RSV-CE Needs Corrections

[Manfred]

What think ye, brethren?


My Reasons:

- There is not likely to be either a new revision of the Douay-Rheims-Challoner version of the Bible or a translation into English of the Nova Vulgata.

- The RSV-CE is, by almost all indications, the preferred text used by Catholic apologists and contemporary Catholic scriptural scholars.

- The Standard Bible Committee issued a second edition of the RSV New Testament in 1971 with many renderings superior to those of the Catholic edition (which was based on the 1959 edition of the RSV NT).

- Many of the corrections suggested below already exist in the
footnotes or Explanatory Notes of the RSV-CE, and could have been incorporated into the text of the RSV-CE by the original editors.


Texts of the RSV-CE and Some Suggested Corrections


Genesis 12:3 text "and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves"; footnote "in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed" to agree with Acts 3:25 and Galatians 3:8

Genesis 18:18 text "and all the nations of the earth shall bless
themselves by him"; footnote "in him all the nations of the earth shall be blessed" to agree with Acts 3:25 and Galatians 3:8

Genesis 22:18 text "and by your descendants shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves"; better "be blessed"

Genesis 26:4 text "and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves"; better "be blessed"

Genesis 28:14 text "and by you and your descendants shall all the families of the earth bless themselves"; footnote "be blessed"

Genesis 9:20 text "Noah was the first tiller of the soil. He planted a vineyard" better "Noah began to till the soil and planted a vineyard"

Exodus 3:14 text "I AM WHO I AM"; better "I AM WHO AM"

Tobit 13:18 text "Hallelujah"; better "Alleluia"

Psalm 45:6-9

text "[6] Your divine throne endures for ever and ever.
Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity;
[7] you love righteousness and hate wickedness.
Therefore God, your God, has anointed you
with the oil of gladness above your fellows;
[8] your robes are all fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia.
From ivory palaces stringed instruments make you glad;
[9] daughters of kings are among your ladies of honor;
at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir."

better "[6] Thy throne, O God, endures for ever and ever.
Thy royal scepter is a scepter of equity;
[7] thou lovest righteousness and hatest wickedness.
Therefore God, thy God, has anointed thee
with the oil of gladness above thy fellows;
[8] thy robes are all fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia.
From ivory palaces stringed instruments make thee glad;
[9] daughters of kings are among thy ladies of honor;
at thy right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir."

Psalm 104:35; 105:45; 106:1,48; 112:1; 113:1,9; 115:18; 116:19; 117:2; 135:1,21; 146:1,10; 147:20; 148:1,14; 149:1,9; 150:1,6 text "Praise the LORD!"; better "Alleluia!"

Proverbs 5:19 text "affection" better "breasts"

Isaiah 7:14 text "young woman"; footnote "virgin"

Throughout all four Gospels text "Truly, I say to you" or "Truly,
truly, I say to you"; better "Amen, I say to you" or Amen, amen I say to you"

Note: texts of all parallel NT passages have not been included herein.

Matthew 16:18 text "powers of death"; footnote "gates of Hades"; better "gates of hell"

Matthew 16:26 text "life"; better "soul"

Matthew 19:5 text "one"; footnote "one flesh"

Matthew 19:6 text "one"; footnote "one flesh"

Matthew 16:9 text "unchastity"; better "fornication"

Matthew 20:15 text "Or do you begrudge my generosity?" footnote "Or is your eye evil because I am good?"

Luke 1:34 text "How can this be, since I have no husband?"; better "How shall this be, since I do not know man?"

John 2:4 text "what have you to do with me?"; better "what to you and to me?"

John 19:5 text "Here is the man!"; better "Behold, the man!"

1 Corinthians 6:9 text "the immoral"; Explanatory Notes "fornicators"

1 Corinthians 6:9 text "homosexuals"; Explanatory Notes "effeminate nor sodomites"

1 Corinthians 6:16 text "one"; footnote "one flesh"

1 Corinthians 7:9 text "cannot"; better "do not"

1 Corinthians 9:5 text "wife"; footnote "woman, sister"

Hebrews 2:10 text "pioneer"; better "author"

Hebrews 12:2 text "pioneer"; better "author"

Revelation 3:15 text "I will spew you out of my mouth."; better "I am about to vomit you out of my mouth."

Revelation 19:1,3,4,6 text "Hallelujah"; better "Alleluia"

[SFH]

I agree wholeheartedly. Not to mention the substitution of "steadfast love" for "mercy," "descendant" for "seed," etc. The list could go on and on.

Liturgiam Authenticam provides a nice summary of how a bible translation should be done (e.g., "Alleluia" rather than "Praise the LORD" and "Amen, amen" rather than "Truly, truly") and it doesn't take much of the RSV-CE to realize that the RSV-CE just doesn't cut it.

Strangely, I've raised these issues on a number of occasions and no one at Ignatius Press, including Fr. Fessio, has shown any interest in bringing the RSV-CE closer to the dictates of Liturgiam Authenticam or the Nova Vulgata. Perhaps, they are constrained by copyright laws. At any rate, they initially expressed interest in making some of the changes, but then went radio silent.

I've been doing my own translation of the Nova Vulgata, with references to the Hebrew and Greek text to make various passages a bit more specific, but I doubt I'll be done anytime soon, and I'll probably just do a small publication of 100 copies or so to some of my friends and family members who have asked for a copy.

I think the Douay Rheims Old Testament and the Confraternity New Testament is you best bet. (I have a 1948 translation Douay/Confraternity with a new translation of the Psalms taken from Pope Pius XII's Latin Psalter. The language is traditional thee/thou and used "Blessed is the man" rather than "Happy is the man" in Psalm 1. I think that's the closest you can come to the Nova Vulgata for now.)

God bless

[Manfred]

I had noticed that several volumes of the Ignatius Study Bible was using something called the RSV Second Catholic Edition. A spokesman (sorry, spokesperson ) for Ignatius claimed the Second CE had changes to conform to Liturgiam Authenticam. Naturally, I went to verify this and found it to not be true, as none of the guidelines proposed there, let alone any of those I would have suggested, had been incorporated.

I've never seen a copy of the Confraternity Psalms you mention; sounds as if they would be just about right, as opposed to the later Confraternity Version (1955, "Happy is the man..."), or the RSV-CE.

I still don't get the enormous resistance to an "official" English translation of the Nova Vulgata. I just wonder who is behind the perceived opposition. And I won't accept Pius XII's writing in Divino Afflante Spiritu as an answer!

[tee_eff_em]

I always get a kick (and a bit of a start ) out of the web page at the Vatican, Archive - Sacred Scripture, which reads:

The New American Bible
[English, Italian, Latin]

The New American Bible in Italian and Latin!?

tee

[tee_eff_em]

Over a year ago....

Originally Posted by tee_eff_em

I always get a kick (and a bit of a start ) out of the web page at the Vatican, Archive - Sacred Scripture, which reads:

The New American Bible
[English, Italian, Latin]

The New American Bible in Italian and Latin!?

I'm pleased to say I noticed today this oddity has been corrected -- It now reads: "The Bible...."

(Additionally there is a Spanish bible available too)


I don't know when it happened, nor who told them to do it. (Or: Maybe the Vatican Archivist reads this forum! )


tee

[SFH]

Originally Posted by Manfred

I had noticed that several volumes of the Ignatius Study Bible was using something called the RSV Second Catholic Edition. A spokesman (sorry, spokesperson ) for Ignatius claimed the Second CE had changes to conform to Liturgiam Authenticam. Naturally, I went to verify this and found it to not be true, as none of the guidelines proposed there, let alone any of those I would have suggested, had been incorporated.

I've never seen a copy of the Confraternity Psalms you mention; sounds as if they would be just about right, as opposed to the later Confraternity Version (1955, "Happy is the man..."), or the RSV-CE.

I still don't get the enormous resistance to an "official" English translation of the Nova Vulgata. I just wonder who is behind the perceived opposition. And I won't accept Pius XII's writing in Divino Afflante Spiritu as an answer!

My only complaint with the Nova Vulgata is that they followed St. Jerome's translation of the Greek Septuagint when it came to the Book of Psalms. As you probably know, the translation in the Douay-Rheims Bible is based on St. Jerome's translation from the Greek Septuagint not from the Hebrew. For whatever reason, the Nova Vulgata appears to have followed St. Jerome's translation from the Greek Septuagint (with corrections to conform it to the Hebrew text) rather than work with St. Jerome's translation from the Hebrew.

[DaveBj]

RSV-CE also needs a grammar check in those areas where they retained the Elizabethan English (the thee/thou/thy pronouns in those sections where God is addressed). I ran across one reading the other day where they mentioned "thy altar." It should have been "thine altar."


DaveBj

[tjmiller]

My copy of the Neo-Vulgate has two Psalters: one from the Hebrew, the other juxta LXX.

[SFH]

Originally Posted by tjmiller

My copy of the Neo-Vulgate has two Psalters: one from the Hebrew, the other juxta LXX.

Check your copy again. I suspect it isn't the Nova Vulgata but the critical edition of the Vulgate done by the Benedictines (which published both of St. Jerome's translations of Psalms).

I have both the Nova Vulgata and the Vulgate.

[Semper Fi]

There is supposed to be a 2nd edition of the RSV-CE out pretty soon. I hope they corrected all of these mentioned, because I am holding out on buying an RSV-CE until some of these are corrected.

[mmortal03]

There is some new information on the Ignatius Bible Second Catholic Edition here:

http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004...w_ignatiu.html

The above link includes important comments that people made about the original blog entry, which appears here:

http://www.jimmyakin.org/2006/02/revised_ignatiu.html

As for Liturgiam Authenticam, this was mentioned earlier in this thread:

Originally Posted by Manfred

I had noticed that several volumes of the Ignatius Study Bible was using something called the RSV Second Catholic Edition. A spokesman (sorry, spokesperson ) for Ignatius claimed the Second CE had changes to conform to Liturgiam Authenticam. Naturally, I went to verify this and found it to not be true, as none of the guidelines proposed there, let alone any of those I would have suggested, had been incorporated.

One thing to mention here then, is that one of the commentors (I believe from Ignatius Press) is again stating that "it is the *only* English language translation of the Bible updated specifically to correspond to Liturgiam Authenticam. Some of the "tweaking" to which I refer above is to bring the RSV into line with Liturgiam Authenticam."

Any comments?

[mccorm45]

I own a copy of the new 2nd edition of the Ignatius RSV Catholic Edition. Two of the main differences I have spotted so far are:


1) Matthew 16: Gates of Hades, instead of Powers of Death

2) Isaiah 7: Virgin, instead of young woman.

In both cases, the more classic understanding is in the main text, while the other is a footnote.

BTW: The paper quality is fantastic. In addition, there are maps at the end of the Bible.

It is definitely a huge step up from the original Ignatius Bible.

[awalt]

Which version did you buy on their site, the leather 39.95 version? I see there is a 19.95 and 29.95 version also? Thanks!

[mmortal03]

Originally Posted by DaveBj

RSV-CE also needs a grammar check in those areas where they retained the Elizabethan English (the thee/thou/thy pronouns in those sections where God is addressed). I ran across one reading the other day where they mentioned "thy altar." It should have been "thine altar."


DaveBj

There are 10 instances of "thy altar[s]" referenced here: http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/r...t=All&size=All

There is 1 instance of "thine altar" referenced here: http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/r...t=All&size=All

According to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thine , "In a deliberately archaic style, the forms with /n/ are used before words beginning with a vowel sound (thine eyes). This practice is irregularly followed in the King James Bible; it may have emerged as a later nicety archaic genitive case."

So, in actuality, the question becomes whether these verses are in the genitive or possessive case. If they are in the genitive case, in other words, God created the altar, then "thy altar" is grammatically correct, but they could have used "thine altar" because the noun starts with a vowel sound. If they are in the possessive case, God owns the altar, then it should be "thine altar". Since all of these cases are apparently refering to the same thing, it should be one or the other, for the sake of continuity, even though it could be either.

This, however, is not an issue anymore, as they have removed these archaisms from the Second Edition.

[DaveBj]

Originally Posted by mmortal03

There are 10 instances of "thy altar[s]" referenced here: http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/r...t=All&size=All

There is 1 instance of "thine altar" referenced here: http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/r...t=All&size=All

According to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thine , "In a deliberately archaic style, the forms with /n/ are used before words beginning with a vowel sound (thine eyes). This practice is irregularly followed in the King James Bible; it may have emerged as a later nicety archaic genitive case."

So, in actuality, the question becomes whether these verses are in the genitive or possessive case. If they are in the genitive case, in other words, God created the altar, then "thy altar" is grammatically correct, but they could have used "thine altar" because the noun starts with a vowel sound. If they are in the possessive case, God owns the altar, then it should be "thine altar". Since all of these cases are apparently refering to the same thing, it should be one or the other, for the sake of continuity, even though it could be either.

This, however, is not an issue anymore, as they have removed these archaisms from the Second Edition.

The genitive case is the possessive case. And the usage in the KJV is completely regular (= every time the possessed word starts with a vowel not preceded by a consonant, the -ne form is used).

I agree that the use of thee/thou/thy/thine is an archaism that should be removed.

DaveBj