Is there an official Translation (St Joseph vs Douay)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Quickened
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

Quickened

Guest
Hi folks! I posted this before but this actually seems like a better forum for my post as it can have to do with translations!

The question I have is:

Is there an official translation used for reading, teaching and for theological purposes?

Here is how I arrived at the question. At dinner a discussion came up of “Apocryphal” books. Everyone in the discussion had a little to add though the entirety of the books wasn’t well known.

This made me remember that I really don’t know much. 😃

So over this nice long thanksgiving vacation I thought it would be a good time to do some reading. I have two Catholic bibles.

The first one I have was my nana’s. It is a 1961 bible listed as having a Douay Version Old Testament and a Confraternity Version New Testament.

The second one was a gift for my confirmation which may be a 1991 or 1992 St Joseph’s Edition of the New American Bible (revised NT and revised psalms)

I noticed that the book of Tobit/Tobias where I started at is strikingly different. It’s my opinion that it’s entirely possible to come away with two different thoughts on the text since they seemingly differ so greatly.

So long story short… which should I be using and quoting from when discussing scripture with others?

Thanks in advance guys/gals!
 
mdkirkbride said:
ewtn.com/expert/answers/bible_versions.htm
Click to expand...
It should be noted that since this was written (in fact, only a few months ago) a new version of the NAB was released. It wasn’t reported to be a paricularly “conservative” or “progressive” translation compared to the previous version(s) of the NAB. Among other controvercial changes it changed “holocausts” to “burnt offerings”. Not sure if the inclusive language concerns were addressed.
 
Also perhaps worth asking is has the church of rome made any official statement? I see that EWTN (through that link) mentions those statements of rejection and acception but where could I view those documents or anything with an official statement?
 
Aelred_Minor said:
It should be noted that since this was written (in fact, only a few months ago) a new version of the NAB was released. It wasn’t reported to be a paricularly “conservative” or “progressive” translation compared to the previous version(s) of the NAB. Among other controvercial changes it changed “holocausts” to “burnt offerings”. Not sure if the inclusive language concerns were addressed.
Click to expand...
Is there somewhere where I can read about the changes and perhaps why they were made?
 
Quickened said:
I noticed that the book of Tobit/Tobias where I started at is strikingly different. It’s my opinion that it’s entirely possible to come away with two different thoughts on the text since they seemingly differ so greatly.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind there are something like five remarkably different versions of Tobit that have come down to us from antiquity; different English translations are based on different ancient versions, and sometimes even pieced together from combinations of them. The Douay-Rheims version of Tobit comes from Jerome’s Latin translation of an Aramaic original that apparently hasn’t survived to the present day; the 1991 New American Bible translates from a Greek version found in Codex Sinaiticus.

Modern scholars are not sure which of the ancient versions is the original, if any; but as the Council of Trent pointed out, Jerome’s Latin translation, after having been used and trusted by the western Church for so long, is a safe place to start. Although this is not the same as saying that the Aramaic original that underlies Jerome’s translation is the original version of Tobit, it is the version western Catholicism has known and loved for over a millennium, and what you see in our tradition such as literary allusions or paintings will be referring to that one rather than to the others.

I encourage you to read both versions side-by-side and note the differences between them. Then you can bring them up in the Apologetics Sacred Scripture forum and we can all join in the discussion!
 
Johnnyduffy said:
The Douy-Rhiems is the official english translation.
Click to expand...
no it is not
the Douay-Rheims Challoner is the translation of the Latin Vulgate and was the English translation approved up until English translations approved in the 20th century, the RSV-CE, NAB, and Jerusalem bibles being the most prominent, and the ones approved for liturgical use by various bishops’ conferences. The NAB is the only version currently approved for liturgical use in the US (with the exception of the psalms).

The version you should use for teaching and parish bible studies and discussion any version approved by the bishops of your country. The version to be used in liturgy should be that approved for that purpose by your bishops. You can use any approved English translation with an imprimatur for your own personal devotional reading. If you are engaging in apologetics discussions with non-Catholics, it is helpful to use a version closest to the bible they are using, which is why many apologists prefer the RSV-CE. “St. Joseph” is not a bible translation, it is a Catholic publisher, one of several approved to print and distribute the NAB.

there are several discussions on this forum of the revised NAB.
 
Thanks for the insight guys! Makes wrapping my head around this a bit easier!

Going back to the Tobit differences (should that be a different thread?) did these translations use different source material in the translating process?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top