispose of Protestant materials?
#21
I see. This brings up some interesting questions in this Internet age of ours. Many of us routinely expose ourself to erroroneous statements when we have conversations with non-Catholics. Often we will need to read their cited sources in order to understand their perspective, and so address them accurately. What is your opinion on this? Is the cat so far out of the bag that we simply have to expect more of lay people these days? That is, we need to be taught how to better discern and guard our Faith since our contact with bad influence is almost totally unavoidable.
Reply
#22
(11-18-2020, 06:19 PM)NemoClericus Wrote: This brings up some interesting questions in this Internet age of ours. Many of us routinely expose ourself to erroroneous statements when we have conversations with non-Catholics.

There's a distinction to be made here.

In everyday life we all run into people who may challenge our Faith, or with whom we get into a real conversation with and can look to influence positively towards the Faith. There is a danger here, and that is why historically the Church and society protected the faithful by not allowing heretics and infidels the same civil rights and status. That time is long past and now we live in a minority Catholic society where the civil laws openly attack us, so that's a difference today, and of course we will naturally be exposed to more.

Nevertheless, there's a difference between these daily conversations, and people who actively seek out non-Catholics for debate or retort. That is especially true in the Internet age, and it's not a good thing. Historically the bishops would never allow Joe Catholic to go in public forums and debate. Firstly, because he is probably not well studied enough to know the fine theological details he needs, and secondly, such debates seem to put the Faith and error on the same level.

My own opinion here (certainly in no way definitive), is that when we have these daily conversations or circumstances present themselves, we make clear statements, offer arguments, but try not to get into long or complex debates. Focus the effort on those who are sincere and interested and ignore the rest. Finally, we should not neglect prayer and penance for such folks, which is often forgotten, as if the whole thing depended on a convincing argument.

(11-18-2020, 06:19 PM)NemoClericus Wrote: Often we will need to read their cited sources in order to understand their perspective, and so address them accurately.

I'd say that's usually quite rare that we need to read such sources. The arguments are not typically much different today than before, and rarely is reading their sources needed to figure out the underlying premise, and then finding a Catholic source with the reply.

(11-18-2020, 06:19 PM)NemoClericus Wrote: Is the cat so far out of the bag that we simply have to expect more of lay people these days? That is, we need to be taught how to better discern and guard our Faith since our contact with bad influence is almost totally unavoidable.

I'd say that there is a need for the laity to be better trained in the basics of their Faith. It is no longer sufficient to get through Baltimore No. 3 and think we're done. There is need to learn this, and keep going, especially in good spiritual reading to complement the catechesis. It doesn't mean that the average person needs to be reading Papal encyclicals, but there are good basic books and sources that help refine this.

Yes, contact with bad influences is unavoidable, but we can do two things to protect ourselves (and in doing so help convert others) :

1. Learn the Faith and Spiritual Life better so we are more solidly fixed to it in the face of bad influences,

2. Don't actively choose to expose ourselves to bad influences, but accept that if God arranges a situation to occur, he will also provide the grace and means.
[-] The following 2 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • HailGilbert, jovan66102
Reply
#23
MM, I would have to ask your clarification on some things.

This has been an issue that I have struggled with in the past, mostly because the things that I had from my Protestant days had a sentimental, family connection. 

But I have brought this matter before confessors and gotten pretty diverse answers (all of these confessors are SSPX priests). Some priests have told me that the if I am reading something which was on the Index, then I should be discerning in my reading. Basically, I saw the answer as more of an application of prudence. Certain books ended up on the Index for certain reasons. Dumas' novels were on the Index, Pascal's Pensees were on the Index. Does that mean that there cannot be profit derived from these books, or that in the present age which we find ourselves we can't enjoy them? I have a hard time seeing why not.

Others have been more strict. This usually has to do with Protestant materials whenever I get the "more strict" answers. But even then, it isn't universal. 

So, how would you assess something like that? I feel like I have gone to the most immediate channels for moral counsel.

For example, I possess three Bibles which do not bear the imprimatur or nihil obstat. The RSV, NRSV and KJV. I bought these books second hand from thrift shops, and only because they had the "Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical" books (including books historically found in the Vulgate but which seem to be impossible to find in a good Catholic translation, like 3 Maccabees, 3rd and 4th Esdras, the Prayer of Manasseh and Psalm 151, as well as some other material.) The RSV and NRSV are both available in Catholic editions, though I am aware that there are minor differences in how some passages are rendered. The KJV might be more difficult to justify possessing, aside from using it as a reference work, but I have seen Ordinariate Catholics who have published editions of the KJV which they use (I am unaware of ecclesiastical approbation for such a work.) They also use the Coverdale Psalter, originally a Protestant translation of the Psalter historically associated with the Anglicans.

So, to me the situation seems much more complicated. Which is why I typically go with the "think with prudence" solution. 

But I would still appreciate your thoughts on the issue.
"Especially will I do this if the Lord make known to me that you come together man by man in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ... so that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but which causes that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ." St. Ignatius of Antioch

"But Polycarp... waving his hand towards them, while with groans he look up to heaven, said, 'Away with the Atheists.'" Martyrdom of Polycarp
Reply
#24
That previously posted quote from the Catechism of St. Pope Pius X implied that a Catholic should dispose of materials that are given by a Protestant, most likely for the intended motive to steer a Catholic away from the faith.

I don't think that can necessarily be extrapolated out to say that a Protestant who becomes Catholic has to burn all of his non-Catholic Bibles or other books that were purchased, handed down, or otherwise obtained, once he converts.

I have an NIV Study Bible published by Zondervan, because the historical backgrounds of each book of the Bible that is provides is unparalleled in any Catholic Bible. Also, unlike the horrendous "Catholic" New American Bible (which probably deserves to be burned more than a Protestant Bible), the NIV affirms the traditional dating and authorship of each book of the Bible. But I use it only to read on this type of subject matter, and am aware that the footnotes on things like the papacy and sacraments are opposed to Catholic teaching.
Reply
#25
LH- read this https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=88096&pid=1435309#pid1435309 for an explanation of why reading prot Bibles is a violation of the the Natural Law.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • HailGilbert
Reply
#26
(11-20-2020, 07:49 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: LH- read this https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=88096&pid=1435309#pid1435309 for an explanation of why reading prot Bibles is a violation of the the Natural Law.

Thanks.  I read it.  I'd say there is still a difference between reading the study materials in a Protestant Bible, things that have nothing to do with doctrines of faith but are just explanations of history, and reading an unapproved / Protestant translation.

The explanations in footnotes and introductions are more likely to lead someone astray than a translation itself.  Which almost makes this whole topic of Catholic-Protestant Bibles absurd, since the "approved" New American Bible contains such a mediocre translation and horrendous footnotes,  that we are presented with a situation where reading an approved Catholic Bible becomes arguably more detrimental to the faith than reading a Protestant one.  Someone reading a Protestant NIV will find its introduction to the Gospel of St. Matthew affirming that the apostle wrote it, whereas the "Catholic" NAB insists that he had nothing to do with it, and it was written by an unknown author at the end of the 1st century.  

At the end of the day, we're in a situation where, at least here in the US, over 60% of professed Catholics support gay marriage and half support abortion.  It seems that a renewed effort of Catholics burning Protestant Bibles in their possession should be low on the list of priorities.  Furthermore, this whole topic falls under the list of things that canon law says should be penalized, but in practice are rarely, if ever, recognized or enforced anymore.
Reply
#27
(11-20-2020, 09:20 PM)LionHippo Wrote: At the end of the day, we're in a situation where, at least here in the US, over 60% of professed Catholics support gay marriage and half support abortion.  It seems that a renewed effort of Catholics burning Protestant Bibles in their possession should be low on the list of priorities.  Furthermore, this whole topic falls under the list of things that canon law says should be penalized, but in practice are rarely, if ever, recognized or enforced anymore.

By that logic eliminating liturgical abuse seems a back burner issue as well.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#28
(11-20-2020, 09:20 PM)LionHippo Wrote: The explanations in footnotes and introductions are more likely to lead someone astray than a translation itself.  Which almost makes this whole topic of Catholic-Protestant Bibles absurd, since the "approved" New American Bible contains such a mediocre translation and horrendous footnotes,  that we are presented with a situation where reading an approved Catholic Bible becomes arguably more detrimental to the faith than reading a Protestant one.  Someone reading a Protestant NIV will find its introduction to the Gospel of St. Matthew affirming that the apostle wrote it, whereas the "Catholic" NAB insists that he had nothing to do with it, and it was written by an unknown author at the end of the 1st century.  

At the end of the day, we're in a situation where, at least here in the US, over 60% of professed Catholics support gay marriage and half support abortion.  It seems that a renewed effort of Catholics burning Protestant Bibles in their possession should be low on the list of priorities.  Furthermore, this whole topic falls under the list of things that canon law says should be penalized, but in practice are rarely, if ever, recognized or enforced anymore.

Pretty much this, the amount of outright wild heresies and atheist fantasies promoted as truth in pretty much EVER single catholic Bible is insane. I wish people put more emphasis into burning those abominations and whoever created them.

It is also unclear what a protestant Bible is. I can understand avoiding completely Bible4s with missing books, with notes that are hostile towards catholic doctrine, or that are very blatant with manipulation attempts in the trasnlation (e.g. not translating "ecclesia" as church but "congregation" or similar). Following those things, is, let's say, a KJV (original, which includes all the books), a protestant Bible, or merely a Bible made by protestants? Because I surely will choose it over every single  modern translation (and of course over every version with openly atheist notes)
Reply
#29
The prohibition is against unapproved Bibles, IOW, Bibles that do not bear an imprimatur. Can't say I've ever seen a KJV, whether all 73 books or not, with an imprimatur.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • MagisterMusicae
Reply
#30
(11-23-2020, 04:12 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: The prohibition is against unapproved Bibles, IOW, Bibles that do not bear an imprimatur. Can't say I've ever seen a KJV, whether all 73 books or not, with an imprimatur.

And the reasoning is that because the Church has not supervised these through the imprimatur process, subtle problems, not blatant heresies creep in and this does far more damage, because it seems like such a non-issue, that we pass it off as a silly thing.

Will "a virgin shall conceive" or "a young woman"? Is Mary "full of grace" or a "highly favoured one"? Does St Paul have the right to take around with him a "wife" or a "sister"? If there is one sick should he be brought before the "elders" for their prayers, or the "priests".

These are but a few issues which in themselves which may seem small, but add up, and often are part of the citation for doctrines. What happens, for instance, when one reads St James and hears about extreme unction from a Catholic perspective, then looks up the quote and it talks about "elders" not "priests". It could cause doubts and questions.

Subtle error is more dangerous.

That the modern Church has approved horrors like the New American Bible, does not means that therefore unapproved Bibles produced by heretics are now okay. If anything it would mean we ought to stick with those Catholic editions printed before these problems started, not that Protestant-produced Bibles are now acceptable.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)