Confraternity Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter starrs0
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

starrs0

Guest
Is anyone here familar with the Confraternity Bible I have a mint copy from 1957 that has some lovely color illustrations sadly it’s been out of print for almost 30 years. 😦
 
40.png
starrs0:
Is anyone here familar with the Confraternity Bible I have a mint copy from 1957 that has some lovely color illustrations sadly it’s been out of print for almost 30 years. 😦
Click to expand...
I have a copy of the Confraternity New Testament dated 1941. I enjoy reading the translation. I wish they would have finished the entire bible instead of scraping it and creating the NAB before it was finished.
 
I have a really nice 1961 Confraternity Bible, which is the Douay OT and the Conf. NT. It too has lots of nice color pictures. It is an outstanding Bible, and a nice complement to the Douay-Rheims. The Confraternity NT is top notch stuff, frmo the Catholic perspective. Some of the Bibles have a COnfraternity Psalms in them as well, and I believe some other OT books re-done as well.
 
The Confraternity edition of the D-R was an updating of English as regards spelling and grammar. The NT was completed (I believe sometime in the 30’s). The OT was in the works when it was abandoned in favor of the NAB, which was finally published in 1970.
 
I too have a Confraternity version of the Bible, a St. Joseph edition!! It’s a great bible, and I wish it would be widely reprinted.

Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)
 
You and me both Jaypeeto4 I just don’t care for the NAB I prefer the Confraternity Bible my ony gripe with it is the strange spelling it uses for some peoples names it can be a little confusing.
 
40.png
starrs0:
Is anyone here familar with the Confraternity Bible I have a mint copy from 1957 that has some lovely color illustrations sadly it’s been out of print for almost 30 years. 😦
Click to expand...
The Confraternity Old Testament is substantially the same as the New American Bible with the exception of Genesis and Psalms; it is based on the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic texts. In the edition you have, the books from 1 Samuel (1 Kings) to 2 Machabees are from the Douay-Rheims text.

The Confraternity New Testament is a revision of the Douay Rheims translation; it is based on the Latin Vulgate.
 
40.png
SFH:
The Confraternity Old Testament is substantially the same as the New American Bible with the exception of Genesis and Psalms.
Click to expand...
That is only true if all Bibles are substantially the same. The Confraternity OT is the Douay OT, except, as you note, there are a couple books that were changed. My Confraternity OT is the Douay OT in its entirety. But the NAB is a totally different translation.
 
40.png
johnbres2:
That is only true if all Bibles are substantially the same. The Confraternity OT is the Douay OT, except, as you note, there are a couple books that were changed. My Confraternity OT is the Douay OT in its entirety. But the NAB is a totally different translation.
Click to expand...
The Confraternity translation refers to a number of different editions with a New Testament revision of the Douay Rheims translation based on the Latin Vulgate and an Old Testament with some books newly translated from the Hebrew and Greek and other books coming from the Douay Rheims Old Testament. As more books were translated from the Hebrew and Greek, they replaced the Douay Rheims translation in the Old Testament. Psalms was done first, then Gensis through Ruth, then the rest of the Wisdom literature, then the Prophets. Eventually (1969), all the books of the Old Testament were translated from the Hebrew and Greek and replaced the Douay Rheims translation. Three years later, these books (with a new translation of Genesis) and a new translation of the New Testament were issued as the New American Bible.
 
40.png
SFH:
Three years later, these books (with a new translation of Genesis) and a new translation of the New Testament were issued as the New American Bible.
Click to expand...
SFH, Thank you for the detail. How do you know this? I had no idea the NAB had any connection to the Douay. That is hard to believe based on things like not having “full of grace” in Luke 1:28. Is there a site you are aware of that explains this? I don’t mean to be calling your knowledge of this into question. I am just interested in researching it further. Tx. Peace.
 
40.png
johnbres2:
SFH, Thank you for the detail. How do you know this? I had no idea the NAB had any connection to the Douay. That is hard to believe based on things like not having “full of grace” in Luke 1:28. Is there a site you are aware of that explains this? I don’t mean to be calling your knowledge of this into question. I am just interested in researching it further. Tx. Peace.
Click to expand...
“The Books of Genesis to Ruth were first published in 1952; the Wisdom Books, Job to Sirach, in 1955; the Prophetic Books, Isaiah to Malachi, in 1961; and the Historical Books, Samuel to Maccabees, in 1969. In the present edition of Genesis to Ruth there are certain new features: a general introduction to the Pentateuch, a retranslation of Genesis …” – Preface to the New American Bible The Old Testament.

You might also check out The Jerome Biblical Commentary, Texts and Versions, the English Bible (69:174). It discusses the development of the Confraternity edition and the New American Bible.

You can also compare the text of the Confraternity Edition, starting with Exodus, with the NAB text.

I wouldn’t say that the Douay Rheims and New American Bible have any connection with each other. In the Confraternity editions, the Douay Rheims translation served as a place holder until the new translation of the book by the CCD was completed.

Note that the New Testament is a different story because the New American Bible’s translation is based on the Greek text and abandons traditional Catholic terms (a big negative in my book) while the Confraternity translation is a revision of the Douay Rheims (see preface to the Confraternity New Testament).
 
I had misunderstood what you said, when you said that the NAB replaced the Douay-Rheims. As you point out, there is no connection. I will check out the Jerome commentary when I can find a copy that I don’t have to pay for!
 
SFH said:
“The Books of Genesis to Ruth were first published in 1952; the Wisdom Books, Job to Sirach, in 1955; the Prophetic Books, Isaiah to Malachi, in 1961; and the Historical Books, Samuel to Maccabees, in 1969. In the present edition of Genesis to Ruth there are certain new features: a general introduction to the Pentateuch, a retranslation of Genesis …” – Preface to the New American Bible The Old Testament.

You might also check out The Jerome Biblical Commentary, Texts and Versions, the English Bible (69:174). It discusses the development of the Confraternity edition and the New American Bible.

You can also compare the text of the Confraternity Edition, starting with Exodus, with the NAB text.

I wouldn’t say that the Douay Rheims and New American Bible have any connection with each other. In the Confraternity editions, the Douay Rheims translation served as a place holder until the new translation of the book by the CCD was completed.

Note that the New Testament is a different story because the New American Bible’s translation is based on the Greek text and abandons traditional Catholic terms (a big negative in my book) while the Confraternity translation is a revision of the Douay Rheims (see preface to the Confraternity New Testament).
Click to expand...

SFH,

This is the third post I’ve seen of yours today that is dead-on right! It’s good to know there’s someone else out there who cares as much about these matters as do I. THANKS!!
 
I have a Confronternity version from 1941 and it is much better than the NAB, which I have relegated to the bookshelf as an occasional reference book. The Confronternity I have is Douay (completely) with the NT translated into modern language directly from the text of the Latin Vulgate. I have managed to find a copy for my wife and daughter and brother-in-law as well by searching the St. Martin DePorres thrift shops up north. God bless them, they even gave them to me because they are holy books! I have found that what I really prefer is, in fact, the Douay-Rheims! There are excellent sources to find new copies of it. If you like the Confronternity, there is something else I think you will love. My Prayer Book by Fr. Lasange (circa 1914), is an awesome source for understanding Mass and for insights into Catholic theology and for many of the most beautiful prayers I’ve ever seen!
 
40.png
anawim:
The Confraternity before 1970 is the Douay-Rheims.
Click to expand...
Huh? The Confraternity is not the Douay-Rheims. The Confraternity before 1970 is a different translation than the Douay-Rheims-Challoner. The Douay-Rheims-Challoner (what most simply call the Douay-Rheims) dates about 200 years before the Confraternity version.

The Douay-Rheims-Challoner dates from the 18th century. With the actual Douay-Rheim dating from the end of the 16th and beginning of the 17th centuries. The Confraternity NT is from the 1940s. Unfortunately they scraped the Confraternity translation before completing the entire translation in favour of a new translation, that being the NAB.
 
40.png
AugustineFL:
Huh? The Confraternity is not the Douay-Rheims. The Confraternity before 1970 is a different translation than the Douay-Rheims-Challoner. The Douay-Rheims-Challoner (what most simply call the Douay-Rheims) dates about 200 years before the Confraternity version.

The Douay-Rheims-Challoner dates from the 18th century. With the actual Douay-Rheim dating from the end of the 16th and beginning of the 17th centuries. The Confraternity NT is from the 1940s. Unfortunately they scraped the Confraternity translation before completing the entire translation in favour of a new translation, that being the NAB.
Click to expand...
Yes, the translation known as the Contraternity is the updated English of the Duoay-Rheims. The Duoay-Rheims was updated at least 3 times since it was first translated in the late 16th., early 17th. century. The last update, only updated the NT. That was in the 1930’s. They had made plans to update the OT, but scrapped the plan in favor of working on the NAB instead.

Growing up, all we had was the Confraternity edition of the Duoay-Rheims. In 1965 they introduced the Catholic Edition of the RSV, and a year later introduced the Jerusalem Bible. But as a kid, all I had was the Conrfraternity Edition of the D-R.
 
40.png
anawim:
Yes, the translation known as the Contraternity is the updated English of the Duoay-Rheims. The Duoay-Rheims was updated at least 3 times since it was first translated in the late 16th., early 17th. century. The last update, only updated the NT. That was in the 1930’s. They had made plans to update the OT, but scrapped the plan in favor of working on the NAB instead.

Growing up, all we had was the Confraternity edition of the Duoay-Rheims. In 1965 they introduced the Catholic Edition of the RSV, and a year later introduced the Jerusalem Bible. But as a kid, all I had was the Conrfraternity Edition of the D-R.
Click to expand...
I see that you used a few different versions, including the Confranternity and (possibly the 1899 DRB?). I would be interested in which you prefer and why, rather than just the history.
 
40.png
rciadan:
I see that you used a few different versions, including the Confranternity and (possibly the 1899 DRB?). I would be interested in which you prefer and why, rather than just the history.
Click to expand...
The Haydock has a commentary that I love. The NT portion is available on line: haydock1859.tripod.com/index.html

Unfortunately, the Confraternity edition I had from the late 50’s finally fell apart, and regretably, I got rid of it. I wish I had kept it, no matter what the condition. It could have been rebound.
 
ANAWIM: Thanks! I went to the Haydock site and, praise God, found a wonderful treasure! I would advise all Catholics to visit this site! Thanks again. As per your Confranternity, keep checking the Catholic thrift shops. They pop up from time to time and many time in excellent to mint condition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top