Which Bible?
By Tim Rohr
11/6/04
Okay, a short “View from the Pew”. I’ve had several
articles floating about for quite a while, including one
about some very interesting challenges as per our
continued adherence to Humane Vitae after the
problematic birth of our 10th child. However,
I am most motivated to write about this one.
Of all my esteemed fellows in the Catholic Evidence
Guild of Guam, I am certain that I am the least
knowledgeable, and thus the least credentialed, to
comment on this subject. But I can’t recall ever being
so intrigued over such a topic. So here goes. And of
course, correct me if I am going in the wrong direction.
The topic is “Which Bible?” Now, I have been using this
question to confound my Protestant opponents for quite a
while, as there is an obvious difference between the
“Protestant” Bible and the “Catholic” Bible, namely the
number of books. This question leads directly to the
question of Authority, which is the real issue anyway.
However, up until my involvement with the Guild, I
really had paid no attention to the fact that there are
also different “Catholic” bibles. And even if there are
different Catholic bibles, how much different could they
be?. So big deal.
I had owned a copy of the New American Bible since my
(semi-heretical) Loyola days. And that’s the one I’ve
always used, albeit infrequently. I have attempted to
read this bible on many occasions, but for some reason
became quickly bored after a couple chapters. I chalked
it up to my deficient prayer life, or general sloth,
etc.
The first time I even remember hearing about the Douay
Rhiems Bible was at a CEGG
meeting. I didn’t know what it was and it sounded way
too archaic for me, so I didn’t pay much attention.
However, my sleepy apathy about the difference in
“Catholic” bibles was blasted awake by a small pamphlet
from Tan Books entitled “Which Bible Should You Read?”
The case for the Douay Rhiems was staggering and I was
fired with a desire to read it. Sure enough, it’s an
incredibly different and exciting read (as compared to
my NAB).
Before,
I get into the list of credentials for the DR, I want to
relate two passages in the NAB that have always troubled
me:
The first is Genesis 3:15. In the church of my youth,
there was a particular statue that fascinated me (as no
other statue did), and I’m sure many of you too. That
statue was of the Blessed Virgin standing atop a globe
crushing a snake beneath her feet. I’m sure it was the
creepy, sinister-ness (is that a word?) of the ugly
snake that first grabbed our youthful attentions. But
the whole picture was just fascinating: Mary, this
beautiful woman in blue, peace-filled face, standing
atop the world, crushing, the gasping, hideous serpent!
Powerful!
I loved this statue and knelt before it on so many
occasions. To this day I remember that at my second
grade first communion, my place at the altar rail
happened to be in front of this statue. I have always
loved that image.
Unfortunately, the image turned out to be just a pious
imagining for my NAB says in Gen 3:15 (where I was told
that this image comes from) “He will strike at your
head, while you strike at his heel.” So it’s not Her at
all! Wherefore then, this statue? Search every other
Bible. Nope, it’s not there. I was misled, or so I
thought, until I found my beloved serpent crushing
Madonna in the DR! There she is! And not just striking
at his head as the NAB says, not just bruising his head
as the CRSV says, but CRUSHING it!
Hooray for Mary! You go girl! Wherefore the rosary as
the greatest weapon against Satan if not for this
passage! Let’s take a look at all the other common
Catholic English translations.
“He will strike at your head, while you strike at
his heel.” (NAB)
“he will bruise your head, and you shall bruise his
heel” (CRSV)
“It will crush your head and you will strike its
heel” (JB) (What’s with the neuter?)
No point in going into all the Protestant bibles as they
say the same thing. But now look at the DR translation:
“She shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait
for her heel.” (DR)
Wow! I get goose bumps from that. Not only do the other
translations ignore Mary, they actually give Satan a
fighting chance. What’s up with that? Excuse my lay
ignorance, but talk about milquetoast translations! Of
course the larger inference is that Jesus (through Mary)
will destroy Satan. This lines up perfectly with our
Catholic belief; there is no contradiction here.
Now, and apologies, this is not a short “View” as
promised. (I’m having too much fun :>) Now, the second
verse that has always troubled me is Luke 1:28. That’s
where we get “Hail Mary, full of grace.” Why does it
trouble me? Because it’s NOT there! Big time egg on my
face when trying to defend the Immaculate Conception
with NAB in hand! Look:
“Rejoice, O highly favored daughter!” (NAB ’70)
“Hail, favored one! (NAB ’86)
“Rejoice, you who enjoy God’s favor” (JB)
Bet you didn’t know you have been incorrectly saying
the “Hail Mary” prayer all these years!
Now, let’s look at the DR:
“Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee…”
There it is. You can relax now. No need to start
reciting “Rejoice, you who enjoy God’s favor….blessed
are you among women….”
“Full of grace” (“gratia plena” in the Latin Vulgate)
are the key words to our understanding of the dogma of
the Immaculate Conception. Why do the other “Catholic”
bibles do away altogether with those words? (Unless to
pacify Protestants???) Amazing! (To me anyway).
There are loads of examples like these, but I don’t
want to rewrite the little booklet from Tan, so I’ll
recommend that you read it yourself. However, here are
some things that I felt were worth pondering: