Original and True DR Bible OR RSV-CE OR Both?

[Jeremy_Peter]

I was hoping to get a straight forward answer seeing as the other threads I’ve serached really didn’t help help me decide.

I am looking to purchase either the “Original and True Douay-Rheims Bible (1582)” or the Ignatius Bible RSV-CE second edition.I really am not a fan of iconic images on the cover of the Ignatius leather bound RSV-CE second edition, but I am willing to get it because of the quality and, from what I’ve read, it’s a really good translation. I like the DR Bible because it’s a translation of a translation that had access to original and complete manuscripts, but I am concerned about the actual re-translation. Should I get both (is it even worth it?)?

Can anyone shed some light on this situation or suggest an even better translation than the above??

Thanks!

 

[Omyo12]

To start, only the Rheims was released in 1582

Rheims- New Testament: 1582
Douay- Genesis - Job: 1609
Douay- Psalms - 4 Esdra: 1610

If you want an “original” Douay Rheims (1610)… be willing to spend almost $200 for a hardcover version.

You can get it HERE

You can also get a digital copy for $20 from HERE
However I dont know if the digital copy has the apocrypha (3 Esdras, 4 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh) in the appendix

However for most people, when they say they read the Douay-Rheims, they’re referring to the 1852 Challoner Revision

Even the one on drbo.org is the Challoner Revision

You can get it HERE

As for the Revised Standard Version- Catholic Edition, you can get the first edition in Black Genuine Leather with no icons HERE

I would recommend getting the Douay Rheims (Challoner revision) and RSV-CE from Oxford University Press…

the revisions in the Ignatius Bible RSV-2CE aren’t that great and the Oxford Press one just looks better!

Here’s a quote from an old post here a while back on the RSV2CE vs RSVCE

Oct 1, 2006

I wish that a good portion of the old RSV-CE Needs corrections thread had not been lost with the hack-in, because I could have referred you to it.

Anyway, to answer your question, myself and a few others on this board had determined in the “Needs Corrections” thread that the revisions that it contains are just really not worth it, especially if you already have the original Ignatius Bible. We have come to the conclusion that the better buy is the new Oxford Press RSV-CE Reader’s Edition that comes out in December, which is based on the 1971 RSV instead of the 1959 RSV. It has MUCH more significant revisions, and is overall just better.

 

[colliric]

I was hoping to get a straight forward answer seeing as the other threads I’ve serached really didn’t help help me decide.

I am looking to purchase either the “Original and True Douay-Rheims Bible (1582)” or the Ignatius Bible RSV-CE second edition.I really am not a fan of iconic images on the cover of the Ignatius leather bound RSV-CE second edition, but I am willing to get it because of the quality and, from what I’ve read, it’s a really good translation. I like the DR Bible because it’s a translation of a translation that had access to original and complete manuscripts, but I am concerned about the actual re-translation. Should I get both (is it even worth it?)?

Can anyone shed some light on this situation or suggest an even better translation than the above??

Thanks!

Keep the Bishop Challoner revision, with his utterly fantastic study notes and traditional book introductions(really these should be included with every Catholic translation!). The arguements put forward for the “Original and True” douay-rheims are quite incorrect and reek of Rheims onlyism.

The challoner revision does indeed use the language of the KJV(because it’s actually quite asthetically poetic for it’s time, and Challoner was familar with it because he was a convert to Catholocism) and takes some other ideas from it(such as fully translating Christos as “The Annointed” when not directly inconnotation with Jesus), but it is all the better for it.

 

[Jeremy_Peter]

Keep the Bishop Challoner revision, with his utterly fantastic study notes and traditional book introductions(really these should be included with every Catholic translation!). The arguements put forward for the “Original and True” douay-rheims are quite incorrect and reek of Rheims onlyism.

The challoner revision does indeed use the language of the KJV(because it’s actually quite asthetically poetic for it’s time, and Challoner was familar with it because he was a convert to Catholocism) and takes some other ideas from it(such as fully translating Christos as “The Annointed” when not directly inconnotation with Jesus), but it is all the better for it.

Oh, interesting. When I was reading through another thread, it was recommended to forget about the Challoner version?? I’m confused. That’s why I asked about the “original and True” version. Obviously the website is bias, but it gives “sound” reason for purchasing the OTDR version??

 

[colliric]

Oh, interesting. When I was reading through another thread, it was recommended to forget about the Challoner version?? I’m confused. That’s why I asked about the “original and True” version. Obviously the website is bias, but it gives “sound” reason for purchasing the OTDR version??

The arguement has quite a bit of Pride associated with it. There is a strong “onlyist” position and immediatly that should raise the alarmbells. The scripture itself is probally very good and a very very Catholic translation. But no scripture translation is perfect of itself. Plus the website has a clear very anti-change anti-modernism position.

There are good reasons why Challoner made his revisions, firstly the english was even then antiquated, “Christos” is a title actually meaning “the annointed”(not a personal name of Jesus), and the KJV’s beautiful use of the english language could not really be overlooked, but indeed needed to be revised into a Catholic version. there’s no need to be scared to admit the Grammar and structure of the KJV was fantastic, but the translation far from being sutable for a Catholic. Take what’s good, leave what’s bad…

Perhaps that is specifically what drove Challoner to revise the Douay, a desire to improve it’s asthetic appeal, without comprimising it’s exceptional faithfullness to the Vulgate and Catholocism.

 

[Jeremy_Peter]

My sincere thanks!

I will take a look to see what’s out there now that I have a few more options.

God Bless!

 

[CalCatholic]

I was hoping to get a straight forward answer seeing as the other threads I’ve serached really didn’t help help me decide.

I am looking to purchase either the “Original and True Douay-Rheims Bible (1582)” or the Ignatius Bible RSV-CE second edition.I really am not a fan of iconic images on the cover of the Ignatius leather bound RSV-CE second edition, but I am willing to get it because of the quality and, from what I’ve read, it’s a really good translation. I like the DR Bible because it’s a translation of a translation that had access to original and complete manuscripts, but I am concerned about the actual re-translation. Should I get both (is it even worth it?)?

Can anyone shed some light on this situation or suggest an even better translation than the above??

Thanks!

Get both! If you don’t like the cover on the RSV-2CE (which I love), but like the translation, buy the hardcover version and buy a leather Bible cover and put over it and the problem is solved. I prefer the RSV-2CE translation, but I also have a 1950 Catholic family Bible with the D-R Old Testament and the Confraternity New Testament, which allows me to compare both translations for scripture study.

 

[Bible_Reader]

I do have and read the original D-R. I use it as a literal translation of the Vulgate.

The criticisms in the Catholic Encyclopedia do apply:

Then, also, in the translation, many technical words were retained bodily, such as pasch, parasceve, azymes, etc. In some instances, also where it was found difficult or impossible to find a suitable English equivalent for a Latin word, the latter was retained in an anglicized form. Thus in Phil., ii, 8, we get “He exinanited himself”, and in Hebrews 9:28, “Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many”. It was considered that an ordinary reader, finding the word unintelligible, would pause and inquire its meaning and that this was preferable to satisfying him with an inadequate rendering. In other cases latinisms seem to have crept in unawares, as in Luke 10:1, “Our Lord designed also other seventy-two” or in Phil., ii, 10, “In the name of Jesus, every knee bow of the celestials, terrestrials and infernals”. The proper names are usually (though not always) taken from the Vulgate; but the word Dominus is rendered throughout Our Lord. The general result was a version in cumbersome English, so full of latinisms as to be in places hardly readable, but withal scholarly and accurate.

If you are comfortable with reading Elizabethan and Jacobean English and have a working knowledge of Latin, I think you’ll find the original D-R to be a useful guide to Scripture. If not, you may wish to start with a more contemporary translation. The Challoner vesion is significantly less archaic than the original D-R; and translations of the last 50 years will be even more accessible.

Personally, I’d advise starting with a simpler translation first, and as you strengthen your ability and familiarity with Scripture, going to a more challenging translation.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Just a few points with respect to Bishop Challoner’s revision of the D/R in 1749-1752.

Although Bishop Challoner was a convert, it was when he was a child. He was actually tutored by the illustrious John Gother, (of King James II’s time, and who deserves to be canonized IMHO) who sponsored him for acceptance to Douay Seminary when he was just a young teen. So do not imagine that Challoner grew up with the KJV or had any more love for it than any English Catholic of the time. The fact is, Challoner thought some of the phraseology of the KJV was better turned and remembered than what was extant from the D/R. Challoner was very sensitive to the needs of his flock, and would have worked hard to give them what was most accurate, easy to read, and understand, as well as consonant with the KJV which all the rest of England was using and quoting.

It should be remembered that Challoner also worked on an earlier revision in 1738 of the D/R with Fr. Blythe OCD. That was a magnificent folio NT. He also would have had knowledge of the 1718 C. Nary edition and the 1730 R. Witham retranslations of the Vulgate. So Challoner would have drawn from a very pure spring of Catholic Biblical translations. Some (websites) seem to imply that Challoner was somewhat suspect because there are not a few parallels with the KJV.

The main drive for Challoner publishing this Bible was to give his flock a good revision of the D/R that was not out of their reach either in price or language. His 5 small 12mo volumes were just a few shillings each (about the size of today’s paperbacks.) The old Douay Rheims of the 17th century was virtually impossible to find by Challoner’s time, and his older 1738 revision was a grand and very expensive edition. Witham’s 2 volume NT was also scarce and difficult to obtain. Challoner was able to virtually flood the Catholic landscape with his affordable, yet beautiful revision of the D/R Bible.

Lastly, people hardly can believe all of the books Challoner published during his lifetime, not to mention his Bishopric. He usually published at least one volume per year, and often more. Some of these books were new updated translations, like the Imitation of Christ, the works of Teresa of Avila, the works of John Gother, Lives of the Saints, as well as polemical, instructional and devotional works of his own.

 

[Canto]

Personally I’m not that fond of the RSV so called CE but many like it and it is much more readable. If readability is what you’d like try a confraternity version.

If you are getting the Original Douay Rheims (completed in 1582 though the old testament was not released until 2 parts in 1609 and 10) I recommend the version in modern english.

I downloaded PDFs from
realdouayrheims.com/
(some of the promotion is over the top and exaggerated)
you can get printed versions though

It updates the spelling (not the words/meanings) which is why I prefer it to other versions i.e. fulle of grace becomes full of grace.

It is full of referecnes to the Church fathers, has the Latinism that are theological terms used in the Church and fill our prayer life. Even though the translation can be weird in parts I personally love the literalness of it all - but then again I have numerous other translations to help in the verses. It’s my fav English translation

 

[Jeremy_Peter]

To start, only the Rheims was released in 1582

Rheims- New Testament: 1582
Douay- Genesis - Job: 1609
Douay- Psalms - 4 Esdra: 1610

If you want an “original” Douay Rheims (1610)… be willing to spend almost $200 for a hardcover version.

You can get it HERE

You can also get a digital copy for $20 from HERE
However I dont know if the digital copy has the apocrypha (3 Esdras, 4 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh) in the appendix

However for most people, when they say they read the Douay-Rheims, they’re referring to the 1852 Challoner Revision

Even the one on drbo.org is the Challoner Revision

You can get it HERE

As for the Revised Standard Version- Catholic Edition, you can get the first edition in Black Genuine Leather with no icons HERE

I would recommend getting the Douay Rheims (Challoner revision) and RSV-CE from Oxford University Press…

the revisions in the Ignatius Bible RSV-2CE aren’t that great and the Oxford Press one just looks better!

Here’s a quote from an old post here a while back on the RSV2CE vs RSVCE

I did order the RSV-CE that you recommended, but I was wondering about the DR Challoner version that you linked to. It’s a hardcover version published by Tan Books. Would this one, published by Baronius Press, be the same? amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0954563115/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance ? I would rather have a bonded leather version, but I want to choose the right one. Know where I can get a good version of the Challoner DR if the one I just posted isn’t very good??

Thanks.

 

[Bible_Reader]

I have the Baronius edition, and can strongly recommend it on the basis of text block, which is newly typeset and very easy to read. The Bible maps, engravings, and encyclicals are also nice additions to the Baronius edition.

The Tan edition is a photographic reproduction of a much older copy and has many smudges and inferior binding. It is also currently out of print at the publisher, although some retailers still have it in stock

I own the Baronius hardcover black leather edition, standard size (I have a special loathing for bonded leather) and find it to be a well-produced book. I cannot speak to the quality of the binding on the bonded leather edition (I have a special loathing for bonded leather and I’ve also heard some negative feedback from others – but I have no personal experience with the Baronius bonded leather).

Here is a sample page in the Baronius edition; as you can see, the typesetting is first-rate. Here is a detailed description of the Baronius edition including information on maps, engravings, and included encyclicals.

Here is a listing of all Baronius Douay-Rheims-Challoner editions.

You can buy these volumes directly from Baronius Press, or from most other Catholic booksellers. There are also large sizes available if your eyesight is poor, and pocket sizes if you require them.

 

[Jeremy_Peter]

I have the Baronius edition, and can strongly recommend it on the basis of text block, which is newly typeset and very easy to read. The Bible maps, engravings, and encyclicals are also nice additions to the Baronius edition.

The Tan edition is a photographic reproduction of a much older copy and has many smudges and inferior binding. It is also currently out of print at the publisher, although some retailers still have it in stock

I own the Baronius hardcover black leather edition, standard size (I have a special loathing for bonded leather) and find it to be a well-produced book. I cannot speak to the quality of the binding on the bonded leather edition (I have a special loathing for bonded leather and I’ve also heard some negative feedback from others – but I have no personal experience with the Baronius bonded leather).

Here is a sample page in the Baronius edition; as you can see, the typesetting is first-rate. Here is a detailed description of the Baronius edition including information on maps, engravings, and included encyclicals.

Here is a listing of all Baronius Douay-Rheims-Challoner editions.

You can buy these volumes directly from Baronius Press, or from most other Catholic booksellers. There are also large sizes available if your eyesight is poor, and pocket sizes if you require them.

Wow, thanks for the info!

Why don’t you like the bonded leather? I guess I find it easier to keep the page open to where I want it, and I find it easier to read in my lap if I don’t have a flat surface to put it on. What was the negative feedback that you heard?

 

[tobiashope]

I have three versions of the Bible
The DR, RSV-CE, AND THE CCD TRANSLATION OF THE 50’S which the DR in more mordern english. I just got my RSV and am disappointed in it even though it is highly recommend especailly on Catholic Radio and EWTN it is easy to read and is probably a good study bible, I it seems a little weak to me. The DR is good but the Old English the Thee and Thy’s makes a little difficult to read. It also has excellent notes on the bottom. The best is my CCD version which was given to students in the 50’s & 60’s it is modern english and has excellent refernces notes, sadly it is falling apart and is why I got the RSV-ce (which my leatherette version has no notes.) I tried to get another from Loome Theological Books in MN. But they were out. I am going to give the RSV a little more time, but may go back to my DR.

God Bless
TobiasHope

 

[Jeremy_Peter]

I have three versions of the Bible
The DR, RSV-CE, AND THE CCD TRANSLATION OF THE 50’S which the DR in more mordern english. I just got my RSV and am disappointed in it even though it is highly recommend especailly on Catholic Radio and EWTN it is easy to read and is probably a good study bible, I it seems a little weak to me. The DR is good but the Old English the Thee and Thy’s makes a little difficult to read. It also has excellent notes on the bottom. The best is my CCD version which was given to students in the 50’s & 60’s it is modern english and has excellent refernces notes, sadly it is falling apart and is why I got the RSV-ce (which my leatherette version has no notes.) I tried to get another from Loome Theological Books in MN. But they were out. I am going to give the RSV a little more time, but may go back to my DR.

God Bless
TobiasHope

Hmmm… I guess I have come to the following conclusion:

It is better to have more than one version for study. Having said that, it is my personal preference to have a good modern translation (RSV-CE) and a more “poetic” version (Challoner DR). IMO, using the two gives me the “best of both worlds”. Growing up with the KJV, I found that the language to be inspiring while adding to the beauty of scripture and giving you an additional resource for study from (hence, the DR). I wouldn’t be able to get that with the Confraternity alone. All in all, I guess it’s whatever works for you personally

 

[Bible_Reader]

Why don’t you like the bonded leather? I guess I find it easier to keep the page open to where I want it, and I find it easier to read in my lap if I don’t have a flat surface to put it on. What was the negative feedback that you heard?

OK, first, I want to make clear that I have not personally examined the Baronius bonded leather Bibles – so I am just speaking of bonded leather Bibles in general.

Two traditional bindings are hardcover (which, when well done, always lies flat) and leather (which is more durable, limp, and can “flop” easily in the hand).

The limpness and flexibility of true leather is incredible. Here is an example (not with a translation that I recommend, but we are talking about book bindings here).

My experience is different than yours – I find that hardcovers, if they have sewn bindings, tend to keep the page better than bonded leather. The key factor here is the binding – many cheap books are made with glued bindings which do not lie flat (or hold page position) regardless of whether the binding material.

Bonded leather bindings combine the worst features of both. They are made from collagen leather fibers from macerated hide pieces bonded in a synthetic or latex resin – which unlike real leather, is not particularly durable or resistant to rubbing or scratches. This makes bonded leather feel like plastic. The edges of bonded leather can be rather sharp – just like a sharp plastic edge. This makes it uncomfortable (for me, at least) to read in bed. Bonded leather, in my experience does not make it easy for the text block to lie flat (particularly with glued bindings).

(There are exceptions – Cabra bonded leather is better than usual bonded leather, but the only publisher using Cabra bonded leather that I know of is Cambridge University Press.)

Hardcover books can be stored on a bookshelf in upright position, but neither leather nor bonded leather can – the edge will over time collapse. That means both leather and bonded leather must be stored horizontally. The problem with bonded leather is that the cover tends to quickly develop a curl – to keep the cover flat, one must put a larger book on top of the cover with sufficient weight to hold down the cover.

For leather bindings, the best (in my opinion) are from best to worst (1) goatskin, (2) calfskin, (3) pigskin (also called Berkshire leather). These are all made from solid pieces of leather. A step down is (4) French Morocco (this is split, thin calfskin). My next favorite is actually the cheapest – (5) “new generation synthetic leather” made out of polyurethane on a vicose base – usually called TruTone, TuTone, or NuTone. This type of binding is quite good, even though it is entirely synthetic.

For me, a high-quality hardcover (not all hardcovers are high quality) feels best. I also crave truly limp leather covers. But bonded leather – forget it. But that’s just my opinion.

For more thoughts on leather bindings, see Tim’s comments here.

---

Regardless of your opinion on bindings, I think you will find the interior (page block) of the Baronius to be the best out there.

 

[Bible_Reader]

It is better to have more than one version for study.

May I suggest you may be interested in the Oxford Catholic Comparative New Testament? It is physically handsome as a book and contains the Douay-Rheims-Challoner, the RSV-CE, the NRSV, the NAB, the Jerusalem Bible, the New Jerusalem Bible, the Good News Bible, and the Christian Community Bible? Most of these are useful (I do not care for the CCB) and it allows direct comparison. At $25 it is a bargain.

Oxford lets these parallel Bibles go out of print after a few years, so if you think it is something you might want, I suggest you buy it while you still have a chance.

Of course, it is only the New Testament, but you may find the ability to compare multiple translations on the same page useful.

 

[Jeremy_Peter]

May I suggest you may be interested in the Oxford Catholic Comparative New Testament? It is physically handsome as a book and contains the Douay-Rheims-Challoner, the RSV-CE, the NRSV, the NAB, the Jerusalem Bible, the New Jerusalem Bible, the Good News Bible, and the Christian Community Bible? Most of these are useful (I do not care for the CCB) and it allows direct comparison. At $25 it is a bargain.

Oxford lets these parallel Bibles go out of print after a few years, so if you think it is something you might want, I suggest you buy it while you still have a chance.

Of course, it is only the New Testament, but you may find the ability to compare multiple translations on the same page useful.

Haha… wow!! I didn’t know this existed. You’re right, for the price it sounds really good. Too bad I ordered my RSV-CE already. Oh well. Thanks for the tip though!! Man, for a no frills bible, it sure is tempting.

 

[selylidne]

If you enjoy the occasional bit of serious study, don’t dismiss the possibility of getting a copy in the original languages. Yes, scholars spend lifetimes arguing about the nitpicky details of the original wordings, but remember that much of it was written to be read aloud to ordinary people, and it can be picked up surprisingly easily (although not effortlessly, of course). A wonderful halfway step is an interlinear bible, which usually has the left page in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, or even Latin, and the right page in English.

 

[Bible_Reader]

A wonderful halfway step is an interlinear bible, which usually has the left page in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, or even Latin, and the right page in English.

Not to make too fine a point of it, but you’ve described a diglot. An interlinear intersperses two languages line-by-line (or more usually, phrase-by-phrase or word-by-word)