1) The Revised Standard Version-Second Catholic
Edition remains the most popular translation as expressed by a majority of the
readers of this blog. Could you speak a little bit about how the RSV-2CE came
to be? Some of my readers have expressed a desire to know more about the
changes from the original RSV-CE, particularly since the RSV-2CE does more than
simply eliminate the archaic English from the text. One example would be the
additions found in Sirach 24 of the RSV-2CE. Another would be changes similar
to what we see in Luke 9:31, where “departure” was changed to the more literal
Greek rendering of “exodus”.
The history of the RSV2CE is straightforward.
We published for many years the so-called Blue Bible, the Ignatius Bible, the
Catholic Revised Standard Version. Many people loved it but some didn't like
that the occasional archaic language of the translation--the "thees" and "thous"
used in direct addressed to God. So we looked into a slight revision, while
still keeping the Blue Bible available. Meanwhile, in discussions with the
Congregation for Divine Worship, we became aware that some folks in the Vatican
wanted a Bible that fit better with the norms for liturgical translations as
found in Liturgiam Authenticam. So our edition of the Bible was reviewed by the
Congregation and several biblical experts to make it more in conformity to
Catholic liturgical use. That is why it's really a sort of RSV Catholic Edition
Plus--plus a more standard English reflecting the removal of the archaic
language and an enrichment of the translation of the text to reflect the
Church's liturgical tradition.
2) Are there any future plans to release the
RSV-2CE in different editions? Some readers have expressed a desire that Ignatius Press publish
a full RSV-2CE compact, as well as a large print edition.
The answer is "yes but". Right now, the focus is
on finishing the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. We have an "inexpensive" group
edition of the RSV2CE Ignatius Bible due out soon for the Year of Faith, which
will be very affordable for bulk purchases. The other things you mentioned--the
compact Bible and the large print Bible--are certainly things we're interested
in, if people have interest in using them! If folks have ideas for editions of
the Bibles they'd like to see, we're certainly willing to consider
them.
3) Since the NCCCUSA holds the copyright to the
RSV-2CE, is Ignatius Press limited in how it can utilize and promote the
translation?
Not as such. The NCCCUSA holds the copyright for
the underlying RSV Catholic translation. But the specific modifications to the
text are Ignatius Press' copyrighted changes and we have flexibility in what we
can do with the translation itself. In fact, there is a lectionary based on the
RSV2CE that is used in Africa and some other places for the celebration of the
Sacred Liturgy in English. Some folks would like to see it used here, as a
complementary lectionary text, but that's a matter for the USCCB to take
up.
4) The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible is widely
regarded as one of the best Catholic study Bibles on the market. Indeed, the
class I teach for the Catholic Biblical School of Michigan requires the ICSB as
its main textbook and all of my students are amazed at the quality and
comprehensiveness of the notes and other study aids contained in it. Could you
talk a little bit about how the ICSB came to be and how each volume is
evaluated?
Two words, really: Scott Hahn. He was the
original impetus for the project. With respect to the evaluation process for
each volume, it's kind of a dance. Curtis Mitch, a colleague of Scott Hahn's,
works to create the original draft materials, based on a number of
things--Scott's ideas, at least broadly conceived, and Curtis' own research. I
review the drafts and sometimes interact with other scholars about particular
points. Usually, I send my notes to Curtis who reviews things with Scott. We
sometimes go back and forth on things, but not often. I see my role as mainly to
raise questions (sometimes as a kind of devil's advocate, if I can use that
expression in connection with the Bible) and to speak for the average Catholic
in the pew to make sure the dynamic duo of Scott and Curtis, who are both
brilliant, by the way, don't leave the rest of us behind. The idea is that while
there is a broadly Hahnian inspiration for the interpretive moves in the
annotations and commentary, we don’t want any one exegetical vision to
dominate--in the way, say, Scofield's annotations dominated the original
Scofield Reference Bible. This is, after all, a Bible, not a straight
commentary. You can do a lot more by way of asserting your own exegetic opinions
in a commentary than in a Bible. People have a habit of investing annotations to
a Bible with more significance. And understandably so. Thus, we must be careful
not to give the impression that any particular scholar's view is, per se, one
and the same with "what the Bible says". Obviously, Scott and Curtis
agree.
5) Fr. Fessio, in an interview earlier this year,
mentioned that the completed ICSB may need to be published in two volumes. Is
this true? Some of my readers have mentioned that other study Bibles on the
market, like Zondervan’s NIV SB and Crossway’s ESV SB, contain just as much
information and are still able to be published not only in one volume, but also
in various sizes.
The plan right now is to have a single volume.
But there are a variety of factors here that we have to find a way, as
publishers, to fit together. One is the comprehensive quality of the commentary
and annotations. Another is readability of the text. Another still is the
physical size of the book. I expect, though, we'll be able to produce the entire
work, in a highly readable text, and a high quality book. Once we have
finished all the annotations and commentaries for the Old Testament, we will
have to make sure everything fits together. we had to do this with the New
Testament books. We wound up have to do some revisions of the already-published
New Testament content to make sure everything worked. And of course Scott Hahn,
being the ever-fertile scholar he is, had some revisions he thought important to
make, based on his own further study and input he had received.
6) When will we see future volumes of the ICSB
released? Dr. Scott Hahn mentioned on EWTN Bookmark earlier this year that the
ICSB project should be completed by 2014 or 2015 at the latest. Is that still
the plan?
Yes. I'd like to see it done by the end of 2013
but that's probably optimistic.
7)
Finally,
do you have a favorite passage or verse from the Bible? Why?
John 3:16. It says
it all.
26 comments:
Please, PLEASE produce the ISB in ONE volume. I don't care if it's big and expensive. I just want it in one volume.
The point is, it doesn't NEED to be big--witness the ESV Study Bible, which comes in various sizes. I don't understand why Mr. Brumley wasn't more forthcoming about the poor production choices his press has made in the past--not just book size, but poor binding, troublesome layout (the text in the "blue Bible" running directly into the gutters, the odd yellow paper used on the RSV-2CE, the terrible faux-leather cover on the first edition of same) and overall inattention to physical book quality. And, he still dodges the question of who actually made the changes to the RSV-2CE, in what places, for what reasons--and why was Liturgiam Authenticam followed in some sections and not others?
Perhaps Ignatius has been listing to customer critisism... The 2CE I bought for someone as a gift last year had white pages. On the other hand, I have owned and bought as gifts several of the Blue Bibles, and the quality of the binding has not improved, but seems to have worsened! The front and back signatures are glued on by a cardboard strip which sometimes even tears the paper, and the glue doesn't even stay well. The margins are not that bad when you break the book in, but as far as sewn bindings go, this one is in the bottom of the gutter! I am glad to hear they are working on making the ICSB a cool product, but please fix the old one, too! Maybe release it in blue genuine leather?
That's some rather strong criticism leveled against Mr. Brumley and Ignatius Press. I don't know if the complaints are fair/accurate since I don't own any Bibles made by this company, and so it's not a debate I'll wade into, but I think it might be good to at least start off with:
"Thanks for taking time to answer Timothy's questions for all of us. I'm sure we all appreciate that. I have some concerns about the books your company publishes...."
I think that it is a great that Ignatius is going to publish a low cost RSV-2CE for group study. It will be very useful for RCIA, teen confirmation and bible study classes!
I think that you go a long way in making the RSV-2CE more mainstream. Now Mr. Brumley, we older RCIA and Bible instructors need a large print edition so we can read out loud to those classes. Thank you for coming on the Catholic Bibles blog!
What I would really love to see personally, as someone who uses the RSV-2CE regularly, is a somewhat smaller lighter format, which contains more annotations without going so far as to be a full-fledged study Bible, perhaps culling some concise tidbits of useful information from the ICSB and sprinkling them throughout, along with some introductions to the books of the Bible. That would bring it on par with the offerings of other Catholic translations like the JB and the NAB.
It does seem odd that no one at Ignatius Press seems to know who made the changes to the RSV CE or what specific changes were made...these seem like such simple questions.....it shouldn't be hard to get an answer....I don't understand why no one seems to know the answers....
I mentioned to Mark that I would really like an RSV-2CE Reference Bible. This edition would include the text (perhaps with a slighly larger font), cross-references, and maps of the current edition, but also include a concise concordance, additional charts and maps conveniently located throughout the biblical text when appropriate, and even the 3-Year Sunday Mass readings. (Many of those extras already exist in the ICSB.)
I don't read Mr. Brumley as saying he does not know who edited the RSV-2CE and what edits and enrichments were made; he simply states that such edits and enrichments were made, without going into detail as to the particulars. Fr. Fessio did the same thing when he was asked the same question. I think it's unfortunate that the answer is not forthcoming, especially given the developments with the RSV-2CE's competition, the ESV, and the forthcoming English-language lectionaries in countries other than the US.
Actually, IIRC, the interview with Fr. Fessio said that there was no 'master list' so to speak of all the changes that had been made.....if they actually know I don't understand why they aren't willing to say....it's not a big deal and it is something that we would expect to be available for a revision to a Bible translation....go to the ESV website and they have pretty detailed lists of all the changes that have been made in the three editions of that translation....
I apologize for my whining, I do really appreciate the feedback regarding the Ignatius Bibles. Thank you Mr. Brumley!
Regarding the RSV-2CE revisions, the whole thing doesn't seem so mysterious to me. A publishing company wanted to make an updated version of a good (perhaps the best in modern english?) Catholic Bible. They prudently sought advice from the Congregation for Divine Worship which gave them suggestions regarding the readings. The changes were based on L.A. and modern english use. They made these changes and also revised non-lectionary passages accordingly. Unfortunately, they did not document all these changes in a computer program. I know that there was also a link to an interview with Fr. Fessio somewhere in the history of this blog that stated just as much.
And in case no one has mentioned this yet: thank you, Ignatius Press for the RSV-2CE!
Many thanks to Mark Brumley and Ignatius Press for this interview, and especially for the Ignatius Study Bible. I started reading the individual Ignatius Study Bible booklets probably almost ten years ago, and it has been very helpful to me (a Catholic layman with little prior Bible education) in gaining a deeper understanding of the Bible. I have heard some complaints about the format, but the format seems great to me -- both for the booklets and for the New Testament volume.
My thoughts exactly Jonny!
Great interview! Thank you. The Ignatius Study Bible is an amazing thing. I hope IP will look at Crossway's good and bad choices in producing their ESV Study Bible and take some cures from there. Another good resource is http://www.bibledesignblog.com
In critical time of our life whether it is about the strong decision like abortion of choosing the right partner referring the Bible can be the best suggested way to deal such situation. Thank you very much.
Thanks as always for this post, Tim.
But some mysteries remain:
(1) I have to wonder why ICPEL chose the ESV w/Apocrypha over the RSV-2E, when they clearly wanted an "updated RSV-CE". Did ICPEL reject RSV-2E on the merits or was there some legal (copyright) reason. (Of course, this is really a question for ICPEL, but it seems to me there is some part of the story not being told.)
(2) It seems odd to say on the one hand that Ignatius's is focused on the ICSB, when it is at best years away and it has been so poorly promoted.
(3) I still feel there is not very much transparency on the RSV-2CE changes. Who did those changes? What criteria were exactly used?
They rejected the RSV because it is a 60 year old translation and is based on outdated scholarship....sure, the Catholic Edition is only 46 years old, and the second is only 6 years old, but those are only re-edits of the 1952 edition, not new translations, and are based on the same exact scholarship as the 1952 RSV....they believe, I think rightly, that they should use a translation which reflects 21st century scholarship and not mid 20th century scholarship.....they originally wanted the NRSV, but the NCC said no....so they went to the ESV as the next best thing....
The ESV is still based on the 1952 RSV, but reflects modern scholarship
Ultimately we're probably never going to get more information about Theophrastus' #3 than what Fr. Fessio wrote on this blog four years ago:
The answer to the third question (why the secrecy about the changes?) will answer the second (what are they?). We didn't keep a list of the changes. We accepted some the CDW made without discussion; others we discussed and sometimes made them, sometimes convinced the CDW there was no need to make them, or an alternative was better. This process took *years*. I'm not sure we evan have the materials that would show which changes were made.
They didn't keep track of the changes and they were probably made by the various staff members of Ignatius Press and the CDW over the 1990s. With the new ESV lectionary and NABRE revision projects we might get two more data points to ID what exactly LA requires, and hopefully ICPEL and the USCCB will keep better notes than the Ignatius Press editors.
I'll stick with my RSV-2CE, even if it based upon 60 years old scholarship! It still refers to the DSS as textual evidence for the OT, and much of the archaic language has been cleaned up. And it is used in the English speaking mass in a few places in the world. So what is missing that is so important?
Can you compare passages, where the RSV-2CE reflects outdated scholarship and the ESV - modern scholarship?
Well for one thing NT in the RSV CE and 2CE is based on the Nestle Aland 17th edition....the ESV is based on the 27th edition, likewise in the OT the ESV consulted the Dead Sea Scrolls, the RSV weren't able to consult anything except the Issiah scroll....but realistically, the differences between the ESV and RSV are not dramatic...something like 95% of the text is identical, it's just that the ESV is more recent.
I'm not saying that the RSV is a bad translation, not at all, in fact, it's probably my favorite translation, however an honest person has to admit that it is outdated in certain respects, not so outdated to be useless, but outdated enough that you do not probably want to use it for the liturgy...
And to put it into perspective, the RSV is a translation from my grandparent's generation....that's kind of old.
I know it would be a lot of work for someone, but couldn't one in theory compare the texts of the RSV-CE and the RSV-2CE to come up with a list of the changes? Not that I'm volunteering for the task... If someone has electronic copies, there may be some way to compare electronically?
Charles,
The one tool that is available in this task would be the RSV Concordance published by Emmaus Road. It contains, in the back, a mini Concordance which shows the changes to the RSV-2CE.
Well I am currnetly doing research to see if it might be possible to write a simple computer program that could scan text and note the differences......if it's not too hard I can probably write the program myself.
Update: it is actually very easy with a simple Unix command to do this.....my problem is that although it is easy to get a digital copy of the RSV CE 2,I can't get a digital copy of the RSV CE first edition....if anybody knows where I can get a digital scan of the RSV CE 1966 edition....let me know....and I can perform the scan and compile a list of differences...
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/r/rsv/
This has the RSV (1952/71) text, though not the Catholic amendments.
Marlowe's Bible Researcher website has a link to a listing of the variations across all the RSV editions too.
Post a Comment