The official Bible?

[Unfinished]

Which Bible is the official Catholic Bible? I was always under the impression it was the RSV, but at Barnes and Noble yesterday when I went to pick one up, all I could find Catholic wise was the “New American Standard” which also had written on the side “The Official Catholic Bible”. Is this correct?

 

[Fidelis]

Unfinished:

Which Bible is the official Catholic Bible? I was always under the impression it was the RSV, but at Barnes and Noble yesterday when I went to pick one up, all I could find Catholic wise was the “New American Standard” which also had written on the side “The Official Catholic Bible”. Is this correct?

What you probablyactually saw was “The New American Bible,” not the “New American Standard.”

The NAB is the “official” Bible for Americans only in the sense that it was the one commisioned by the US bishops for use in this country, especially in the liturgy and in teaching documents. Of course Catholics are free to use any approved Catholic Bible for devotional and study.

 

[Aaron_I]

If it has nihil obstat and imprimatur (located near the copyright info), then it is fine. I use the NAB myself.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

To my knowledge, the only Bible officially declared authentic by the Catholic Church, by virtue of the universal ordinary magisterium is the Latin Vulgate.

the same sacred and holy synod… has decided and declares that the… Vulgate edition which has been approved by the Church itself through long usage for so many centuries in public lectures, disputations, sermons, and expositions, be considered authentic, and that no one under any pretext whatsoever dare or presume to reject it." (Council of Trent Session IV, April 8, 1546)

See also John Paul II’s Scripturarum Thesaurus, which is the Apostolic Constitution of April 25, 1979, by which the new Vulgate edition of the Holy Bible is declared “typical” and is promulgated.

Nevertheless, there are various English translations of the Bible which are accepted by the Catholic Church, such as the Douay-Rhiems, the Revised Standard Version-Catholic edition, the Jerusalem Bible, and the New American Bible.

See here for help in choosing a Bible translation:

Bible Translations Guide
catholic.com/library/Bible_Translations_Guide.asp

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Unfinished:

Which Bible is the official Catholic Bible? I was always under the impression it was the RSV, but at Barnes and Noble yesterday when I went to pick one up, all I could find Catholic wise was the “New American Standard” which also had written on the side “The Official Catholic Bible”. Is this correct?

The official Bible of the Catholic Church is the Latin Vulgate.

 

[theMutant]

The New American Bible is the “official” version used in the current English liturgies. This is probably what was meant by the labelling. The previous posters are correct, however, that the official Bible of the Catholic Church is the Latin Vulgate. While other sources can be referenced when making vernacular translations, the Vulgate is supposed to be the primary and authoritative source for all Catholic translations.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

theMutant:

The New American Bible is the “official” version used in the current English liturgies

Just a correction… the NAB is the official version for English liturgies in the USA. The last I read though, Rome has not approved the NAB for its use of inclusive language (someone can correct me if I’m wrong). The liturgical translation used in Canada is the NRSV-CE (although it too isn’t a recommended translation).

These Bibles have all been approved in some point in time throughout our history:

The Douay-Rheims-Challoner
The Jerusalem Bible
The RSV-CE (which is what the Catechism uses for English translations).

If there’s anymore approved (from Rome, not the USCCB) English translations, feel free to add them.

Not sure about any others.

 

[Church_Militant]

No one seems to have mentioned the old Confraternity Version that was between the DRV and the newer translations. I found a couple and it’s not bad.

BTW, here’s a link to the Nova Vulgata for those who want to see the current Latin Vulgate edition.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[drforjc]

No one seems to have mentioned the old Confraternity Version that was between the DRV and the newer translations. I found a couple and it’s not bad.

Yes, I like that version too, although there are a few troublesome (to me, at least) footnotes in it, though not nearly as bad as the NAB. Its style is easily understandable but sounds a bit more dignified than then NAB.

 

[asteroid]

If you’re in the UK then the missal readings will be from the Jerusalem Bible.

There’s the New Jerusalem as well. Maybe that will end up in a future edition of the Missal.

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

Peace be with you!

I’m surprised that the NAB and Jerusalem Bible, while approved Catholic Bibles, do not have Mary being addressed by Gabriel as “full of grace”–they both have “favored one”. Does anyone know why this is? I even saw an RSV (it was the “ecumenical edition”) that had that too. Why are they not using the literal Greek translation for this? Are they just trying to make the Bible more “Protestant friendly”?
Other than that passage, I do like these two translations and have one of each.

In Christ,
Rand

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Br. Rich SFO:

The official Bible of the Catholic Church is the Latin Vulgate.

That’s a bit of a surprise, as the CC is made of many sister-Churches of (I thought) equal status. Is the Roman Church senior to the rest ?​

Even if it is, that doesn’t quite explain how the Septuagint OT (say) is not of equal status with the Vulgate, since it is as “official” for Greek Catholics as the Vulgate is for us Latins. Sixtus V declared it to be such in 1587, after it had been edited. It’s true this was before the Union of Brest in 1596, and that at least some “Greek Rite” churches in South Italy were under Latin Rite supervision & bishops instead of that of their own clergy & Rite - but AFAIR, that was the status of the Septuagint

So can a single version not used by all Catholic Churches be alone “official” for the whole Church which these sister-Churches comprise ? That’s my question - or are there as many official versions for the entire Church, as there are for the several Churches

 

[asteroid]

Rand Al'Thor:

Peace be with you!

I’m surprised that the NAB and Jerusalem Bible, while approved Catholic Bibles, do not have Mary being addressed by Gabriel as “full of grace”–they both have “favored one”. Does anyone know why this is? I even saw an RSV (it was the “ecumenical edition”) that had that too. Why are they not using the literal Greek translation for this? Are they just trying to make the Bible more “Protestant friendly”?
Other than that passage, I do like these two translations and have one of each.

In Christ,
Rand

That surprises me too. And it makes it hard to debate the meaning of “full of grace” when discussing the immaculate conception.

 

[StCsDavid]

Rand Al'Thor:

Peace be with you!

I’m surprised that the NAB and Jerusalem Bible, while approved Catholic Bibles, do not have Mary being addressed by Gabriel as “full of grace”–they both have “favored one”. Does anyone know why this is? I even saw an RSV (it was the “ecumenical edition”) that had that too. Why are they not using the literal Greek translation for this? Are they just trying to make the Bible more “Protestant friendly”?
Other than that passage, I do like these two translations and have one of each.

In Christ,
Rand

Hey, don’t get me started on all the flabby, politcally correct translations in the NAB. I’m more of an Ignatius RSV guy myself.

 

[mercygate]

Here is a link to the official Bible of the Catholic Church on line: the Nova Vulgata.

 

[theMutant]

## That’s a bit of a surprise, as the CC is made of many sister-Churches of (I thought) equal status. Is the Roman Church senior to the rest ?

Even if it is, that doesn’t quite explain how the Septuagint OT (say) is not of equal status with the Vulgate, since it is as “official” for Greek Catholics as the Vulgate is for us Latins. Sixtus V declared it to be such in 1587, after it had been edited. It’s true this was before the Union of Brest in 1596, and that at least some “Greek Rite” churches in South Italy were under Latin Rite supervision & bishops instead of that of their own clergy & Rite - but AFAIR, that was the status of the Septuagint

So can a single version not used by all Catholic Churches be alone “official” for the whole Church which these sister-Churches comprise ? That’s my question - or are there as many official versions for the entire Church, as there are for the several Churches

It seems to me that you are confusing the liturgical rites with Biblical translations. The Church -both east and west- has always referred to various biblical texts in making its translations.

In regard to the Septuagint, In the 16th century, the Latin Vulgate was the most ancient and accruate version available because the Greek copies had been made after it. Indeed, the Old Testament text of the Vulgate was made using the Septuagint texts available in the 4th century (many of which had been lost through deterioration by the 16th century) as well as Hebrew versions which is why it is so accurate. It is my understanding that no complete copy of the Septuagint version that predates the Vulgate has ever been found but that what has been found has consistently shown the Vulgate to be an extremely accurate translation.