"Catholic approved" Bibles

[Manfred]

The Good News Bible is “good” only starting fires in your fireplace, paper wieght, chocking a door, leveling a table, you know stuff like that. My aunt gave me a Good News New Testament for my first communion. That’s the bible I started reading at the age of 14. I moved from that to the NAB. The NAB is hard to read at times (at that age) but it was better. I’ve never tried the Jerusalem Bible . My dad liked it a lot. I’ver heard poor reviews on the New Jerusalem Bible. But my experience is limited with those. I’ve been reading the NIV for most of my adult life along with my NAB for balance. I like to see how the KJV puts things. I have a parallel bible with KJV, NIV and Greek with literal translations-my favorite when I really want to get screwed up.

Back to subject. Red letters drive me nuts. But I’ve learned to ignore them now in my Breviary. So if I come across it in a bible, I’m likely to ignore it now.

The JB, though approved for Lectionary use in many English-speaking countries, is not literal enough for serious bible study, but is OK for private reading. Same for the NJB. The latter is far better than the highly-vaunted NRSV in that its use of inclusive language is quite restrained when compared to the RNAB and the NRSV, both of which have crept into Lectionaries, the former in the USA, the latter in Canada.

As far as red letters in your Breviary: don’t we call those “rubrics”?

 

[mdstanzel]

Yes. I found a good explaination online but will have to find it later for posting.

 

[Mannyfit75]

The Latin Vulgate is the only bible ever to be declared “free from error” by the Church.

That is not entirely accurate. The Jerusalem Bible is another Bible that have been approved by the CC.

The Jerusalem Bible was the first widely accepted Catholic English translation of the Bible since the Douay-Rheims Version of the 17th century. It carries the **Church’s imprimatur **as being correct in all matters of faith and doctrine. This means it is an official Catholic Bible. The Jerusalem Bible was considered such a high quality advanced English translation of the Bible that the Holy See used it in the European liturgy and the Mass. This reference for The Jerusalem Bible can be found in the introduction page of the Roman Catholic Missals as the source reference for the readings. It has also been widely praised for an overall very high level of scholarship, and is widely admired and sometimes used by liberal and moderate Protestants.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Bible

 

[lak611]

The Latin Vulgate is the only bible ever to be declared “free from error” by the Church.

Not exactly an argument for its use alone.

There was a time when the Vulgate could be described as an “official” translation of Scripture for the Latin rite of the Church, but not the whole Church. It also never superseded the original language versions in authority (a point Pius XII made in Divino Afflante Spiritu21). But while the Vulgate in its latest edition—the “Neo-Vulgate” promulgated by John Paul II—has a privileged position based on its use in ecclesiastical documents, the law has changed such that there is no “official” translation of Scripture for the Latin rite. . . ecclesiastical documents have acknowleged that the Vulgate is free of doctrinal and moral error. However, not containing doctrinal and moral error is not the same thing as being a perfect translation. In fact, it isn’t even the same thing as being a good translation. If someone utters the Spanish sentence " La manzana es verde" and I translate that as “The apple is red,” then I have in not committed a moral or theological error, but I have committed a translation error (verde means green, not red).

In the same way, as Pius XII pointed out (DAS 20), this does not mean that the Vulgate always reflects accurately what is in the original texts. Sometimes it doesn’t.

catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0202bt.asp

 

[Brian_C]

If you’re looking for an RSV-CE, there are RSV-CE editions beyond the Ignatius. There are also the Oxford Press editions as well as the Scepter Publications edition. All, I believe, use the Oxford as a starting point.

Oxford Press has some very nice two tone leather RSV-CE’s and Scepter has some nice colors such as a light brown. In the English translation of “Jesus of Nazareth,” Benedict uses the RSV. However, I’ve noted at least one place so far where he criticizes it for not using the proper verbiage in a passage.

 

[demerzel85]

I’ve got a TEV bible that I got in first grade. I looked for the Nihil Obstat & Imprimatur and it’s not there.’’

I got both versions of the GNB/TEV as confirmation gifts. 1 from Parish the other from my grandparents.

1. First Edition with Deuterocanonical Books
   Nihil Obstat: RC Fuller, DD, PhD, LSS, Censor
   Imprimatur: Cardinal Basil Hume, OSB, Archbishop of Westminister, 25 July 1979
2. Second Edition with Deuterocanonicals
   Nihil Obstat: Fr Efrea O Rivera, OP, STL, SSL
   Imprimatur: Cirilo Almario Jr, DD, Bishop of Malolos, ECBA Chairman

No it’s not… the english versions we used in school had a Nihil Obstat & Imprimatur on them.

The free from error statement refers to the dogmatic declarations in the Council of Trent not the ‘nothing hinders’ and ‘let it be printed’ statements.

Nihil Obstat is Latin for ‘nothing hinders’
Imprimatur is Latin for ‘let it be printed’

Some books or bibles may also have an Imprimi Potest. This is Latin for ‘able to be printed’.

 

[demerzel85]

That is not entirely accurate. The Jerusalem Bible is another Bible that have been approved by the CC.

Hmm… comparing Imprimatur to declarations by an Ecumenical Dogmatic Council…

Decree Concerning The Canonical Scriptures
“If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema.”

Decree Concerning The Edition And Use Of The Sacred Books
“Moreover, the same holy council considering that not a little advantage will accrue to the Church of God if it be made known which of all the Latin editions of the sacred books now in circulation is to be regarded as authentic, ordains and declares that the old Latin Vulgate Edition, which, in use for so many hundred years, has been approved by the Church, be in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions held as authentic, and that no one dare or presume under any pretext whatsoever to reject it.”

Session IV - Celebrated on the eighth day of April, 1546 under Pope Paul III

The Imprimatur, Nihil Obstat and/or Imprimi Potest found in the RSVCE, JB, NJB, NRSV, CCB, NAB, GNB etc all do not equal these decrees.

 

[demerzel85]

Peace be with you!

Also, I have been told many times that the word used by Gabriel at the Annunciation means “Full of Grace” in Greek and was used as a title to Mary. But every single Catholic Bible (not just “Catholic approved”…the Bibles that say Catholic Bible) that I’ve looked at just says “highly favoured one” just like the Protestant translations. And, so far the only Bible I’ve seen that has the Magnificat as “My soul *magnifies *the Lord” is the KJV, which is certainly not approved by the Church…all the Catholic translations I’ve seen say “My soul proclaims the Lord”.
Why is this?

In Christ,
Rand

Hmm… the Douay Rheims is a Catholic translation and the follow verses read…

Luke 1:28 - And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Luke 1:46 - And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord.

And well the KJV plagarised from the DRV

 

[demerzel85]

My RSV-CE has “magnifies”. The NAB Revised NT has “proclaims the greatness.” The Liturgy of the Hours also has “proclaims the greatness”.

That cause the US LOTH uses the NAB translation. For the rest of the English speaking world the Grail translation is used and it goes “My soul glorifies the Lord”

But well now days I just go “Magnificat anima mea Dominum…” when I pray vespers

 

[demerzel85]

The RSV-CE (Also known as the Ignatius Bible) is very good for scriptural research, and is a more faithful translation from the original languages.

At the end of the day the RSV, CE or not, is still a Protestant translation at its core. So for example John 3:16 is deliberately mistranslated from the Greek in support of sola fides.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=107374

 

[Mannyfit75]

Hmm… comparing Imprimatur to declarations by an Ecumenical Dogmatic Council…

Decree Concerning The Canonical Scriptures
“If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema.”

Decree Concerning The Edition And Use Of The Sacred Books
“Moreover, the same holy council considering that not a little advantage will accrue to the Church of God if it be made known which of all the Latin editions of the sacred books now in circulation is to be regarded as authentic, ordains and declares that the old Latin Vulgate Edition, which, in use for so many hundred years, has been approved by the Church, be in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions held as authentic, and that no one dare or presume under any pretext whatsoever to reject it.”

Session IV - Celebrated on the eighth day of April, 1546 under Pope Paul III

The Imprimatur, Nihil Obstat and/or Imprimi Potest found in the RSVCE, JB, NJB, NRSV, CCB, NAB, GNB etc all do not equal these decrees.

Um, if you read my post carefully I didn’t say that the Church approved only the JB. I said, the Church approve both the JB and the DR for use.

 

[demerzel85]

Um, if you read my post carefully I didn’t say that the Church approved only the JB. I said, the Church approve both the JB and the DR for use.

Just to clear this up a little. I was referring to the difference between an Imprimatur and a Dogmatic Decree. The level of approval for the Latin Vulgate is different from Bibles with Imprimatur. One is infallible and must be believed and adhered to by Catholics, the other just is ‘let it be printed’.

 

[porthos11]

That cause the US LOTH uses the NAB translation. For the rest of the English speaking world the Grail translation is used and it goes “My soul glorifies the Lord”

Not for the Magnificat. The US edition uses the ICET translations, not the NAB. Grail did not translate the Gospel Canticles.

But well now days I just go “Magnificat anima mea Dominum…” when I pray vespers

Fair enough for as long as you stick to the Latin. But for those who pray in English, they are obligated to pray as printed.

 

[demerzel85]

Not for the Magnificat. The US edition uses the ICET translations, not the NAB. Grail did not translate the Gospel Canticles.

I have by Everyday Prayer book right in front of me and the 3 Gospel Canticles, the Benedictus, Magnificat and Nunc Dimittis are all from the Grail Version. There are also a few Old Testament Canticles from the Grail Version. Some Canticles are also from the 1973 RSV. Everyday Prayer is the Commonwealth equivalent of the Christian Prayer in the US.

ICET translation… so for the Nunc Dimittis goes “Now Lord you have kept your word…” and the Benedictus has “…he has come to his people to and set them free…” My my, Zachariah and Simeon did not say these

Fair enough for as long as you stick to the Latin. But for those who pray in English, they are obligated to pray as printed.

Even if you are praying the Divine Office in English, there is no problem using some Latin. The Salve Regina and Regina Caeli are options for Compline for example.

 

[porthos11]

I have by Everyday Prayer book right in front of me and the 3 Gospel Canticles, the Benedictus, Magnificat and Nunc Dimittis are all from the Grail Version. There are also a few Old Testament Canticles from the Grail Version. Some Canticles are also from the 1973 RSV. Everyday Prayer is the Commonwealth equivalent of the Christian Prayer in the US.

Ah, okay. We use the US edition, so the Gospel Canticles are the ICET translations.

ICET translation… so for the Nunc Dimittis goes “Now Lord you have kept your word…”

Nope, in the ICET translation in the US edition it goes, “Now Lord, you let your servant go in peace/ your word has been fulfilled.”

and the Benedictus has “…he has come to his people to and set them free…” My my, Zachariah and Simeon did not say these

So what did they say?

I do not care now bland-sounding the ICET translations are. Only one fact matters: these are the only ones approved for my country, and I submit to that approval. I will not turn the Liturgy of the Hours into my own private property.

Even if you are praying the Divine Office in English, there is no problem using some Latin. The Salve Regina and Regina Caeli are options for Compline for example.

That’s what I said. You can even pray the Our Father in Latin. What I’m saying is that if one is praying the English texts, they must use the English texts as printed for their territories. Good for you, that you have a dual-option there in Singapore. Here in the Philippines, we use the US edition only; the three-volume is not approved. Obedience dictates that I use the four-volume.

 

[Renton405]

Get the Haydock Commentary Douay Rhiems Bible… it is absolutly a beautiful bible that has the best footnotes ever. Many from the Fathers, Counsils, Saints, etc…

 

[lak611]

Get the Haydock Commentary Douay Rhiems Bible… it is absolutly a beautiful bible that has the best footnotes ever. Many from the Fathers, Counsils, Saints, etc…

It’s quite expensive. Another alternative is to use another Douay-Rheims Bible and this free Haydock commentary.

 

[Renton405]

It’s quite expensive. Another alternative is to use another Douay-Rheims Bible and this free Haydock commentary.

Yes, it is 100$… But it such a great investment… And the cover is absolutly beautiful …I can say honestly that it is the best bible one could ever have, and I have nearly all of them…

The Septuagint By Sir Brenton is also a great translation of the LXX… its pretty much the only english version we have that puts the translations next to the greek text…and it has the apocrypha too… Sir Brenton used the Codex Vaticanus for most of the tranlsation and used the Sinactus for filling in the parts that the Vaticanus didn’t have(or was lost during the ages)…this book I use when I want get down to the nitty gritty and look at the greek with the english…

 

[Sabda]

I have the Oxford RSV-CE. This particular one sold like hot cakes at the local Catholic bookstore. My only complaint so far is that I did not get the zippered instead. I do like this over the NAB. One neat thing about it is in the back it list the changes that were made to convert it to a Catholic translation. And yes, one of the changes was converting Luke 1:28 from “O’ favored one” to “full of grace” in the text.

Honestly, there is no perfect translation. I have heard people complain about the DRV.

 

[Sabda]

The Good News Bible is “good” only starting fires in your fireplace, paper wieght, chocking a door, leveling a table, you know stuff like that. My aunt gave me a Good News New Testament for my first communion. That’s the bible I started reading at the age of 14. I moved from that to the NAB. The NAB is hard to read at times (at that age) but it was better. I’ve never tried the Jerusalem Bible . My dad liked it a lot. I’ver heard poor reviews on the New Jerusalem Bible. But my experience is limited with those. I’ve been reading the NIV for most of my adult life along with my NAB for balance. I like to see how the KJV puts things. I have a parallel bible with KJV, NIV and Greek with literal translations-my favorite when I really want to get screwed up.

Back to subject. Red letters drive me nuts. But I’ve learned to ignore them now in my Breviary. So if I come across it in a bible, I’m likely to ignore it now.

ROFL, Hey, my granny gave me a KJV for my first communion Bible. You think the NAB is hard at that age? Of course it was the ONLY Bible I had for years and years. Obviously, I didn’t read it a whole lot.