I don’t doubt that some Catholics are hypercritical of their non-Catholic Christian brethren with regards to the literal nature of Scripture.
The quote from my post to you (really a quote from a Catholic Answers forum thread) is not so hypercritical when viewed in the light of the specific topic being discussed which is: did God “dictate” word for word the Scriptures (which no one can deny is an accurate representation of what many Non-Catholics believe this thread alone is evidence of that).
As that post goes on to explain, there is another way to understand the word “dictate” (or dictation) which is to say a forceful yet not mechanical guidance of an entity or process. Like, as the poster said, Team X really dictated the pace of the game.
So in this sense there is no disagreement between Pope Leo XIII and paragraph 106 of the Catechism.
As a “note bene” you may want to note that Bible commentaries are not infallible teachings. You seem to note that almost in passing near the end of your post but I wanted to make that clear.
I was not contending Leo XIII was teaching dictation in s negative way, but gave you an example of using the term which i did not see CB even describing.
As a “note bene” you may want to note that Bible commentaries are not infallible teachings. You seem to note that almost in passing near the end of your post but I wanted to make that clear.
Of course they are not infallible, but which is irrelevant as the constant RC refrain about the need for the magisterium can hardly be restricted to infallible teaching, as according to at least one RC apologist they do not make up the majority of what RCs believe and practice.
Moreover, not only is what magisterial level Cath teachings fall under, subject to interpretation, including what all the infallible teachings are, but their meaning can be to varying degrees, while even official Ordinary Magisterium teaching leaves much undefined.
Thus in real life RCs much look to the interpretation and counsel of their local ordinaries, and things like the NAB commentary. The latter esp. finds a viable place, since Rome has never infallibly defined more than a few verses at best, nor has the Ordinary Magisterium provided a complete authoritative commentary on even the NT.
But her American bishops to whom the Vatican has entrusted the care of 78 million souls, approved the NAB and its notes, and in study Bible the Bible helps, both of which teach liberal revisionism as was showed (not that all the notes are wrong). Some of that
It had been succeeded by the NABRE, but i have seen some of the same type of liberal scholarship in it, from the limited access i was able to get.