Why do you like the Douay-Rheims?

[Epistemes]

For those who read the Douay-Rheims, and prefer it to other English translations, why do you like the Douay-Rheims? What about it makes you prefer it to the more accepted (and liturgical!) RSV-CE and NAB?

 

[SFH]

For those who read the Douay-Rheims, and prefer it to other English translations, why do you like the Douay-Rheims? What about it makes you prefer it to the more accepted (and liturgical!) RSV-CE and NAB?

I don’t know whether I’d call the RSV-CE more “liturgical.” Only the NAB is approved to be used in the Catholic liturgy in the United States. Moreover, between the Douay-Rheims, the RSV-CE, and the NAB, the Douay-Rheims is the closest to the Nova Vulgata and conformity with Liturgiam Authenticam.

If you’re going to read the Fathers of the Church and the Doctors of the Church, the Douay-Rheims is most often the closest translation of the text they’re using.

There have been many discussions of the deficiencies in the RSV-CE and NAB on these forums. If you want further reasons for why people read the Douey-Rheims, you might want to check some of those discussions out.

 

[Manfred]

For those who read the Douay-Rheims, and prefer it to other English translations, why do you like the Douay-Rheims? What about it makes you prefer it to the more accepted (and liturgical!) RSV-CE and NAB?

Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but only the Douay-Rheims gets Luke 1:34 right; to wit,

“How shall this be done, because I know not man?”

That is a VERY literal rendering of the Greek.

If you really want to know what made me decide to purchase - and READ - the Douay-Rheims, get a copy of TAN’s “Which Bible Should You Read?”

 

[Jerry-Jet]

I like the Douay Rheims the most because it sacrifices the doctrines of the Catholic Church less than any other English translation of the Bible.

I like the Douay Rheims the most because it is closer to the Latin Vulgate than any other English translation of the Bible and the Catholic Church stated at Trent that the Latin Vulgate is free from error in regards to faith and morals.

That doesn’t mean the Latin Vulgate is perfect–but since it IS free from error in regards to faith and morals and other English translations that are not based on the Latin Vulgate have not been declared to be free from error concerning faith and morals by the Catholic Church and since it is my opinion that other English translations do contain errors in regards to faith and morals–then if I am concerned about faith and morals then I should choose the Latin Vulgate because the Catholic Church has taught me so!

Since there is no perfect translation of the Latin Vulgate in English it stands to reason that I should try to obtain the English version that is CLOSEST to the Latin Vulgate.

The closest English version to the Latin Vulgate IS the Douay Rheims.

Now of course the Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate are not perfect so I am obliged to 'love the Lord our God with all my mind" as Jesus taught.

That requires learning about places where the Latin Vulgate as expressed in the Douay Rheims is wrong–it involves learning what the Nova Vulgata says that may be different from it–and it also entails learning the latest Catholic scholarship about places where even the Nova Vulgata might be wrong or inaccurate when compared to the best available sources of the ancient biblical languges.

All of this is a tall order that I am not a scholar enough to accomplish–but the Lord does want me to do my best–to study his word and to listen to the magisterium of the Catholic Church when studying the Bible.

Which of course means that I really need to study many different translations of God’s word and critically study what the magisterium of the Catholic Church and what Catholic scholars and Catholic theologians have to say about exactly which words are the most accurate.

In everyday practice the only English versions of the Bible I respect are the Douay Rheims Challoner Hadock–the Last Confraternity bibles of the 1960s which had all but just a few books of the Od Testament finished and the RSV-CE 2d edition.

Nne of these three are perfect by any means. But I will say this—between all three you’re going to be pretty close to the truth.

I WISH someone would update the Douay Rheims. I WISH someone would translate the Nova Vulgata into English and I WISH the pope would appoint the most conservative Catholic biblical scholars he knows in the world to even UPDATE the Nova Vulgata in regards to the best ancient bilical manuscripts available in the original languages.

I further wish that after that was done that the most precise translation of that new Latin translation would be done in every language of the world and that the liturgies of all the Catholic Churches in the world when quoting scripture would all quote the same biblical text as closely as possible.

All of these WISHES will never come true–so in the meantime I rely most on the Duay Rhims Calloner Haydock Bible but read other bibles and pray that all Bible translations all over the world will ALL be improved–the Douay Rheims included!

We may never have a perfect bible but if we trust in God in seeking out His Word then despite all our inaccuracies He will indeed either in this world or in purgatory perfect us!

 

[mkarzon]

I believe you can see “Catholic doctrine” more easily in this bible.

One example is Ez 9:4 …and mark Thau upon the foreheads of the men that sigh…

Thau is the Greek letter “t”, therefore the “mark” can be understood to be a foreshadowing of making the Sign of the Cross.

The RSVCE for Ez 9:4 says, …and put a mark upon the foreheads of the men who sigh…

The foreshadowing of the Sign of the Cross is lost in the RSVCE.

One drawback to the DR bible is that 17th century English doesn’t “flow” as well as the RSVCE. Thankfully, I’m able to own both versions.

 

[lak611]

For those who read the Douay-Rheims, and prefer it to other English translations, why do you like the Douay-Rheims? What about it makes you prefer it to the more accepted (and liturgical!) RSV-CE and NAB?

I like both Douay-Rheims and RSV-CE equally. I like the beauty of the language in the Douay-Rheims, but I like the readability of the RSV-CE. The NAB is just awful, and I don’t like it one bit (too much dynamic equivalence and horrible commentary). NAB reminds me of a Catholic version of the Protestant NIV, which I don’t like either.

 

[Manfred]

I like both Douay-Rheims and RSV-CE equally. I like the beauty of the language in the Douay-Rheims, but I like the readability of the RSV-CE. The NAB is just awful, and I don’t like it one bit (too much dynamic equivalence and horrible commentary). NAB reminds me of a Catholic version of the Protestant NIV, which I don’t like either.

Gee, I wish I had said this, because this pretty much sums up my sentiments towards each of the translations you mentioned!

D-R: beauty of the language;
RSV-CE: readability;

NAB: a Catholic version of the
NIV which I don’t like.

In all fairness, the D-R (like the RSV-CE) could stand some corrections. Had I the time or inclination right now, I’d start a thread “D-R Needs Corrections”. Admittedly, it was relatively easy to start one for the RSV-CE, since I had quite a bit of (name removed by moderator)ut: some based on comparison with the D-R, of course; some from evangelical Protestants who publish more critiques of bible versions than do Catholics; some of my own (e.g., I just loathe the use of the term “pioneer” for Jesus which appears twice in the Letter to the Hebrews; and let’s not forget the lame rendering of Luke 1:34). But for the D-R, I’d like to see someone else make the first move.

Manfred

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Manfred to tell the truth I’m ignorant and don’t know where the Douay Rehims needs correcting and where that correcting would be endorsed by traditional orthodox conservative Catholics.

I’m sure there are some places in the Douay Rheims like that–I’d love to hear about them.

Many of the quibbles that many people have with the Douay Rheims don’t hold water.

It’s use of words like chalice seem to beg for correcting.

I don’t think there is a need to hold to all the Latin spellings either.

And I don’t know where all the Nova Vulgata is at odds with the Douay Rheims–where examination of the oldest manuscripts in the original languages convinced the translators of the Nova Vulgata to go with different language than what the Douay Rheims used.

I just don’t think it would be that hard to make the Douay Rheims much more readable and without adding inclusive language and without departing far from the Latin Vulgate or with other more accurate ancient sources.

How much could the Douay Rheims be corrected and still be faithful to the Latin Vulgate or the Nova Vulgata?

If the RSV can be polished would it be that difficult to polish the Douay Rheims?

 

[lak611]

I’m sure there are some places in the Douay Rheims like that–I’d love to hear about them.

I don’t think there is a need to hold to all the Latin spellings either.

I would change all the spellings and names of the Old Testament books so that they are the same as the other Bible translations. For instance, Osee becomes Hosea. Also, I would spell the names of persons according to the Hebrew names in both the Old and New Testaments (for instance, the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke).

I just don’t think it would be that hard to make the Douay Rheims much more readable and without adding inclusive language and without departing far from the Latin Vulgate or with other more accurate ancient sources.

I would also change the numbering of the Psalms, so they are the same as all the other translations.

 

[bighodag]

I like the DR Bible because its the only Catholic version of an english-language bible available for e-Sword.

e-sword.net/downloads.html

If you’ve not checked out e-Sword, the free digital Bible, you should. It downloads with the KJV with Apochrypha. You can add the Latin Vulgate and DR Bible, amongst dozens of others.

e-sword.net/bibles.html

There are numerous Catholic topic files available, such as, the Baltimore Catechism, Ante-Nicene Fathers, etc.

e-sword.net/extras.html

esnips.com/doc/e9570d8c-decf-426e-ad3f-fbe90866db88/Baltimore_Catechism_1891

The software include a prayer list and scripture memorization tools.

I find e-Sword very useful in my online apologetics work.

 

[MTD]

For those who read the Douay-Rheims, and prefer it to other English translations, why do you like the Douay-Rheims? What about it makes you prefer it to the more accepted (and liturgical!) RSV-CE and NAB?

Well, I suppose it’s high time I join in; I know you’ve all been just waiting for me to jump in after all those criticisms I made of the RSV-CE on “RSV-CE Needs Corrections.” But perhaps some will be surprised that I haven’t much to say:

I like the D-R simply because of its accuracy to the text it translates, the Latin Vulgate. Of course, that very accuracy means it inherits all the deficiencies of the Vulgate; however, I find the deficiencies of the Vulgate more tolerable than those of the RSV-CE, which for no good reason takes undue liberty in translating certain passages, such as (my famous) Luke 1:34.

Need I say anything about the NAB?

How much could the Douay Rheims be corrected and still be faithful to the Latin Vulgate or the Nova Vulgata?

It would not be worth the effort to revise the D-R in accord with the Nova Vulgata. There are too many differences in the Old Testament; it would be much more worthwhile to make a completely new translation from the Nova Vulgata. Which I don’t see really happening because Liturgiam Authenticam calls for a translation from the original languages with the Nova Vulgata used as a guide in choice of text and rendering.

If the RSV can be polished would it be that difficult to polish the Douay Rheims?

I’m not impressed with the polishing of the RSV, so…

Maria

 

[Jerry-Jet]

MTD: What would your idea be for the best possible Catholic Bible translation?

Is it possible to start all over and translate from the original lanugages and use the Nova Vulgata as a guide to renderings?

Are there any Catholic Bible scholars in the world who would like to do such a thing?

Will it ever happen?

 

[lak611]

It would not be worth the effort to revise the D-R in accord with the Nova Vulgata. There are too many differences in the Old Testament; it would be much more worthwhile to make a completely new translation from the Nova Vulgata. Which I don’t see really happening because Liturgiam Authenticam calls for a translation from the original languages with the Nova Vulgata used as a guide in choice of text and rendering.

The only changes I would like in the Douay-Rheims Version would be: changing the numbering of the Psalms to correspond with all the other translations; changing the names of books/persons to correspond with the Hebrew (example Hosea instead of Osee, Micah instead of Malachi instead of Malachias, Micah instead of Micheas, Jonah instead of Jonas, etc.); and including a pronunciation guide to names, like many KJV Bibles have.

Currently, I never read the Psalms in the Douay-Rheims because I know the numbering of most of them from all the other translations, and it is too much trouble to look them up in the Douay-Rheims, when I can easily find them in the RSV-CE, NRSV-CE, KJV, or NASB.

 

[Epistemes]

Currently, I never read the Psalms in the Douay-Rheims because I know the numbering of most of them from all the other translations, and it is too much trouble to look them up in the Douay-Rheims, when I can easily find them in the RSV-CE, NRSV-CE, KJV, or NASB.

One plus of the Ignatius RSV-2CE is that, beginning with Psalm 10, it numbers the Psalms according to both the Hebrew *and *Greek/Latin translations, where Psalm 23 is actually Psalm 23 and 22. If future editions could include this feature, much how the RSV-CE also successfully includes the additional material to Esther in the proper order within the text instead of at the end, as Jerome did (and which is the way the DR faithfully translates it), then I wouldn’t find this objectionable in the least!

 

[MrS]

I like it cuz it makes me work at any Bible Study…

I use a Catholic Parallel often which includes the DR. It is great to see the singular translation of the DR, while the others sort of soft-peddle in their translations. Combine that with the Haydock commentary… and you have some great reading… and learning.

 

[MTD]

MTD: What would your idea be for the best possible Catholic Bible translation?

I don’t really know; I guess I haven’t thought about it much. LA’s proposal of a translation from the original languages with comparison to the Nova Vulgata does sound like a good idea. However, Fr. Echert of the EWTN Scripture forum, whom I respect a lot, has implied that the Nova Vulgata is not objectively accurate in some areas (see Revisions to Vulgate). So it would seem that a complete translation according to the Nova Vulgata would be rather undesirable (please note I’m not talking about the pericopes of the Lectionary). I’ve studied Latin and wanted to get a Vulgate; when I asked Fr. Echert’s advice on which version to get (Latin Vulgate: which version to get?), he recommended the Clementine. So it looks like this Vulgate business gets a little complex.

Is it possible to start all over and translate from the original lanugages and use the Nova Vulgata as a guide to renderings?

Of course it’s possible.

Are there any Catholic Bible scholars in the world who would like to do such a thing?

Now that’s another story. I’m inclined to think not. If Biblical scholars are actually going to make the effort to translate the whole Bible from the original languages, they’re far more likely to want to make their own decisions regarding choices of text and rendering.

Will it ever happen?

Um, I have a hard time believing it. I do think, however, that there is a possibility of that happening with the pericopes of the Lectionary if the Holy See should insist on it as it has with the other texts of the Mass.

Currently, I never read the Psalms in the Douay-Rheims because I know the numbering of most of them from all the other translations, and it is too much trouble to look them up in the Douay-Rheims, when I can easily find them in the RSV-CE, NRSV-CE, KJV, or NASB.

If that is the only reason you don’t read the D-R psalms, what a pity! All it takes to solve that problem is a pen to write in the Hebrew numbering of each psalm in your D-R Bible. Unless you don’t read the D-R psalms because of the translation also…

One plus of the Ignatius RSV-2CE is that, beginning with Psalm 10, it numbers the Psalms according to both the Hebrew *and *Greek/Latin translations, where Psalm 23 is actually Psalm 23 and 22.

The RSV-CE does the same thing.

Maria

 

[Manfred]

One plus of the Ignatius RSV-2CE is that, beginning with Psalm 10, it numbers the Psalms according to both the Hebrew *and *Greek/Latin translations, where Psalm 23 is actually Psalm 23 and 22. If future editions could include this feature, much how the RSV-CE also successfully includes the additional material to Esther in the proper order within the text instead of at the end, as Jerome did (and which is the way the DR faithfully translates it), then I wouldn’t find this objectionable in the least!

The original 1965-66 RSV-CE also includes the dual numbering of the Psalms, as does the 1966 JB and the 1985 NJB. Notice, however, that the NAB didn’t think this was worth the effort.

In the above I used the present tense, “includes”, for the original RSV-CE because Ignatius and other booksellers STILL offer it, and rightfully so, since, IM(not-so)HO, the RSV-2CE does not appear to have the potential to supplant it.