silverwings_88:
Well, I was wondering if the DRV sufficient for scripture study in catholic theology
What do you mean by “scripture study in Catholic theology”?
If you are referring to graduate level studies in theology (MA, PhD), one should already have a working knowledge of at least one classical language, and should be learning a second (preferably Latin and Greek). (Yes, even dogmatic theology and moral theology grad students should as well.) With knowledge of Greek one would be using the actual Greek texts (Hort and Westcott, Alexandrian, Scrivener, the Byzantine Majority, LXX, etc.), and one would occasionally refer to various translations for comparison purposes only. At this level, then, contemporary translations are of very little importance.
If what you mean by “scripture study in Catholic theology” is undergraduate work or MDiv work, the rule of thumb is to use the translation that your profs use. It might not be the best of translations or the one you are comfortable with, but it makes it easier to follow along, and everyone knows that what college profs really want is to hear students regurgitate the prof’s own ideas and opinions (and the facts as long as they don’t get in the way). No prof I know of (undergraduate or graduate) wanted us to refer to any of the notes in our bibles, and pointed us in the direction of the commentaries and scholars they wanted us to use in our research. The political answer is to give your prof whatever he or she wants; you will have plenty of time to disagree with your profs once you have the grade and your degree.
If you are referring to directed independent study outside of a formal academic environment (which is where the vast majority of us are probably at), and your Greek skills are rusty or non-existent, then it is best to concentrate not so much on the translation, as on the notes that accompany whatever translation you decide to use. I have a very low regard for the notes in the NAB. There is no such thing as KJV with Catholic friendly notes. I’m not familiar with NJB notes, though most people here think they are excellent. I’m a big fan of the notes in the RSV-CE Ignatius Bible, and the notes in the Haydock DRV. It’s always a good idea to have more than one translation around with various notes so you can compare them (i.e. Ignatius RSV-CE with Haydock DRV).
The best commentary I’ve ever used is A Catholic Commentary On Holy Scripture, edited by Orchard, 1953. Unfortunately this commentary is out of print, so you have to go to booksellers to find a used copy. Unfortunately the booksellers know that this commentary is sought after, so they ask for a lot. One was bequeathed to me, so in a way I was fortunate. Aside from this commentary, I’ve yet to find one that worth the money (and this includes the NJBC). Really, the best thing to do is to read as many articles and buy as many books as you can by Fr. William Most.
silverwings_88:
Saying that, is it okay to study using the KJV with apocrypha?
Like I said that would depend on what you mean by scripture study for Catholic theology. At the independent study or parish-bible-study-group level, I don’t see anything wrong with using the KJV if that is what one is used to using. Yes, there are some very well publicized mistranslations (i.e. Joseph’s “multi-colored” tunic), but what modern translation doesn’t have mistranslations? Being aware of these problems can be sufficient for some people who just can’t get used to another modern translation. The biggest problem with the KJV isn’t necessarily the translation, but the notes, and I’m not aware of any KJV with Catholic friendly notes. (Though I wouldn’t say that the NAB, the bible that most American Catholics use, has Catholic friendly notes, either.) Using the Scofield Reference Bible would be totally unproductive.
I own and often use a KJV. This is the translation that my Evangelical/Fundamentalist friends and family know (and have memorized). It’s easier for me to speak to them using the same language, so to speak. I just wish I could find a KJV without any notes and plenty of margin space. (For that matter, I wish I could find any modern translation without notes and lots of margin space.)
The notes in the 1899 Bible are a mere handful of those in Haydock.)