Imprimatur And Nihil Obstat

[Hananiah]

Ummm...Sungenius believes that geocentrism (the earth is the stationary center of the universe) is part of Tradition and that anyone who maintains heliocentrism (the earth revolves around the sun) is a heretic.

The first part of that statement is true; the second part is not. Sungenis is a geocentrist, but he states in his science creed that he does not consider heliocentrists any less Catholic than he, since the Church has not made a dogmatic ruling on the issue. The geo-centrism section of CAI is actually quite entertaining. Sungenis actually defends his position intelligently, cites scientific documents, and builds a fairly good case (not that I agree with him of course).

[M.SIGGA]

Oh, btw, the currently lectionary readings aren't from the Jerusalem Bible. They were adapted from the Revised NAB. Substantial changes were made (particularly in reference to gender-language), so they aren't directly from the RNAB, but the RNAB served as the basis.

for Paladin,

Yeah this is right, I was confused. The Jerusalem Bible is what is used only on EWTN, and i think you can buy it from their online catalogue if you really want to get a new Bible. I personally like the NAB which you already have.

[p0lar_bear]

I think that disclaimer is a more recent addition.

He has also broken with pretty much all of the major Catholic apologists (e.g. Mark Shea, Scott Hahn, Karl Keating, James Akin). It seems like he spends more time in rather uncharitable attacks against Catholics than in actual apologetics. If nothing else, it presents a bad image of Catholicism.

[Hananiah]

Sungenis seems to have stopped putting a lot of effort into writing for his website and started focusing more on books. He's publishing a new translation of the New Testament with commentary and apologetics essays, and also has 3 books coming out in the near future.

http://www.catholicintl.com/products/future.html

[Paladin D]

Is the NAB translation itself good? Just the commentaries are a little off in some areas?

[M.SIGGA]

Is the NAB translation itself good? Just the commentaries are a little off in some areas?

the translation is good, it just depends on which edition you get. i really like the st. joseph edition. the medium version has an exensive commentary and doctrinal index and i'm sure the large version has even more.

[Selah]

I..uh...

[ardillacid]

[quote name='jasJis' date='12 February 2004 - 08:53 AM' timestamp='1076590414' post='118821']
In all honesty,

No.



We did not miss your myopic bias who lies about the Catholic Church and can't make a simple post without throwing in a negative.

You are wrong to call Authority in the Catholic Church 'overlords'.

The Catholic Church itself, teaches that man must follow his own conscience OVER the teaching of the Church. It of course, does not teach us to do so without due respect and openess to the Grace God has provided for mankind through the ages, including what is taught by the Church.

Please go away, spouter of misleading falsehoods.
[/quote]
What ever happened to this guy?

[Vincent Vega]

Don't be a smuck alee.

[Guest KevinSymonds]

The imprimatur and nihil obstat are still required for books touching upon faith and morals.

There was a lot of misunderstanding about this after Vatican II. Many thought they were no longer required but that was never the case.

The reason why people thought they were no longer necessary was because they were rooted in the system of censorship engendered in the Index of Forbidden Books. Once Pope Paul VI removed the Index's legal force, the relevant canons (1399 and 2318) in the 1917 Code of Canon Law were abrogated (formally done in November 1966).

People [i]thought[/i] they could now publish without the imprimatur and nihil obstat but were mistaken. Though they no longer pertain to the Index per-se, they still give the reader and writer the freedom of conscience that they are not endangering faith and good morals.

Yes, the imprimatur and nihil obstat are not infallible. They do, however, show obedience and docility to ecclesiatical authority and Eternal/Natural Law.

-KJS

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='KevinSymonds' date='05 June 2010 - 12:54 PM' timestamp='1275753248' post='2124079']
The imprimatur and nihil obstat are still required for books touching upon faith and morals.

There was a lot of misunderstanding about this after Vatican II. Many thought they were no longer required but that was never the case.

The reason why people thought they were no longer necessary was because they were rooted in the system of censorship engendered in the Index of Forbidden Books. Once Pope Paul VI removed the Index's legal force, the relevant canons (1399 and 2318) in the 1917 Code of Canon Law were abrogated (formally done in November 1966).

People [i]thought[/i] they could now publish without the imprimatur and nihil obstat but were mistaken. Though they no longer pertain to the Index per-se, they still give the reader and writer the freedom of conscience that they are not endangering faith and good morals.

Yes, the imprimatur and nihil obstat are not infallible. They do, however, show obedience and docility to ecclesiatical authority and Eternal/Natural Law.

-KJS
[/quote]
It is only as good as the bishop who gives it.

[Hilde]

[quote name='jasJis' date='12 February 2004 - 03:53 PM' timestamp='1076590414' post='118821']

The Catholic Church itself, teaches that man must follow his own conscience OVER the teaching of the Church. It of course, does not teach us to do so without due respect and openess to the Grace God has provided for mankind through the ages, including what is taught by the Church.

Please go away, spouter of misleading falsehoods.
[/quote]
Oh, is that how it is. I've been doing this all wrong.

[Guest KevinSymonds]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='10 June 2010 - 10:48 PM' timestamp='1276224512' post='2127092']
It is only as good as the bishop who gives it.
[/quote]

And still necessary to obtain it from one's bishop or the bishop of the diocese wherein the books will be published.