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
I have the Douay-Rhiems, the Knox Bible and the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition 2nd edition.  I use the RSV-CE exclusively for my lectio divina.  I like it very much.
(02-19-2021, 01:55 PM)Evangelium Wrote: [ -> ]I have the Douay-Rhiems, the Knox Bible and the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition 2nd edition.  I use the RSV-CE exclusively for my lectio divina.  I like it very much.

RSV-CE seems to be a popular choice.  I'll have to check it out.  What's the difference between the two editions, anything significant?
I'm not aware of any significant difference.  In any case, it's the 2nd edition that you will find available at Ignatius Press.

This is the edition that was available at my traditional chapel's bookstore.

I use the smaller New Testament and Psalms edition for my lectio divina.
I have many bibles of all kinds of translations. My journey started as a Protestant, then Catholic, then sort of nothing and lost, and now slowly coming back home.

Most recently I have been using a DR that I bought from Baronius. I love it. The language can be hard to follow. When I am stuck, I will grab another bible, usually an NIV as that is what my first bible was, to get a better sense of what is being said, then back to my DR.

The ESV bible is one I really like and I wish there was a Catholic version of it.

Ive also got an NAB that I don't really care for. Then I have an Ignatious RSV or many NRSV? They both read very odd to me.

Day to day though, I am on Team DR all the way.
I love necro-threads! Lazarus, rise & come forth!

First: "Douay-Rheims" is more a category of translations, not a specific translation. The Rheims NT was published in 1582, followed by the Douay OT in 1609/10. Each underwent a few reprints throughout the 17th century. They didn't appear as a single volume regularly until Bishop Challoner revised the text of both and created his own translation in the mid-18th century. What most folks call the "Douay-Rheims Bible" today is really Challoner's Bible, including the MacMahon and Haydock revisions/editions of Challoner's text.

Knox put out a fresh, 20th century translation directly from the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate with reference to the original languages. There was some criticism of his translation style, some thought it too informal. 

The Confraternity Bible, particularly the New Confraternity translation (c. 1941-1969) is a solid choice...before it morphed into the dreaded NAB project of 1970.

The RSV-CE of 1965/66 is the Church's attempt at not reinventing the wheel. The RSV was/is a decent translation, provided certain textual changes were made along with annotations clarifying the text. 

I utilize: Knox, New Confraternity & the RSV-CE...in addition to other translations. FWIW.
I was a Lay Reader in the Anglican Church for years, responsible for publicly reciting the Book of Common Prayer Daily Office, Morning and Evening Prayer, in the Chapel. The BCP itself is in Elizabethan/Jacobean English. The Scriptures, of course, were the KJV, so the same style of language. The Psalter in the BCP is Miles Coverdale's translation from 1535, so similar. I especially liked the Psalter because it was translated from the Vulgate and was designed for chanting in English. In fact, I now have an Eastern Orthodox edition of the Psalter with Coverdale's translation, divided into the kathismata.

At any rate, all this means two things. 1) I am quite comfortable with the language of the D-R, and 2) if I'm quoting Scripture, I have to check the D-R to be sure I'm not quoting the KJV or Coverdale.
(03-04-2021, 10:11 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]I was a Lay Reader in the Anglican Church for years, responsible for publicly reciting the Book of Common Prayer Daily Office, Morning and Evening Prayer, in the Chapel. The BCP itself is in Elizabethan/Jacobean English. The Scriptures, of course, were the KJV, so the same style of language. The Psalter in the BCP is Miles Coverdale's translation from 1535, so similar. I especially liked the Psalter because it was translated from the Vulgate and was designed for chanting in English. In fact, I now have an Eastern Orthodox edition of the Psalter with Coverdale's translation, divided into the kathismata.

At any rate, all this means two things. 1) I am quite comfortable with the language of the D-R, and 2) if I'm quoting Scripture, I have to check the D-R to be sure I'm not quoting the KJV or Coverdale.

I still like the KJV and quote it. Unfortunately it is the "Bible" language of the English-speaking world. D-R is good, but it can be clunky with the translation at times.
(03-05-2021, 12:42 AM)austenbosten Wrote: [ -> ]I still like the KJV and quote it.  Unfortunately it is the "Bible" language of the English-speaking world.  D-R is good, but it can be clunky with the translation at times.

I think this is mostly just a leftover from an older tradition. King James is mostly associated with weirdo, evangelical fundies. The Douay version has always read well to me.
(03-05-2021, 12:42 AM)austenbosten Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-04-2021, 10:11 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]I was a Lay Reader in the Anglican Church for years, responsible for publicly reciting the Book of Common Prayer Daily Office, Morning and Evening Prayer, in the Chapel. The BCP itself is in Elizabethan/Jacobean English. The Scriptures, of course, were the KJV, so the same style of language. The Psalter in the BCP is Miles Coverdale's translation from 1535, so similar. I especially liked the Psalter because it was translated from the Vulgate and was designed for chanting in English. In fact, I now have an Eastern Orthodox edition of the Psalter with Coverdale's translation, divided into the kathismata.

At any rate, all this means two things. 1) I am quite comfortable with the language of the D-R, and 2) if I'm quoting Scripture, I have to check the D-R to be sure I'm not quoting the KJV or Coverdale.

I still like the KJV and quote it.  Unfortunately it is the "Bible" language of the English-speaking world.  D-R is good, but it can be clunky with the translation at times.


Doesn't the Anglican Ordinariate use a Catholic approved translation of the KJV? Kind of like RSV vs RSV-CE
(03-06-2021, 12:50 AM)irenaeusofnewyork Wrote: [ -> ]Doesn't the Anglican Ordinariate use a Catholic approved translation of the KJV? Kind of like RSV vs RSV-CE

I've no idea, but I've messaged Fr Vaughn Treco asking him. He was a Priest of the Ordinariate, until he was excommunicated for the 'crime' of actually being a Catholic.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13