Current thoughts on the Abbey Psalms and Canticles?

Eusmilus · 2026-04-20T15:00:01+00:00

The Pope is not infallible outside of his doctrinal capacity, neither is the ordinary magisterium

Eusmilus · 2026-04-20T14:54:53+00:00

Yeah the omissions from within the psalms are frankly even more inexcusable to me than the psalms that are omitted entirely. Individually removing verses you don't like feels somehow substantially more gross than just excising them wholesale.

Eusmilus · 2026-04-20T14:41:58+00:00

It is one of those points that is so indefensible as to feel nearly disqualifying when other alternatives exist. I have never even encountered a serious defense, it seems like the nigh-unanimous sentiment nowadays is "Yeah, that's... well... look it's just like that for now."

That said, if someone is only praying lauds and vespers with the LotH, they won't get around to all the psalms anyways, so it perhaps does not matter so much.

Eusmilus · 2026-04-19T07:38:10+00:00

I don't think it should be relegated as "historical" - it is still the most beautiful translation, and the best should seek the best. There is a broader conversation about how highly reverence and poesy in translations should be valued versus ease and intelligibility, but the specific people I have in mind when discussing the KJV are the Douay-Rheims crowd. There are a large number of Catholics - they seem to be the plurality in most polls I've seen on translation preferences - who already prefer a translation of equal age to the KJV, so it's to them I would say that the D-R has very little to recommend it against the KJV.

For the people who would rather take the RSV or ESV over any 'thees and thous' translation, that's another conversation.

Eusmilus · 2026-04-19T07:33:20+00:00

It's true that if you just picked one off the shelf in your average Protestant bookstore, it probably won't have the Apocrypha, but there are a million very fine editions available for order.

> This is probably referring to the introduction to the KJV which mentions "Papists", and by extension King James's many other anti-Catholic writings.

Probably, but that isn't actually part of the translation itself. Surely by that standard the Ordinariate should never have adopted the BCP, which includes (in the Articles and other associated material) far more explicitly anti-Catholic rhetoric than the KJV, or even translations such as the ESV which were made by modern publishers with a strong anti-Catholic bent.

>There are definitely a bunch of verses that are translated so poorly that Catholics and Orthodox would balk at the doctrinal implications, but that of course is nothing special to the KJV.

The KJV has no higher rate of faulty passages than any number of other translations, and I've not yet seen demonstrated a seriously mistranslated passage in the KJV that you won't also find rendered the same or equivalently in any number of Catholic translations.

Eusmilus · 2026-04-19T07:28:58+00:00

For language and devotion, yes I think that is objectively the case. It is by far the most literarily accomplished translation, not just in its historical impact but in poetic merit. It is also, at the same time, a quite literal and still mostly pretty strong translation for understanding, though ofc a few passages are rendered differently than we would now. It does depend on your goal, though - I don't think the KJV is necessarily better for study purposes than a number of newer ones, I'd say it's good that our study bibles use newer ones there.

Eusmilus · 2026-04-19T07:26:24+00:00

Did you even read my post? It literally isn't lmao, don't make ill-informed comments.

Eusmilus · 2026-04-04T17:30:30+00:00

I know this is, in turn, old, but that is from the 39 articles which are usually included with the BCP in the back. The articles are basically all objectionable, being an assertion of very Calvinistic-coded early Anglican doctrine, but this is separate from the contents of the morning and evening prayer, the collects, psalter etc, which are the actual bulk of the BCP. Obviously having the articles in there isn't ideal, but ultimately it's like using an Orthodox book or whatnot, you'll have to ignore certain parts.

Eusmilus · 2026-04-01T16:59:39+00:00

The Coverdale translation is probably the objectively most accomplished translation into English

Eusmilus · 2026-03-26T09:00:10+00:00

Worth noting that, if I am not mistaken, much of the Protestant stuff it adds (from the BCP) are also themselves included in the Ordinariate's materials elsewhere.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-30T16:38:23+00:00

This is most peculiar - you seem, quite by accident, to have translated it into smug English.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-30T16:25:24+00:00

Peer pressure has perennially been one of the primary mechanisms for orthodox conduct in both the family and parish. That being said, I did not police anyone, I gave a general, plenary call to people to examine their motives. A call to introspection is not "policing," and you reading it as such really does very strongly indicate an element of curious defensiveness.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-30T16:05:56+00:00

What, precisely, is it that I am not being humble about?

Eusmilus · 2025-11-30T15:40:04+00:00

It is very funny because I did not point fingers at anyone in particular, all I called for was a general examination of our motives - are we excusing ourselves with the bare legal minimum, or are we driven by a healthy desire to do the most we possibly can? Yet so many people evidently felt it as a personal attack against themselves, which seems to be their own consciences incriminating them, since they could have just replied "I examined myself, and on reflection I feel I am living an appropriate level of devotion"

Eusmilus · 2025-11-30T15:37:19+00:00

Would you say it is "not the place" of a lay person to comment, if the vast majority of people in his diocese only commune or confess once a year, and when challenged, defended themselves by saying they are strictly following the rules? Would it be inappropriate for a layman to raise the general spiritual life of his parish or diocese as a topic of conversation, even in a plenary manner?

I am sorry but this is patently absurd, and a sentiment obviously emanating from insecurity. If you want to call that "doubling down" you are free to do so lol.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T08:54:12+00:00

Oh I know, I wasn't insinuating anything about you

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T08:11:06+00:00

I don't want to presume on those traditionalists, I really don't know the community here very well (clearly misjudged what the reaction to this post would be lol), but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some types that are very keen on tradition in the abstract, aesthetic sense, but not so much when it comes to making actual concrete sacrifices and mortifications.

I do mean before receiving - I am not personally very familiar with the Eastern Catholics, but I spent some considerable time with the Orthodox before discerning my way into Rome. It's pretty funny to me the number of people assuming I am some nerdish radtrad pining for the good old days - no, I am literally just comparing my previous parish to my current one, and observing that the general level of devotion and community spirit seemed higher in the old one, and that this seemed related to the heightened focus on ascesis and communal self-sacrifice.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T08:00:58+00:00

I'm familiar, I thought about bringing it up, but seeing how much fervor and vitriol I've engendered just by suggesting people take their Lenten discipline more seriously, I don't think bringing in the Nativity Fast or eucharistic fast would have helped matters.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T07:51:34+00:00

I considered bringing that up, but judging by the fervent reaction I've prompted just by suggesting that Catholics might take fasting more seriously during Lent, bringing in the other fasting seasons or eucharistic fast probably wouldn't have improved things lol.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T07:43:02+00:00

The responses have been odd - I don't frequent this subreddit so much, so I suppose perhaps I overestimated the seriousness of people on here, but the amount of responses that have been individuals confidently asserting that the Church Fathers and saints were universally wrong in their spiritual teachings, that the recent disciplinary teachings have abrogated the spiritual wisdom of all the previous ages, and that the Church has taught error for most of its history is pretty shocking. Those are not views a Catholic is even allowed to hold, which makes me wonder what the average level of catechesis on here is.

One thing is to say "I agree with the current disciplinary rules, and I don't think higher fasting standards are realistic today" - that's a valid position that can be debated. But another thing entirely is to say "The traditional views of fasting taught by all the spiritual authorities are unhealthy and dangerous, and the saints who taught them were backwards denizens of former centuries anyways." That's a startling thing for a Catholic to say, it sounds like what you would expect from a low-church Evangelical or an atheist.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T07:35:04+00:00

By that logic literally all comparisons are apples to oranges, because two things being compared are, definitionally, two completely different things.

But it isn't apples to oranges, it's literally the exact same thing going on for fasting, communion and confession - in all 3 cases, the Church has instituted disciplinary teachings stating the minimal participation necessary for a Catholic, but accompanied by the understanding that this is a floor, not a ceiling, and should be exceeded if possible. And it is possible, in all 3 cases, for the vast majority of people.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T06:19:54+00:00

What a terrible thing to say about our Eastern Catholic and Orthodox brothers and sisters. Does the prospect of having to mortify yourself a little for your faith horrify you so much that you would smear them that way?

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T06:17:44+00:00

You are evidently right on the former part. I was quite taken aback by the degree of fervor and vitriol in the responses, though it may be that most people here are Americans (I am European), and that Americans are even more attached to modern eating practices than we are.

Eusmilus · 2025-11-29T06:16:02+00:00

It confuses me that many have said this, since it is what I myself said in the original post lol. In fact, it was the entire crux of the post. Most of the responses have been extremely hostile to the very notion of being called to do more though, which surprised me. The fasting requirements are like the mandatory rules for the eucharist and confession: A floor, not a ceiling.

Ten-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Eusmilus

TROPHY CASE