S
starrs0
Guest
Does anyone have the Ignatius Bible: Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition how well is it translated, does it read well?
- Status
M
mike0219116
Guest
You might want to look through this thread about the new RSV-SCE:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=91598
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=91598
S
SFH
Guest
I have a leather copy. I couldn’t find an imprimatur in it or a nihil obstat, but it says it’s published with ecclesiastical approval. It’s unclear to me whether that refers to the 1966 version or this most recent version. The link the earlier reader provided should give you a sense of how accurately is was revised in accordance with Liturgiam Authenticam.
I do think it’s odd that they took out all the “thees” and “thous” except in the Our Father. I wish they had just restored the second person singular throughout rather than removing it entirely. The cover page to the Old Testament indicates it was revised from the King James Bible in 1946, which is inaccurate. The New Testament was revised in 1946 (and again in the 1970s), but the Old Testament was not revised until the 1950s.
The book is about one inch thick (by way of comparison, the NAB St. Joseph’s Edition is two inches thick) and the type set is pretty small (my guess is 9 point font).
It’s also published in China, which doesn’t make me too happy. While Catholic priests have traditionally made Catholic bibles, usually it wasn’t because they were being forced to do it by an oppressive Communist regime that has imprisoned them for defending the Faith. I suspect St. Ignatius would not be too happy that his name was being associated with that particular country.
Having said all that, I still feel it’s the best modern English translation of the Bible available to Catholics. (The Nova Vulgata is still the best translation of the Bible in any language, period.) Given the size of the font, however, as well as my personal taste for some of the more traditional Catholic phrases (which are still lacking in the Ignatius Bible) I will probably stick with a Confraternity edition I bought a while back that was made in the USA and has larger font.
B
Benedictus
Guest
I have recently purchased a hardcover copy of it. In terms of typesetting and the physical characteristics, it is a big improvement over the first edition.
As for the translation itself, there were few significant changes. They took out the few “thees” and “thous” that were in the previous version.
They changed Isaiah 7:14 to read “virgin” instead of “young woman”. There’s a footnote that says “Or, young woman”, but there’s no explanation of the translation issues (i.e., Septuagint vs. Masoretic manuscripts).
They claim that it conforms to Liturgiam Authenticam, but I think the claim is questionable. For example, in the Gospels, Jesus often says “Amen, Amen I say to you…”, LA says that the Hebrew Amen should be rendered as Amen, whereas this Bible still has “Truly, truly I say to you…”
All said, it’s the best modern English Bible available, which isn’t saying much. I have the Douay-Rheims, which is nice for praying the Psalms and such but isn’t well suited to serious reading.
As for the translation itself, there were few significant changes. They took out the few “thees” and “thous” that were in the previous version.
They changed Isaiah 7:14 to read “virgin” instead of “young woman”. There’s a footnote that says “Or, young woman”, but there’s no explanation of the translation issues (i.e., Septuagint vs. Masoretic manuscripts).
They claim that it conforms to Liturgiam Authenticam, but I think the claim is questionable. For example, in the Gospels, Jesus often says “Amen, Amen I say to you…”, LA says that the Hebrew Amen should be rendered as Amen, whereas this Bible still has “Truly, truly I say to you…”
All said, it’s the best modern English Bible available, which isn’t saying much. I have the Douay-Rheims, which is nice for praying the Psalms and such but isn’t well suited to serious reading.
S
SFH
Guest
Here’s a passage from Isaiah in the RSV-CE:
“in the latter time he will make glorious the way of the sea, the land beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations. The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in a land of deep darkness on them has light shined”
By comparison, the Nova Vulgata reads (my translation of the Latin):
“in the latter time he will glorify the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in the region of the shadow of death on them has the light shined.”
A
awalt
Guest
I got a copy at a Diocesan Formation Day about 3 weeks ago, they had a bunch of store booths selling stuff outside some of the breakout classrooms.
By luck, the day started with a Mass, and the presider was one of our Bishops. I met him in the hallway, and got him to bless this Bible! So it’s special to me now
I really like this Bible the best of all the ones I have. It’s very readable, and the combination of the bone-colored paper and the type font they use makes it very easy to read (I have trouble reading some Bibles). Even the Bishop remarked that it was a very easy Bible for him to read with his “poor eyes”!
So I recommend it - but keep in mind, the “best” Bible is the one you will read!
By luck, the day started with a Mass, and the presider was one of our Bishops. I met him in the hallway, and got him to bless this Bible! So it’s special to me now
I really like this Bible the best of all the ones I have. It’s very readable, and the combination of the bone-colored paper and the type font they use makes it very easy to read (I have trouble reading some Bibles). Even the Bishop remarked that it was a very easy Bible for him to read with his “poor eyes”!
So I recommend it - but keep in mind, the “best” Bible is the one you will read!
W
windingroad
Guest
I have to agree with SFH’s comments. I was kind of surpirsed myself to open it up and see the “ecclesiatical approval” thing instead of a formal imprimatur.
But while some of the issues raised about the “thee’s” and “thou’s” and how closely it follows Lituricam Authenticam are fair points, I still prefer either edition of an RSV-CE to the New American Bible even if the NAB is the official translation of the USCCB (and my own Archbishop apparently supervised the revision of the Psalms).
The cleaner typset and better quality of paper is a welcome thing too but I must especially agree big time with the “China” issue also. Given the state of many things in China right now (relations with the Church, the suppression of democratic reforms, etc.), I’m surprised Ignatius Press has gone this route.
And actually if you look closely on the copyright page, this edition is actually published by Thomas Nelson for Ignatius Press instead of by Ignatius themselves in the 1st Catholic Edition (Made In USA). Hmm…
Anyway…
Can anyone recommend a good concordance to go with this new RSV edition? I’m actually in need of a good Scriptural dictionary too.
But while some of the issues raised about the “thee’s” and “thou’s” and how closely it follows Lituricam Authenticam are fair points, I still prefer either edition of an RSV-CE to the New American Bible even if the NAB is the official translation of the USCCB (and my own Archbishop apparently supervised the revision of the Psalms).
The cleaner typset and better quality of paper is a welcome thing too but I must especially agree big time with the “China” issue also. Given the state of many things in China right now (relations with the Church, the suppression of democratic reforms, etc.), I’m surprised Ignatius Press has gone this route.
And actually if you look closely on the copyright page, this edition is actually published by Thomas Nelson for Ignatius Press instead of by Ignatius themselves in the 1st Catholic Edition (Made In USA). Hmm…
Anyway…
Can anyone recommend a good concordance to go with this new RSV edition? I’m actually in need of a good Scriptural dictionary too.
S
SFH
Guest
I agree that the RSV-CE Second Edition is much better than the NAB (especially since they translate “almah” as “virgin”).
I was very pleased to see that they changed “steadfast love” to “mercy” in the Hebrew sections of the Old Testament. I always felt it sounded somewhat clunky to read “Give thanks to the Lord for he is good for his steadfast love endures forever.”
On the other hand, I don’t know why they felt the need to change “asses” to “donkeys” in the Old Testament. Not only is it a less accurate translation (five points to anyone who can tell me what the difference is between an *** and a donkey), but it’s kind of condescending. I think we’re all smart enough to figure out that an *** in the biblical context is not someone’s derriere.
I also wish they had fixed the Passion narrative in St. John’s Gospel. The 1971 second revision to the New Testament of the RSV “Behold the man” sounds much better than the RSV-CE’s “Here is the man.” For want of a better word, the RSV-CE still sounds clunky.
And then, there’s the continued translation of “deep darkness” instead of “shadow of death.” In passages like Isaias, where the prophecy refers to Christ, whose resurrection brought us out of the shadow of death and into the light of eternal glory, I think the alternate translation (i.e., “shadow of death”) has much more significance.
I really wish they had preserved the Aramaic expressions in the New Testament (e.g., maranatha, amen, raca, etc.), but that’s been written about ad nauseam and I don’t think another post really sheds more light on the subject.
And finally, they still retain the translation “by you all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves” instead of the Nova Vulgata’s “in you all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.” The words “in you” have a distinct Messianic message as any Pauline scholar will tell you. (Christ was in Abraham just like St. Paul argues that Levi was in Abraham.) So when the translation reads, “in you” all the nations of the earth shall be blessed or “in your seed” all the nations of the earth shall be blessed there is a Messianic prophecy. The RSV-CE, which departs from the King James Version and the Douay-Rheims and the Nova Vulgata on this point, strips the passage of its prophetic import.
I was very pleased to see that they changed “steadfast love” to “mercy” in the Hebrew sections of the Old Testament. I always felt it sounded somewhat clunky to read “Give thanks to the Lord for he is good for his steadfast love endures forever.”
On the other hand, I don’t know why they felt the need to change “asses” to “donkeys” in the Old Testament. Not only is it a less accurate translation (five points to anyone who can tell me what the difference is between an *** and a donkey), but it’s kind of condescending. I think we’re all smart enough to figure out that an *** in the biblical context is not someone’s derriere.
I also wish they had fixed the Passion narrative in St. John’s Gospel. The 1971 second revision to the New Testament of the RSV “Behold the man” sounds much better than the RSV-CE’s “Here is the man.” For want of a better word, the RSV-CE still sounds clunky.
And then, there’s the continued translation of “deep darkness” instead of “shadow of death.” In passages like Isaias, where the prophecy refers to Christ, whose resurrection brought us out of the shadow of death and into the light of eternal glory, I think the alternate translation (i.e., “shadow of death”) has much more significance.
I really wish they had preserved the Aramaic expressions in the New Testament (e.g., maranatha, amen, raca, etc.), but that’s been written about ad nauseam and I don’t think another post really sheds more light on the subject.
And finally, they still retain the translation “by you all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves” instead of the Nova Vulgata’s “in you all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.” The words “in you” have a distinct Messianic message as any Pauline scholar will tell you. (Christ was in Abraham just like St. Paul argues that Levi was in Abraham.) So when the translation reads, “in you” all the nations of the earth shall be blessed or “in your seed” all the nations of the earth shall be blessed there is a Messianic prophecy. The RSV-CE, which departs from the King James Version and the Douay-Rheims and the Nova Vulgata on this point, strips the passage of its prophetic import.
S
SFH
Guest
Incidentally, I did not edit my last comment with ***; apparently the RSV-CE Second Edition is not the only place where donkeys and asinos (Latin) get mixed up. 
M
mike0219116
Guest
The compact RSV-CE published by Oxford must use the most recent revision of the RSV NT because its renders John 19:5, “Behold the man,” and Luke 1:34, “And Mary said to the angel, ‘How shall this be…’”
For reference, that bible is available from Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/01...f=pd_bbs_4/102-1247487-2747363?_encoding=UTF8
A larger version of this bible will be published soon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195288653/ref=sr_11_1/102-1247487-2747363?_encoding=UTF8
M
mmortal03
Guest
Can one of the moderators merge the significant posts from this thread into the following thread that was already created? forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=91598
Also, Mike, can you modify your URLs into more proper links so that they do not stretch the page horizontally?
Thanks
Also, Mike, can you modify your URLs into more proper links so that they do not stretch the page horizontally?
Thanks
- Status