J
Jestersage
Guest
Is it true that Traditional catholic use Douay more than RSVCE?
- Status
P
PluniaZ
Guest
Traditional Catholics obey the Church hierarchy, so they would be fine with either approved translation.
K
Kielbasi
Guest
Probably not.
I don’t think that the Douay has really been the best selling Catholic bible for many years.
A
Ad_Orientem
Guest
In my experience, TLM communities and individuals tend to use the DRV. Perhaps in part because it is a very accurate (if in places clunky) translation of the Latin Vulgate, which has the approbation of the Council of Trent and was used by the Church Fathers. More modern Bibles are translated directly from Hebrew and Greek, but using manuscripts such as the Masoretic text that are more recent than those to which St. Jerome had access.
D
Dempsey1919
Guest
The lectionary uses the DRV. It should be noted that this was not the only version used before the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. The Americans used the Confraternity version and the English used the Knox version. I’ve seen one hand missal with readings from the Knox. I wish Baronius or Angelus would reprint a 1962 with the Confraternity or Knox.
R
reggieM
Guest
In our community, we use the DR – but the Confraterity version which has a more modern translation. That is used for English readings at Mass.
However - very few people have a Bible in that translation because I don’t believe it has been reprinted.
Failing that, the DR remains most popular. But it’s also difficult so I do see people using the RSV.
po18guy
Well-known member
The New Testament of the 1941 Confraternity is in print by Scepter, but in pocket size only. Even though the Old Testament of the Confraternity is quite similar to that used in the NAB, I still wish for a completed Confraternity Bible, as the notes and introductions are excellent and confidence inspiring.
R
reggieM
Guest
Yes, I agree - the notes are superb!
I didn’t know that about the pocket edition also - thanks.
D
Dempsey1919
Guest
I think it is very likely that traditionalist Catholics will use any Catholic Bible. As I mentioned in my previous post, the DRV is inappropriate for scholarly use because it’s a translation of a translation. I’m sure traditional priestly fraternities like the FSSP will use modern translations such as the RSV. In fact, I know one very traditional priest who used that version when studying in seminary.
R
reggieM
Guest
I agree with that. I’ve heard free translations of the Latin into English also as a priest from a traditional order explained a Biblical passage. But if there’s any serious scholarship, nobody will go to an English translation alone.
po18guy
Well-known member
The vinyl cover is a little cheesy. I asked for a leather or bonded leather cover. One can always hope.
K
Kielbasi
Guest
What do you mean by “serious scholarship” here?
I think someone can still “seriously” study the bible, without knowing the original Greek or Hebrew languages.
But I guess that depends on what you mean by “seriously”.
R
reggieM
Guest
I’m going to guess that the word you’re interested there in is “scholarship” not “seriously”.
Of course, people can be “serious” about anything. But doing real scholarship is a different matter.
You can’t use English translations as your source material - eventually you have to go to the original languages.
For just reading, learning and other matters which certainly can be done quite seriously, the English translations are fine (although it’s probably best not to use just one in that case).
An interesting feature of the Douay Rheims is that it borrowed heavily from the King James. Many passages are word-for-word identical.
There was a time just after Vatican II when more bible translations were permitted when the earliest of who we’d call “traditionalists” made some very strong appeals for the use of DR-alone (or something that sounded like that).
Some key passages that were hallmarks of Catholic thought in the English-speaking world were changed in the new translations.
Two of the most prominent I recall are:
Douay Rheims Genesis 3:15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and **her **seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for **her **heel.
as compared to the New American Standard:
And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall [a]bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.
and the NAB editiion from the US Bishops site:
I will put enmity between you and the woman,and between your offspring and hers;
They will strike at your head, while you strike at their heel.
Here’s another claimed-to-be Catholic edition of the NAB:
catholic.org/bible/book.php?bible_chapter=3
I shall put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; it will bruise your head and you will strike its heel.’
We can see the significant differences here. In the DR, the Blessed Virgin is crushing the serpent’s head with her heel (thus the countless traditional statues showing this).
I had never actually noticed the U.S. Bishops version, which my guess is they changed it from the NASB which had just “his” heel doing the crushing. Now they have “their heel” doing it. At least that preserves Our Lady in her role - and then along with Jesus as well. In any case - the older NAB that was used in parishes was the same as the NASB quoted above, so Our Lady was removed from that scene - thus an outcry from traditionalists and an urging to use just the DR.
The second one is this:
Douay Rheims Matthew 24:28
Wheresoever the body shall be, there shall the eagles also be gathered together.
The NAB (bishops version ) has this:
"Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather.
That one always seemed very significant to me, because the NAB translation makes little sense as compared to the DR - or at least, I prefer the DR so much more.
The interpretation in the DR version is that at the end of the world, “where the Body is” - therefore the Body being the Holy Eucharist. There the “Eagles” - those who are noble in virtue and soar up to the Lord, “will gather” - so the Faithful will cluster even more around the last remaining places where we find The Body of the Lord.
In the NAB version - “where the Corpse is” there the Vultures … ?
I guess it’s just the opposite, the vultures being sinners, they gather around the culture of death or a dead body of sorts.
But that makes no sense as I see it.
The previous line is:
*For just as lightning comes from the east and is seen as far as the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. *
With the coming of the Son of Man I think the idea of the Eagles gathering to the Body makes more sense than the vultures going to a corpse.
But those are just two passages that raised concerns in the days long ago.
J
Jestersage
Guest
OP here, replying to all. So far, I bought a DouayRheims as my first Catholic bible, after feeling a bit frustrated with NAB1987 edition that my pious aunt gave me. So far, the book is good, and I do not see much issue for private studies.
I am still debating if I should get RSVCE. It will likely not be 2CE, because so far no one have made a 4x6 edition. Factor into the price, I am likely to go with the Oxford Publish edition, which is only $25 in Canadians.
(Can someone tell me how big of a difference is RSVCE to 2CE?)
I am still debating if I should get RSVCE. It will likely not be 2CE, because so far no one have made a 4x6 edition. Factor into the price, I am likely to go with the Oxford Publish edition, which is only $25 in Canadians.
(Can someone tell me how big of a difference is RSVCE to 2CE?)
J
Jestersage
Guest
The entire paragraph (Matthew 24:26-28) is about how one should not approach the false prophets. Because of this, until you showed that line side by side, I thought it’s a metaphor about how the place around false prophets will bring about death (vulture)
Haydock does go with the Douay intepretation, however:
This really does illustrate that even in private study – which is a should – we should get a good translation, and most importantly, also talk with others.
R
reggieM
Guest
That’s a good insight - I did not consider that about the false prophets.
Yes, that’s very important. It was said that in old days the Church discouraged Bible reading by the lay-faithful, and while that is not true, it is true that the Church always urged caution for anyone just reading through the Bible without anyone else to discuss it with.
Translations of the Bible are so difficult. I read the Knox version at times and I’m always surprised at how radically different it is from others. But Msgr. Knox was an excellent scholar - he just took a different interpretation and no translator can fully know the exact equivalents from the original language to another.
- Status