RSV-CE Luke 1:28

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cari
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Manfred said:
HOW do they get away with this?

I hope, at least, that the CCCB is preparing a lectionary to replace this “provisional” edition. That’s “provisional”, as in “since 1992”. 😦
Click to expand...
I would rather hope the Vatican is preparing the new lectionary. The CCCB has a bad track record, don’t you agree?
 
Manfred said:
HOW do they get away with this?

I hope, at least, that the CCCB is preparing a lectionary to replace this “provisional” edition. That’s “provisional”, as in “since 1992”. 😦
Click to expand...
I hope the RNAB is replaced here in the USA.
 
lak611 said:
I hope the RNAB is replaced here in the USA.
Click to expand...
It is truly counter-productive (in matters of the faith) to have a copy of the Bible at home that is not the same as the one in the Lectionary. Not to mention the CCC uses the RSV-CE (as far as I can tell).

I also hope the (A)RNAB goes away. I’d like to see an RSV-3CE in the near future employed for Lectionaries and home use.
 
paramedicgirl said:
I would rather hope the Vatican is preparing the new lectionary. The CCCB has a bad track record, don’t you agree?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, Rome leaves it up to the local bishops’ conferences to prepare vernacular translations and then submit them for approval. So I have to agree with you that the CCCB’s track record is poor (1) for selecting the NRSV and (2) for neglecting to submit it to Rome for (dis)approval. At least the USCCB complied with (2).
 
So, just what is it that makes the NRSV-CE Catholic?

And which “other notes” does “favored one” strike?

:confused:
 
Manfred said:
Unfortunately, Rome leaves it up to the local bishops’ conferences to prepare vernacular translations and then submit them for approval. So I have to agree with you that the CCCB’s track record is poor (1) for selecting the NRSV and (2) for neglecting to submit it to Rome for (dis)approval. At least the USCCB complied with (2).
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the RNAB is not any better than the NRSV.
 
It does say in mine “Hail, full of Grace, the Lord is with you”

Me personally, I’m a maticulous Bible Snob, and use the DRB, or use a Bible in Spanish, which is much better than the NAT (New American Tragedy), BNT (Bad News Translation)

That favored one, or Greetings Favored one, drives me nuts. the greek word there means perfected by grace, hence full of grace.

I’m promoting going back to the DRB, it’s the most faithful Catholc Translation that I’ve found that’s in english

I am praying for the Church in Canada that the confused bishops get on board, and get the GRIM, and and lectionary approved by the Holy See.

As for the USCCB that let the NAT get by, I pray that this version gets taken out of stores.

I’m in the archdiocese of LA, so please pray for my liberal cardinal 🙂

We need bishops like in Africa where they rejected a translation of the Bible because there were non-Catholic interpetations in the notes 🙂

Time to sleep, good night everyone!

Dr. M
 
And as a new Catholic I was always taught on forums that it was the USCCB that had all the problems…
 
Cari said:
Hey y’all,

Am finally so sick of my NAB that I’m going to shell out the money to get a new bible (despite my husband’s snarky comments about me becoming a bible snob 😉 ).

Does anyone have a RSV-CE in front of them and can tell me, beyond a doubt, that Luke 1:28 says “full of Grace”, rather than the horrible “highly favored daughter”?

I looked up the RSV online, but found the Protestant version of it, which has the verse as “O favored one”, which isn’t going to work for me.

Plus, are there footnotes on the same page as the scriptures, or are they in the back? (I get distracted easily by the footnotes)

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Now I just have to get over the fact that I wasted my Catholic Answers Topic Tabs on my NAB :rolleyes:

Cheers,
C
Click to expand...
“Full of grace: …] Luke could have described her with the words full of grace (Gk. pieres charitos) as he did of Stephen in Acts 6:8, yet here he uses a different expression (Gk. kecharitomene) that is even more revealing than the traditional rendering. It indicates that God has already ‘graced’ Mary previous to this point, making her a vessel who ‘has been’ and ‘is now’ filled with divine life.”

Ignatius Catholic Study Bible; Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch; Ignatius Press; 2001
 
banjo said:
“Full of grace: …] Luke could have described her with the words full of grace (Gk. pieres charitos) as he did of Stephen in Acts 6:8, yet here he uses a different expression (Gk. kecharitomene) that is even more revealing than the traditional rendering. It indicates that God has already ‘graced’ Mary previous to this point, making her a vessel who ‘has been’ and ‘is now’ filled with divine life.”

Ignatius Catholic Study Bible; Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch; Ignatius Press; 2001
Click to expand...
orthodox Catholic Teaching, awesome!
 
Thanks for pointing this out. I just looked on line at USCCB.org, and it’s the NAB that the Bishops have on line. Quite frankly I’m flabbergasted. It was always my belief and understanding that the accuracy, translation and transmission of the Bible from culture to culture and generation to generation was in the care of the Magisterium. I hope the change from “Grace” to ‘favored” in the NAB is not some misguided concession to ecumenism
 
Gato said:
Thanks for pointing this out. I just looked on line at USCCB.org, and it’s the NAB that the Bishops have on line. Quite frankly I’m flabbergasted. It was always my belief and understanding that the accuracy, translation and transmission of the Bible from culture to culture and generation to generation was in the care of the Magisterium. I hope the change from “Grace” to ‘favored” in the NAB is not some misguided concession to ecumenism
Click to expand...
Well, here’s the trick. Check out the Gospel reading for December 8, 2006. Notice it says “full of grace”. Then click the link for Lk 1:26-38 above the excerpt on that first page. Notice it says “favored one”.

The NAB people own is not the same NAB used in the lectionary. It’s a bit pitiful that American Catholics don’t have a Bible version for their homes that matches the version used at Mass.
 
japhy said:
Well, here’s the trick. Check out the Gospel reading for December 8, 2006. Notice it says “full of grace”. Then click the link for Lk 1:26-38 above the excerpt on that first page. Notice it says “favored one”.

The NAB people own is not the same NAB used in the lectionary. It’s a bit pitiful that American Catholics don’t have a Bible version for their homes that matches the version used at Mass.
Click to expand...
It still would be preferable if the NAB and RNAB are scrapped for the lectionary as well and replaced with a better translation. The lectionary still has the inclusive language, which the better Bible translations do not. I would prefer that the RSV-CE is used for the lectionary, not the NAB or RNAB (and definitely not the NRSV).
 
Gato said:
Thanks for pointing this out. I just looked on line at USCCB.org, and it’s the NAB that the Bishops have on line. Quite frankly I’m flabbergasted. It was always my belief and understanding that the accuracy, translation and transmission of the Bible from culture to culture and generation to generation was in the care of the Magisterium. I hope the change from “Grace” to ‘favored” in the NAB is not some misguided concession to ecumenism
Click to expand...
The Magisterium hardly has anything to do with Bible translations It may adopt a translation for official use, but it has historically left the actual translations to various people and bodies.
 
porthos11 said:
The Magisterium hardly has anything to do with Bible translations It may adopt a translation for official use, but it has historically left the actual translations to various people and bodies.
Click to expand...
Given the situation in most of the English-speaking countries, it wouldn’t hurt for a body of the Holy See to take a much more pro-active role in biblical translations. And this does not mean farming out any of this to ICEL!
 
Manfred said:
Given the situation in most of the English-speaking countries, it wouldn’t hurt for a body of the Holy See to take a much more pro-active role in biblical translations. And this does not mean farming out any of this to ICEL!
Click to expand...
I would love for the Holy See to be much more active in Canada. We could use a little (or a lot) of good old fashioned censorship of these runaway liberal translations we are forced to endure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top