The Gospels Ain’t Fiction

Comments

1. 

   January 17, 2007

   Guest

   Interesting points made… Another pragmatic way I’ve explained this to my religious ed class is to think about Christ as a teacher (which of course He was), a teacher to many different audiences. As any good teacher would, He adapted the telling of the story to the audience to emphasize different points & to make the story relevant for where they were. Even if the audience had heard the stories several times (as the disciples surely did), they might remember the story or points differently depending on the context of the story-telling, the key point, where a particular statement took them, any distractions in the place, etc. Given that they’ve heard me tell them the same stories about my life differently to illustrate different points & that they hear their other teachers (and parents) often repeat stories, they don’t think it’s a problem… they know that sometimes different tellings include details that aren’t included at other times… and they’ve argued with siblings about when different events happened in their lives so they know about how different people remember different things. But in the re-telling recorded by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in Scripture, the disciple would select (probably remember) the instance of the story telling that fit the point he was making…
2. 

   January 17, 2007

   Guest

   I love Mr. Shea’s accounts, particularly his explanations that the Gospels are translations, i.e. “Greek accounts of conversations that largely took place in Aramaic.” A modern analogy is in order. The marketing genius that gave us “Got milk?” (and it was genius) turned around and translated this to Spanish as “¿Tienes leche?” Now the former is an adaptation of colloquial language to the purpose of selling milk. The latter is a literal translation of that colloquial language – and the result is a question that a lactation consultant might ask of her client as she sits in the hospital a couple of days after giving birth to her newborn. So not only are the Gospels not the exact “tape recorded sayings of Christ,” they cannot be because in order to provide that sort of literalism, the Gospels would munge many, perhaps most, of Jesus’s words. This is especially true since we do not typically read the Gospels in the original (i.e. the authors’ original) Greek but in English, Spanish, or perhaps even Latin. Now, these are all an additional hop away from the Greek, and therefore two hops away from the original Aramaic that Jesus likely spoke (and it is worth mentioning that vernacular Bibles translated from Latin are two hops away from the original Greek).

   So if we return to the “Got milk?” conundrum, a competent translator might have rendered that into Spanish as “¿Tomas leche?” (“Do you drink milk?”). But another competent translator might have rendered it as “¿Te gusta la leche?” (“Do you like milk?”) or “¿Bebes leche?” (“Do you drink milk?” using a different Spanish verb) or even “¿Te ha captivado la leche?” (“Has milk captivated you?”). There are other possibilities as well that would remain faithful to the original.

   And finally, it is worth observing that the Church’s declaration of the inspired contents of the Bible (made around 400 A.D., if I remember rightly) was of the Greek translations. So, while there is value in rendering from the Greek into the vernacular (or even into the Latin, as the Nova Vulgata does) a version that toes the line as closely as possible to the original Greek, there is no point in worrying about the inspired nature of the Greek texts themselves.
3. 

   January 17, 2007

   Guest

   Actually, I have come to the conclusion that Mark Shea has a strong bit of Saint Peter to him – his unabashed devotion and colloquialized power of voice remind me of good old Saint Pete right after Pentecost. And even when I disagree with him, the arguing points are still his to argue. The man makes me feel like a third-grader in a best Religion class with someone who knows how to ‘tell it like it’s Gospel’.

   Thanks, Mark. Keep reminding us that just because the truth sometimes needs a little digging to find and get into – a thing of which you are personally so well aware – it is no less the God-given truth.

   But, I do have this hunch that some Scripturally unmentioned offspring of the great and good Saint Peter (Saint Andrew’s?) has provided some of your genetic material. You get to that Pearly Gate, Saint Peter’s gonna hug you like the great(sss)-grandson you are.

   God’s blessings be with you until we meet in glorious forever.

   Through Christ, with Christ, in Christ,

   Pristinus Sapienter

   (wljewell @catholicexchange.com or … yahoo.com)
4. 

   January 17, 2007

   Guest

   I believe you are incorrect about the church’s declaration on inspired content. Unless you are talking about some other declaration.

   but the console of Trent ( 14xx ) officially closed the cannon by declaring which books were acceptable to Catholics and specified that ‘old Latin vulgate’ as inspired and infallible. ( those who do not accept it are anathema )

   http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html

   In his encyclical requesting a new translation of the bible from the original language. The pope requested a new translation. Pointing out it was already in the work ( a new translation to the Latin) at the time of the console. He also said he took nothing away from the authenticity of the old Latin vulgate as declared by the console but thought a fresh translation would be useful now and that his interpretation of the console was that it
   Did not intend to prevent translations from the original languages especially because in the end they will only support the moral authority of the vulgate.

   http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html

   http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_30091943_divino-afflante-spiritu_en.html
5. 

   January 17, 2007

   Guest

   Lemme guess, fishman . . .

   You read these in the original Vatican Latin, too, right? I am amazed at the strong knowledge around here.

   However, Trent affirmed the earliest council decisions on Canon of Scripture rather than ‘setting new rock’. Trent was combatting Luther’s re-canonizing for Protestant purposes.

   Through Christ, with Christ, in Christ,

   Pristinus Sapienter

   (wljewell @catholicexchange.com or … yahoo.com)
6. 

   January 17, 2007

   Guest

   Yo Mark, Oh wise one from the west(coast). I really like this wljewell, I believe s/he has the gift of discernment of people mixed with some sound Theology, and knows who does and doesn’t, and is able to separate the two.
   Keep up the good work Mark and wljewell.
7. 

   January 17, 2007

   Guest

   jchege,

   I am abashed – to be placed anywhere near Mr. Shea – well, being God’s waterboy warrior, I may bring the man a fresh canteen – is great compliment.

   Note that I sign myself by allusive nickname as ‘Pristinus’ – no feminine Latin to that – which perhaps is a shame with the way the ladies around here are so vibrant, and being female myself just might improve my strains of thinking.

   I do not so much emulate Mr. Shea in my writing as have that same blunt-force- instrument approach – We beat you with one large if soft teddy-bear.

   Through Christ, with Christ, in Christ,

   Pristinus Sapienter

   (wljewell @catholicexchange.com or … yahoo.com)
8. 

   January 18, 2007

   Guest

   To the gentleman making the “got milk”analogy. I think you miss the point. it is one thing to say that translations are imperfect, it is quite another to make the claim that gospel writers created sayings and events out of whole cloth and attributed them to Jesus. After all, it is quite acceptable to use translators in a court of law because it is understood that while certain ideas do not translate perfectly from one laguage/culture to the next, those ideas can still be communicated effectively never the less.
9. 

   January 18, 2007

   Guest

   Since we are correctly sending kudos to Mr. Shea on this thread, I recommend his book “Making Senses Out of Scripture” which I greatly enjoyed. I’m sure you can find it on the link at the bottom of the article.

   In it he deals with the senses of scripture (the literal and the spiritual — which includes the allegorical, moral and anagogical) that the Church has traditionally taught.

   Or perhaps I should just say, “Got Mark?”
10. 

    January 19, 2007

    Guest

    Good article. We should all be excited about spreading good news.
    Please visit http://www.ourladyofamerica.com and http://www.oltiv.org and pray for Our Lady of America