This Sunday at mass as I listened to the Epistle I was once again dumbfounded on the deliberate mistranslation of the Latin of the Vulgate Version of Wisdom, Chapter Seven. Three things or facts we must acknowledge, just as the Church teaches, the occasion or the time must be considered and it is the Church, as many of the Fathers taught, is the only authority to interpret Scriptures. Thirdly the Church is the same yesterday and tomorrow and until 1964 never changed one iota of its teachings. Irenaeus, Basil, Origen and Jerome were very specific on who had the final authority over the interpretation of the Bible.
Let us look at the Latin Vulgate from the modern point of view. Modern minds and in a somewhat prideful manner have made it an anachronism, from a time out of place and step with interpretation of our time.
This is entirely wrong, especially when a justification is made that modern day interpretation of those times is so superior to Church Authorities closer in time to the original. Is that an egotistical spin or not? First look at those who authorized the Latin Vulgate. Look at Jerome, although it was His work with the Byzantine branch of Catholicism (remember that the Church re named herself Katolicos to keep her identity separate from the first heretics the Gnostics) that gave us the first written bible. He had the help of all the great monasteries, Basilicas and other sites that had records and illuminated manuscripts containing Apostolic teachings. Now look at the Synods that authenticated his works. Are you going to deny that many of the Bishops and theologians of that time were not fluent in Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and other dialects of the
I find that commentaries written by modern writers in their perverseness make the Apostles and Christ say things they did not and have changed the written words of the Fathers of the Church as they, these pseudo theologians, rush to spin their theology. Going back to where I started Wisdom Chapter Seven says in the Latin Vulgate and in many of the earlier translations thereof, “I wept and Wisdom came’ Today it says, “I prayed and wisdom came”. Such a bad translation when the whole thrust of the chapter is of the birth of a baby and is not exactly a prophecy but a revelation through Solomon. The whole meaning is radically altered. To make a claim a baby prayed, beggars one's imagination
I urge you to consider this question, pray and think. “Do we as a Church now have a Gospel of Men and not the Gospel of Christ?” It would do you well to consider what then, do we believe or what are we believing?
Changing the subject, I see among the bishops and priests we have so many who do not believe in the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. It seems to their minds we should not partake of Holy Communion since it will spread influenza. Tell me Bishops which would be better to say, "Do not receive Him, if you have fear", or as you do say, “It, the consecrated Host spreads diseases”. Is that not what you are really saying? Do you not find your disbelief and your statement, oblique in its reference, it is the not the Body and Blood. Is it not disgraceful, did you not think before you spoke?” I wonder how Jesus feels about your disgusting statements about the status of His sacrifice?
It would I think be better if our shepherds looked to heaven for guidance before they engaged gears.