FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Why no modern English trad Bible translation?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
(04-23-2017, 04:55 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: [ -> ]Listen, I'm not a Knox apologiist, nor do this his translation is the best. (I, for instance, despise some of his psalms when he decides to depart from his stated purpose and goes all alphabetical on us like in Psalm 118-- sure the Hebrew is that way, but in English it's just kitschy, not a great works of literature.)

Anyway, I just don't see why people are desirous of a modern redaction of the Douay-Challoner:

1. It is reinventing the wheel

There are plenty of decent Catholic translations into English : Knox, RSV-CE, Jerusalem Bible (not the NJB), Confraternity, etc.). Why are these so insufficient that the Challoner needs to be redacted to modern language?

2. It smacks of a certain fundamentalist Protestant spirit which wants to have a "perfect" translation of scripture (because it is the foundation of their privately developed "faith").

No Bible translation will every be 100% accurate to the original inspired texts. That's because those texts are no longer extant and any translation will fail to completely convey the meaning of the original.

What we have to settle for is what the Magisterium teaches us about scripture (since we're not able to privately interpret) : the Vulgate is, in morals and doctrine, substantially equivalent to the inspired texts. When the Church teaches what scripture means it comes from this text, or another which bears the same characteristic of substantial equivalence to the original (no others have been so defined).

The problem is that no translation from the Vulgate, Greek or any other early version will ever be good enough to be used for us defining doctrine or moral teaching, because that's not our job. Thus any reasonably accurate translation would be fine to study scripture and back up what the Church already teaches.

Thus, a word-for-word literal translation is somewhat pointless unless you're trying to study Latin or Greek.

Pick the version or versions that best help you to understand the text. Don't seek some "perfect" translation. It doesn't and will never exist.

I agree one of the best Bible-based Catholic apologists I know said repeatedly that if you really want to to study the Bible and you lack knowledge of Greek, then you need several different translations, as each have their strengths and weaknesses
I think that the Bible is definitely in translation. I am NOT sure that the translation is accurate because the language of the Bible is very complex. Maybe you just didn't find such a copy of the Bible
In Mi-Ca-El when someone cited the Bible they almost always used the Latin first and then they used a translation.
I am content with the Bibles approved by the Church.  I have the Knox, Douay-Rheims, and a 50 year old NAB that I bought as a teenager. I prefer editions before Vatican II.  If I have questions about what I'm reading, I ask Father. 
I am studying Church Latin so I can read the Bible in the inspired Latin. I am looking for a good book on old English Grammar.
English is a language that is constantly being corrupted by those who have a wicked intent, and I have a certain distrust of all things of this modern world.
(10-28-2020, 11:44 AM)Mr Joy Wrote: [ -> ]I am content with the Bibles approved by the Church.  I have the Knox, Douay-Rheims, and a 50 year old NAB that I bought as a teenager. I prefer editions before Vatican II.  If I have questions about what I'm reading, I ask Father. 
I am studying Church Latin so I can read the Bible in the inspired Latin. I am looking for a good book on old English Grammar.
English is a language that is constantly being corrupted by those who have a wicked intent, and I have a certain distrust of all things of this modern world.

Great goal to read the Bible in Latin, but you should also add Koine Greek if you want to be as close to the original Gospel texts as possible.  The good news is Koine is easier than Homeric, the bad news is it’s still Greek.
What I'd like to see is a Catholic revision of the old, super-literal, ASV Bible. That's my personal favorite. Either that, or a Catholic literary translation in the same vein as Robert Alter's Hebrew Bible and Richmond Lattimore's New Testament. If the Bible is God's word in human language, then literary qualities (that normally get wiped out in the uniform style most translations have) are important. Read Alter's Job for instance. It's positively majestic.
There really needs to be a Traditional Catholic modern english bible translated from the original languages. That bible of course needs to be faithful to church teaching and packed with footnotes and commentary from the early Church fathers and Saints.

It is honestly a bit disappointing that the Orthodox beat Catholics to it. They have an "Orthodox Study Bible." Admittedly, it is an NKJV, but the commentary and footnotes are filled with early church fathers.

I would love to see maybe the FSSP or the ICKSP try to make a translation. Or maybe an independent Traditional Catholic Publisher. Ryan Grant, a Facebook friend of mine, would be perfect if he wasn't busy working on other projects.
I thought the douay-rheims bible was a Traditional translation of the Bible for Catholics.
I use the RSV:CE and I like it a lot. I also have the Douay-Rheims, but the RSV is so much easier and smoother to read. It does not use gender neutral language, does not dumb down the text, and retains the "thees and thous" only in prayer directed toward God. Which I kind of like, it gives the English a kind of liturgical flavor, while keeping the whole bible predominantly in modern English.

I don't think there's any need to adhere to an "old vulgate only" position. Its kind of reminiscent of protestant king james onlyism. No translation is ever going to be 100% in coherence with the original inspired texts, and more importantly, Christianity is not a religion of the book like Islam is with the Quran. We read scripture within the framework of Apostolic Tradition, so literal 1:1 coherence with the original texts or some mythically "pure" vulgate isn't all that important.

I'd always recommend the RSV:CE (1st edition!) for anyone who struggles with reading the old English.
I did the 'read the bible in a year' thing with the NAB, which was before I went the traditional route, and I'm glad I did. It was easy to read and I stuck with it.

Since then I've heard that some translations and footnotes are a bit modernized and that I should get a Douay-Rheims Bible, so that's what I'm reading now. To be honest, it was a little difficult to read at first, which I'm guessing is common. But I'm getting used to it now and I kind of like it.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13