The Desclée de Brouwer publishing house, which publishes the Jerusalem Bible, changed the word “man” (“hombre”) to “person” (“persona”) in its new Spanish edition.
The Jerusalem Bible is among the best known publications of the Bible. It has been published in Spanish since 1967. The first edition was published in French in 1956, and was based on the original Hebrew and Greek texts, not the Latin Vulgate, as are subsequent editions in other modern languages.
The excerpt shared by several Twitter users refers to Matthew 4:19, where Christ says to his disciples: “I will make you fishers of men,” which in the new edition says, “I will make you fishers of persons.”
“It doesn’t seem right to me, but I think it has the importance that we give it. If we read Holy Scripture every day, we would have realized long ago that the Jerusalem Bible translation is not the best option,” said Fr. Antonio María Domenech Guillén, a priest of the Diocese of Cuenca.
ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish language sister news agency, asked the managing director of the Desclée De Brouwer publishing house, Javier Gogeaskoetxea, about the change in the most recent version of the Jerusalem Bible.
“The change is due to the fact that the Biblical and Archaeological School of Jerusalem seeks above all fidelity to the original texts. It so happens that in the original ‘Greek’ text the word used does not include gender. Therefore the translation possibilities should not include it either: person or human being”, he explained.
“If I were to put ‘man,’” he continued, “we would be lacking in fidelity to the original text because the Greek word is neither man nor woman.”
“I understand that there is an attempt to ‘polemicize’ by attributing ‘inclusive’ language to the translation. But nothing is further from reality, the reason is fidelity to the original text,” he said.
“The basic rule followed by the Jerusalem Biblical and Archaeological School is that ‘the oldest text is always the most truthful.’ If the words are now changed to be ‘gender-friendly’ it has nothing to do with the decision of the Jerusalem Biblical and Archaeological School,” he noted.
“The biblical translations don’t conform to modern times, but rather try to be faithful to the ancient texts,” the managing director of the Desclée De Brouwer publishing house concluded.
Father Jesús Silva, a Spanish priest and graduate in Patristic Theology, gave a detailed explanation on Twitter about what would be the best translation of the word ánthropos in the Greek text, first translated in the Jerusalem Bible as “men”, and now as “persons.”
“The term that translates, anthropos, refers to a ‘human being’ regardless of sex. However, the translation as ‘persons’ has its problems. To what people was Jesus referring: human, angelic or divine? Well, in the text, thus translated, it is not excluded that Jesus is calling the disciples to evangelize the angels or God himself,” the priest said.
Fr. Silva then said that “since ‘persons’ is an ambiguous term, we will have to look for another that is not. We can then translate it as ‘human persons’ or ‘human beings.’ In turn, this translation is equivocal, since, what makes a human human?”
“Let’s put that it’s ‘a rational being’, as the RAE (Royal Academy of the Spanish Language) says. However, if intelligent aliens exist, it remains to be seen whether the term ‘human’ can be applied to them or not. As long as this is not clarified, the concept of human persons is also equivocal.”
“Perhaps the most appropriate translation,” the priest further mused, “whenever we want to avoid translating the word ánthropos as ‘man’ – could be ‘earthling’; although according to the RAE, any inhabitant of the earth is one, for which it should rather be said ‘fishers of human earthlings.’”
But as for the term “human,” Fr. Silva noted that the RAE defines it as “‘proper to man.’ That is to say, that literally speaking, what is human is what is proper to man (sic): men earthlings. But what does ‘man’ mean?
“The RAE comes to our aid again. The word ‘man’ means ‘rational animate being, male or female.’ Let’s therefore say that with the word ‘anthropos’ Jesus wanted to tell the Twelve that they would be ‘fishers of rational animated beings, male or female.’”
So then, the priest summed up, “with that circumlocution that’s so correct, to avoid misunderstandings that occur with words like ‘person,’ ‘human being’ or ‘human earthling,’ and adopting the principle of the economy of language, we could translate the word ánthropos as ‘man’, which includes all of the above.”
To conclude, Fr. Silva proposed that “in this new translation of the Bible, more adapted to our time, and guided by a principle of inclusion, as well as fidelity to the text and the intention of Jesus, let us translate the phrase in a new way as ‘I will make you fishers of men.’ You’re welcome.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Pope Benedict XVI announced his intention to resign the papacy during a meeting of cardinals Feb. 11, 2013. The surprise announcement, which he made in Latin, took place in the Hall of the Consistory in the Vatican’s apostolic palace. / Vatican Media
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jan 2, 2023 / 06:00 am (CNA).
On Feb. 11, 2013, before a gathering of cardinals who had come to the Vatican expecting to hear the announcement of upcoming canonizations, Pope Benedict XVI dropped a bombshell.
After a few announcements about Church business at the conclusion of the meeting, the pope took out two sheets of paper and read a prepared statement in Latin.
“I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church. After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry,” the then 85-year-old pontiff told the gathering of the Catholic Church’s highest-ranking clergymen.
Because he spoke in Latin, the language used for official Vatican proclamations, reporters present did not at first realize that the pope had just stepped down.
‘Total surprise, total shock’
The assembled cardinals, on the other hand, who knew their Latin, reacted with stunned silence.
American Cardinal James Stafford later told CNA that the pope’s statement was received with “total surprise, total shock.”
“A cardinal who was sitting next to me said, ‘Did he resign?’ I said, ‘Yes, that’s what he did. He resigned.’ And we just all stood at our places.”
Cardinals react to Pope Benedict XVI’s announcement of his intention to resign the papacy Feb. 11, 2013. The surprise announcement, which Benedict made in Latin, took place in the Hall of the Consistory in the Vatican’s apostolic palace. Vatican Media
Nigeria’s Cardinal Francis Arinze, who was present that morning, said the announcement was a “surprise, like thunder that gives no notice that it’s coming,” reported The Catholic Telegraph.
In renouncing the papacy, Benedict became only the second pope in almost 600 years to voluntarily step down. In 1294, Pietro da Morrone, an elderly hermit, was crowned Pope Celestine V, but finding the demands of the job too much for him, he resigned after only five months.
In 1415, Pope Gregory XII also resigned, but under very different circumstances — he stepped down in order to end a crisis within the Church known as the Great Western Schism.
Title, white clothes, and papal coat of arms
What happened next with Benedict XVI was no less surprising to those who expected him to live as a retired cardinal.
In his last official statement as pope, before a general audience on Feb. 27, 2013, Pope Benedict assured the tens of thousands of people gathered to hear him speak as pope for the last time that even though he was stepping back from official duties, he would remain, in essence, pope.
“The ‘always’ is also a ‘forever’ — there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this,” Benedict said.
“I do not return to private life, to a life of travel, meetings, receptions, conferences, and so on. I am not abandoning the cross, but remaining in a new way at the side of the crucified Lord,” he told the crowd.
A day earlier, on Feb. 26, 2013, the director of the Vatican Press Office, Father Federico Lombardi, had silenced speculation over what Benedict would be called and what he would wear. He would, Lombardi said, retain the trappings of the papacy — most significantly, his title and dress.
“He will still be called His Holiness Benedict XVI,” Lombardi said. “But he will also be called Pope Emeritus or Roman Pontiff Emeritus.”
Lombardi said Benedict would continue to wear a white cassock but without the mozzetta, the short cape that covers the shoulders. The pope’s fisherman’s ring would be replaced by a ring from his time as cardinal. The red shoes would go as well, Lombardi said, and be replaced by a pair of brown ones.
“The city of León is known for beautiful shoes, and very comfortable shoes. And when the pope was asked what he wanted to wear he said, ‘I want the shoes from León in Mexico,’” Lombardi said at the press conference.
On May 2, the cardinal who designed Benedict’s coat of arms in 2005 told CNA that he had written the pope emeritus suggesting that his coat of arms would need to be redesigned to reflect his new status. Cardinal Andrea Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo proposed making the keys of St. Peter smaller and less prominent.
“That shows that he had a historic possession but not a current jurisdiction,” said the cardinal at the time.
Benedict, however, it seems, politely declined a new coat of arms. La Stampa reported the following year that the Vatican Publishing House’s manual of ecclesiastical heraldry in the Catholic Church contained the following note:
“Expressing deep appreciation and heartfelt gratitude to the author for the interesting study sent to him, [Benedict] made it known that he prefers not to adopt an expressive heraldic emblem of the new situation created with his renouncing of the Petrine Ministry.”
By his decision to continue to dress in white like the pope, retain the title of pope, and keep the coat of arms of his papacy, Benedict revealed that in giving up the “active exercise of the ministry,” he was not forsaking the role of pope altogether.
Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI pray together at the papal residence in Castel Gandolfo March 23, 2013, their first meeting after Francis’ election. Vatican Media
An expanded Petrine ministry
In his 2013 announcement, Benedict clearly expressed his intention to step aside, even determining the date and time of his official departure. Nonetheless, his decision to keep the title of pope and maintain the ceremonial protocol that goes along with the papacy led some to speculate whether there were not actually “two popes.”
Benedict’s personal secretary and closest confidante, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, sought to clear up any confusion in 2016.
In a speech at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome on May 20, 2016, Gänswein said that Pope Francis and Benedict are not two popes “in competition” with one another but represent one “expanded” Petrine office with “an active member” and a “contemplative.”
Parsing Benedict’s speech, Gänswein explained that in stepping down, Benedict was not giving up his ministry.
“The key word in that statement is ‘munus petrinum,’ translated — as happens most of the time — with ‘Petrine ministry.’ And yet, ‘munus,’ in Latin, has a multiplicity of meanings: It can mean service, duty, guide, or gift, even prodigy. Before and after his resignation, Benedict understood and understands his task as participation in such a ‘Petrine ministry [munus],’” Gänswein said.
“He left the papal throne and yet, with the step he took on Feb. 11, 2013, he has not abandoned this ministry,” Gänswein explained, saying the latter scenario was something “quite impossible after his irrevocable acceptance of the office in April 2005.”
Benedict himself later made clear in an interview with his biographer Peter Seewald that he saw himself as continuing in his ministry. He said that a pope who steps down is like a father whose role changes, but always remains a father.
“Of course a father does not stop being father, but he is relieved of concrete responsibility. He remains a father in a deep, inward sense, in a particular relationship which has responsibility, but not with day-to-day tasks as such. It was also this way for bishops,” Benedict said.
“I think it is also clear that the pope is no superman and his mere existence is not sufficient to conduct his role, rather he likewise exercises a function.
“If he steps down, he remains in an inner sense within the responsibility he took on, but not in the function. In this respect one comes to understand that the office of the pope has lost none of its greatness, even if the humanity of the office is perhaps becoming more clearly evident,” Benedict said.
Benedict’s decision “not to abandon his ministry” inspired a cottage industry of conspiracy theories, with some questioning whether the pope emeritus truly stepped down because of his age and frailty.
George Weigel, author of the definitive biography of St. John Paul II, “Witness to Hope,” dismissed such speculation in an interview with CNA.
“I have no reason to think that there was anything more to Pope Benedict’s resignation than what he said was its cause: his conviction that he no longer had the strength, physical and intellectual, to give the Church what it needed from a pope,” he said.
“Everything else written about this is sheer speculation. Let’s take Benedict at his word,” Weigel said.
A life of prayer
In retiring to live in the Mater Ecclesiae Monastery in the Vatican Gardens, Benedict did not completely withdraw from the world. He attended public events in his new capacity as pope emeritus, received visitors, and pursued a life of fruitful study, writing, and prayer.
Pope Francis visits Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI at the Mater Ecclesiae monastery in Vatican City to exchange Christmas greetings Dec. 23, 2013. Vatican Media
Matthew Bunson, Catholic historian, author, and executive editor of EWTN News, told CNA that Benedict was determined not to exercise authority in his new role.
“He really embraced what it means to be pope emeritus, and refrained from making public comments, to instead live a life of prayer and reflection,” Bunson said.
“Benedict really was on retreat, and in prayer,” he said, “and that means we have his prayer for us as a Church.”
While becoming increasingly frail, Benedict continued to celebrate Mass daily with the other residents of the monastery and was known to enjoy spending time in the Vatican Gardens praying his daily rosary.
In the fall of 2021, more than eight years after Benedict stepped down, his private secretary, Gänswein, told Domradio in Cologne, Germany, that Benedict was “stable in his frailty.”
He described the pope emeritus as very weak physically but still clear in mind. Gänswein said he had not lost his “typical Bavarian humor.”
The meaning of Benedict’s renunciation for future popes
In 2013, after Benedict announced that he would step down as pope, Father Gianfranco Ghirlanda, a Jesuit theologian and canonist chosen by Pope Francis to be a cardinal, wrote an essay on what should happen when a pope steps down.
In the article, published in Civiltà Cattolica, Ghirlanda suggested the retiring Benedict take the title bishop emeritus of Rome.
“It is evident that the pope who has resigned is no longer pope; therefore he no longer has any power in the Church and cannot interfere in any government affair. One may wonder what title Benedict XVI will retain. We think that he should be given the title of bishop emeritus of Rome, like any other diocesan bishop who ceases,” he said.
In December 2021, at a congress on papal resignations, Ghirlanda took up the theme again.
“Having two people with the title of ‘pope,’ even if one added ’emeritus,’ it cannot be said that this might not generate confusion in public opinion,” he said.
To make clear that the pope who resigns is no longer pope, he said, he should perhaps be called “former Roman pontiff” or “former supreme pontiff.”
Pope Francis in July 2022 told reporters that if he were to retire from the papacy he would do things differently from his predecessor.
“The first experience went very well,” Pope Francis said, because Benedict XVI “is a holy and discreet man.”
In the future, however, “it would be better to define things or explain them better,” the pontiff added.
“I am the bishop of Rome. In that case I would be the bishop emeritus of Rome,” he said, and then suggested he would live in St. John Lateran Palace rather than at the Vatican.
The road leading from checkpoint 300, one of the main entrances to Bethlehem, to the city is completely deserted. Since Oct. 7, when the war broke out, the gate has been closed. Nov. 18, 2023. / Credit: Marinella Bandini
Mexico City, Mexico, Dec 12, 2019 / 04:00 am (CNA).- In the 500 years since Our Lady of Guadalupe appeared, the image of Our Lady has become the subject of several popular myths and legends, especially in Mexico, where she appeared.
Fr. Eduardo Chávez was the postulator for Juan Diego’s canonization and is a renowned expert on the apparitions. He is also director of the Institute for Guadalupan Studies.
Speaking to ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish language news partner, Chávez separated fact from fiction.
Is it true the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe has the same temperature as a human body?
“It’s logical that marble, stone, wood, and fabric have different temperatures,” he said. The image of the Virgin is formed on “a cloth made out of plant fibers, an agave called ‘ixotl.’ And it doesn’t have a temperature like a human being would have,” he said, dispelling a common rumor about the image.
Was the image painted or fabricated by human hands?
Chávez said the idea that the image was painted by human hands is “simply and plainly impossible,” because among other important details, St. Juan Diego’s tilma “doesn’t even have any brushstrokes on it.”
“It’s imprinted on there, it’s a print as such,” he noted.
Chávez also pointed to the miraculous nature of the image, asking “how is it possible for it to have lasted despite the fact that acid was accidentally spilled on it in 1784? How is it possible that after a bomb was set off underneath it on November 14, 1921, that nothing happened to it?”
Do the Virgin’s eyes move?
The priest said that on social media “people are saying that if you shine a strong light, the eyes dilate and things like that. No such thing. They don’t move, they don’t dilate.”
Chávez explained that “they’re misinterpreting something that an ophthalmologist, Enrique Graue, noted, namely that the eyes seem to be human, in the sense that they look like a photo of a human being, with the depth and reflection of a human eye.”
Does the Virgin of Guadalupe “float” on the mantilla?
Chávez was blunt: “The image doesn’t float,” rather “it’s imprinted on the tilma.”
“Nor are there two or three images placed one on top of the other,” as some claim, he explained.
Is Our Lady of Guadalupe a Catholic adaptation of an Aztec goddess?
Some scholars have promoted the idea that the Virgin of Guadalupe is a Catholic adaptation of the Aztec goddess, Coatlicue Tonantzin, who is a combination of a woman and serpents, and a symbol of fertility.
However, Chávez said that Our Lady of Guadalupe is not an adaptation of a goddess, and has nothing to do with idolatry.
“She’s not called Coatlicue, which would be idolatry, she’s called Tonantzin which isn’t any kind of idolatry, but means ‘our venerable mother,’ and as the indigenous affectionately say, ‘our dearest mother.’ It’s a title, it’s not idolatry.”
“The missionaries of the 16th century would never have made up a costume for a pagan goddess. That’s completely false,” he underscored.
Is there music hidden in the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe?
Based on mathematical analysis, Mexican accountant Fernando Ojeda discovered music embedded in the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Chávez explained.
Viewing the flowers and stars in the image of the Virgin as if they were musical notes, Ojeda outlined found a melody.
Chávez said that analysts repeated the experiment with copies of paintings from the 16th and 17th centuries, “where stars and flowers are placed at the painter’s discretion”, but the only thing they produced was “noise, not harmony.”
“Only with the original does a perfect harmony emerge, with a symphonic arrangement. It is true, music comes forth from the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe,” he affirmed.
Was there recently a light miraculously projected on the womb of the Virgin of Guadalupe?
For Chávez, “it’s hard to know if it was a miracle at that time because we don’t know if it was a ray of light that happened to hit upon one of the nearby metal objects, projecting a light on her womb.”
“What we do know is that she is the defender of life,” he said, and pointed to “the simple fact that she has a dark ribbon over the womb, which means she’s pregnant and that therefore Jesus Christ Our Lord is in her immaculate womb.”
Can words be seen on the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe?
Responding to those who say they can see the word “peace,” on the image, Chávez said “I don’t see that anywhere.”
“She communicates with glyphs as the indigenous did. And when it was by words she spoke in Náhuatl through Juan Diego who later translated,” he said.
Did Bishop Juan de Zumárraga mistreat Saint Juan Diego?
“The key, everything turns on the bishop,” he said, since “although the Virgin of Guadalupe chose a layman, spoke to a layman, expressed her message to a layman,” the shrine she asked for “was not going to be done without the authority of the bishop.”
Chávez said it was instead the servants who treated Saint Juan Diego badly when he went to see Bishop Juan de Zumárraga, “it was the servants who left him outside.”
The Franciscan bishops “never treated him badly, on the contrary, he treated him with affection” as well as with “a lot of respect, and much dignity,” Chávez said.
This story was originally published by ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.
Oh yes. This makes perfect sense.
But why not harken back to Plato, an even earlier source.
In which case the passage would read:
“I will make you fishers of featherless bipeds.”
Trips off the tongue, eh?
No, these exercises in political correctness aren’t stupid at all.
Revolutionary proposal – Let’s resuscitate the generic meaning of “man”.
Wokeness has no place in Scripture. The more politically incorrect and Patriarchal a Bible translation is, the better.