Sorry for seeming obsessed,
, it’s just that I’ve ordered one to many “soft leather” Bibles, or books for that matter, that wound up being like the Baronius Press DR I currently own. It’s labeled a genuine leather\soft cover, and it’s pretty much like a slightly limp piece of cardboard. 
I think the RSV 2nd edtion from ignatius press has them
I have a paperback edition of the Saint Benedict Press Douay-Rheims and I can confirm that it does have cross-references. It is too bad the RSV does not, which is a real shame.
You will have multiple people give reasons why one or the other is better. I prefer the RSV, which is used by many Catholic scripture scholars, as well as many Vatican publications. Both contain some older archaic language, with the RSV using less. If you don’t like reading the Bible with “thees” thous" and “dost” than you may be interested in the RSV-2CE from Ignatius Press. In any case, all of these translations are fine for study and approved by the Church.
I think they are both great translations…just depends on if you like archaic language or not. I suspect that the DR may be more reliable in some ways, although the RSV incorporates more modern research and textual findings, whereas the DR is limited to what was available to Jerome at the time. The DR is also a translation of the latin, which may result in different renderings that may be unfamiliar to some. I like both but I find the DR difficult in spots, especially the old testament…I also don’t like how people’s names are different, as are some of the book titles. But the DR is authentically Catholic for sure and does interject a bit of mystery whenever it is read. The Benedictus RSV can be found on their website.
Just received the DR version and can confirm it does in fact have cross references. If I get a chance this weekend, I’ll post a few pics. It’s probably the nicest DR I have seen, not that they are easy to find, LOL. I can really only compare it to my Baronius Press version, which has now found a new home on the book shelf in my living room.
Thanks, I am trying to decide between the DR and the RSV. I like the red letter thing, an old crossover from my Baptist days.
Yeah, I like the red letter thing too–same reason as you. I think this particular one does give you the corresponding modern names in the table of contents. I am more curious as to whether the DR version has cross-references…the Benedictus RSV does not…which I do not like.Thanks, I am trying to decide between the DR and the RSV. I like the red letter thing, an old crossover from my Baptist days.
By the way, does the DR have a cross reference regarding the names of the books in the OT to the more familiar ones?
Thanks everyone for the info, I just ordered the RSV through St Benedict Press. Although it appears that it does not have the cross reference that mccorm45 has pointed out, I think I will be happy with it.
Anyway, I think I’ll be really happy with it!Good to hear that you are happy with it. I will be out of town for a few days and it will probably arrive while I an gone. I will let you know what my thoughts are when I get to review it. I am sure I will be as happy as you are with it.I just got my new RSV today, but haven’t had too much time to analyze it. But what I see so far I like! It is in the typical RSV Form with the appendices at the end of the old & new testaments, but the type and the set up is great! There are section headings, which I’ve never seen in an RSV and the poetry or quoted passages are set off. Also, i love the words of Christ in red. If I have a chance, I’ll post pics. Also, the leather seems to be a better quality than the one on my D-R I just got from them, even though they are both genuine leather.
Is it true that there are no chain (ie, cross) references linking associated scripture passages? From what you describe, it sounds similar to the large print version of the Ignatius/Oxford RSVCE bible.
)A good translation, but not my favourite by any means because of the inclusive language. Hope this helpsI’ll have to look at it when I get home to see. I have the large print version you are speaking of and it is somewhat similar, but I like this one much better.
Thanks Matt. I wonder why the seminarians are given the NRSV if it has the inclusive language issue. I don’t care for that, personally, but if it is otherwise better for study then maybe that’s the one I need. I wonder if the inclusive language pet peeve will really matter once one begins reading/studying. I’ll go look at wiki and see what comes of it. Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut!Hi,
Just a quick answer for your quick question!
Wikipedia has some good details on the Revised Standard Version,Catholic Edition (just put it into google.) The wiki article also shows the main textual differences between the original RSV and the catholic version.
The RSV Second Edition was updated so it has no thees and thous, and still reads very well. It has updated certain passages too, I believe. I am sure other users can inform you better in time, Im just a little rushed, here!
The NRSV, unlike the two versions mentioned above, has inclusive language, and is a more ecumenism friendly bible, if you will! It is also encouaged for use in studies (take this from a seminarian!
Matt