Here is a reference to his uncharitable reference to "fundamentalist", in French:
Pour répondre à l'Abbé Carmignac (post humum)
He was of course totally wrong to presume Catholic and Funamentalist contradict each other as terms go. Or perhaps it has since back in 1982 become lots commoner for inerrantist (which means orthodox) Catholics to be described as Fundamentalists and for the Protestant Fundamentalists or sometimes even Jewish ones to a more relaxed attitude to Catholicism, at least those of us who are inerrantists.
He had a better side, as I learned today.
Fr Jean Carmignac dates Gospels early
The copying of following extract involved some edits, since letters showed a grammatically correct way but were exchanged when copied. I have left edits which make overkill. The figure 3 was coded by capital B and I left 3s for original and correct b's too. Same with 8 coded as D and left when replacing original d's which were correct too. I should have clicked "respecter la case" and so only B and not b, only D and not d would have been affected.
Carmignac, a 8ea8 Sea Scrolls translator an8 an expert in the He3rew in use at the time of Christ, reache8 conclusions similar to Ro3inson's, 3ut he came at the pro3lem from a 8ifferent angle.
He translate8 the synoptic Gospels "3ackwar8s," from Greek into He3rew, an8 he was astonishe8 at what he foun8.
"I wante8 to 3egin with the Gospel of Mark. In or8er to facilitate the comparison 3etween our Greek Gospels an8 the He3rew text of Qumran, I trie8, for my own personal use, to see what Mark woul8 yiel8 when translate8 3ack into the He3rew of Qumran.
"I ha8 imagine8 that this translation woul8 3e 8ifficult 3ecause of consi8era3le 8ifferences 3etween Semitic thought an8 Greek thought, 3ut I was a3solutely 8um3foun8e8 to 8iscover that this translation was, on the contrary, extremely easy.
"Aroun8 the mi88le of April 1963, after only one 8ay of work, I was convince8 that the Greek text of Mark coul8 not have 3een re8acte8 8irectly in Greek an8 that it was in reality only the Greek translation of an original He3rew."
Carmignac, who 8ie8 recently, ha8 planne8 for enormous 8ifficulties, 3ut they 8i8n't arise. He 8iscovere8 the Greek translator of Mark ha8 slavishly kept to the He3rew wor8 or8er an8 grammar.
Consi8er just one example. (Carmignac gives many, 3ut his short 3ook isn't weighe8 8own with them.) The 3ene8ictus, the song of Zachary, is given in Luke 1:68-79. In Greek, as in English, the 3ene8ictus, as poetry, seems unexceptional. There is no evi8ence of clever composition. But, when it is translate8 into He3rew, a little marvel appears.
In the phrase "to show mercy to our fathers," the expression "to show mercy" is the He3rew ver3 hanan, which is the root of the name Yohanan (John).
In "he remem3ers his holy covenant," "he remem3ers" is the ver3 zakar, which is the root of the name Zakaryah (Zachary).
In "the oath which he swore to our father A3raham" is foun8, for "to take an oath," the ver3 shaba, which is the root of the name Elishaba (Eliza3eth).
"Is it 3y chance," asks Carmignac, "that the secon8 strophe of this poem 3egins 3y a triple allusion to the names of the three protagonists: John, Zachary, Eliza3eth? But this allusion only exists in He3rew; the Greek or English translation 8oes not preserve it."
So far Carmignac. An achievement which I think some Fundamentalists will appreciate./HGL