What Bible do Catholics here use?

[vladimir998]

I have a number of Catholic Bibles. I enjoy the Douay-Rheims Version, but the Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition (RSV2CE) is easier to use.


I eagerly await the publication of the New Testament of the Ignatius RSV2CE Study Bible this May!


So what Bible do Catholics here use?

[tealblue]

NAB But I don't like how threy do the comentaries.

[vladimir998]

Tealblue,

NAB But I don't like how threy do the comentaries.

I don't like the notes either. The notes in the Ignatius Study Bible are soooooo much better. I just can't wait until the New Testament is done. I bought a bunch of the booklets, but I want the whole New Testament in one volume. Five months and counting. (Although the release date will probably be pushed back if previous experience is anything to go by).

[Columcille]

I have a number of Catholic Bibles. I enjoy the Douay-Rheims Version, but the Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition (RSV2CE) is easier to use.


I eagerly await the publication of the New Testament of the Ignatius RSV2CE Study Bible this May!


So what Bible do Catholics here use?

Typically, based on the region, the readings of Mass in America are from the NAB. I believe in Great Britian and other English nations that the Jerusalem Bible is read during Mass. In fact on the Universalis website it states the following:

The readings [...] are from the Jerusalem Bible, which is used at Mass in most of the English-speaking world. The New American Bible readings, which are used at Mass in the United States"

I do believe the Douay-Rheims held the place of honor for a lot longer time before these versions were made. However, I am not aware if the Douay-Rheims was actually quoted in Mass for the readings prior to Vatican II. I would assume that the Vulgate was read instead and that the Douay-Rheims was probably quoted within the priest's homily. I am not of that generation, so I am speaking on ignorance, but it seems a likely conjecture in my mind.


I do not use the NRSV, although I have an Oxford publication of it. Even though there are several scholars from the Catholic Church and one Eastern Orthodox scholar on its committee, it does not have the imprimatur seal and blessing from the Church. That does not mean that the version is without merit, but what it does mean to me is that where ecumenical bodies may differ about what a passage means that what you will get in the footnotes is a lack of commentary to avoid the messy differences that highlight our lack of full communion or even variations of wording that would be preferred by the Protestants over the Catholic and Orthodox word. To highlight an old example, it was Tyndale who translated "congregation" in favor of the word "church." Even later Protestant bibles did not translate to such a word. In later translations, some scholars of a Calvinistic worldview or Arminian worldview might also come to a text with a certain bias and hope to manipulate a word to carry their dogma further. Perhaps it may not happen at all, but it could be an unintended consequence of such an ecumenical approach.

I personally like the SAAS version (St. Athanasius Academy Septuagint) that is found in the OT of the Oxford Study Bible. I cannot wait until the EOB (Eastern Orthodox Bible) comes out in its entirety. I think the Jerusalem Bible is my favorite Catholic bible.

[vladimir998]

Coumcille,

You wrote:

However, I am not aware if the Douay-Rheims was actually quoted in Mass for the readings prior to Vatican II.

In some missals perhaps.

I would assume that the Vulgate was read instead and that the Douay-Rheims was probably quoted within the priest's homily.

I regularly attend the old Mass. The way it is done is that the priest first reads the texts from the Latin Missal, the altar missal in other words. Then he reads the same texts in English from the ambo. Most priests use what is in essence a small lectionary for the vernacular readings.

I do not use the NRSV, although I have an Oxford publication of it. Even though there are several scholars from the Catholic Church and one Eastern Orthodox scholar on its committee, it does not have the imprimatur seal and blessing from the Church.

Some editions do. Look for one called "Catholic Edition". I had one until recently (a particular tall edition). It was a beautifully produced Bible, but completely lacked notes and cross references!

I cannot wait until the EOB (Eastern Orthodox Bible) comes out in its entirety.

Oh, I see. You mean this: http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/

Hmmmm...I don't know. It seems less user friendly than the OSB and, well, less text informative too - at least regarding the Fathers. And there's an article by Mark Bonocore ? That's a shocker really.

[Columcille]

Coumcille,

You wrote:



In some missals perhaps.



I regularly attend the old Mass. The way it is done is that the priest first reads the texts from the Latin Missal, the altar missal in other words. Then he reads the same texts in English from the ambo. Most priests use what is in essence a small lectionary for the vernacular readings.



Some editions do. Look for one called "Catholic Edition". I had one until recently (a particular tall edition). It was a beautifully produced Bible, but completely lacked notes and cross references!





Oh, I see. You mean this: http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/

Hmmmm...I don't know. It seems less user friendly than the OSB and, well, less text informative too - at least regarding the Fathers. And there's an article by Mark Bonocore ? That's a shocker really.

Thanks for commenting on the old Mass.

As far as the NRSV, I still avoid it even with a Catholic approval. The committee of the NRSV states in the Oxford Annotated in the preface on page xii the mandates from the Division sought to eliminate linguistic sexism from the bible. I think such a preconceived mandate is an***hetical to the translation process and is an attempt to change Scripture to meet the modern norms. What next, a new translation needs to be made for the sympathies of the homosexual, a new mandate given by the Division! While the translation may be a fine translation, it is one that is politically surrounded itself with the Politically Correct Police. Hence, in my mind, it is inferior for a Catholic edition.

[vladimir998]

Hence, in my mind, it is inferior for a Catholic edition.

I agree.


I am eagerly awaiting the NT of the RSV2CE - which has no inclusive language. Supposedly it will be out in May. I like the balance of the RSV2CE: Relatively literal but still well written with a seemingly natural flow to the language.