RSV-CE vs RSV-2CE

  • Thread starter Thread starter Omyo12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Omyo12

Guest
I know there’s already a forum about the RSV-2CE and the RSV-CE from 2007 but the link to the list of changes is a dead link

Does anyone have a link to the complete list of chances between the RSV-CE and RSV-2CE??

Thanks!!
 
Omyo12 said:
I know there’s already a forum about the RSV-2CE and the RSV-CE from 2007 but the link to the list of changes is a dead link

Does anyone have a link to the complete list of chances between the RSV-CE and RSV-2CE??

Thanks!!
Click to expand...
No, regrettably, the author of that list pulled it from his school’s web site a while back.

While the following link may not be exactly what you are looking for, it may shed some light:

jimmyakin.org/2006/02/revised_ignatiu.html
 
Yeah, wish I still had that thing. Then again, I wish they hadn’t done half a job on the second edition in the first place )=.
 
Transformer said:
Yeah, wish I still had that thing. Then again, I wish they hadn’t done half a job on the second edition in the first place )=.
Click to expand...
That’s EXACTLY what the RSV-2CE is: a work-in-progress that did not go far enough in the direction of Liturgiam Authenticam.

It baffles me that the Antilles bishops embraced this right away for their Lectionary, inadequate as it is, thus lending to it an air of authenticity it doesn’t rightfully deserve.

And yet the world’s English-speaking bishops are still dragging their feet on approving the new English translation of the Mass because…???
 
Transformer said:
Yeah, wish I still had that thing. Then again, I wish they hadn’t done half a job on the second edition in the first place )=.
Click to expand...
The RSV-2CE is not a re-translation of the RSV-CE, it is the the RSV-CE with some of the archaic language (thees & thous) removed. The word ‘cup’ was replaced with the ‘chalice’ (as in the D-R, and the new Roman Missal), young woman was replaced with Virgin (as in the D-R, and as it should be). Ignatius submitted the RSV-2CE to the Vatican for approval to print an approved Lectionary, many of the changes that were made were at the request of the Vatican. The RSV-2CE is not replacing the RSV-CE, so I am not sure what you mean by the job was only half done.
 
CalCatholic said:
The RSV-2CE is not a re-translation of the RSV-CE, it is the the RSV-CE with some of the archaic language (thees & thous) removed. The word ‘cup’ was replaced with the ‘chalice’ (as in the D-R, and the new Roman Missal), young woman was replaced with Virgin (as in the D-R, and as it should be). Ignatius submitted the RSV-2CE to the Vatican for approval to print an approved Lectionary, many of the changes that were made were at the request of the Vatican. The RSV-2CE is not replacing the RSV-CE, so I am not sure what you mean by the job was only half done.
Click to expand...
As you said, the RSV-2CE changed the archaic language but also replaced some words. I think what Transformer means is that it could have done a little more.

The reason for the RSV-2CE was to revise according to the Liturgiam Authenticam. However, it could have done a better job at it.

As brother Manfred stated:
That’s EXACTLY what the RSV-2CE is: a work-in-progress that did not go far enough in the direction of Liturgiam Authenticam.
Click to expand...
It baffles me that the Antilles bishops embraced this right away for their Lectionary, inadequate as it is, thus lending to it an air of authenticity it doesn’t rightfully deserve.
Click to expand...
 
Omyo12 is correct. The RSV-2CE is half revised in accordance with Liturgiam Authenticam. What’s the point of that? It also has very few cross-reference annotations in the Old Testament, and embarrassing typographical errors.

It should have been better.
 
Transformer said:
Omyo12 is correct. The RSV-2CE is half revised in accordance with Liturgiam Authenticam. What’s the point of that? It also has very few cross-reference annotations in the Old Testament, and embarrassing typographical errors.

It should have been better.
Click to expand...
According to Ignatius Press, the changes that were made to the RSV-CE were made to conform it to Liturgiam Authenticam. And Ignatius puts on the title page of the RSV-2CE, ‘This edition was revised according to Liturgiam Authenticam, 2002’ Again Ignatius Press submitted this to the Vatican for approval, some changes were suggested and made, and the result is the current RSV-2CE Bible and Lectionary. Now if you are suggesting that this is not true, you need to explain where the RSV-2CE does not meet the requirements of Liturgiam Authentican and what in your opinion still needs to be done.
 
// does the rsv-2ce retain the way how some name’s and/or places are to be pronounced???
 
Jehuty_X said:
// does the rsv-2ce retain the way how some name’s and/or places are to be pronounced???
Click to expand...
Yes, but to a lesser degree, the RSV-2CE on the word ‘Philistines’ uses only acsent mark (exp. Philis’ tines) instead of breaking up the word in two places as the RSV-CE does.
 
CalCatholic said:
Yes, but to a lesser degree, the RSV-2CE on the word ‘Philistines’ uses only acsent mark (exp. Philis’ tines) instead of breaking up the word in two places as the RSV-CE does.
Click to expand...
// thank you…i’ve seen the original rsv-ce and i really did not like that…very very weird…
 
Transformer said:
Omyo12 is correct. The RSV-2CE is half revised in accordance with Liturgiam Authenticam. What’s the point of that? It also has very few cross-reference annotations in the Old Testament, and embarrassing typographical errors.

It should have been better.
Click to expand...
// what do you mean by typographical errors???
 
Jehuty_X said:
// what do you mean by typographical errors???
Click to expand...
There’s a few typos.

For example,
if you have a RSV-2CE, look at the heading of Job 15 and look at the text.

The heading reads: “Eiphaz Rebukes Job”

but right under that:

“Then **Eliphaz** the Temanite answered…”

I have heard there are a few others though I’m not sure where.
 
Omyo12 said:
There’s a few typos.

For example,
if you have a RSV-2CE, look at the heading of Job 15 and look at the text.

The heading reads: “Eiphaz Rebukes Job”

but right under that:

“Then **Eliphaz** the Temanite answered…”

I have heard there are a few others though I’m not sure where.
Click to expand...
// thanks…oh okay…darn, i was thinking on giving the rsv-2ce edition a chance which i am still thinking of…the castillian version of the new jerusalem bible 3rd edition (which i own) has typos…i can’t believe publishers print the holy scriptures with typos and release them like that…no respect…
 
Jehuty_X said:
// thanks…oh okay…darn, i was thinking on giving the rsv-2ce edition a chance which i am still thinking of…the castillian version of the new jerusalem bible 3rd edition (which i own) has typos…i can’t believe publishers print the holy scriptures with typos and release them like that…no respect…
Click to expand...
Its a shame. I still like my RSV-2CE though
I absolutely love the leather binding and the quality of the off-white pages is amazing
At first I didn’t like the icons of the Four Evangelicals and the Byzantine style Christ on the cover but I’ve really grown to love it.

I’m waiting for the revised NAB OT with the re-revised Psalms. I’m ok with the NT, we’ll just have to wait and see.

I also have the bonded leather Douay Rheims by Baronius Press though I’m very disappointed with the binding. It’s so stiff… 😦
 
Omyo12 said:
Its a shame. I still like my RSV-2CE though
I absolutely love the leather binding and the quality of the off-white pages is amazing
At first I didn’t like the icons of the Four Evangelicals and the Byzantine style Christ on the cover but I’ve really grown to love it.

I’m waiting for the revised NAB OT with the re-revised Psalms. I’m ok with the NT, we’ll just have to wait and see.

I also have the bonded leather Douay Rheims by Baronius Press though I’m very disappointed with the binding. It’s so stiff… 😦
Click to expand...
// you have the bonded leather edition of the rsv-2ce??? is it good quality??? i am thinking on buying that version…when i saw the cover of the rsv-2ce, at first, i was puzzled, but ended up liking it…so i’m still thinking about buying it…

// i have the burgundy leather version of the douay-rheims (challoner) bible and the binding is strong…though the leather seems stiff at first, but gets flexy later on… 😃 …it’s sad that baronius press is reverting to bonded leather…
 
Jehuty_X said:
// you have the bonded leather edition of the rsv-2ce??? is it good quality??? i am thinking on buying that version…when i saw the cover of the rsv-2ce, at first, i was puzzled, but ended up liking it…so i’m still thinking about buying it…

// i have the burgundy leather version of the douay-rheims (challoner) bible and the binding is strong…though the leather seems stiff at first, but gets flexy later on… 😃 …it’s sad that baronius press is reverting to bonded leather…
Click to expand...
the bonded leather edition of the RSV-2CE is amazing! The inner cover is high quality cotton paper and the pages are very thick (reminds me of school textbooks) and the color of the pages are creamy white so it looks old fashion. It has two red book markers that are very silky.

I really hope the DR gets more flexible over time (i admit its pretty strong). Its gotten better than when I first got it. Also, the book markers are pretty cheap feeling compared to the RSV2CE bonded leather…
 
Omyo12 said:
the bonded leather edition of the RSV-2CE is amazing! The inner cover is high quality cotton paper and the pages are very thick (reminds me of school textbooks) and the color of the pages are creamy white so it looks old fashion. It has two red book markers that are very silky.

I really hope the DR gets more flexible over time (i admit its pretty strong). Its gotten better than when I first got it. Also, the book markers are pretty cheap feeling compared to the RSV2CE bonded leather…
Click to expand...
// thanks…i wish all bibles had high quality paper (cotton) instead of the usual “cheap” thin paper that can be damaged and rip easily…
 
Jehuty_X said:
// you have the bonded leather edition of the rsv-2ce??? is it good quality??? i am thinking on buying that version…when i saw the cover of the rsv-2ce, at first, i was puzzled, but ended up liking it…so i’m still thinking about buying it…

// i have the burgundy leather version of the douay-rheims (challoner) bible and the binding is strong…though the leather seems stiff at first, but gets flexy later on… 😃 …it’s sad that baronius press is reverting to bonded leather…
Click to expand...
I have had my RSV-2CE since 2006, I use it all the time and the bonded leather cover has held up fine. It is still my overall favorite Bible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top