New Haydock Bible just published!
#1
Information 
However it is an eBook, not a print version.  It can be found where ever eBooks are sold.

Many traditional Catholics are familiar with the Haydock Bible because of its copious and wonderfully traditional orthodox notes throughout.  It was probably the FIRST great Catholic Study Bible to appear way back in 1811!  It was often reprinted throughout the 19th Century as a ponderous quarto Bible often weighing as much as 20 pounds!  There were even a couple of Folio versions: the first edition, and later in 1825 an American Edition.  Now it is enjoying a rebirth even in our own time, usually found as a facsimile copy of the 19th century quarto edition. 

What many don't know, is that there was a major revision/update of the Haydock Bible done in 1878 by converts from the Oxford Movement.  That update was based on Rev. Husenbeth's abridged version of the Haydock Bible done in 1853.  It was a light abridgement however, as it mainly was interested in removing notes with only a local passing interest, or questions of antiquity that were not pertinent.  Those Husebeth abridged Haydock Bibles were still huge and weighed up to 20 pounds!  Father Thomas G. Law and Father Frederick Canon Oakeley took this version and updated it, sometimes restoring an original note, but mostly ADDING new information that resulted from discoveries in Archaeology, Philology, and Scripture studies. 

It is this updated Haydock Bible which has just been published as an eBook.  It contains EVERYTHING, that was found in that Bible.  All of the Notes, cross references, and supplementary material, as well as some additional material that can only be found in this eBook version.  A picture of the cover was attached to this post.  It is ISBN 9780578978604 and the Full Title is: The Holy Bible: With Notes, Critical, Historical, and Explanatory, Selected from the most eminent commentators and critics by the Rev. George Leo Haydock

It was designed to be easy to use.  The notes are linked right from the Scripture Text.  The text of the Bible itself is the Douay Rheims, Challoner's revision.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply
#2
Thank you for this.
I found two places online offering this, neither of them in the US. Do you know a domestic source?
Also, have you used/seen this? I don't mind the hefty paper version but the tiny print is becoming next to impossible for me to read.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ptochos's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#3
(09-08-2021, 12:33 PM)Ptochos Wrote: Thank you for this.
I found two places online offering this, neither of them in the US. Do you know a domestic source?
Also, have you used/seen this? I don't mind the hefty paper version but the tiny print is becoming next to impossible for me to read.

You could try one of these: https://www.walmart.com/ip/MagniPros-2PA.../690887502
“But all will be well, and all will be well, and every kind of thing will be well.” ~Julian of Norwich

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug."~Mark Knopfler (?)

"No matter who you are somebody thinks you're a heretic. Wear it like a badge of honor........... :LOL:"~Silouan

The fact that I "like" a post is not necessarily an endorsement or approval of its content.
Reply
#4
(09-08-2021, 12:33 PM)Ptochos Wrote: Thank you for this.

Here it is on Amazon Kindle (US):

The Holy Bible: With Notes, Critical, Historical, and Explanatory, Selected from the most eminent commentators and critics by the Rev. George Leo Haydock
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:
  • J Michael
Reply
#5
(09-08-2021, 12:33 PM)Ptochos Wrote: Thank you for this.
I found two places online offering this, neither of them in the US. Do you know a domestic source?
Also, have you used/seen this? I don't mind the hefty paper version but the tiny print is becoming next to impossible for me to read.

Here are a couple of more places:

Barnes and Noble


Rakuten: Kobo

I not only have seen it, but I use it for my daily readings! I like the fact that it is easy on the eyes, text can be enlarged, words can be looked up in the dictionary (at least on a Kindle) or ideas or other references can be searched on the web.  I have the original print copies too, but they are getting more difficult for my old self to handle.  Plus, I can have it while on vacation or at Bible study, or wherever I take my Kindle.  It is a good resource.  I have the Ignatius Study Bible on my Kindle too. But that is only the NT so far.  Still waiting for the OT.
Reply
#6
The only thing I would be a bit careful about here is the question of what "updated" really means.

Is this just a word-for-word copy of the last revision (Law/Oakeley)? Where does this "extra material" come from?

This is one reason why Bibles always needed an imprimatur, and still do.

For instance, what if a group that erroneously thought that a 168-hour literal Creation narrative was Catholic dogma and other interpretations (permitted by the Church) were heresy? What if they took a Haydock Bible, modified or selectively added or removed notes to fit their viewpoint and included additional material promoting their errors?

What if the same thing happened with a neo-Modernist, trying to move some traditional Catholics away form orthodoxy towards heterodoxy?

So, it's good that such editions exists, but there are always questions that should hang over such things when they are not individually and directly approved by the Church, or exact photographic duplications of what was directly approved by the Church.
Reply
#7
(09-13-2021, 02:20 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: The only thing I would be a bit careful about here is the question of what "updated" really means.

Is this just a word-for-word copy of the last revision (Law/Oakeley)? Where does this "extra material" come from?

This is one reason why Bibles always needed an imprimatur, and still do.

For instance, what if a group that erroneously thought that a 168-hour literal Creation narrative was Catholic dogma and other interpretations (permitted by the Church) were heresy? What if they took a Haydock Bible, modified or selectively added or removed notes to fit their viewpoint and included additional material promoting their errors?

What if the same thing happened with a neo-Modernist, trying to move some traditional Catholics away form orthodoxy towards heterodoxy?

So, it's good that such editions exists, but there are always questions that should hang over such things when they are not individually and directly approved by the Church, or exact photographic duplications of what was directly approved by the Church.




That is a very valid concern. The word "updated" refers to the Oakeley-Haydock Bible itself.  It UPDATED the original Haydock Bible (with notes only, not the Scripture text.) This Bible with its notes and supplementary material received the approbation of His Eminence the Cardinal of Westminster (Cardinal Manning.)


This eBook version is a word for word copy of the notes and supplementary material that was found in the Oakeley-Haydock Bible.  Even the 19th century English punctuation and spelling have been retained. The extra material consists of the Preface to the eBook edition and an Introduction to the Haydock Bible which was excerpted from the journal "North West Catholic History" Volume XL, 2013, pp.24-35 (with the author's permission, all of which can be read as samples on sites that sell this bible) This is the entirety of the original matter. Further, there were additions from the original Haydock Bible of 1811 which were left out of the Oakeley-Haydock Bible, such as the list of Commentators and some other matter that was thought to be helpful.   The Bible text itself is a word for word copy of the Douay Rheims Bible published by Murphy of Baltimore in 1899.  There are a couple of instances where a word was reverted back to the MacMahon version of the Challoner bible for the sake of keeping the notes parallel with the text.  (originally the text of the Haydock bible was the MacMahon version)  All of these Bible texts and the notes have the approbation of the hierarchy.  The preface and introduction is concerned with this bible's place in the history of the Douay Rheims Bible and the validity of still using such an old study bible.  Lastly, bishops do not consider electronic books, as well as periodicals etc. to be within the scope of the imprimatur. See the USCCB explanation here: Permission to Publish especially if it is not intended to be used as a textbook for parish educational purposes.

The problem with photographic facsimiles of old bibles is they are often "shrunk" to fit modern size pages, and the scanning is entirely dependent on the quality of the original printed page, which of course is hundreds of years old!  Therefore they can be VERY hard to read.  I know, I have several of those kind of printed bibles too!  I rarely use them.
Reply
#8
Thank you for the information.

I'd note that the document you cite, as well as Canon Law, specifically mention the need for a bishops' conference or the Holy See to approve translations of Scripture. A document like an eBook clearly falls under a public distribution. It needs to be approved, or at the very least, it should have some guarantee, usually by what is called a "Concordat" that it matches the original, and so the original imprimatur still applies. That can be granted by an individual bishop or equivalent.

For instance, nova & vetera, the German publisher, retypeset an edition of the 1962 Breviary and so they went to their local ordinary to get a certification that is printed in each copy. Simply because they scanned and OCRed the original, was not sufficient guarantee that the Breviary was legitimate.

So, I'd just renew my concern that even if this is a word-for-word reproduction, there still is some duty to ensure that what is published is guaranteed to not be heterodox. All it would take is a small error in an otherwise good publication to make it harmful. Scripture is one of the first places heretics introduce errors, as well.

Not saying this eBook is bad. Not at all. Just caveat emptor.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#9
(09-17-2021, 02:56 AM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: Thank you for the information.

I'd note that the document you cite, as well as Canon Law, specifically mention the need for a bishops' conference or the Holy See to approve translations of Scripture. A document like an eBook clearly falls under a public distribution. It needs to be approved, or at the very least, it should have some guarantee, usually by what is called a "Concordat" that it matches the original, and so the original imprimatur still applies. That can be granted by an individual bishop or equivalent.

For instance, nova & vetera, the German publisher, retypeset an edition of the 1962 Breviary and so they went to their local ordinary to get a certification that is printed in each copy. Simply because they scanned and OCRed the original, was not sufficient guarantee that the Breviary was legitimate.

So, I'd just renew my concern that even if this is a word-for-word reproduction, there still is some duty to ensure that what is published is guaranteed to not be heterodox. All it would take is a small error in an otherwise good publication to make it harmful. Scripture is one of the first places heretics introduce errors, as well.

Not saying this eBook is bad. Not at all. Just caveat emptor.

Understand that journals, magazines and electronic publications (such as this forum) also fall under the heading of public distribution.  However, they are not within the scope of the imprimatur. 

Your example proves my point.  The Breviary, which is intended for liturgical use by Catholics AND WHICH IS PRINTED, clearly REQUIRES an imprimatur.

If this eBook were to take printed form, then it would have to be submitted to the Bishop for approval.  

From the USCCB website: 
Quote:In recent history, canon law has not required that church authorization be granted for writings that are to appear in newspapers, magazines, or periodicals.
and:

Quote:Similarly, current canon law pertaining to the approval of books and other
writings within the Latin Catholic Church does not extend to all of the instru-

ments of social communication that are available to advance the new evan-

gelization, such as audio, radio, video, cinemagraphic, television, or other
electronic productions.

Lastly, and I hesitate to mention this; but the NABRE study bible, with all of its shocking notes, as well as many writings by Biblical Scholars like the far-from-orthodox Raymond Brown, have the imprimatur.  That imprimatur does not guarantee you are reading something that is what people on this website would call "traditional Catholicism."  Far from it!  Whoever reads from any kind of religious writing, whether it be THIS website, or journals, periodicals, books, pamphlets, bibles, or what have you,  it is still a REQUIREMENT that the reader be cautious and not lapse into a false sense of security simply because there is an imprimatur.  However, if the local ordinary were to request this eBook bible for examination, I'm sure there would be no problem at all.  The real problem is attempting to lay a burden on the bishop to review something that is not even within the scope of his duties to satisfy excessive scrupulosity.

The intent of this eBook Bible is to revive a wonderful edition of the Haydock Bible, that is rarely if ever seen today, so that it isn't lost forever.  It was formatted and transcribed in a way that would give the reader a real "feel" for what the antique printed copy was like, as was said earlier, including the spelling and punctuation, even some of the original engraved plates.  But unlike the original, is light, easy on the eyes, and portable.
Reply
#10
Yeah ... did Canon Law at seminary, and moral theology.

eBooks require some approval, else, what's the point of approvals?

I can distribute heresy via Kindle and it's okay, but print it and now, I've violated Canon Law?

Let's look at the principle, and not play the Pharisaic legalist here.

The reason the Church has required the approval of works distributed for public consumption is that, especially since printing, these have been quick and easy to distribute, and thus error easy to circulate. The Church has a duty to prevent theological or moral error from being distributed under guise of it being "Catholic" or "Christian". Thus, she instituted a system by which things that can be printed (i.e. easily distributed) for public use, must be approved if they touch on matters of faith, morals, Church history, theology, Scripture, philosophy, or Christian ethics. Certain of these are even more restricted so only a larger body of bishops or the Holy See can approve them, such a liturgical books or Scripture.

If that prohibition does not, at least by reason of morality, touch on electronic items for distribution, then this undermines the whole point of this protection and duty of the Church. Perhaps, legally, one could wiggle out that some electronic "print" in not really a book, and so technically does not fall under some Canon. I find that specious, but even were it true, there is a moral duty, and a grave one, to ensure that what is published, even electronically, has some guarantee that what it contains is in accordance with what it presumes to reproduce, or that, if new, it accords with the Catholic Faith and good morals.

If not, the absurd results : One is allowed to publish an electronic version of the heretical Jehovah's Witness "Bible" electronically, though it would be forbidden were it set to print. A more widely and easily accessible electronic version is not banned, though a less-accessible and more costly one is.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)