E
Epistemes
Guest
Does Ignatius or Oxford/Scepter publish the best RSV-CE? Or do you know of another publisher? [Please name, if so.]
- Status
M
Manfred
Guest
I chose Ignatius because, as was reported in the thread “RSV-CE Needs Corrections”, when Oxford finally published its Reader’s Edition, it was determined that the Ignatius edition had the original 1965-66 RSV-CE text with its accompanying Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur; the Oxford edition used the RSV 2nd ed. NT (1971) with the RSV-CE changes, but continued to use the 1965-66 NO and Imprimatur.
Another publisher? When the RSV-CE was first published, the Catholic Truth Society (CTS) of Great Britain was one of its publishers. Actually, it was Oxford who printed it for the CTS, just as Nelson prints the Ignatius edition.
M
MH84
Guest
But it’s the same text isn’t it?
Btw I voted for Scepter/Oxford just because I own a copy myself.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
No it’s different. I’m looking forward to the third edition–sooner or later the Protestant renderings will be fully excised and you’ll have an accurate bible.
M
Manfred
Guest
M
mmortal03
Guest
I chose the Oxford/Scepter, but I must specifically choose the Compact version. The Reader’s Version lost all that the Compact version “accidentally” and unofficially gained.
This isn’t going to be the most accurate poll, however. Most people are going to just mark the one that they have, and most people haven’t seen both or been informed on what the differences between the four (yes, four) are.
The four editions are:
The original 1965/66 RSV-CE: this is, for all intent and purposes, the same as the Ignatius First Edition.
The Ignatius Second Catholic Edition: This is more like an Ignatius First and a Half Edition, and frankly, most of the changes that were made were either purely aesthetic, were not very practical, effectual or important, or were arguably a step backward. *Some *people purchase it just because Isaiah 7:14 now says “virgin”. I think that buying it for just that individual reason is quite a silly one, but hey, whatever subjective reasons help people sleep at night.
The Oxford/Scepter/Ignatius RSV-CE Compact: This is, in my opinion, the best one, but there is a good chance that it is technically breaking copyright, and some people don’t like it because they argue that there is no way to be sure that the Church is okay with it. I have compared the differences (that we are aware of) line by line, and am positively sure that the Church would be okay with it, but some people can’t think for themselves and need the Church to tell them what to think. The previous sentence isn’t a criticism of people who will generally listen to the Church, but of those who misunderstand and apply a way too legalistic and literal understanding of the Church’s wishes, and have a misinterpretation of what the Imprimatur/Nihil Obstat were there for in the first place. In the current state of the ridiculousness and bureaucracy that is the process of English bible translation and approval in the Catholic Church, we just aren’t going to see a reliable, straightforward, fast, and attention-for-the-details type approval process. English speaking Catholics, in between what have always been decade or longer spaced decisions, must fend for themselves if they want to obtain any reliableness and understanding of their biblical text, but I am getting away from the main topic.
The Oxford Press RSV-CE Reader’s Version: For this one, Oxford, after over a year’s delay, finally put out an edition that they thought had corrected for all the “mistakes” of the Compact that they had released two years prior, but now it was in a full-sized version. They almost got all the “problems” reverted to what the original RSV-CE had contained, however, they still missed a few places. Had they consulted me, they would have gotten it right. This is not self-righteousness present here in my post at all; instead, it speaks only for the utter incompetence of the editors there at Oxford regarding a translation of a bible, which, of all things, is important to get right the first time, and they couldn’t even get it right the second time. And, in doing this, they also removed the only things exciting that their translation had going for it (which were the revisions of 1971 integrated along with the 1965 Catholic specific changes.)
This isn’t going to be the most accurate poll, however. Most people are going to just mark the one that they have, and most people haven’t seen both or been informed on what the differences between the four (yes, four) are.
The four editions are:
The original 1965/66 RSV-CE: this is, for all intent and purposes, the same as the Ignatius First Edition.
The Ignatius Second Catholic Edition: This is more like an Ignatius First and a Half Edition, and frankly, most of the changes that were made were either purely aesthetic, were not very practical, effectual or important, or were arguably a step backward. *Some *people purchase it just because Isaiah 7:14 now says “virgin”. I think that buying it for just that individual reason is quite a silly one, but hey, whatever subjective reasons help people sleep at night.
The Oxford/Scepter/Ignatius RSV-CE Compact: This is, in my opinion, the best one, but there is a good chance that it is technically breaking copyright, and some people don’t like it because they argue that there is no way to be sure that the Church is okay with it. I have compared the differences (that we are aware of) line by line, and am positively sure that the Church would be okay with it, but some people can’t think for themselves and need the Church to tell them what to think. The previous sentence isn’t a criticism of people who will generally listen to the Church, but of those who misunderstand and apply a way too legalistic and literal understanding of the Church’s wishes, and have a misinterpretation of what the Imprimatur/Nihil Obstat were there for in the first place. In the current state of the ridiculousness and bureaucracy that is the process of English bible translation and approval in the Catholic Church, we just aren’t going to see a reliable, straightforward, fast, and attention-for-the-details type approval process. English speaking Catholics, in between what have always been decade or longer spaced decisions, must fend for themselves if they want to obtain any reliableness and understanding of their biblical text, but I am getting away from the main topic.
The Oxford Press RSV-CE Reader’s Version: For this one, Oxford, after over a year’s delay, finally put out an edition that they thought had corrected for all the “mistakes” of the Compact that they had released two years prior, but now it was in a full-sized version. They almost got all the “problems” reverted to what the original RSV-CE had contained, however, they still missed a few places. Had they consulted me, they would have gotten it right. This is not self-righteousness present here in my post at all; instead, it speaks only for the utter incompetence of the editors there at Oxford regarding a translation of a bible, which, of all things, is important to get right the first time, and they couldn’t even get it right the second time. And, in doing this, they also removed the only things exciting that their translation had going for it (which were the revisions of 1971 integrated along with the 1965 Catholic specific changes.)
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
mmmortal03: Say if you were put in charge and could take the best from ALL of these Catholic editions of the RSV what FURTHER changes would you make?
Are there any Protestant renderings in the RSV as opposed to Catholic renderings as found in any of the other Catholic English bibles so onerous or problematic enough for you to want to make further changes?
In other words could a fantastic RSV-CE 3d edition ever come to fruition?
Are there any Protestant renderings in the RSV as opposed to Catholic renderings as found in any of the other Catholic English bibles so onerous or problematic enough for you to want to make further changes?
In other words could a fantastic RSV-CE 3d edition ever come to fruition?
M
Manfred
Guest
For a while now, we’ve been referring to a particular copy of the RSV-CE as the “Oxford/Scepter” edition. Perhaps the time has come to call on someone who has an actual Scepter Press edition and see which RSV-CE it agrees with: the Ignatius first edition, or the Oxford “Compact” edition. Depending on this (name removed by moderator)ut, we may have to distinguish the Scepter from the Oxford and identify it more with the original blue-cover ignatius.
M
mmortal03
Guest
Regarding changes, there have been some good threads here dealing with this, and I don’t have the time at the moment to regurgitate all of them now. There was one good thread lately dealing with the Douay Rheims that had some good stuff in it. I think every few months someone starts a new thread on this issue, and so everything has become fragmented. I don’t have to time to collect everything all into one place, and if I did, my luck would be that a hacker crashes the server again and everything is lost. Someone should make a webpage that summarizes some key changes that should be made…
On a different note, I am interested in what changes are going to go into that British non-inclusive NRSV revision, but who knows what we will get with that. I say this because I have realized that those who are the perfectionists in the English translation/revision world that we need are often the eccentrics or liberals who put something out contrary to what would be best (though however meticulous their work), and the rest are just ignorant or second rate or working in the original languages or Latin.
I have always had hope that there are real biblical scholars in the Catholic Church who are conscious of the issues that we bring up on this board regarding the English language, but I have decided that I think those people either all just deal in the original languages or the Latin, or they are so old that they don’t have a realistic viewpoint on things anymore. Or maybe the ones that do have something constructive to contribute are caught up in the bureaucracy of the Church. Don’t forget that the English speaking Magisterium tends to be made up of a good bit of liberals that the Vatican doesn’t agree with. Not all of them, but a good portion of them.
Realizing that the differences are relatively minor intra-RSV-CE, and even intra-RSV, I think we do have to instead look between English translations. The Douay Rheims is a good reference point, but don’t use it the way the Second Catholic Edition did.
One thing you said probably sums up the Catholic Church’s viewpoint on English translations well. They seem not to want to change things at all unless they are “so onerous or problematic enough.” They should instead work toward fixing all the problems continuously, not make just one huge change, and then wait for 20 or 30 years, even though there are errors. There should be a committee that CONTINUOUSLY works on English translation issues, and looks at all Catholic translations, not just ones that the Catholic Church officially puts out. (oh, but that isn’t their job, they say…but, yeah, it actually should be).
I understand totally about trying to have standardized texts out there as to not be confusing, but I think that in today’s age we can deal with slight revisions, as long as it is explicitly documented.
As far as specific changes, look at the previous threads where we have discussed this.
Who knows? Now this is just semantics, but I would rather they put out an RSV-CE “We got it right this time and didn’t take so darn long to do it” edition, instead. Yes, that doesn’t mean I am not for putting out revisions as well, see above, however, I am just trying to make it clear how the information is all out there available for them to do it right, but somehow they just don’t.
R
rocketrob
Guest
Manfred,For a while now, we’ve been referring to a particular copy of the RSV-CE as the “Oxford/Scepter” edition. Perhaps the time has come to call on someone who has an actual Scepter Press edition and see which RSV-CE it agrees with: the Ignatius first edition, or the Oxford “Compact” edition. Depending on this (name removed by moderator)ut, we may have to distinguish the Scepter from the Oxford and identify it more with the original blue-cover ignatius.
To answer your question, Scepter appears to currently publish two versions of the RSV-CE (both in leather, or something like leather.)
One is published by Thomas Nelson for Scepter, and is exactly the same (size, text, font and all) as the original (blue) Ignatius first edition (which is published by Thomas Nelson for Ignatius Press). I own this particular Scepter bible, and prefer it to the Ignatius edition (which I also have in the paperback version at work) mainly because the text is not nearly as cramped near the binding. In other words, you don’t have to force the bible open to see the text near the inside margins.
The second is a compact version co-published with Oxford University Press. I do not have this version, but I do have the Oxford compact bible, and the Ignatius compact bible (which I gave one of my children). I believe all the compact bibles, unless they’ve started to be “fixed,” have applied the Catholic additions from the mid-60’s to the newer 1971 version of the RSV NT. So, they are not exactly the same as the Ignatius first edition.
On top of these editions, you have the RSV-CE second edition by Ignatius, and then the Reader’s Edition of the Oxford bible (bigger than the compact version) in which Oxford tried to go back to the original RSV-CE text, but apparently didn’t quite totally accomplish this.
(Manfred, I know you know most of this…I guess I’m posting it for ‘posterity.’)
As you also know, I have been researching and following this RSV topic for nearly two years now, and the whole situation still amazes me. I even keep wondering about which would be the best bible to “settle down” with. (I am currently using my Scepter RSV-CE first edition and the Douay Rheims because I at least clearly know the ‘pedigree’ of these versions).
I guess the important point is that all of these versions convey what we need to know regarding salvation history, and God’s revelation of Himself to us.
Sincerely,
rocketrob
J
Joel_Tunnah
Guest
The Ignatius Study Bible, by Scott Hahn is good (RSV-CE translation). Only the NT is available so far though? Each book is in pamphlet form, but the notes are great.
Avoid any bible published by Oxford. The notes and introductions in the RSV and RSV-CE contradict the teachings and traditions of the Catholic Church on nearly every page.
Avoid any bible published by Oxford. The notes and introductions in the RSV and RSV-CE contradict the teachings and traditions of the Catholic Church on nearly every page.
W
wmscott
Guest
I have the Ignatius RSV-CE second edition, a Scepter RSV-CE and a Scepter RSV-CE large family Bible. I understand that there are some differences in the language, translation, or interpretations. Are there any really serious or damaging theological differences where there is a possibility to cause harm from using one over the other, or is this just a matter of wanting to have the most “Pure” translation possible. i am asking for my own curiosioty. thanks
M
mmortal03
Guest
Thanks rocketrob. You got all of that right. I just want to add for anybody interested that the Catholic Comparative New Testament by Oxford and the My Daily Catholic Bible: Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition 20-Minute Daily Readings both also use the 1971/65 hybrid that the compacts have. I think this is great, but some people still disagree with me.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
Is it true that the 3d edition will be the 1971/1965 hybrid with “virgin” in Isaiah 7:14?
If that happened would you tare your hair out mmortal03?
If that happened would you tare your hair out mmortal03?
M
mmortal03
Guest
What? Who said that? But I think that if that happened, it would be silly, because I think that if they are going to choose to translate from the Hebrew, then they should translate from the Hebrew, and if they are going to choose to translate from the Greek, then translate from the Greek. Now bear with me here. I don’t have problems with trying to create one best representation of what the originals said. But no one thinks that that passage in the Hebrew was corrupted over time, so it is a very different issue than that of looking for the most likely or best textual copy of it. The Hebrew said what it said, so choose which you are going to have your translation stick to, and then place a footnote in there for where a relevant difference occurs in the Greek.
If you really think that what the Hebrew said was wrong or corrupted, then why are you using the Hebrew as your primary source? Why not translate from the Septuagint, instead?
M
Manfred
Guest
Joel,
Neither the RSV nor the RSV-CE (be it from Ignatius, Scepter, or Oxford) contradicts the teachings or traditions of the Catholic Church.
J
Joel_Tunnah
Guest
Hi Manfred. I said the notes and introductions contradict the teaching of the catholic church, and they do.
M
Manfred
Guest
rocketrob,
EXCELLENT POST!!
The past few months (since June sometime) I reverted to doing my daily bible readings - including the Psalms - from the Douay-Rheims. It’s got style.
M
Manfred
Guest
The New Oxford Annotated Bible with The Apocrypha (1977 ed.) purports to be “an ecumenical study bible”, but does little to bolster Catholic teaching. But, unlike the NIV Study Bible or any of the Scoffield (sp?) editions of the bible (used mainly by fundamentalists), it does NOT criticize Catholic teaching.
- Status