Best Literal Catholic Translation of the Bible

[ProVobis]

what do you mean by dime a dozen?

Somehow I don’t think all of the published English translations can all be inspired by God, can they? Maybe they are, but knowing what I know about translators and translations, I have my doubts.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations

Besides didn’t the Magisterium of the Church burn some of the early English Bible translators (Tyndale et al) at the stake? Seems like there must have been a good reason for that. Personally I think St. Thomas More made a good point.

 

[po18guy]

Well, yeh. The Church wrote/assembled it. Plus a lot of Church teachings (like the Trinity and civic morals and such) aren’t even in scripture. I’m afraid we need more than scripture.

Of course! Being a Christ-centered Church, the scriptures are a crucial part of it - but only part.

 

[catholictiger]

Somehow I don’t think all of the published English translations can all be inspired by God, can they? Maybe they are, but knowing what I know about translators and translations, I have my doubts.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations

Besides didn’t the Magisterium of the Church burn some of the early English Bible translators (Tyndale et al) at the stake? Seems like there must have been a good reason for that. Personally I think St. Thomas More made a good point.

I’ll just say this we shouldn’t take translations of the bible lightly. What translation we use is important. I would say stick to Catholic translations like RSVCE NAB Duoay Rhemies. If you do that no issues.

RSVCE is the best for academic endeavors

NAB is good because of its close connection to the liturgy.

 

[ProVobis]

I’ll just say this we shouldn’t take translations of the bible lightly. What translation we use is important. I would say stick to Catholic translations like RSVCE NAB Duoay Rhemies. If you do that no issues.

The other issue I have here is the fear of copyright infringements which heavily limits the ability to write the proper translation(s), forcing translators to be a little, if not a lot, creative at times. I’m sure the NAB and other translators were conscious of this. Again, how does anyone know which translations are actually inspired by God? I think I’ll have to trust the Church’s Nova Vulgata on this count.

 

[aragonjohn1]

Much of this is due to the fact that unlike English, Greek (and Latin and Church Slavonic, for that matter) are inflective languages. I know that Latin (and probably Greek too) translate better into Polish, but even here Polish is used more commonly used and morphed into more modern meanings all the time. Modern languages are very mutable, much so that even Shakespeare paperbacks have more commentary than actual text.

I too tend to read more scholarly Bible commentary than the attempted translations.

Aragonjohn1, good article.

you are welcome, glad ya enjoy. am myself very interested in " old" versions of English.

God bless

 

[Matt_Guitar_Man]

Thank you all for your reply’s.
I have most translations mentioned except the confraternity. The reason I asked is that I have had an evangelical minister staying with me over a few days and to my surprise he said that in most evangelical circles the RSV is not excepted as a very scholarly translation and is considered a paraphrase. I was a bit dismayed as I thought we may have been able to find common ground with the Oxford expanded edition.
Previously he was using an NIV which I thought definitely had a dispensation’l millennial’lest bent to it. Now he is championing the Holman? Never heard of it? Seems to think it is the most (as he put it) literal? What does everyone think?

 

[Tous_Logous]

Thank you all for your reply’s.
I have most translations mentioned except the confraternity. The reason I asked is that I have had an evangelical minister staying with me over a few days and to my surprise he said that in most evangelical circles the RSV is not excepted as a very scholarly translation and is considered a paraphrase. I was a bit dismayed as I thought we may have been able to find common ground with the Oxford expanded edition.
Previously he was using an NIV which I thought definitely had a dispensation’l millennial’lest bent to it. Now he is championing the Holman? Never heard of it? Seems to think it is the most (as he put it) literal? What does everyone think?

The Holman Christian standard bible is a Protestant/evangelical translation. I don’t remember the history of the translation itself but it tends to follow a “literal” approach from the masoretic and koine Greek texts. It has no deuterocanonical books and I think it is a translation that uses the name “YHWH”. I would not recommend it for your main bible reading but I do use it for comparing verses in other translations.

 

[po18guy]

Thank you all for your reply’s.
I have most translations mentioned except the confraternity. The reason I asked is that I have had an evangelical minister staying with me over a few days and to my surprise he said that in most evangelical circles the RSV is not excepted as a very scholarly translation and is considered a paraphrase. I was a bit dismayed as I thought we may have been able to find common ground with the Oxford expanded edition.
Previously he was using an NIV which I thought definitely had a dispensation’l millennial’lest bent to it. Now he is championing the Holman? Never heard of it? Seems to think it is the most (as he put it) literal? What does everyone think?

The NIV strikes me as a distinctly “dumbed down” translation. Its vocabulary and style seem aimed at, say, a middle school reading level. As well, I detect that the text has been massaged to more closely align with fundamentalist beliefs. As to the Holman, it is also clearly biased toward various iterations of protestantism. Its vocabulary and literary style remind me of common conversation, such as speaking with a neighbor. A read of Matthew 16 and the footnotes is an example of the bias in translation.

Both bibles are incomplete, as they pointedly lack the Deuterocanon. Sadly, this seems now to be an irreversible act of the later reformation. From initial doubts about the canonicity of those seven books, protestantism has now defaulted against them - yet has no authority to declare them one way or the other. Both 2,000 year old apostolic Churches (Orthodox and Catholic) have held them to be canonical.

If you don’t have a Confraternity bible they are frequently found on eBay for around $10 plus postage. There are several for sale there now.

 

[Matt_Guitar_Man]

Thanks po18guy, I will have a look on ebay right now. Is there just one version or are there revisions etc and if so which do you recommend?

 

[TimothyH]

Well, yeh. The Church wrote/assembled it. Plus a lot of Church teachings (like the Trinity and civic morals and such) aren’t even in scripture. I’m afraid we need more than scripture.

The Trinity is in Scripture.

According to the foreknowledge of God the Father, unto the sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you and peace be multiplied. (1 Peter 1:2)

And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one. (1 John 5:7)

These passages are from the Douay-Rheims-Challoner, right there in black and white.

Acts 17:11 says that people who confirm what they are being told by finding it in scripture are more noble than those who just believe what they are told without confirming it as true in the Bible. Many say that the Trinity is not in the Bible but two of Jesus’ closest Apostles - Peter and John - write about the Trinity explicitly.

This is why it is important to read scripture, to be able to “accurately handle the word of God” and not just listen to what people say.

-Tim-

 

[tvknight415]

Well said.

We have the Magisterium of the Church to guide us in the scriptures, but commentaries can be quite another thing. Tradition may guide them, or it may not. If we rely too heavily on commentaries, the potential exists to succumb to the cult of personality. With scripture translations, each version seems to miss the bull’s eye by just a bit. In utilizing various translations, a somewhat more accurate “pin map” may bracket the bull’s eye and bring the scriptures into slightly sharper forus - at least in my case.

Thanks po18guy, I will have a look on ebay right now. Is there just one version or are there revisions etc and if so which do you recommend?

I was watching ebay a few months ago. The search i was using was (include description search):

Confraternity bible -nab -nabre -“new american bible” -sin -dummies -postcard

For what to go with- i would personally pick one by the catholic book publishing company between 1949 and 1954 with the english translation of the new latin psalms (all douay OT through 52, in 53/54 the first 8 books of the OT are confraternity). I personally went with a 1951 smaller size.

My second choice would be to go with one 1961 or later that has the first 8, 7 sapiental, and 18 prophetic books in the confraternity edition (benzinger or CBPC).

Most of the confraternity translated OT books made their way into the 1970 nab, but confraternity genesis was unique to the confraternity bibles.

 

[po18guy]

Thanks po18guy, I will have a look on ebay right now. Is there just one version or are there revisions etc and if so which do you recommend?

Sadly, it is a bit complicated, based on that era of rapid change. The confraternity was a work-in-progress. It was a total updating of the Douay-Challoner English translation of the Latin Vulgate. The Confraternity NT was introduced in 1941 and is an absolutely great NT. All 1941-1969 Confraternity bibles have this NT. Copies of the NT alone are often found for sale. As to the complete bible, from 1941 until about 1949-1950 or so (and this varies by publisher) the OT was directly from the Challoner revision of the Douay-Rheims. I like this particular combination simply because the older Testament is rendered in matching older language and one is immediately aware of this as he reads. There seem to be three versions of the Psalms used over the years and by various publishers. One version, in some 1953 and later editions, has Psalm 1 begin with “Happy” rather than “Blessed is the man…” Those are a looser translation and OK to read, but the earlier and later versions read “Blessed”, as is the meaning and intent of the Psalm.

A 1949 edition by the Catholic Book Publishing Corporation uses the D-R OT, the Pius XII Psalms and the Confraternity NT. A 1950 edition by P. J. Kenedy and Sons uses the straight D-R OT/Psalms with the Confraternity NT. A 1952 Benziger Brothers edition uses the D-R OT, the Pius XII Psalms and the Confraternity NT. The 1953 Belmont Abbey “Catholic Action Edition” uses the Confraternity translation of Genesis to Ruth and the “Happy” Psalms, although it is filled with beautiful artwork - which is lamentably absent from most current bibles. These and other publishers used various combinations and gradually introduced additional books of the Confraternity OT translation, but the book was never printed in completed form under a single cover. The decision to adopt the NAB in the late 60s killed the Confraternity/Vulgate project as of 1969. A pity, as the foot notes and book introductions in every Confraternity edition that I have seen are rock-solid and confidence inspiring, whereas the NAB introduced the murky, doubt-producing modernist intros and notes.

One huge difference between the Confraternity and the NAB is that the entire Confraternity of Christian Doctrine was ordained clergy with upper level degrees in sacred theology and scripture. They are listed in the back pages and must be searched for. In contrast, the revisers and editors of the NAB are listed up front where all can see their names and were comprised of clergy, as well as secular theologians - and one Presbyterian minister! The quality of the notes and intros descended from there.

A final note: all Confraternity bibles that I have seen have the “Prayer to the Holy Spirit before reading the Scriptures” somewhere between the inside cover and Genesis. Neither the NAB nor the NABRE have this prayer anywhere in them. I truly wonder what happened there…

 

[po18guy]

I was watching ebay a few months ago. The search i was using was (include description search): Confraternity bible -nab -nabre -“new american bible” -sin -dummies -postcard

I generally search separately by “Confraternity” (being careful as the NAB is also considered a “Confraternity” publication), “Douay”, “Rheims”, or “Catholic Bible 1941” and so on through about 1953. Several examples currently on eBay start under $10 - an absolute bargain.

For what to go with- i would personally pick one by the catholic book publishing company between 1949 and 1954 with the english translation of the new latin psalms (all douay OT through 52, in 53/54 the first 8 books of the OT are confraternity). I personally went with a 1951 smaller size.

There are also very good Benziger Bros and P.J. Kenedy editions. CBPC seems to rely on a slightly larger font - far better for (Ahem!) unaided reading.

My second choice would be to go with one 1961 or later that has the first 8, 7 sapiental, and 18 prophetic books in the confraternity edition (benzinger or CBPC).

All have the excellent Confraternity NT, so it is hard to lose here, although those with the “Happy” Psalms are a bit of a low point.

Most of the confraternity translated OT books made their way into the 1970 nab, but confraternity genesis was unique to the confraternity bibles.

That is what I understand, but I believe they were somewhat modified in conformance with Divino Afflante Espiritu, which urged the use of other ancient manuscripts in addition to those which Saint Jerome used in the Vulgate.

 

[po18guy]

The Trinity is in Scripture.

According to the foreknowledge of God the Father, unto the sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you and peace be multiplied. (1 Peter 1:2)

And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one. (1 John 5:7)

-Tim-

Not so curious as to the revelation of the Trinity is the fact that Peter and John were two of the three privileged Apostles whom our :Lord called apart from the others on special occasions (Raising of Jairus’ daughter, the Transfiguration, and at Gethsemane).

 

[tvknight415]

CBPC seems to rely on a slightly larger font - far better for (Ahem!) unaided reading.

Very true, and the version I have is NOT one of the larger prints. Avoid one with this cover if you want the nice sized print from CBPC (the one I linked is also way overpriced anyways… I got mine for $12 shipping included - it was just the first compact I found on the search). Also, here is some additional information about the various editions and publishers of Confraternity Bibles

Also try searching for “New Catholic Edition” (use the quotes too) on AbeBooks or Amazon for some nice choices. And, of course, ask any seller for pics of the actual Bible - given the age, some Bibles may have deteriorating covers/bindings/pages and not hold up well (unless you plan to have it rebound, but that’s a whole different discussion). Ask questions, because CBPC had several different covers and several different styles (no art, “illustrated” with b/w images, “fine art editions” with color paintings inside, cloth hardback, bonded leather covers, red letter editions).

 

[po18guy]

Very true, and the version I have is NOT one of the larger prints. Avoid one with this cover if you want the nice sized print from CBPC (the one I linked is also way overpriced anyways… I got mine for $12 shipping included - it was just the first compact I found on the search). Also, here is some additional information about the various editions and publishers of Confraternity Bibles

Also try searching for “New Catholic Edition” (use the quotes too) on AbeBooks or Amazon for some nice choices. And, of course, ask any seller for pics of the actual Bible - given the age, some Bibles may have deteriorating covers/bindings/pages and not hold up well (unless you plan to have it rebound, but that’s a whole different discussion). Ask questions, because CBPC had several different covers and several different styles (no art, “illustrated” with b/w images, “fine art editions” with color paintings inside, cloth hardback, bonded leather covers, red letter editions).

Thanks for that link! $10 +S/H is my usual limit, me having a tad too much Scottish blood, I guess Most confraternity bibles I have bought were in VG to Exc condition. I picked up one 1957 edition that was in fair condition to use as a garage bible. The good news/bad news is that since Catholics are not exactly known for their fanatical devotion to scripture reading, the majority of older bibles are almost unread. Good for us today, though.

 

[ProVobis]

The Trinity is in Scripture.

Okay, but the expanded text is:

7 Thus we have a threefold warrant in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, three who are yet one;[2] 8 and we have a threefold warrant on earth, the Spirit, the water, and the blood, three witnesses that conspire in one.[3]

Point is that the commentary is IMO worth as much if not more so than a simple translation.

 

[TimothyH]

Okay, but the expanded text is:

7 Thus we have a threefold warrant in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, three who are yet one;[2] 8 and we have a threefold warrant on earth, the Spirit, the water, and the blood, three witnesses that conspire in one.[3]

Point is that the commentary is IMO worth as much if not more so than a simple translation.

Commentary may be valuable, but it will never be what Scripture is. But that assumes a reasonably good Bible. I agree with you there.

And I agree about a simple translation and was just commenting in another thread about the Christian Community Bible - Catholic Edition. It dumbs down the text for the sake of readability and even omits words. It reads like a children’s Bible. I’d rather read the Rule of St. Benedict or the Sayings of the Desert Fathers than such a Bible. There are some really really bad translations out there.

I have to admit that I am really enjoying my Douay-Rheims-Challoner more and more.

-Tim-

 

[ProVobis]

I have to admit that I am really enjoying my Douay-Rheims-Challoner more and more.

I don’t think the Church burned anyone at the stake for reading that version.