Confraternity Bible Info

[yankeesouth]

I am reading the ‘Which Bible Should you Read?’ pamphlet published by Tan Books that shows that the Douay Rheims translation is the one Catholics should be reading. It takes various bible verses and compares how various bibles translate including protestant bibles. For example…

1 Cor 16:14…Douay-Rheims - Let all things be done in charity
New American Bible - You’re every act should be done in love
Catholic Revised - Let all that you do be done in love

And it goes on to show all other translations replace the word ‘charity’ with ‘love’.

But it does not mention the Confraternity Bible which led up to the NAB. I have a couple of those bibles and in that translation it keeps the word ‘charity’ but has a slight change otherwise…

Let all that you do be done in charity.

Here’s another one…

Matthew 16:18…Douay-Rheims - And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
New American Bible - and the jaws of death shall not prevail against it
New International Version - and the gates of hades shall not overcome it.

All other translations replace ‘hell’ with other words.

But in this instance the Confraternity bible is true to the Douay Rheims…

and the gates of hell shall not prevail against

Just wondering if anyone knows the history of the Confraternity Bible and what was the intention of the translation since it seemed to be close to the Douay Rheims version anyway.

 

[ChristMyLife]

I went through a phase where I was obsessed about the Confraternity Bible and researched everything about it.

I’m also a Wikipedia editor, and I personally created a lot of the content on the Confraternity Bible wiki, and I can vouch that everything on there is 100% accurate.

Confraternity Bible - Wikipedia

 

[StephieNorthCo]

I greatly prefer my “Confraternity” Bible to NAB. Things just spring out at me for whatever reason. Of, course, I prefer RSV to NAB as well. I do have DR version on this tablet that comes in quite handy.

 

[ChristMyLife]

I’m a big Bible geek, my top 3 most used Bibles are a Didache NABRE, a CTS Jerusalem Bible, and a Douay Rheims.

This way I get the best scholarly and very close to the Liturgy readings formal equivalence Bible (the NABRE), an excellent dynamic equivalence Bible which is also identical to that used Liturgically in Britain (the CTS Jerusalem), and the Catholic equivalent to the KJV, the first full English Catholic translation and most traditional Catholic English Bible available which every Catholic should own, the old Douay Rheims.

 

[yankeesouth]

But why not just use the one that is most faithful to the Latin, the Douay Rheims? Those other two you mention are even different among themselves so which one is correct? When you say the NAB is the most scholarly how so? I was led to believe that some of the notes are a little off in some respects. Not arguing, just inquiring.

And thanks for the wiki article … exactly what I was looking for.

 

[ChristMyLife]

Those other two you mention are even different among themselves so which one is correct

They all are.

Different translations bring out different meanings of the underlying Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts.

Any major translation approved by the Church is good to use.

And the NAB is the most scholarly English Catholic Bible IMO just because it represents the latest ideas in Catholic biblical scholarship…

By scholarly I do NOT mean most spiritual or even most “true.” I simply mean most close to what is taught in Seminaries and Universities.

And yes, there are definitely footnotes and comments in the introductions to the NAB which are troubling to say the least… I’ve learned to simply appreciate these for what they are - scholarly, fallible opinions of the people who wrote them. They are not Scripture, they are not Tradition, and they are not from the Magisterium. They are simply scholarly tidbits and opinions of the individuals who authored them.

 

[Start]

I’m a bit skeptical about it since the Latin Vulgate does have its flaws and the Douay-Rheims is a translation of it.

 

[Vico]

Douay-Rheims

What is commonly called the Douay-Rheims is actually the Douay-Rheims-Challoner revision of 1749 and 1752 or later such as the American version of 1899. The Douay-Rheims was published in 1582 (NT) and 1609-1610 (OT). These used the Vulgate as a base. Parts of the Confraternity bible included parts of the Challoner-Douay Old Testament.

La Bible de Jérusalem of 1956 used the original scriptures and then it was translated again to English in 1966 and later revised into CTS New Catholic Bible with the 1963 Grail Psalter replacing the original Psalm book.

 

[Crusader13]

Just wondering if anyone knows the history of the Confraternity Bible and what was the intention of the translation since it seemed to be close to the Douay Rheims version anyway.

I have the same booklet and did a comparison of those verses quoted between the Douay Rheims and the Confraternity NT. For the most part the Confraternity NT is right in line with the Douay version. There are some instances where the Confraternity translates a word or verse that I don’t personally like.

One that surprised me the most was 2 Thessalonians 2:14. The Douay version has “traditions” where as the Confraternity NT has “teachings”.

It isn’t a deal breaker for me but it just highlights the fact that as good as the Confraternity is, it doesn’t completely outshine the Douay version. But the Confraternity NT does make several updates to the Douay Version that I believe are better translated than what we find in the Douay version, so I don’t believe you lose anything by choosing it over the Douay NT.

The biggest draw back is that the Confraternity NT is only the NT! The translators ditched the Latin Vulgate and the idea of updating Challoners version of the Douay in favor of using the Hebrew and Greek for the OT. So we don’t have a complete Confraternity Bible using the same principles that were used for the NT.

Instead the Confraternity OT is the what we find in the NAB prior to the most recent revision completed in 2010.

 

[deMontfort]

You ought to be thinking in terms of being faithful to the original Greek and Hebrew NOT to the Latin.

 

[Crusader13]

I think the Latin gets a bad rap at times, specifically because it’s a translation of the Hebrew and Greek. So for example, any bible that uses the Vulgate as it’s source, becomes a “translation of a translation”. Which I don’t think should automatically disqualify it from being a trusted and faithfully accurate bible, so long as it can be shown to have been translated correctly.

I know this opens up a whole can of worms regarding the Vulgate vs the original language Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, which is not my focus. However, I think that for Thomas A Nelson and others who use his line of reasoning regarding the Douay Rheims bible vs modern translations; I believe it has become easier and perhaps safer, to simply stick with an older translation, such as the Douay. Rather, than deal with the many different modern translations, which differ so greatly from one to the next, that it becomes difficult to know for certain, if what you’re reading is in fact accurate.

 

[yankeesouth]

Comment deleted by author.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Well TAN is a publishing company. Sounds like they overstepped their bounds there a bit.

Each National Conference of Bishops approves translations.

For the US:

http://www.usccb.org/bible/approved-translations/

USCCB Approved Translations of the Sacred Scriptures for Private Use and Study by Catholics​

1983 - Present

The 1983 Code of Canon Law entrusts to the Apostolic See and the episcopal conferences the authority to approve translations of the Sacred Scriptures in the Latin Catholic Church (c. 825, §1). Prior to 1983, Scriptural translations could be approved by the Apostolic See or by a local ordinary within a diocese.

What follows is a complete list of the translations of the Sacred Scriptures that have received the approval of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops since 1983.
In addition to the translations listed below, any translation of the Sacred Scriptures that has received proper ecclesiastical approval ‒ namely, by the Apostolic See or a local ordinary prior to 1983, or by the Apostolic See or an episcopal conference following 1983 ‒ may be used by the Catholic faithful for private prayer and study.

Books of the New Testament, Alba House

Contemporary English Version - New Testament, First Edition, American Bible Society

Contemporary English Version - Book of Psalms, American Bible Society

Contemporary English Version - Book of Proverbs, American Bible Society

The Grail Psalter (Inclusive Language Version), G.I.A. Publications

New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE)

New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, National Council of Churches

The Psalms, Alba House

The Psalms (New International Version) - St. Joseph Catholic Edition, Catholic Book Publishing Company

The Psalms - St. Joseph New Catholic Version, Catholic Book Publishing Company

Revised Psalms of the New American Bible (1991)

So You May Believe, A Translation of the Four Gospels, Alba House

Good News Translation (Today’s English Version, Second Edition), American Bible Society

Translation for Early Youth, A Translation of the New Testament for Children, Contemporary English Version, American Bible Society

 

[Hodos]

First, there are several reasons why one would be better served by using a Bible other than the Douay-Rheims version. The best reason for this is that the textual basis for the Douay-Rheims is not the Greek and Hebrew manuscript tradition, from which the Bible was originally written and transmitted. The textual basis for the Douay-Rheims is actually the Vulgate, the 5th Century Latin translation of the Hebrew and Greek texts. So from that standpoint alone, I would not use it as my “go to” or make the claim that it is a superior translation.

Second, using the word Love instead of Charity actually communicates better the meaning of the word Agape (although even that doesn’t hold the nuance which Agape does).

Third, there is a reason newer translations use the word Hades or death. These are actually more accurate translations than to say “hell”. The Greek texts normatively uses the word Gehenna when it is speaking of Hell and distinguishes it from Hades which is the realm of the dead.

 

[yankeesouth]

which is not my focus

Nor mine. I was mainly looking for some history behind the Confraternity. I appreciate the comments that pertained to that.

The biggest draw back is that the Confraternity NT is only the NT! The translators ditched the Latin Vulgate and the idea of updating Challoners version of the Douay in favor of using the Hebrew and Greek for the OT. So we don’t have a complete Confraternity Bible using the same principles that were used for the NT.

Yeah I think they got as far as the first eight books? Again I appreciate the comments. I don’t have a Douay-Rheims and I think the pamphlet and some answers in this thread will prompt me to get one.

 

[Hope1960]

I use the NAB. I know many people here dislike it but I like mine. I bought it on the recommendation of a very faithful Catholic at Pauline Books and Media, sold by a very faithful (I assume) nun.

 

[ChristMyLife]

Yeah I think they got as far as the first eight books?

Work had been done on 20 books of the OT when Divino Afflante Spiritu then came out and they scrapped that work to start fresh from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

 

[ChristMyLife]

use the NAB. I

The NAB translation itself is great.

The 1970 NAB is what’s used Liturgically in the OF Roman Rite Office, and a modified version of the 1970 NAB OT and 1986 NAB NT are what’s used Liturgically in the OF Roman Rite Mass in America.

It’s really certain things written in the notes and introductions which many people, including myself, dislike about the NAB Bible.

 

[Hope1960]

It’s really certain things written in the notes and introductions which many people, including myself, dislike about the NAB Bible.

Yeah, I also have a Protestant Bible (forget the name) that has really interesting notes, but it’s not Catholic so I haven’t used it in years.

 

[ChristMyLife]

also have a Protestant Bible

Many of the best and most popular Protestant Bibles are also available in approved Catholic Editions, so if you like the way a certain Protestant Bible reads you may be able to get it in an approved Catholic version.

A list of Protestant Bibles which have Church approved Catholic editions:

New Living Translation - Catholic Edition (NLT-CE)

The Living Bible (TLB-CE)

Good News Bible/Today’s English Version (GNB-CE aka TEV-CE)

Revised Standard Version (RSV-CE and RSV-2nd CE)

New Revised Standard Version (NRSV-CE)

English Standard Version (ESV-CE)

The RSV, NRSV, and ESV are especially widely used Protestant Bibles and regarded as highly accurate and scholarly, and there are approved Catholic editions of each.

The only solid Protestant Bible translation which doesn’t have an approved Catholic edition that I wish did is the ol’ King James. The KJV translation itself is 100% solidly orthodox, not a single word needs to be changed in it. There are 3 issues with the KJV which could easily be taken care of to get an approved Catholic edition. 1) the introductory letter and dedication contain explicit anti-Catholic statements. These can simply be dropped and excluded. 2) most modern KJV’s don’t include the deuterocanonical OT books. These can easily be included. 3) The KJV has no commentary, and the Church mandates at least a very basic commentary for its Bibles - the skeletal apparatus that comes with the RSV-CE could easily be adapted to a KJV-CE.

Here’s hoping we’ll one day soon see a KJV-CE!

I’d also like to see Catholic Editions of the New International Version and Holman Christian (or now simply Christian Standard Bible). Mainly for ecumenical and evangelistic purposes. The NIV is the most popular Bible among Protestants, and the CSB is one of the most popular (along with the KJV and NKJV) among Evangelical Protestants. So it would be great to have Catholic editions of those translations.