BUG: Church document collection is incomplete

AARGH ... but I really don't think I ought to have to double check this sort of thing.

I opened the library and filtered once by Collection: Church Documents (the Verbum supplied collection) and once by the Publisher: Libreria Editrice Vaticana. A partial list of church documents appearing in the second list but not the first. Those in bold clearly belong in the first.

Acerbo Nimis
Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum
Ad Diem Illum Laetissium
Angelus of Pope John Paul I
Angelus-Regina Caeli of Pope Benedict XVI
Angelus-Regina Coeli of Pope John Paul II
Annus Iam Plenus
Apostolic Constitutions of Pope Benedict XVI
Apostolic Letters and Motu Proprio of Pope Benedict XVI
Audiences of Pope Francis, 2013-2015
Audiences of Pope John Paul I
Audiences of Pope John Paul II
Catholic Teaching on Apostolic Succession
Christianity and the World Religions
Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God
Communium Rerum
etc. ....

This is not a completely accurate method of checking but the error rate is not acceptable. In addition, this calls into question whether the data and links in the Catholic Topical Index has been kept up to date.

Further testing suggests that ~ 130 documents have not been added to the Church Documents collection based on this collection where VSCD is the default Church Documents Collection. I am not claiming to have identified all the possible cases.

Find more posts tagged with

Catholic Products

Comments

Gregory Lynne

MJS: True. But Logos/Verbum have yet to define "Catholic Church" according to current socio-cultural-political-spiritual reality. I defer to the film "Unplanned" which I viewed 1x yesterday. In it, "Christians" are displayed as a dualistic spectrum of prolife and proabortion advocates--along with "miscellaneous other persuasions" according to that dyad differentiation. In some cases, there is at-least superficial dialogue, tolerance, and interaction between opposing members of the two camps, with questions relating to "orthodoxy" left aside unanswered. Yet, returning to "your survey": There seems to be little-to-none acknowledgement (nor tolerance) among Logos/Verbum subscribers to such tolerance and interaction. Yet: Even the so-called "Catholic" Douay-Rheims Bible of Verbum/Logos lacks proper attribution to its sources on its "Title Page" and omits the original footnotes and commentaries of its editors! For this aberration to exist among a crowd that is predominantly-sola-scriptura in "sentiment" is astounding! For "Catholics" who tred into digital Verbum and/or Logos' products, this indiscretion isn't without iteration. Nor is there any differentiation among materials produced by "popes" vs. "anti-popes"? So--actually--your 'distinction' of 'Church document omission' is actually a sad and tragic 'insight-with-blinders-on'...IMHO. ["Welcome! To the Great Apostasy."]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062730#Comment_1062730

But Logos/Verbum have yet to define "Catholic Church" according to current socio-cultural-political-spiritual reality.

Fortunately, that is a definition left entirely to God and the "spiritual realm" aka "eternal now".

And, yes, I am a consistent advocate of church documents produced from other ecclesial structures. However, in this case I am merely asking Verbum to consistently implement the implied contract from when the three predefined collections where first implemented.

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062730#Comment_1062730

Yet: Even the so-called "Catholic" Douay-Rheims Bible of Verbum/Logos lacks proper attribution to its sources on its "Title Page" and omits the original footnotes and commentaries of its editors!

Douay Rheims 1609 1582 or Challoner version

Douay-Rheims Bible (DRA)

For five centuries, the Douay-Rheims Bible has remained one of the standard English Bible translations for Roman Catholics around the world. As the first and most enduring translation of the Latin Vulgate, the Douay-Rheims was translated at the end of the sixteenth century at the initiative of Gregory Martin. It quickly rose in popularity among English Catholics—becoming an essential part of Catholic identity during the English Counter-Reformation—and has been reprinted hundreds of times in the centuries that followed.

[There are a ‘few’ errors in that description – IMHO]

To test if it is the 1609 / 1582

Gen 1:5 “that made one day” not just “one day”

Psa 1:1 “gone” not “walked”

Mat 2:1 “Sages” not “wise men”

Genesis 1:5 And he called the light Day, and the darkness Night; and there was evening and morning one day. DRA

⁵ And he called the light, Day, and the darkness, Night: and there was evening & morning, that made one day. RDR

Psalm 1:1 Blessed is the man who hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the chair of pestilence: DRA

¹ (1) BLESSED (a) is the man, that hath not gone in the counsel of the impious, & hath (b) not stood in the way of sinners, and hath (d) not sit in the chair of pestilence: RDR

Matthew 2:1 When Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda, in the days of king Herod, behold, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, DRA

¹ (1) WHEN JESUS therefore was *born in Bethlehem of Juda in the days of Herod the King, behold, there came Sages from the East to Jerusalem, RDR

Version in Logos is thus the Challoner Version with no hint that it is not the originals of 1609 / 1582

The massive notes were from the originals of 1609 / 1582

Kyle G. Anderson

Thanks. In late-2018/early-2019 we hooked up our production tooling with features that makes it easier to get the hook-ups set up.

I'll take this thread as a jumping off point to get old resources updated.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062945#Comment_1062945

Thanks Kyle. I'll give you a bit of time to make the corrections then report any issues still remaining.