Is the English Standard Version to become official?

[bermark]

My understanding is that the ESV is now being considered for use in the liturgy, not the NRSV. The latter would require extensive amendments to the text because of its heavy use of gender-inclusive language, which is contrary to Vatican guidelines. I have been told by a reliable source that the powers-that-be behind the NRSV are not happy with the considerable changes to the text of this translation.

However, there may be developments I am not aware of. Whatever happens I think it will be some years before we see a missal in the U.K. using a translation other than the current Jerusalem Bible.

 

[ajecphotos]

My understanding is that the ESV is now being considered for use in the liturgy, not the NRSV. The latter would require extensive amendments to the text because of its heavy use of gender-inclusive language, which is contrary to Vatican guidelines. I have been told by a reliable source that the powers-that-be behind the NRSV are not happy with the considerable changes to the text of this translation.

However, there may be developments I am not aware of. Whatever happens I think it will be some years before we see a missal in the U.K. using a translation other than the current Jerusalem Bible.

My local priest told mr the NRSV is going to be used, CE version obviously.

Failing that, would I be better off getting the CTS bible?

 

[TypesAndShadows]

My local priest told mr the NRSV is going to be used, CE version obviously.

Failing that, would I be better off getting the CTS bible?

Back when the International Commission for Producing an English-Language Lectionary (ICPEL) was set up in 2006, it was supposedly going to base a new lectionary on the NRSV, and have at least the Sunday lectionary sorted in time for the launch of the new translation of the missal. Obviously, that didn’t happen, and for several months now the talk has been of basing a lectionary on the ESV, and launching it in 2014 at the earliest.

As can been seen in this thread, the news is that the NRSV-folk weren’t that amenable to the necessary changes, whereas the ESV-folk are. See this blog post from March: hughosb.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/update-new-lectionary-esv-some-official-clarification/

Pick whichever Bible you think you’ll actually use.

 

[ajecphotos]

Back when the International Commission for Producing an English-Language Lectionary (ICPEL) was set up in 2006, it was supposedly going to base a new lectionary on the NRSV, and have at least the Sunday lectionary sorted in time for the launch of the new translation of the missal. Obviously, that didn’t happen, and for several months now the talk has been of basing a lectionary on the ESV, and launching it in 2014.

As can been seen in this thread, the rumour (?) is that the NRSV-folk weren’t that amenable to the necessary changes, whereas the ESV-folk are.

Pick whichever Bible you think you’ll actually use.

So many to choose from!!! Guess i want get the right one. Another priest has told me to get the NRSV one today so i have ordered it.

I may end up with a few versions!! Hope not though as i want just one to read and digest and pray from.

 

[ajecphotos]

Well, after doing a bit of research tonight i see it mentioned in more than a few places that the ESV is going to be implemented in the Catholic church in the UK so why would 2 priests, one a Canon lawyer tell me the NRSV is (a) the one that is going to be used and (b) recommend me to get that edition of the bible, obviously the CE version?

My head is spinning!!

All i want is a bible i can use / read / pray with and also ‘marry’ with the church readings!!

 

[Jerry-Jet]

The real answer would be for the USCCB to appoint conservative non modernist–nonhistorico-ciriticalist translators to the final attempt at getting the NAB right.

The kind of translators that wouldn’t be yearning for fights with the Holy See when it comes to scripture passages that will be used in the liturgy.

You know–the kind that would go with “Hail Mary Full of Grace” and “A virgin will conceive”.

The kind that would get rid of MOST of the NAB modernist notes.

Get a translation team like that and Catholics wouldn’t have to go begging to Protestant groups to try to polish up their Protestant translations so that Catholics could use them.

The Catholic Church I’m sure has the best original language biblical texts available in the world.

The real reason we don’t have better Catholic bibles has EVERYTHING to do with modernist theology taught in seminaries and theology schools where many biblical translators attend before becoming proficient in biblical languages and biblical translating.

It really is sad that comparatively uneducated–when it comes to correct biblical translation–Catholic laity can EASILY see what’s wrong with modern Catholic bible translations and FOR that reason hunt around trying to find the LEAST BAD Protestant translation available because the NAB just doesn’t cut it.

How many people here understand that we’re looking at a wrong picture?

Improve upon the Douay Rheims and the Vulgate–improve upon the Confraternity and the Knox versions and DO so from original language texts.

But please spare us all the modernism–all the inclusive language–and all the historical-criticism inspired notes!

Is that too much to ask?

You know it’s gotten pretty bad when Catholics are thinking of going with the ESV which was produced with the help of many Baptists–for the simple reason that modern Catholic translations are THAT bad!

Do you think St. Jerome if he were living today would be dreaming and hoping for an ESV Catholic edition?!!!

 

[ajecphotos]

The real answer would be for the USCCB to appoint conservative non modernist–nonhistorico-ciriticalist translators to the final attempt at getting the NAB right.

The kind of translators that wouldn’t be yearning for fights with the Holy See when it comes to scripture passages that will be used in the liturgy.

You know–the kind that would go with “Hail Mary Full of Grace” and “A virgin will conceive”.

The kind that would get rid of MOST of the NAB modernist notes.

Get a translation team like that and Catholics wouldn’t have to go begging to Protestant groups to try to polish up their Protestant translations so that Catholics could use them.

The Catholic Church I’m sure has the best original language biblical texts available in the world.

The real reason we don’t have better Catholic bibles has EVERYTHING to do with modernist theology taught in seminaries and theology schools where many biblical translators attend before becoming proficient in biblical languages and biblical translating.

It really is sad that comparatively uneducated–when it comes to correct biblical translation–Catholic laity can EASILY see what’s wrong with modern Catholic bible translations and FOR that reason hunt around trying to find the LEAST BAD Protestant translation available because the NAB just doesn’t cut it.

How many people here understand that we’re looking at a wrong picture?

Improve upon the Douay Rheims and the Vulgate–improve upon the Confraternity and the Knox versions and DO so from original language texts.

But please spare us all the modernism–all the inclusive language–and all the historical-criticism inspired notes!

Is that too much to ask?

You know it’s gotten pretty bad when Catholics are thinking of going with the ESV which was produced with the help of many Baptists–for the simple reason that modern Catholic translations are THAT bad!

Do you think St. Jerome if he were living today would be dreaming and hoping for an ESV Catholic edition?!!!

Many thanks

Looks like i should get an RSV-CE one then

 

[TypesAndShadows]

Many thanks

Looks like i should get an RSV-CE one then

When you start getting into this, you get a lot of comments from people who care a lot about things which, actually, most people do not care about. And they will often paraphrase the thing they are concerned by, rather than quoting it.

There is no perfect Bible translation. There’s not even a perfect original text to work from. What there are, are decent translations.

If it has an Imprimatur then, no matter how scandalised some people get on the internet, it’s been judged by a Catholic bishop as not containing anything contrary to Catholic teaching.

If you want something scholarly, that you will then use as a base text for in-depth study, go with an NRSV-CE. This only describes the translation, not a particular physical book: that will be a further choice for you to make. If you want a Bible that will suit memorising and reciting, and resonate with the texts you are already familiar with from Mass, and be thoroughly Catholic, get the CTS Bible.

You are being further confused because people are describing perfectly valid Catholic positions on the Biblical text as being problematic, and also using this as an excuse to rail against translations that are irrelevant to the UK. There are a variety of valid Catholic positions, as long as they remain within certain bounds, just as there are theological questions to which there are a variety of valid Catholic answers. I don’t think you’d find anything difficult with the CTS notes, and in fact I love the way they talk about how the texts are used in the liturgy.

Don’t get so caught up in finding the ‘perfect’ Bible: get a Bible and start reading it. And ignore people who insist that something with an Imprimatur is obviously heretical and unorthodox in such a way to be unusable. You will find people who say this about everything.

 

[ajecphotos]

When you start getting into this, you get a lot of comments from people who care a lot about things which, actually, most people do not care about. And they will often paraphrase the thing they are concerned by, rather than quoting it.

There is no perfect Bible translation. There’s not even a perfect original text to work from. What there are, are decent translations.

If it has an Imprimatur then, no matter how scandalised some people get on the internet, it’s been judged by a Catholic bishop as not containing anything contrary to Catholic teaching.

If you want something scholarly, that you will then use as a base text for in-depth study, go with an NRSV-CE. This only describes the translation, not a particular physical book: that will be a further choice for you to make. If you want a Bible that will suit memorising and reciting, and resonate with the texts you are already familiar with from Mass, and be thoroughly Catholic, get the CTS Bible.

You are being further confused because people are describing perfectly valid Catholic positions on the Biblical text as being problematic, and also using this as an excuse to rail against translations that are irrelevant to the UK. There are a variety of valid Catholic positions, as long as they remain within certain bounds, just as there are theological questions to which there are a variety of valid Catholic answers. I don’t think you’d find anything difficult with the CTS notes, and in fact I love the way they talk about how the texts are used in the liturgy.

Don’t get so caught up in finding the ‘perfect’ Bible: get a Bible and start reading it. And ignore people who insist that something with an Imprimatur is obviously heretical and unorthodox in such a way to be unusable. You will find people who say this about everything.

Many thanks indeed

I have ordered the RSV-CE version! Cant wait to start reading and praying with it.

 

[porthos11]

My understanding is that the ESV is now being considered for use in the liturgy, not the NRSV. The latter would require extensive amendments to the text because of its heavy use of gender-inclusive language, which is contrary to Vatican guidelines. I have been told by a reliable source that the powers-that-be behind the NRSV are not happy with the considerable changes to the text of this translation.

I wonder why they would still have to do this as the Canadian Lectionary is indeed a Rome-corrected NRSV text and has recognitio (no longer interim or provisional). They could simply adopt the Canadian NRSV lectionary and spare themselves a lot of work.

 

[ProVobis]

There is no perfect Bible translation. There’s not even a perfect original text to work from. What there are, are decent translations.

Indeed. Original texts had many authors and writing styles. Good handwriting, bad handwriting, good copies, bad copies. On papyrus, stones, coins and later parchment, much of what couldn’t survive more than a few hundred years. And none I’m sure intended to be writing any Bibles, especially with chapters and verses listed the way they are. There were no doubt other books which the Church judged not to use in the official Bible, but they are still part of scripture. I believe the Dead Sea Scrolls fall into this category.