RSV-CE question

[MaidoftheWood]

Hello, all. I joined ages ago but haven’t posted since, but I have a question I’m hoping someone can answer for me. Also, I’m sorry if I am posting this in the wrong section, I wasn’t sure where to ask.

I am hunting for a Bible that I can enjoy and use for years to come. I am very particular about translations of certain words/phrases, but I understand I might just have to pencil in some of them. (a couple examples: ‘submit’ or ‘submission’ in Ephesians 5, rather than subject or subordinate; “It is consummated” instead of “It is finished”; faith, hope, and love, not ‘charity’.)

In my searching, I have come across the Bible Search on the EWTN website: ewtn.com/devotionals/biblesearch.asp

I have looked up several verses/passages, and so far I like what I see for the most part. At the top, it says “RSV-Catholic.” However, it is my understanding that there are at least 3 different versions of the RSV-CE, maybe 4. There is no indication which one EWTN is using. Does anyone know which they are using? Thank you so much.

 

[asia53]

I don’t know which version EWTN is using. However, I found this article on Wikipedia, it will help you differentiate between the versions.

RSV-CE

You could email EWTN, and ask them. At the bottom of the “Home” page, there is a “Email Us” option.

 

[Able_minded]

Generally best to ask your Priest on what bible to use. I suggest one dedicated and in line with Catholic faith.

 

[MaidoftheWood]

I thought of contacting EWTN about it after posting my thread here. Of course. lol. So I emailed them. Hopefully I will get a definitive answer.

Able minded: well…obviously. This is why I am looking into the RSV-CE (Catholic Edition) Bibles and the one used on the EWTN website. My own word/language preferences are not really matters of interpretation or teaching, but matters of the richness and beauty and flow of the language, the structure of the sentences, and the nuance of meaning in different valid word choices. For instance, ‘consummated’ is far richer theologically than ‘finished’ in Jesus’ last words, though ‘finished’ is nevertheless a valid translation. Consummated, I think, expresses the actual truth much more completely. (and is found in the Douay-Rheims translation, actually. Pity it isn’t used in all Catholic translations. It causes a huge shift in one’s awareness of Christ’s sacrifice and its relation to us and to eternity. It really makes reading the Passion narrative so much richer and more meaningful.)

 

[Zooey]

I seem to remember (from years ago!!) that Mother Angelica of EWTN used to always read from her Jerusalem Bible (the original, not the “New Jerusalem”). Anyhow, maybe that is something to consider in finding out what Bible is being used on there.
I have great sympathy with your quest!! It is such a pain when trying to find a Bible version, the number of them can be staggering, especially when you have heard (not seen!!) a particular one.
I hope & I pray you find just what you are seeking.

 

[bauerice]

I use the Jerusalem Bible but, I think you are looking for the RSV-2CE.
amazon.com/The-Ignatius-Bible-Standard-Catholic/dp/0898708338/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346511764&sr=8-1&keywords=RSV-2CE

 

[CalCatholic]

This search engine uses the RSV-CE. There is also a RSV-2CE (which removes some of the archaic language (such as the ‘thees and thous’). Both are good, it just comes down to your preference.

 

[asia53]

I thought of contacting EWTN about it after posting my thread here. Of course. lol. So I emailed them. Hopefully I will get a definitive answer.

Please post the answer when you find out. I’d love to know. Thank you.

 

[itullian]

i believe its rsv-ce.
Scott Hahn uses that one.

 

[MaidoftheWood]

This search engine uses the RSV-CE. There is also a RSV-2CE (which removes some of the archaic language (such as the ‘thees and thous’). Both are good, it just comes down to your preference.

I thought it might be that one, but in all the passages I looked up, I came across no thees or thous! Or did I just manage to look up only passages without them? I seem to recall it used ‘you’ instead…but I don’t know, I’d have to go look again. I remember looking up John 6, and Jesus said “Truly, truly, I say to you…”, not “Amen, Amen, I say unto thee…”. Personally, I prefer retaining the Hebrew ‘Amen’ where it’s used, but I point this out since it said ‘you,’ not ‘thee.’

And, I just went and looked at it again. The one EWTN is using definitely uses ‘you’ and not thee or thou. But I am confused, because I saw a list someone had made online of some differences between RSV-CE (original) and RSV-2CE (2nd version), and among the ones pointed out, was that for Matthew 19:5 and 19:6 both the original and 2nd versions say only “one” and not “one flesh” (one flesh being mentioned in the footnotes). Yet, I looked this up on the EWTN Bible Search, and it uses “one flesh.”
Maybe the person who made the list made some errors? I wish there were a complete (accurate) list of every single difference in word choice, etc, maybe excepting the change from thee/thou to you, between the original RSV-CE and the second version. I think it’s just weird that Ignatius did not provide such a list.

asia53: I will be happy to share the answer when I hear back from them. I’m not sure when that will be, being Labor Day weekend, but when I do, I will post it here!

Zooey: Thank you! That is good to know, and yes, it is hard, I hope I will find a good one.

 

[Russ_of_Tokyo]

I have heard there are very minor differences between some of the editions of the RSV-CE depending on the publisher, and of course there are more differences between the RSV-CE and RSV-2CE, the most obvious difference being the use of thee and thou when addressing God as in prayer language. May be not consistent with the original languages, but for anyone who is accustomed to the practice of praying with thee and thou, it is more comfortable to have them in their Bible as well.

Recently I heard a podcast of Open Line where Fr. Mitch Pacwa recommend the Ignatius Bible to a caller as the best balanced translation available. I was wondering which one he was talking about (RSV-CE or RSV-2CE) until he mentioned the thees and thous. Which narrowed it down to the RSV-CE. I have both and can go either way, but the compact edition of the RSV-CE wins out for practical reasons (portability and ease of handling).

As for penciling in the specific words that you think ought to be there, I do the same. It lets me own the perfect Bible (perfect in my own mind anyway).

 

[JK8619]

Recently I started a post asking about various Catholic Bibles. The consensus I seemed to get was that the RSV-2CE is possibly the best translation when considering the ease of reading while maintaining an accurate translation. I also did a lot of my own research and I ended up buying the Ignatius RSV-2CE. I am very happy with it and recommend it to anyone.

JK

 

[CalCatholic]

I thought it might be that one, but in all the passages I looked up, I came across no thees or thous! Or did I just manage to look up only passages without them? I seem to recall it used ‘you’ instead…but I don’t know, I’d have to go look again. I remember looking up John 6, and Jesus said “Truly, truly, I say to you…”, not “Amen, Amen, I say unto thee…”. Personally, I prefer retaining the Hebrew ‘Amen’ where it’s used, but I point this out since it said ‘you,’ not ‘thee.’

And, I just went and looked at it again. The one EWTN is using definitely uses ‘you’ and not thee or thou. But I am confused, because I saw a list someone had made online of some differences between RSV-CE (original) and RSV-2CE (2nd version), and among the ones pointed out, was that for Matthew 19:5 and 19:6 both the original and 2nd versions say only “one” and not “one flesh” (one flesh being mentioned in the footnotes). Yet, I looked this up on the EWTN Bible Search, and it uses “one flesh.”
Maybe the person who made the list made some errors? I wish there were a complete (accurate) list of every single difference in word choice, etc, maybe excepting the change from thee/thou to you, between the original RSV-CE and the second version. I think it’s just weird that Ignatius did not provide such a list.

They are there. Look up Psalm 23 verse 5. The RSV-CE only uses ‘thees and thous’ when talking directly to God, so they don’t appear nearly as much as the KJV or the D-R.

 

[CalCatholic]

Recently I started a post asking about various Catholic Bibles. The consensus I seemed to get was that the RSV-2CE is possibly the best translation when considering the ease of reading while maintaining an accurate translation. I also did a lot of my own research and I ended up buying the Ignatius RSV-2CE. I am very happy with it and recommend it to anyone.

JK

I am too!

 

[Jerry-Jet]

The RSV-CE changes “Person” to “presence” in 2 Corinthians 2:10 from what the KJV and the Douay Rheims translated because it is PROTESTANT BIASED and can’t stand the thought of St. Paul granting absolution for the incestuous Corinthian.

I believe that 2 Corinthians 2:10 is scriptural proof positive of the sacrament of confession.

I WILL NEVER trust any translation that CHANGES that DOCTRINAL truth!

The Vulgate is free from errors in terms of DOCTRINE and morals because the Ecumenical Council of Trent guided by the Holy Spirit who is God says so!

And while that DOCTRINE does not require “person” to be used in 2 Corinthians 2:10 instead of “presence”–the FULLNESS of truth that is Holy scripture and was recited in church over the centuries when that scripture was read aloud in church during the liturgy PROVES that “person” is a better translation than “presence”.

Until the day I die I will point out this verse to all those here who want to wax poetic about how great the RSV is in ANY of its current iterations–

it isn’t great–in 2 Corinthians 2:10 it is PROTESTANT biased pure and simple!

It is BIASED on a DOCTRINAL matter!

Now if you’ve always loved the RSV-CE or RSV-CE2 and don’t like hearing what I say the thing to do is not be mad or disappointed because your favorite translation is indeed PROTESTANT biased–

the real thing is to be upset that Catholic translations since the Confraternity translation and the Knox translation ALSO use “presence” instead of “person” in 2 Corinthians 2:10!

Look–if the KJV AGREES with the Douay Rheims–an if KNOX agrees with the Douay Rheims–and if the Nova Vulgata agrees with the Douay Rheims and if the Confraternhity agrees wiht the Douay Rheims–

then raise Cain for the NAB modernist “peudo-ecumenical” translators to agee with not only the Catholic tradition but the KJV tradition and not to back PROTESTANT bias!

It is pathetic that Catholics have to read Protestant biased translations such as the NAB, Jerusalem bible, the New Jerusalem Bible and the RSV in any of its iterations.

Catholics deserve better than that!

The Douay Rheims Challoner and the Confraternity translations of the bible need to be improved–the trouble is that the translators of all the modern translations since the Knox bible use Protestant biased translation choices.

Pray that the next batch of translators of the NAB will not re-visit their errors in bible translation.

We don’t need the “young woman” crowd instead of “virgin” crowd when it comes to Isaiah 7:14. We don’t need translators hat will not translate “Hail Full of grace” and we don’t need translators who will translate “presence” instead of “person” in 2 Corinthians 2:10.

St. Paul forgave “in the PERSON of Christ”! Protestant biased translations can’t say that because they don’t believe it!

And lastly it would not be impossible for such errors in translation as I have listed to be corrected but I’ll tell you this–they won’t be corrected by Protestant translators who get rid of many verses in the deuterocanonical books!

That’s even another reason to not wax poetic about how great the RSV-CE or RSV-CE2 is–it isn’t!!!

 

[CalCatholic]

The Vatican used the RSV (and the NRSV) in the English translation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. All of Pope Benedict’s books that I have read or browsed, have used the RSV in their English translation. The RSV-2CE is being used in the Catholic lectionary for mass in some countries in the world (not USA). Many Catholic theologians use the RSV-CE/2CE in their study and devotion. This is Catholic enough for me!

 

[HillbillyHermit]

The Vatican used the RSV (and the NRSV) in the English translation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. All of Pope Benedict’s books that I have read or browsed, have used the RSV in their English translation. The RSV-2CE is being used in the Catholic lectionary for mass in some countries in the world (not USA). Many Catholic theologians use the RSV-CE/2CE in their study and devotion. This is Catholic enough for me!

Yeah, but some people think they know more than the Pope and Bishops. Or like to hijack threads about translations that aren’t about their preferred one and go on long rants.

I’m curious to know which edition EWTN has on the site. It’s even hard to tell with the ones they have for sale. The NT and Psalms I bought from the catalog has RSV-CE in its description on the site, but it’s the 2CE. Some say that and some don’t. Is the 1st edition still being published?

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Pope Benedict in his encyclical on faith said that the old Vulgate translation on faith in the book of Hebrews 11:1–“Now faith is the SUBSTANCE of things to be hoped for the
EVIDENCE of things that are not seen”

is superior to the RSV translation approved by a German episcopal conference which does not use the words SUBSTANCE and EVIDENCE in that verse.

The RSV says that faith is the “ASSURANCE of things hoped for the CONVICTION of things not seen”.

The Catholic translation of the Vulgate states that faith is based upon SUBSTANCE and EVIDENCE–it is not a subjective thing as the Protestants say but is an OBJECTIVE thing!

If you don’t believe me then maybe you’ll believe Pope Benedict XVI in his encyclical Spe Salvi when in 7. he speaks of the ecumenical translation approved by German bishops! He is saying that Protestant exegesis of the verse had become Catholic exegesis but that the Protestant view was untenable!

The fact that an episcopal conference might OK a translation does not mean that that episcopal conference AGREES with every translation choice in every verse of a particular bible translation.

If Pope Benedict XVI states this in an Encyclical Tell me: is that Catholic enough for a RSV supporter?

I think what that shows is that it is possible for a translation to have an imprimatur and also to be approved by an episcopal conference–but yet to not have the fullness of truth in every single verse.

In other words just because an episcopal conference OKs a translation or just because a translation might be used in the Catechism does not equate to therefore it is a great translation in ALL verses.

There is much in the RSV that is good–that doesn’t mean that all of it is good–some of it isn’t–and some of it is Protestant biased.

How many times here do you hear that Catholics believe in both/and?

Well the RSV is both a great translation in many respects AND Protestant biased in some of its translation choices.

The last statement is very Catholic!

 

[fisherman_carl]

The one that Fr. Mitch Pacwa on EWTN always recommends to viewers is the Ignatius RSV-CE.

Personally, I have the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible (ICSB) which uses the RSV-C2E (2nd edition). This is an excellent study bible with lots of commentary from Scott Hahn and others. I highly reccomend it. It is only the NT and Genesis and Exodus right now. They are still working on the other books of the OT. So I also have an Ignatius RSV-C2E full bible to match. It is easy to read kind of like the NIV which I had used previously.

Lately, I have also been using the RSV-CE that came with the Logos bible software I purchased. I find it to be good as well.

You can’t go wrong with either but I recommend the ICSB with whatever you buy because of the commentary.

 

[Russ_of_Tokyo]

I’m curious to know which edition EWTN has on the site. It’s even hard to tell with the ones they have for sale. The NT and Psalms I bought from the catalog has RSV-CE in its description on the site, but it’s the 2CE. Some say that and some don’t. Is the 1st edition still being published?

If the Bible or New Testament has those four icons on the cover then it is the RSV-2CE. Other publishers including Oxford and Benedict still produce the RSV-CE 1st edition. As a matter of fact Ignatius still produces it as well (it has no icons on the cover).