Ignatius Bible (RSV-CE) 2nd edition

[mmortal03]

Can I trouble you for a comparative scan of the sample pages from your various RSV’s on your RSV comparison page?

I just remembered about this. Here is a scan of what the layout of the inside of the compact editions look like:

umsis.miami.edu/~medmunds/GreyScaleScepterActualSizeSamplePage.jpg

This is what the Ignatius First Edition looks like:
umsis.miami.edu/~medmunds/IgnatiusFirstEditionLuke.jpg

I will add a scan of the Ignatius Second Edition when I get a chance.

 

[porthos11]

I just remembered about this. Here is a scan of what the layout of the inside of the compact editions look like:

umsis.miami.edu/~medmunds/GreyScaleScepterActualSizeSamplePage.jpg

This is what the Ignatius First Edition looks like:
umsis.miami.edu/~medmunds/IgnatiusFirstEditionLuke.jpg

I will add a scan of the Ignatius Second Edition when I get a chance.

Thanks mmortal. I think the others will appreciate the SCE scan as well. I already own a copy. Thanks much.

 

[Manfred]

The Ignatius First Edition had section headings, but not above the start of each section; they were instead only at the top of the page. The compact RSV-CE by Oxford does not even have these section names at all. I do not know if the Reader’s Edition will have the section names (it could be that they were removed from the Compact Edition to save space, or it could be that only the Ignatius Bibles have them; there is no way to tell which is correct until December.)

The so-called “headings” at the top of the pages in the original Ignatius RSV-CE from 1965/66 were taken from Thomas Nelson’s edition of the Protestant RSV.

So, what is inside the covers of any of the various RSV-CE Compact Editions? Well, they seem to have came out in 2005 and were produced by Oxford Press, and then (re-)branded and sold by Oxford Press, Scepter Press, and Ignatius Press, with slightly different bindings to choose from. These are the ones that are based on the 1971 RSV.

However, the full size RSV-CE by Scepter is not based on the 1971 RSV; it is instead the same as the Ignatius First Edition (the original 1965 RSV-CE).

Very interesting observation, mmortal! At last we can finally track these “rogue” RSV-CEs based on the 1971 NT by their being Oxford “Compact Editions”, as opposed to the original RSV-CEs - mainly full-size with the 1959 NT - which appear to be from Nelson.

 

[mmortal03]

Just as a disappointing update, the preliminary reports show that we were probably mislead about the contents of the Oxford Press RSV Catholic Bible Reader’s Version, so please ignore my previous comments about the Reader’s version and take them to refer only to the Compact Version.

It looks like the Reader’s Version may turn out to be the Ignatius First Edition with a new binding and some very small number of changes. We haven’t been able to exhaustively verify what its contents are yet (I don’t have a copy yet), but it doesn’t look to be as excellent as its Compact cousin. Please refer to here for the latest: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1788075 .

 

[Manfred]

Many times in several of these posts I’ve stated that the Ignatius RSV-2CE is a “work-in-progress”. From Liturgiam Authenticam I submit the following excerpt:

“23.
Whenever the biblical or liturgical text preserves words taken from other ancient languages (as, for example, the words Alleluia and Amen, the Aramaic words contained in the New Testament, the Greek words drawn from the Trisagion which are recited in the Improperia of Good Friday, and the Kyrie eleison of the Order of Mass, as well as many proper names) consideration should be given to preserving the same words in the new vernacular translation, at least as one option among others. Indeed, a careful respect for the original text will sometimes require that this be done.”

I have read nothing in these posts that indicate to me that Jesus’ words, “Truly, truly, I say to you…” were revised to “Amen, amen, I say to you…” in the RSV-2CE. Nor in the Psalms has “Praise the LORD!” been revised to “Alleluia!”. Nor has “Hallelujah” in the NT been corrected to “Alleluia”.

True, translating per the above may be considered “one option among others” insofar as the liturgy is concerned. So, why were none of these included in the RSV-2CE footnotes at least?

Manfred

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Why is it so impossibly hard for translators to bring themselves to complying with Liturgiam Authenticam?

You would think somebody somewhere would earnestly try to do it. What am I missing?

P.S. How many years away are we from an RSV-CE 3d edition?

 

[Manfred]

Why is it so impossibly hard for translators to bring themselves to complying with Liturgiam Authenticam?

You would think somebody somewhere would earnestly try to do it. What am I missing?

P.S. How many years away are we from an RSV-CE 3d edition?

Jerry-Jet,

That paragraph I quoted is what I believe would be the essence of the Ratio Translationis which would be used for Lectionary and Missal translations. Heck - I can see it; why can’t the translators?

Meanwhile, if you want a translation already in compliance with at leat this paragraph of LA, well, there’s the venerable Douay-Rheims.

 

[bkovacs]

It would have been nice if the Ignatius Bible (RSV-CE 2nd) would have been similar size wise to the St. Joseph’s edition 6.5" X 9.25", with nice illustrations and artwork.Versus 6" X 9" with no illustrations or artwork. Pretty plain jane Bible, with the exception of cover with Icons. As well as available in large print. No large print edition. Feel sorry for those with poor eye sight. But it is Ignatius Press. So maybe I’m not surprised. For $39.95 for a bonded leather personal size (small) Bible. Kind of pricey if you ask me.

 

[bobolink]

Hello,

I’ve just read through this thread and am not much the wiser to be honest!

I want to order a bible, but am unsure of which of the following is best, and the pros and cons of each:

Catholic Bible-RSV (Leather Bound)
amazon.co.uk/Catholic-Bible-RSV/dp/0898709369/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I5USP2SYLXF91&colid=2ACPVUN3R0S1Y

Or:

**The Revised Standard Version Catholic Bible: Reader’s Version (Leather Bound) **
amazon.co.uk/Revised-Standard-Version-Catholic-Bible/dp/0195288602/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I1LE4J63L6UNFY&colid=2ACPVUN3R0S1Y

Both were published in 2006; I believe the Ignatius one is 2nd edition, but not sure about the other.

Do both have ribbon markers and sectional headings dividing the text? Which is the better translation, if there is a difference? I’m new to all this and don’t understand the differences etc…

I’d really appreciate some advice on this as to which is the best one to go for.

God bless and many thanks in advance,

D

 

[scapularkid8]

Hello,

I’ve just read through this thread and am not much the wiser to be honest!

I want to order a bible, but am unsure of which of the following is best, and the pros and cons of each:

Catholic Bible-RSV (Leather Bound)
amazon.co.uk/Catholic-Bible-RSV/dp/0898709369/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I5USP2SYLXF91&colid=2ACPVUN3R0S1Y

Or:

**The Revised Standard Version Catholic Bible: Reader’s Version (Leather Bound) **
amazon.co.uk/Revised-Standard-Version-Catholic-Bible/dp/0195288602/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I1LE4J63L6UNFY&colid=2ACPVUN3R0S1Y

Both were published in 2006; I believe the Ignatius one is 2nd edition, but not sure about the other.

Do both have ribbon markers and sectional headings dividing the text? Which is the better translation, if there is a difference? I’m new to all this and don’t understand the differences etc…

I’d really appreciate some advice on this as to which is the best one to go for.

God bless and many thanks in advance,

D

I can speak for the first one on your list since I have that exact Bible. There are two ribbon markers. One situated toward the front for Old Testament marking, and the same farther back for the Gospels and Letters. There are sectional headings in this Bible all throughout as well (and they’re accurate too, not just like “Moses Continued Traveling”). The two translations are exactly the same: Revised Standard Version which is, in my opinion, one of the best Catholic Bibles out there.

Again, I can’t speak for the second one, but I highly recommend the first one. It’s just a great Bible. Good feel for easy reading, but it lasts. There’s color maps, discreet in text notes (not ones that take up half the page), and the paper quality is just dare I use the word perfect for a Bible. If you need something smaller, I’d say go with #2, but I would urge you to go with the first one otherwise. You won’t be disappointed. (Trust me, I don’t work for Ignatius Press or anything hahaha )

 

[Mattjolley]

I can speak for the first one on your list since I have that exact Bible. There are two ribbon markers. One situated toward the front for Old Testament marking, and the same farther back for the Gospels and Letters. There are sectional headings in this Bible all throughout as well (and they’re accurate too, not just like “Moses Continued Traveling”). The two translations are exactly the same: Revised Standard Version which is, in my opinion, one of the best Catholic Bibles out there.

Again, I can’t speak for the second one, but I highly recommend the first one. It’s just a great Bible. Good feel for easy reading, but it lasts. There’s color maps, discreet in text notes (not ones that take up half the page), and the paper quality is just dare I use the word perfect for a Bible. If you need something smaller, I’d say go with #2, but I would urge you to go with the first one otherwise. You won’t be disappointed. (Trust me, I don’t work for Ignatius Press or anything hahaha )

Isn’t the second link the ‘Original’ RSV-CE, just a new(ish) edition? Looks like the Oxford Edition of the RSV.

I wouldn’t go for it, since you can now get the leather Ignatius RSVCE2 so cheaply! I got the Hardback of the Ignatius RSVCE2 about a year back when the leather bound version still was pricey. (About £29) Now the price tempts me! Even though I already own the translation!

But yeah, I would hazard a guess that the second one is the older RSV translation and possibly has tiny type (if its a compact edition.) Come to think of it, now I recall, it has a similar-looking box to the Oxford RSV-CE I bought a while back (yes I own many versions of bibles! ) which has tabs for the different books of the Bible. A very nice edition if you are looking for the original RSV, but I personally feel the new Ignatius 2nd Edition outshines it, especially the beautiful cover

I notice you used ‘amazon.co.uk’ to find your bibles. Are you based in the UK? You might wish to try out the CTS New Catholic Bible. It uses the exact scripture we do at mass. (Jerusalem Bible with Grail Psalms) and has great features such as the list of readings for sundays and weekdays of the year, (Great for lookup) a guide to the Liturgy of the Hours, 4 maps, and introductions for each book. It also has brand new footnotes not found in the Original Jerusalem Bibles. Have a peek at their site if you like: cts-online.org.uk/acatalog/Our_Products_CTS_New_Catholic_Bible_21.html

Don’t hesitate to send me a PM with your email address if you’d like to see their PDF brochure for more information, I requested a copy of thebrochure when this bible first became available! A lot of people on here seem to be discovering this Bible and I must admit the majority I have mentioned it to seem to like it!

So, basically, you’re looking at the original RSVCE or the updated ‘Second Edition’ by Ignatius with the pretty cover. Out of those two, I’d day go for the Ignatius 2nd Ed!

I hope I’ve hepled and not just thown an extra ‘spanner in the works’ of your decision-making! And PM me if the CTS Bible sounds good for you:thumbsup:

Matt

 

[Mattjolley]

Hello,

I’ve just read through this thread and am not much the wiser to be honest!

I want to order a bible, but am unsure of which of the following is best, and the pros and cons of each:

Catholic Bible-RSV (Leather Bound)
amazon.co.uk/Catholic-Bible-RSV/dp/0898709369/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I5USP2SYLXF91&colid=2ACPVUN3R0S1Y

Or:

**The Revised Standard Version Catholic Bible: Reader’s Version (Leather Bound) **
amazon.co.uk/Revised-Standard-Version-Catholic-Bible/dp/0195288602/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I1LE4J63L6UNFY&colid=2ACPVUN3R0S1Y

Both were published in 2006; I believe the Ignatius one is 2nd edition, but not sure about the other.

Do both have ribbon markers and sectional headings dividing the text? Which is the better translation, if there is a difference? I’m new to all this and don’t understand the differences etc…

I’d really appreciate some advice on this as to which is the best one to go for.

God bless and many thanks in advance,

D

Hi!

The second link looks like the ‘Original’ RSV-CE, just a new(ish) edition. Looks like the Oxford Edition of the RSV-CE.

I wouldn’t go for it, since you can now get the leather Ignatius RSVCE2 so cheaply! I got the Hardback of the Ignatius RSVCE2 about a year back when the leather bound version was a bit pricey. (About £29)
Now the price tempts me! Even though I already own the translation!

But yeah, I would hazard a guess that the second one is the older RSV translation. Now I recall, it has a similar-looking box to the Oxford RSV-CE I bought a while back (yes I own many versions of bibles! ) which has tabs for the different books of the Bible. A very nice edition if you are looking for the original RSV, but I personally feel the new Ignatius 2nd Edition outshines it, especially the beautiful cover!

I notice you used ‘Amazon.co.uk’ to find your bibles. Are you based in the UK? You might wish to try out the CTS New Catholic Bible. It uses the exact scripture we do at mass. (Jerusalem Bible with Grail Psalms) and has great features such as the table of readings for sundays and weekdays of the year, (Great for lookup) a guide to the Liturgy of the Hours, 4 maps, and introductions for each book. It also has brand new footnotes not found in the Original Jerusalem Bibles. Have a peek at their site if you like: cts-online.org.uk/acatalog/Our_Products_CTS_New_Catholic_Bible_21.html

Don’t hesitate to send me a PM with your email address if you’d like to see their PDF brochure for more information, I requested a copy of the brochure when this bible first became available! I was glad that we in the UK could finally have the scriptures from mass in one bible. A lot of people on here seem to be discovering this Bible and I must admit the majority I have mentioned it to seem to like it!

So, basically, you’re looking at the original RSV-CE or the updated ‘Second Edition’ by Ignatius with the pretty cover. Out of those two, I’d day go for the Ignatius 2nd Ed! If only just for the Section headings, the fact that it has footnotes, and the translation is updated. (I’m sure somebody else can fill you in on the updates!)

I hope I’ve hepled and not just thown an extra ‘spanner in the works’ of your decision-making! I fear I’m not too good at explaining things! And PM me if the CTS Bible sounds good for you

Matt

 

[Linda_Marie]

I’m looking for a good study bible. I took a seminar here in which the nun running the course (a Brown Joey, Mary McKillop’s mob) recommended the Harper-Collins Study Bible which is NRSV with copious notes and maps, a huge book 12" tall, 8" wide, 4" deep. My DH was in Perth (our bookstore here does not run to Bibles) and I asked him to get it for me. He returned with the Harper Study Bible NRSV. It is the Protestant version and the footnotes are decidedly Protestant. For instance, it says that in John 6.35;,“I am the Bread of Life. Bread is used figuratively to illustrate that just as bread sustains physical life, Jesus sustains the spiritual life of the believer.” and at John 6:53; “Jesus used a physical figure of speech in order to teach a great spiritual truth: people should believe on him as the bread of life (see note v35). Since the Lord’s Supper was not yet instituted, this must refer to a spiritual eating and drinking, not a sacramental one.”.

What confidence could I have that the Catholic version has Catholic footnotes? If I can’t be sure that they didn’t just add the Deuterocanons back in and keep all the footnotes the same, what bible would be the best for the most Catholic footnotes? Mattjolley, do you think the bible you linked fills the bill?

I’d like to be sure before I get it. I already have an NAB St. Joseph’s, a New Jerusalem Saints Devotional Bible (no footnotes, just interspersed with writings of the Saints which I absolutely love), the one mentioned above and a couple inherited KJV’s.

 

[bobolink]

Thanks people for your reples and advice. I am indeed in the UK. I already have the NJB so do not really want a JB. I was wondering what exactly are the improvements of the Ignatius RSV-CE 2nd Edition over the Ignatius RSV-CE? I understand there are new headings, but is there a big difference in translation, e.g. that Isaiah bit (young woman vs. virgin? And are the differences worth it? Does the 2nd edition have better footnotes?

 

[Mattjolley]

Most of the footnotes are the same (As far as I know!) as earlier rsv versions, just that they’re placed at the bottom of the page they relate to rather than at the end of the ‘testament’

And it does render Isiah 7:14 as Virgin with ‘young woman’ as a footnote.

 

[bobolink]

Thanks Matt. So I guess the only differences between the existing zipper RSV from Ignatius (which I already own) and the 2nd Edition, is the Isaiah rendering and the removal of archaic words, as well as the useful addition of sectional headings which aid navigation?

 

[Mattjolley]

Yeah, but I think there may be more changes, I’m not the expert around here on that hehe. I’m sure wikipedia had a table of changes made in RSV editions,although im unsure it features the RSV 2CE. Either way, someone may reply to give more info if there are indeed more changes.

 

[Ron_Conte]

P.S. How many years away are we from an RSV-CE 3d edition?

The RSV has some fundamental problems that cannot be solved by mere editing.

1. it is based on the KJV and ASV
2. most of the translation was done by Protestants
3. the OT was not translated in the light of the NT
4. the OT and NT were not translated in the light of Catholic teaching

Liturgiam Authenticam concerns mainly translations of texts used in liturgical services, and only mentions bible translations in a few places. Vatican norms for Bible translation are listed here:
bible-researcher.com/vatican-norms.html

In both cases, there are problems with these instructions. For example, the required reliance on the Nova Vulgata, to settle any disputed readings of the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek texts: the NV in many places is a translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek, deliberately departing from the Latin Scriptural tradition. So the requirement to refer to the NV is nonsensical. One should refer to the Pope Clement VIII Latin Vulgate, not the NV.

I object to the assumption of many posters that merely following the letter of all rules and norms is faithfulness, is the best and most perfect way to do anything. It is a Pharisaical idea. We should consider the will of God, and not assume that all norms and rules are equivalent to the will of God.

 

[Manfred]

Thanks people for your reples and advice. I am indeed in the UK. I already have the NJB so do not really want a JB. I was wondering what exactly are the improvements of the Ignatius RSV-CE 2nd Edition over the Ignatius RSV-CE? I understand there are new headings, but is there a big difference in translation, e.g. that Isaiah bit (young woman vs. virgin? And are the differences worth it? Does the 2nd edition have better footnotes?

You obviously missed this link from that utterly stupendous thread “RSV-CE Needs Corrections”; many of us poured our hearts and souls into that over quite some time.

umsis.miami.edu/~medmunds/RSVCEdiff.htm

And there’s also this one, since one of the editions mentioned is from Oxford, which is NOT the same as that which Ignatius publishes as the original (1965-66) RSV-CE:

umsis.miami.edu/~medmunds/ScepterChangesC.htm

 

[porthos11]

The RSV has some fundamental problems that cannot be solved by mere editing.

1. it is based on the KJV and ASV

I fail to see where this is a problem.

1. most of the translation was done by Protestants

I fail to see where this is a problem.

1. the OT was not translated in the light of the NT

I fail to see where this is a problem.

1. the OT and NT were not translated in the light of Catholic teaching

What matters is whether the translation is faithful to the original texts. But the second edition has done much better by referencing the Nova Vulgata and revising several obscure passages to match it.

Liturgiam Authenticam concerns mainly translations of texts used in liturgical services, and only mentions bible translations in a few places. Vatican norms for Bible translation are listed here:
bible-researcher.com/vatican-norms.html

In both cases, there are problems with these instructions. For example, the required reliance on the Nova Vulgata, to settle any disputed readings of the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek texts: the NV in many places is a translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek, deliberately departing from the Latin Scriptural tradition. So the requirement to refer to the NV is nonsensical. One should refer to the Pope Clement VIII Latin Vulgate, not the NV.

I object to the assumption of many posters that merely following the letter of all rules and norms is faithfulness, is the best and most perfect way to do anything. It is a Pharisaical idea. We should consider the will of God, and not assume that all norms and rules are equivalent to the will of God.

We refer to the NV because the Catholic Church says so.

Following the letter of the Church’s laws and norms for their own sake IS faithfulness, because it is a recognition of the Church’s authority. Following both letter and spirit is even more so.

Usually, the word “Pharisee” is brought up by those who do not wish to obey. Yes, we obey the will of God, and his will is to listen to the Church and obey her.

Liturgiam Authenticam is an Instruction issued by the Holy See and has binding power. You don’t. Calling it nonsense is spitting in the Church’s face and a rejection of her authority.