Douay-Rheims is confusing

[AmbroseSJ]

Mine doesn’t weigh a single ounce.

I use the NAB online. The english recommended version by the Vatican.
NAB Bible here online.

It’s free, but most of all? No paper cuts.

Oh yeah, mine doesn’t weigh a single little ounce.

The Vatican doesn’t recommend any vernacular Bibles, only approves certain one for use in the Liturgy. The NAB was found faulty by the Vatican and was returned to the USCCB for corrections. That is why there is no US Catholic Bible that is currently used in our Liturgy. The Vatican’s corrections made for the Liturgy are still not found in the NAB, and that is fine with the Vatican, but that would hardly constitute a recommendation.

BTW, my Haydock bible doesn’t weigh a single ounce either, but the ink, paper and binding which is required to view the Bible weighs 20 lbs. If I tried to lug around the online NAB I would have to carry over 50 lbs. Plus I don’t have to pay any connect charges or user fees to view my Bible.

 

[Ghoti]

My opinion is that any well read, literate person can understand the DR with ease. That means someone that can read and understand Shakespeare, Milton, Dryden, Pope, Goldsmith, Thoreau, Whitman, Hawthorne, Poe, and any of our older literary masters, would have no trouble whatsoever with Challoner’s version of the DR, and should even be able to read the original DR with little difficulty.

Are these authors even read in the schools anymore? That is my question.

I’ve never read Dryden, but I’d like to read some Pope. I do love Hawthorne, though.

I do have trouble with the DR (and the KJV). Of your list, in school I’ve read Shakespeare (Hamlet and Macbeth) and Poe (“The Telltale Heart” and “The Cask of Amontillado”). Seems to me that a lot of the time the teachers were trying to avoid classic “Americana” (and as a somewhat chauvanistic Canadian, I didn’t argue…Walden? Pfft. )

Also, one’s ability to comprehend that style of English (as with any language skill) can deteriorate over time. I haven’t read Shakespeare in over 35 years – never liked it (actually, I rather loathed it). I liked Poe; I have some works downloaded from the Gutenberg Project to read later – if I ever get back to reading.

Part of my problem now is that I am not nearly as intelligent as I used to be (as a matter of fact, I don’t think I ever was…). My memory is not what it was – I have difficulty remembering nouns in particular – and my reading comprehension seems to be declining. This is exacerbated by untreated AD/HD and medications for a different condition that interfere with my ability to absorb information except in the most passive manner (i.e. TV).

I’m sorry, I’m rambling – I’m not sure what my point is. I think your post (well, the bolded part anyway) stung a bit, although I know you did not intend it to at all. I had always considered myself to be intelligent – I did well in school (when I applied myself ), was always more advanced than most of my peers (when I applied myself ), etc etc. Now I am coming to the realization that while not illiterate, I am nowhere near erudite. I can’t follow the discussions over on the philosophy board. I can’t read Aquinas, Bonaventure or Augustine. I don’t understand a lot about my faith, like hermeneutics, or exegesis, or homoiousis, or any of those million-dollar Greek or Latin terms, even after repeated explanations.

There are those of us who do need a simpler, more straightforward, more contemporary translations, and good copious notes. I don’t have the wherewithall to navigate the DR; maybe I need an RSV-CE, or a JB, or even a Good News. If I can’t understand what is being said, so much more easily can I be led into error.

Side note: I find it amusing that Jesus says we must have faith like a child, and yet it sometimes seems you have to have a DST to figure out what you are supposed to believe. I wonder if only the intelligent can be saved, because so many of us believe and trust without truly understanding.
http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/basic/smileyvault-dunce.gif

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Ghoti:

Side note: I find it amusing that Jesus says we must have faith like a child, and yet it sometimes seems you have to have a DST to figure out what you are supposed to believe. I wonder if only the intelligent can be saved, because so many of us believe and trust without truly understanding.

Very well said! I trust you are being ironic, as there is no need for a DST, or even the ability to read to be saved. Sorry for causing you any discomfort in my post.

 

[zach_dunn]

My opinion is that any well read, literate person can understand the DR with ease. That means someone that can read and understand Shakespeare, Milton, Dryden, Pope, Goldsmith, Thoreau, Whitman, Hawthorne, Poe, and any of our older literary masters, would have no trouble whatsoever with Challoner’s version of the DR, and should even be able to read the original DR with little difficulty.

Are these authors even read in the schools anymore? That is my question.

I’m in 11th grade and I’ve only ever had to read one Shakespeare play, Macbeth, it’s very sad. I’ve heard of the other authors but never read them.

I have a couple off topic questions here: 1) What is a cross reference? Does it point to other verses that deal with the same topic? 2) When I see people quote scripture, often times I see them say something like cf. Matthew 6:5. My question is, what does the cf. stand for? It’s a dumb question, but I have an obsession like that, I need to know what all abbreviations mean…

Pax,
Zach

 

[patrick457]

I’m in 11th grade and I’ve only ever had to read one Shakespeare play, Macbeth, it’s very sad. I’ve heard of the other authors but never read them.

I have a couple off topic questions here: 1) What is a cross reference? Does it point to other verses that deal with the same topic?

A cross-reference is an instance within a document which refers to related or synonymous information elsewhere, usually within the same work. So yes, one can say that a Biblical cross-reference points to other verses or chapters with related topics.

1. When I see people quote scripture, often times I see them say something like cf. Matthew 6:5. My question is, what does the cf. stand for? It’s a dumb question, but I have an obsession like that, I need to know what all abbreviations mean…

Pax,
Zach

Cf. stands for the Latin-derived (but also modern English) word confer, i.e. “compare” or “consult”, and is used to refer to other material or ideas which may provide auxiliary information or arguments.

 

[patrick457]

My opinion is that any well read, literate person can understand the DR with ease. That means someone that can read and understand Shakespeare, Milton, Dryden, Pope, Goldsmith, Thoreau, Whitman, Hawthorne, Poe, and any of our older literary masters, would have no trouble whatsoever with Challoner’s version of the DR, and should even be able to read the original DR with little difficulty.

Are these authors even read in the schools anymore? That is my question.

I’m not a native English speaker, and have not the will to wade through Shakespeare’s work (I’ve not even learnt this at school; thankfully the internet is a handy tool). Even so, for me the Challoner Douai-Rheims or the KJV is still a piece of cake compared to Beowulf or the Dream of the Rood or even the Greek Septuagint and New Testament. Is modern-day education in the west really dumbed-down that people no longer have the heart to learn huge, complicated jargon?

 

[tobinatorstark]

I’m not a native English speaker, and have not the will to wade through Shakespeare’s work (I’ve not even learnt this at school; thankfully the internet is a handy tool). Even so, for me the Challoner Douai-Rheims or the KJV is still a piece of cake compared to Beowulf or the Dream of the Rood or even the Greek Septuagint and New Testament. Is modern-day education in the west really dumbed-down that people no longer have the heart to learn huge, complicated jargon?

Ooh Beowulf. I found that completely confusing compared to the Douay-Rheims Challoner.

 

[Epistemes]

There sure is a lot of severe intelligence questioning in this thread.

If I said that I also didn’t understand accounting textbooks or Blu-Ray manuals would some bean counter or techie come on board and then question the extent of my education?
*
Doesn’t the education in the West teach Adam Smith anymore?*

 

[AmbroseSJ]

There sure is a lot of severe intelligence questioning in this thread.

If I said that I also didn’t understand accounting textbooks or Blu-Ray manuals would some bean counter or techie come on board and then question the extent of my education?
*
Doesn’t the education in the West teach Adam Smith anymore?*

No no no no. If you are well read has little to do with intelligence. That is to say being intelligent does not therefore mean you are well read.

However, anyone that has an interest in reading the Bible should certainly be familiar with some literature, and the more the better. Reading the DR would not be everyone’s preference, but my suggestion was that anyone that was well read, would have no problem with it. I am especially referring to editions of Challoner’s revision of the DR. But even the original DR would not be that difficult for someone able to read Shakespeare.

But your original post, I believe, was related more to the difficulty of understanding St. Paul, then it was with the way the DR translated it. You might like a Bible that is more paraphrase, than literal translation. On the one hand you could try Ronald Knox’s translation or the Jerusalem Bible, or on the other, one like the Good News Bible.

 

[JLSamuel818]

The Vatican doesn’t recommend any vernacular Bibles, only approves certain one for use in the Liturgy. The NAB was found faulty by the Vatican and was returned to the USCCB for corrections. That is why there is no US Catholic Bible that is currently used in our Liturgy. The Vatican’s corrections made for the Liturgy are still not found in the NAB, and that is fine with the Vatican, but that would hardly constitute a recommendation.

BTW, my Haydock bible doesn’t weigh a single ounce either, but the ink, paper and binding which is required to view the Bible weighs 20 lbs. If I tried to lug around the online NAB I would have to carry over 50 lbs. Plus I don’t have to pay any connect charges or user fees to view my Bible.

Good one.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Good one.

 

[Epistemes]

No no no no. If you are well read has little to do with intelligence. That is to say being intelligent does not therefore mean you are well read.

However, anyone that has an interest in reading the Bible should certainly be familiar with some literature, and the more the better. Reading the DR would not be everyone’s preference, but my suggestion was that anyone that was well read, would have no problem with it. I am especially referring to editions of Challoner’s revision of the DR. But even the original DR would not be that difficult for someone able to read Shakespeare.

But your original post, I believe, was related more to the difficulty of understanding St. Paul, then it was with the way the DR translated it. You might like a Bible that is more paraphrase, than literal translation. On the one hand you could try Ronald Knox’s translation or the Jerusalem Bible, or on the other, one like the Good News Bible.

I have other translations, but there’s something in me that wants to primarily use the DR for personal and spiritual reading.

I always oscillate between the DR and my RSV-CE, both of which were pretty pricey.

 

[Axion]

The “Good News” Bible is not recommended since it decides what it THINKS a passage means and then translates so as to make that meaning the only meaning. This means you are reading the translators opinions as much as the bible.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

I always oscillate between the DR and my RSV-CE, both of which were pretty pricey.

I can never understand people’s horror of pricey bibles. These same people would have no hesitation in paying $100 a month for a Cable plan, or a cell phone plan, or (you name it.) But if a Bible is priced beyond a couple of dollars it is “pricey.” I’m not singling you out Epistimes, It’s just that I see so much of this in various Bible threads.

My thinking is that a good Bible is always worth the price. I can’t imagine a better bargain, no matter how pricey. But maybe I’m the weird one.

Example; in another thread it was stated that the Douay Confraternity Bible is an excellent almost modern Bible, but it is “VERY RARE.” I see about a dozen of them right now on Ebay in the $20 - $30 range, and in very good condition dating to 1950 to 1961. I suppose people shake their heads at the extreme expense of such a Bible, and then turn on their $1000 flat screen TV and order a $30 pizza for delivery.

 

[tobinatorstark]

I can never understand people’s horror of pricey bibles. These same people would have no hesitation in paying $100 a month for a Cable plan, or a cell phone plan, or (you name it.) But if a Bible is priced beyond a couple of dollars it is “pricey.” I’m not singling you out Epistimes, It’s just that I see so much of this in various Bible threads.

My thinking is that a good Bible is always worth the price. I can’t imagine a better bargain, no matter how pricey. But maybe I’m the weird one.

Example; in another thread it was stated that the Douay Confraternity Bible is an excellent almost modern Bible, but it is “VERY RARE.” I see about a dozen of them right now on Ebay in the $20 - $30 range, and in very good condition dating to 1950 to 1961. I suppose people shake their heads at the extreme expense of such a Bible, and then turn on their $1000 flat screen TV and order a $30 pizza for delivery.

exactly. I just spent 125 dollars on the Haydock for my sister and her fiancee for their wedding. It was well worth the money I spent for it

 

[Epistemes]

I can never understand people’s horror of pricey bibles. These same people would have no hesitation in paying $100 a month for a Cable plan, or a cell phone plan, or (you name it.) But if a Bible is priced beyond a couple of dollars it is “pricey.” I’m not singling you out Epistimes, It’s just that I see so much of this in various Bible threads.

My thinking is that a good Bible is always worth the price. I can’t imagine a better bargain, no matter how pricey. But maybe I’m the weird one.

I’m not complaining, but just saying that they both cost me about $60 each when I bought them…

…which makes it hard to decide which I want to use primarily. In short, I guess, being that they were pricey makes me want to use them a bit more.

 

[Epistemes]

Oh wow, I totally ran into a line last night which confused me to tears…

“But of them who seemed to be some thing, (what they were some time, it is nothing to me, God accepteth not the person of man,) for to me they that seemed to be some thing added nothing.” (Galatians 2:6)

 

[tobinatorstark]

Oh wow, I totally ran into a line last night which confused me to tears…

“But of them who seemed to be some thing, (what they were some time, it is nothing to me, God accepteth not the person of man,) for to me they that seemed to be some thing added nothing.” (Galatians 2:6)

This meaning that they were possibly of some importance in society, but didn’t give his/her life to God and didn’t try to add to their talents or grow in spirituality.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Oh wow, I totally ran into a line last night which confused me to tears…

“But of them who seemed to be some thing, (what they were some time, it is nothing to me, God accepteth not the person of man,) for to me they that seemed to be some thing added nothing.” (Galatians 2:6)

Here’s the same line in Ronald Knox’s version:

But as for what I owe to those who were of some repute–it matters little to me who or what they were, God makes no distinction between man and man–these men of repute, I say, had nothing to communicate to me.

Ronald Knox is at his finest in translating the letters of St. Paul. He translates from the Latin Vulgate, as does the DR, but he does paraphrase A LITTLE whenever the situation seems to require it. In this instance I think you can see he didn’t veer off from the meaning at all, and even clarified what was being said in the DR.

 

[Epistemes]

I’ve been reading the Book of Job lately, which is one of my favorites, & I came across this verse in the DR:

“God will not cast away the simple, nor reach out his hand to the evildoer” (8:20)

This seems theologically incorrect.

God does reach out his hand to the evildoer, which is grace! (It’s what allows the evildoer to be contrite and sorrowful for his/her sins.) God is always reaching out for us, but it’s a question of whether we take his hand – which is precisely how the RSC-CE renders it:

“See, God will not reject a blameless person,
nor take the hand of evildoers.”

And the NAB:

“Behold, God will not cast away the upright; neither will he take the hand of the wicked.”