If the US Bishop were to change the Liturgy and what Bible translation would you like them to use?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mannyfit75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mannyfit75 said:
I also think the DR has an error or mistranslation in its translation of Genesis 3:15.

Which states,
I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

In most current, Catholic translation. The RSV-CE has it written as:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her see; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”

The footnote of RSV-CE states,

The Latin Vulgate has the reading ipsa conteret, she shall bruise Some Old Latin manuscripts have this reading, and it occurs also in St. Augustine, De Genesi contra Manichaeos, II, which is earlier than St. Jerome’s translation. It could be due originally to a copyist’s mistake, which was then seen to contain a genuine, meaning…"
Click to expand...
What mistranslation are you refering to?

The Gender of the pro-noun. If so, the Hebrew pronoun Hu is an independant pronoun, and can refer to both a man or a woman.

In the Greek Septuagint, the gender for possesive pronoun for ‘heel’ is masculine ( his heel), but there is nothing in the Hebrew text to specify masculine.

St. Jerome used the Hebrew text, so I would hardly call it a mistranslation or copyist error.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
Most of the young people don’t. If young Catholics who have a zeal for their faith, and all of sudden they are force to read a Shakepearean type language, they will find it very difficult to grasps. As much as I love the DR Bible Translation, I don’t think it would be good for lectionary.

."
Click to expand...
What–are you saying our young people have lost the ability to comprehend. When did this happen, how did this happen. Was it something in the water–:rolleyes:
 
Brendan said:
What mistranslation are you refering to?

The Gender of the pro-noun. If so, the Hebrew pronoun Hu is an independant pronoun, and can refer to both a man or a woman.

In the Greek Septuagint, the gender for possesive pronoun for ‘heel’ is masculine ( his heel), but there is nothing in the Hebrew text to specify masculine.

St. Jerome used the Hebrew text, so I would hardly call it a mistranslation or copyist error.
Click to expand...
The footnote said it is in the RSV-CE Bible.

Well, I just don’t think the Douay Rheims Bible would be good for the Lectionary period. It’s language is too hard for most Catholics to understand.

Someone mention the Our Father Prayer and mention the thou, thy, and art. That is a simple prayer. However, it’s hard to read a passage in the Bible which has thousands of thou, thy, and arts. Some of the words aren’t even used today.

The Douay Rheims Bible is only good for private reading not Liturgy. Unless the English speaking community speaks like those old style English, yes I see a reason. The majority though, don’t speak that way.
 
Scotty_PGH said:
Seriously - I had a pretty good handle on those words just by reading my Thor comic books back in the day. :rotfl:

Pssssssssssssst - it’s really not that hard!
Click to expand...
For some people it’s easy. For others it isn’t. For me it takes me longer to finished the DR Bible compared to the RSV-CE Bible.
 
I would have to say RSV-CE. However, I think ALL English speaking Catholics need to be on the same page in regard to the translation that is used in the Mass. It should not matter were you go the translation should be the same.
 
Sabda said:
I would have to say RSV-CE. However, I think ALL English speaking Catholics need to be on the same page in regard to the translation that is used in the Mass. It should not matter were you go the translation should be the same.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Sabda said:
I would have to say RSV-CE. However, I think ALL English speaking Catholics need to be on the same page in regard to the translation that is used in the Mass. It should not matter were you go the translation should be the same.
Click to expand...
RSV-CE is a good choice. I don’t like the NRSV Bible. In some of Paul’s Epistles, where he addresses the congregation as “brothers or brethren,” the NRSV had it as brothers and sisters. I think it distort the content of the passage…

Catholics Answers made a comment on NRSV Bible:
One translation that is hard to place on the spectrum is the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). The basic text of the NRSV is rendered literally, following the RSV, but it uses “gender inclusive language,” which tries to translate the original text into a modern “gender neutral” cultural equivalent. When you read the NRSV you will often encounter “friends,” “beloved,” and “brothers and sisters,” and then see a footnote stating “Gk brothers.” The NRSV also shows a preference for using “God” and “Christ” when the original text says “he.”
Click to expand...
catholic.com/library/bible_translations_guide.asp
 
I said NJB, since that is my favorite in personal reading. However, my second choice is the DR. We need a special “spiritual” language for mass and I (as a protestant at that time) had no trouble at all understanding the KJV at age four!👍 I often went the the Episcopal church with my grandmother then and the liturgy sounded so special and beautiful. (Nothing wrong with Beauty as long as it’s revealing Truth). If the Pope and Bishops won’t use the DR then the RSV-CE.🤷
 
brigid12 said:
I said NJB, since that is my favorite in personal reading. However, my second choice is the DR. We need a special “spiritual” language for mass and I (as a protestant at that time) had no trouble at all understanding the KJV at age four!👍 I often went the the Episcopal church with my grandmother then and the liturgy sounded so special and beautiful. (Nothing wrong with Beauty as long as it’s revealing Truth). If the Pope and Bishops won’t use the DR then the RSV-CE.🤷
Click to expand...
My granny got me my first Bible for First Communion. Yep, it was the KJV. 😃 Nice white flex cover with zipper. Of course I still have it. 👍
 
Sabda said:
My granny got me my first Bible for First Communion. Yep, it was the KJV. 😃 Nice white flex cover with zipper. Of course I still have it. 👍
Click to expand...
The only problem is that the KJV is not complete. There are books missing. The DR is written in the same wonderful language and includes all the books.😃
 
Digitonomy said:
Nonsense. You may have to look slightly harder for a KJV with apocrypha, but they are out there.
Click to expand...
In a different order with an explanation. The 1611 version is
the full text. The KJV language is beautiful and so is the DR. The DR is fully Catholic the KJV is not always so.

This being said we have two or three KJV in the house and they are referred to many times. It is a lovely book.
 
The NRSV:

It is easily read and easily understood if someone reads it aloud. It just has a nice “flow” to it with modern English. And, unlike a previous poster, I would rather hear “brothers and sisters” than bretheren.
 
If I had my way I would like to see masses in English using the Douay Rheims Bible because I think its a better translation and I think just overall sounds better. Would it take a little bit for people to adjust? Of course, but if you grow up hearing it at every mass you will catch on. I don’t like the idea of dumbing down things. People are more intelligent then generally we give them credit for.

If I couldn’t have that than the RSV-CE would be better than NAB. Again I think its more accurate and sounds better.

Historybrat
 
Brendan said:
What mistranslation are you refering to?

The Gender of the pro-noun. If so, the Hebrew pronoun Hu is an independant pronoun, and can refer to both a man or a woman.
Click to expand...
Those are the NRSV. I don’t like the NRSV translation because its gender neutral. I’m refering to the RSV-2nd Catholic Edition the one recommended by Catholic Answers and even Scott Hahn.
 
I say Confraternity New Testament–Douay Rheims Haydock Old Testament–and early 50s Psalms translated into English from Latin that were neither NAB-Olinger or Douay Psalms.

Readable New Testament–Catholic Old Testament that gives Christ as Meessiah passages their due–and beautiful poetic Psalms. What would be wrong with a bible like that?

As long as a large enough amoung ot US bishops fight the Holy See totth and nail over every smidgin of inclusive language they can get into the Liturgy and as long as they defend to the death the NAB there will continue to be problems.

The RSV in any of its editions is a Protestant bible–you know other Catholic trasnslations must be seriously flawed when Catholics wax poetic over its virtues.

Is the RSV the best that Catholics can do? When did Catholics quit writing the Bible, use other relgion’s bibles, and write bad bible such as the NAB and the New Jerusalem bible?

The NAB and the New Jerusalem Bibles make the Confraternity New Testament look fantastic!

Just think folks–if they didn’t make some changes in the RSV Catholics everywhere would have chunked the words of the Rosary!

Would Mary have wanted that?

Hail Mary Full of Grace!

Where do you find that? The Douay!
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Just think folks–if they didn’t make some changes in the RSV Catholics everywhere would have chunked the words of the Rosary!

Would Mary have wanted that?

Hail Mary Full of Grace!

Where do you find that? The Douay!
Click to expand...
Actually, it’s in neither; the text in both the Douay and the RSV-CE 2nd Edition read “Hail, Full of Grace”. Gabriel did not mention Mary by name, only by the Title “Full of Grace”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top