Why no modern English trad Bible translation?
#1
The main traditional versions of Scripture are the Douay-Rheims and the Knox Bibles (I don't know whether Douay-Confraternity Bibles are still being printed).

I've been thinking that a new convert to traditional Catholicism wouldn't have a traditional Bible in modern English like their Protestant equivalents would have. The Knox is a dynamic equivalence translation and I know that a literal translation is better. RSV-CE is translated from original language texts and not the Vulgate, plus it has the names in the Protestant form.

Why don't a group of trad Bible scholars (fluent in Latin, Hebrew and Greek) get together and produce a translation of the Vulgate, compared with the Hebrew and Greek, into modern English? With the traditional names (Josue, Elias, 1 Paralipomenon, Isaias, Abdias etc).

Do you think trads should have a traditional Bible translation in modern English, or are you happy to stick with the Douay-Rheims?
Reply
#2
I'm happy to stick with the Douay-Rheims. :)
[-] The following 5 users Like In His Love's post:
  • Anon777, deusmeus, Dmorgan, jack89, wxboss
Reply
#3
I know that a lot of traditional Catholics love the Douay-Rheims, and that's fine.

But what do you do when you have someone who is new not only to traditional Catholicism, but the Bible and Christianity in general? Someone who has never read the Bible? I think it would be hard for them to read 18th century English.

I remember hearing about a guy I know who attends (and is now the pastor of a separate) independent fundamental KJV only Baptist church engaging in prison ministry. He told a prisoner that he should stop reading his modern version of the Bible and start reading the KJV. He couldn't read it.

It is to avoid situations such as this that I think a modern traditional Catholic version of the Bible would be a good idea. I wouldn't expect those devoted to the DR to abandon it. I just think there should be more options.
Reply
#4
I can't see a group of Catholic scholars doing a "traditional" translation into modern English, especially the hierarchy, USCCB, etc. who are all obsessed with gender-neutral language and even heretical footnotes. Or at least not getting the support to do so. I could see all the Catholic Answers type apologists strongly urging other Catholics away from a "traditional" translation that isn't stamped with an imprimatur and whatnot.

Probably the closest to a traditional modern English translation would be the RSV, which is decades old but still reverent and readable; even though it was not originally a translation done by Catholic scholars.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Sequentia's post:
  • deusmeus
Reply
#5
The RSV-CE is ok. When I read scripture, I generally read the missal or the breviary, which I assume uses the Douay-Rheims translation. I have an RSV-CE that I sometimes read if I want to read more than I can handle from a screen. I wish they would have a revised Douay-Rheims with some updated phrasing and book naming. "Blessed are the paps that gave thee suck" sounds ridiculous, as does "Sophonias."
[-] The following 1 user Likes Credidi Propter's post:
  • Jennet78
Reply
#6
(04-17-2017, 11:24 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote: The RSV-CE is ok. When I read scripture, I generally read the missal or the breviary, which I assume uses the Douay-Rheims translation. I have an RSV-CE that I sometimes read if I want to read more than I can handle from a screen. I wish they would have a revised Douay-Rheims with some updated phrasing and book naming. "Blessed are the paps that gave thee suck" sounds ridiculous, as does "Sophonias."

It may be helpful to point out that the biblical names (for the most part) retain their traditional spellings even in John Paul II's Nova Vulgata. That said, Zephaniah makes me snicker, too. Not as much as "Nimrod" or "Dorcas", but Hebrew names sound funny to my Anglophone ears, whatever the transliteration convention used.

By wife, however, agrees wholeheartedly with you regarding "paps" and "give suck", which are words she never could manage to force past her lips after the Office. For some reason it doesn't bother me, but I have my nose in depreciated English all the time.
Reply
#7
I like the DR but I just can't get over the beginning of Genesis. "Let there be light" sounds so much nicer than "be light made". Parts of the DR to me sound almost robotic or formulaic because of the weird way it translates the Latin. I would love to see an updated DR, perhaps smooth it out a bit so its wording isn't so clunky.

Also I really prefer the Hebrew names when speaking English, they sound a bit less strange to me. If I were reading Latin then I would go for the Latin names.
Reply
#8
(04-17-2017, 09:13 PM)Dominicus Wrote: I like the DR but I just can't get over the beginning of Genesis. "Let there be light" sounds so much nicer than "be light made". Parts of the DR to me sound almost robotic or formulaic because of the weird way it translates the Latin. I would love to see an updated DR, perhaps smooth it out a bit so its wording isn't so clunky.

Also I really prefer the Hebrew names when speaking English, they sound a bit less strange to me. If I were reading Latin then I would go for the Latin names.

Yes, I have always found the DR clunky, but that is the natural byproduct of the approach — near-slavish fidelity to the Vulgate at the expense of euphony. But it still is readable.

In modern English, the Orthodox Study Bible is not bad. The OT is translated from the LXX and uses the NKJV NT. The footnotes are a bit light, but they are drawn from patristic interpretations, not the modernist morass that the NAB has. Obviously Orthodox and not Catholic, but the number of places where there would be variation are very few. The most notable would be Genesis 3:15 since the Vulgate is alone among ancient versions in having the woman crushing the serpent's head; the LXX and Peshitta agree with the Hebrew in having the woman's seed crush the serpent's head. But since either reading can be harmonized with the other, that's not a huge deal as long as you're aware of it.
[-] The following 1 user Likes aquinas138's post:
  • williamus
Reply
#9
(04-17-2017, 11:21 PM)aquinas138 Wrote: Pesh**ta

:LOL:  That reminds me of "This Week in Unnecessary Censorship" from Jimmy Kimmel.
Reply
#10
DR can be quite difficult for many people to read. I wouldn't mind something that's a little bit easier to read, but doesn't destroy the meanings like the more modern versions. Certainly a difficult endeavor, but I'm sure some people could pull it off.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)