Which Catholic Bible would you like to see used as the liturgical Bible in the United States?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Holly3278

Guest
Hi everyone! I just thought I’d create a poll and ask which Bible version you all would like to see used as the liturgical Bible for the United States. If you would like to see the New American Bible continued to be used then vote for it. Otherwise, vote for the version/translation that you prefer.
 
Since the Church knows better than me which Bible should be used, I believe the Bible to be used should be the Bible which the Bishops haven chosen - which, unless I’m mistaken, is the NAB.
 
I would like to see the Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition used because to me, it seems to be the most orthodox of the Catholic Bibles except for maybe the Douay-Rheims (Challoner) but it contains outdated language which may be confusing to younger people or people who are not familiar with its language.
 
Eucharisted said:
Since the Church knows better than me which Bible should be used, I believe the Bible to be used should be the Bible which the Bishops haven chosen - which, unless I’m mistaken, is the NAB.
Click to expand...
You make a good point but I personally would still like to see the Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition used instead. After all, we have been using the New American Bible since the 70s or something like that and I think it’s about time for a change but that’s just me. That said, I am satisfied with the New American Bible. The Bible itself is orthodox regardless of whether or not the notes are. But the notes are not used within the liturgy.

Also, I’m confused. If you want the Church to continue using the New American Bible, why didn’t you vote for the New American Bible? 🤷:confused:
 
The RSV-CE; I have Fr. Richard John Neuhaus on my side.

However, for the TLM, it should be D-R all the way, with no attempts to “modernize” it.
 
The RSV-CE is the best Catholic edition of the Bible out right now in English.

If the ESV gets approval I may have to reconsider that, but the RSV-CE is the standard. I use it as my main Bible.
 
The RSV-2CE is approved in Lectionary form by the Antilles Episcopal Conference. It’s the only English Lectionary that matches a published Bible without changes.
 
I am still gonna have to say the Douay-Rheims/Challoner text. Right now it is the only Catholic Bible in print that I can truly 100% trust. If the Confraternity and Ronald Knox Translations were still being published I would give them consideration. Then the RSV-CE, JB, NJB and NAB. The Douay-Rheims is the best English Bible in print and always will be as far as I am concerned
 
A new translation is needed.

The Knox translation takes too many liberties with the text; it is a rather loose translation.

A Bishops’ Conference does not necessarily make the best decision about which text to use. Such decisions are of the temporal authority of the Church and so are fallible decisions. The Canadian Bishops’ Conference chose the NRSV; they were rebuked by Pope John Paul II for using that text, which has much inclusive language. But they persisted in using it, and finally receive approval from Pope Benedict (not because he agreed with their decision, but more probably because they were going to use it anyway).
 
Ron_Conte said:
A new translation is needed.

The Knox translation takes too many liberties with the text; it is a rather loose translation.

A Bishops’ Conference does not necessarily make the best decision about which text to use. Such decisions are of the temporal authority of the Church and so are fallible decisions. The Canadian Bishops’ Conference chose the NRSV; they were rebuked by Pope John Paul II for using that text, which has much inclusive language. But they persisted in using it, and finally receive approval from Pope Benedict (not because he agreed with their decision, but more probably because they were going to use it anyway).
Click to expand...
In what methods would you recommend in creating a new translation?? What previous versions would consider using for source?? I ask you because of your experience with the Latin Vulgate (Clementine Edition) and the Douay-Rheims and the one you are working on right now. Thought you might give a little insight on what you would do to make a completely new translation.
 
tobinatorstark said:
I am still gonna have to say the Douay-Rheims/Challoner text. Right now it is the only Catholic Bible in print that I can truly 100% trust. If the Confraternity and Ronald Knox Translations were still being published I would give them consideration. Then the RSV-CE, JB, NJB and NAB. The Douay-Rheims is the best English Bible in print and always will be as far as I am concerned
Click to expand...
It does seem to be that each of the versions available today have their problems.

I use the D-R for my personal use (this is the best I can do as I am not real literate in the OLD Latin, Greek and other biblical languages I am working on it). 😉

CAUTION PERSONAL RANT: People complain of the use of old language, well if the population was better educated it would not be an issue. Sorry but those that have been raised on comic books and Cliff Notes just need to start reading a dictionary and see what the words mean. We need to stop dumbing down our education system so everyone can play on an even playing fIeld. Life just does not work this way. END OF PERSONAL RANT

Our home school group uses the JV & NJV. Good for the youth, not watered down. They graduate to the D-R.👍

The NRSV is way to inclusive and the meanings of some texts change with their inclusive language.😦
 
What’s the JV? Jerusalem?

I myself prefer to read the original Jerusalem Bible in my personal reading. This is probably due to the fact it is used in the Liturgy here in the UK.

I was thrilled last year when they finally printed a version of it with the Grail Psalms, to match our Liturgy exactly word for word.🙂

Sometimes I switch to the D-R or RSV-CE, it really depends on my mood.

But the majority of the time its the JB (With Grail Psalms!) all the way!👍
 
The New American Bible: It’s okay, but as has been noted the newer notes leave something to be desired.

The New Jerusalem Bible: Too inclusive language & use of divine name problems. Not nearly as good and its predecessor and a poor substitute.

The Jerusalem Bible: Nice but again, use of divine name problems. (different article explaining)
**
The New Revised Standard Version:** Too inclusive language & just nowhere near the level of its predecessor.
**
The Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition:** One of my two favorites & very nice. My choice for modern Mass for dignity and reverence as well as general accuracy.

The Douay-Rheims (Challoner) Version/Bible: My own personal preference for study and faith sharing. I could live with it as a text for Mass.

Other/I don’t know: I can also agree with this. I bow to the bishops and His Holiness as the best authorities and final arbiters.
 
Church_Militant said:
The New American Bible: It’s okay, but as has been noted the newer notes leave something to be desired.

The New Jerusalem Bible: Too inclusive language & use of divine name problems. Not nearly as good and its predecessor and a poor substitute.

The Jerusalem Bible: Nice but again, use of divine name problems. (different article explaining)
**
The New Revised Standard Version:** Too inclusive language & just nowhere near the level of its predecessor.
**
The Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition:** One of my two favorites & very nice. My choice for modern Mass for dignity and reverence as well as general accuracy.

The Douay-Rheims (Challoner) Version/Bible: My own personal preference for study and faith sharing. I could live with it as a text for Mass.

Other/I don’t know: I can also agree with this. I bow to the bishops and His Holiness as the best authorities and final arbiters.
Click to expand...
This is why I use the edition of the JB without the use of the divine name and with the Grail Psalms, it matches England’s liturgy 🙂 Its known as the ‘CTS New Catholic Bible’ if anyone’s interested!
 
Mattjolley said:
This is why I use the edition of the JB without the use of the divine name and with the Grail Psalms, it matches England’s liturgy 🙂 Its known as the ‘CTS New Catholic Bible’ if anyone’s interested!
Click to expand...
Cool. I have a cherished JB that I use for reference sometimes.

Yours sounds really nice and near perfect, because it really is a fine translation.
 
I have the D-R version and from what I’ve read, I like it a lot. But, I did vote for the RSV-CE because, as it’s been stated, the D-R version is kind of hard to understand. For me it’s a lot more than kind of hard, but I like it anyway.
 
Unless I’m mistaken (which is far from impossible), the Vatican uses the RSV2-CE for its English translation.

Anyway, that’s what I use the most, and what I voted for.

Ruthie
 
Ron_Conte said:
A Bishops’ Conference does not necessarily make the best decision about which text to use. Such decisions are of the temporal authority of the Church and so are fallible decisions. The Canadian Bishops’ Conference chose the NRSV; they were rebuked by Pope John Paul II for using that text, which has much inclusive language. But they persisted in using it, and finally receive approval from Pope Benedict (not because he agreed with their decision, but more probably because they were going to use it anyway).
Click to expand...
Ain’t that the truth, though? “Fallible decisions”, for sure, and in some cases guided by economic considerations, e.g., USCCB holds the copyright to the (R)NAB.

Let’s review:

USA: (R)NAB;
Great Britain and many other places: The Jerusalem Bible;
Canada: NRSV.

I thought I read somewhere that only in India were they still using the RSV-CE. Good for them!

I can’t believe there are actually folks who prefer - for the Liturgy - the informality of the JB.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top