Tag Archives: biblioblog

2 (kinda) New (to me) Theo-Blogs

On Twitter, Chrystal Marie Lewis introduced me to a relatively new theo-blog, The Seedbed.

Why the title, The Seedbed?

According to this post by Sarah Morice Brubaker,

Making The Seedbed into a sort of free school, which is quite appropriate given the name. (“Seedbed” is the English for “seminarium,” the word from which “seminary” — what has been traditionally a training school for clergy, but whose definition is being broadened/reimagined as we speak — derives. Of course, the fact that the blog will be a bunch of religiously-thoughtful women makes the language even more evocative, when you consider the stubborn representation of “woman” as “passive receiving-ground for the man’s word/seed” that has so afflicted much of western theology, philosophy, and myth.)

Other contributors include Priscilla the Explainer (see Acts), Cassandra of Troy, badasstheologychickwivattitude, and hadhufang according to the About Page.

The Seedbed also has a facebook page.

Secondly, this is a blog I meant to introduce a while back, so here goes.

Women In Theology is a “a blog written exclusively by women from an anti-kyriarchal Christian ecumenical theological perspective.”

In addition,

It’s important to be aware that despite our acronym (WIT for “women in theology”) we do not claim to speak for all women; we have chosen to adopt this name for our blog to maintain a connection with a group of women scholars who have served as mentors and inspirations to us and who themselves had a group called “WIT” in graduate school. . At the same time, we do not write as a unitary voice on this blog. We hope that our diverse theological perspectives and many ways of naming our commitment to the full social, political, economic, domestic, and ecclesiastical equality of women can emerge through this collaboration. Within this collaboration, some of us self-identify as feminists and others do not. Recognizing the inappropriate employment of feminism as a means of exerting control over other other women and groups, we believe it is important not to impose this term on those of us who explicitly do not self-identify in this way. Still, because the history of Christian theology is one in which women have been spoken about (by men) much more than they have been allowed to speak for themselves, we seek to add our voices to a theological conversation that remains male-dominated. Our group is currently predominately Catholic, but includes former, current, and future Protestants; on the whole, we are committed to ecumenical dialogue.

The list of authors can be found here. And they have a Facebook page as well.

Please check out these blogs, subscribe to them, and interact if you so choose.


Political Jesus has a Facebook page as well.

What Now Shall I Read? A Case for the NAB

The Codex Gigas from the 13th century, held at...
Image via Wikipedia

A very special thank you to Jeremy Thompson from Free Old Testament Audio (where coincidentally you can find the rankings of the top 50 Bibliobloggers on the interwebs) for joining us in this project, “What now Shall I Read?” You You can read the first post on my search for a new Bible translation here. The case for the NIV can be found here. The case for the NRSV can be found here.  Jeremy recommends checking out the USCCB lectionary page and iMissal (an NAB iphone app). And now, let’s give Jeremy a very warm political Jesus welcome as he tells me why he uses the NAB version.

Thanks to Chad for inviting me to write the third part in this series on Bible translations.  As happens from time to time in the Biblioblogoshpere, I may be a bit of an odd one out.  As a Roman Catholic, I’m likely writing a post about a translation that many readers will dismiss, the New American Bible.  So, humor me … 😉
There are only two Bible translations that I read with any kind of consistency, namely the NRSV and the NAB.  I generally use the NRSV in academic settings and the NAB in parish settings.  That is not to say I don’t use other translations.  In fact, when I am studying a particular passage I almost always compare translations using either BibleWorks or Logos.  I don’t believe that there is any one translation that is adequate taken on its own.  Be that as it may, there are three underlying reasons why I primarily use the NAB for daily reading and in parish settings: canon, community, and liturgy.
From the standpoint of canon, I use the NAB because it contains the deuterocanonicals.  I doubt anyone would read a version of the Harry Potter series that left out all or part of book three. In the same way, I don’t read Bibles that leave out books that I believe to be canonical.  If you are a Protestant, would you read from an NIV that was missing the Book of Esther or Job?  Doubtful.  In the same way, I wouldn’t expect an Orthodox Christian to consistently read from the NAB.
Let me give you one illustration where this would play an important role.  My NAB is a study Bible, as most of them are.  In its cross-references and notes it sometimes refers to the deuterocanonicals.   A translation that doesn’t contain these books cannot do so.  I think this is a major weakness even in Bibles where these texts are not taken as canonical (i.e. perhaps they could be included as an appendix somewhat like the NRSV).  At the very least, the deuterocanonicals do shed some light on the New Testament, even for the Protestant.  The inability to cross-reference these texts or refer to them in notes such that the reader can easily look them up without going to another text is problematic.
Now, I have no intention of arguing about issues of canon here.  This is not my blog.  I’m only explaining to you why I read a particular translation.
Against that backdrop, one might say that there are a number of texts that include the deuterocanonicals other than the NAB.  This is certainly true, which brings me to the point of community.  To be quite honest, many Catholics are not entirely happy with the NAB.  I’m not always happy about the translation decisions either.  I hate the way it sometimes handles text critical issues.  But, the fact of the matter is that it is what most people in my church parish read.  So, if I am teaching my adult Sunday School class on Sunday morning and read from anything other than the NAB, I am likely to cause confusion.  Therefore, I read the NAB as a part of my community and point out possible translation issues as I am teaching.
I remember what it was like being in an evangelical Protestant church and everyone using a different translation.  I could walk into church on Sunday morning and find people reading from the NIV, the NLT, the ESV, the NASB, the KJV, the NKJV, the Message, or the HCSB.  And, then there was the continual interjecting in Sunday School class: “but mine says …”  and me thinking “well that’s nice” ;-).  It is refreshing not to have to deal with that so much anymore.  Of course, some people in my church parish do have different versions, but I would say that over 90% of the people who come in for any teaching that I do in my parish use the NAB.  And, any time I listen to another person in my parish teach, they use the NAB.  So, do I love it? No.  I love Hebrew and Greek texts.  Is it adequate? Yes.  And, most people in my community use it.
Finally, and tied to the aspect of community, is liturgy.  The NAB is the text used in the lectionary from which my church and most others in North America read.  When I do devotional reading I generally read from the lectionary.  I always try to interact with the lectionary texts in Hebrew and Greek when I have time, but that is a bit idealistic considering everything I’m currently doing.  Whether I study the lectionary readings in Greek and Hebrew or English I always go to the United States Council of Catholic Bishops website or to iMissal to find where the lectionary readings are.  If I read the lectionary in English, I am reading the NAB.  If I do that, then I am seeing the same readings from the same translation as any Catholic in North America who has attended mass that day or who has read from the lectionary.  And, I think there is something really wonderful about that – Christians reading the Bible together in some unified way.
I love the lectionary.  In the tradition of which I was a part, the usage of scripture was somewhat myopic.  Rarely were there sermons on the Old Testament or the gospels.  Our preachers spent most of their time in the epistles.  The lectionary forces me to remove my blinders to some degree because I am not choosing what I want to read.  I get an Old Testament reading (usually), a psalm, and a gospel reading.  I must interact with readings that I might ordinarily overlook.  And, I believe that is important.  At the very least, I think it humbles me.  It makes me realize just how difficult it is to do theology considering the variety of perspectives found in the text of the Bible.  Some may believe that all of the Biblical authors are saying similar things only in different ways, but even still, that is a lot to sort.  I am thankful that lectionary makes me ever more aware of this.  And, the Bible version that makes it easiest for me to experience these benefits of the lectionary is the NAB.
With all this said, I am not recommending that everyone read the NAB.  For me, it just makes sense.  I would recommend though that we should all take into account canon, community, and “liturgical” context when making decisions about which translation we read from, even if you don’t use a lectionary – God help you ;-).
Enhanced by Zemanta

November 2010 Biblioblog Rankings: We Are #31!

Image representing Alexa as depicted in CrunchBase
Image via CrunchBase

Jeremy Thompson has graciously recorded the rankings according to Alexa stats for the biblioblogs.  Same top three, yada yada, and then Chad and I reached #31 this month!

Here are the rest of the rankings.

Enhanced by Zemanta