The team at Drawn to Faith is excited to introduce their first Catholic journaling bible. This new journaling bible is perfect for any Catholic who wants to build a stronger relationship with Christ through creative worship. This bible is printed with a single column and over three inches of margin space for journaling, drawing, hand lettering, and even watercolor! The paper in this bible is five times thicker than standard bible paper, and the large format allows for maximum journaling space.
- -All bible verses from the Catholic Bible
- -Each book contains a full page illustration perfect for coloring
- -Premium matte finish paperback cover design
- -Perfect for all coloring & watercolor mediums
- -High quality 60 pound paper stock
- -Large format 8.5" wide x 11.0" tall pages
I would love to see more of these type of bibles. I own The Message Canvas Bible which is fantastic!
That's a rather interesting bible translation being used there (for copyright reasons, I presume). The CPDV is online here http://www.sacredbible.org/ and apparently a completed one-man-project of turning the Douay-Rheims-Challoner into modern English in view of matching the (Old) Vulgate. I would love to see this done professionally. (Not that I know that this wasn't professionally done, and I haven't really evaluated this translation to the limits of my own Latin. I'm just prejudicially cautious about any one-man-project.)
I grew up treating all books as semi-holy objects. Hence highlighting, underlining or writing in any book makes me cringe a little bit. Doubly so for an actually holy book, and triply so for adding (amateur) illustrations.
I'm not at all saying that to spoil the spiritual enjoyment of people who are into this. Good on them! It's just interesting to me that this is such a big thing, apparently... To me it's like suddenly lots of people being into mustard ice cream with pickles. Weird.
It is a print on demand book, and if you look at comments on Amazon, they must have uploaded the wrong file at first. It looks like an attractive book, though for an older person like myself, even underlining any book is a form of sacrilege.
I'd be curious what others think of this translation as well. I know the translator, Ron Conte has some, shall we say unique theological views, but that may not nessesarly mean his translation is totally off the mark. I am fascinated by his stated goals of trying to make a modern translation of the Vulgate. Still I don't know Latin and his translation does not have any ecclesial approval that I'm aware of, so I have a hard time feeling comfortable with this Bible. Any here been able to evaluate this work in any kind of rigorous way?
In regards to underlining books, especially Bibles, it's one reason I enjoy reading books on a Kindle: I can highlight passages to my heart's content knowing that I'm not actually damaging the book.
Dude, the CPDV has at least one physically printed Bible?
Going places now! ;D
I wonder if Mr. Conte knows about it...
If you check on his website, there is on demand printing of the entire CPDV in either multiple volume large print or single volume regular print. Reasonably cheap, too.
I would have gone for the single volume out of curiosity. Except there is a relatively lengthy errata list online, and apparently only the errata up to 2010 have been corrected in the printed version.
Why on earth the files for on demand printing haven't been corrected (in seven years) is a mystery to me. It means a lost sale for Mr Conte. It's the little things...
They actually published this a long time ago and I even provided a link to it in a comment to an earlier post concerning the question of journaling Catholic Bibles.
The cover isn't exactly unisex and I haven't seen any other cover design that would be appealing to a male audience. Just saying...
What on Earth is a 'journaling Bible?'
Have you seen medieval illuminated manuscripts? Well, journalling is a modern amateur / hobbyist / home-made version of that.
A journalling bible is simply a regular bible with massive amounts of "margin" space (about a third of the page is empty space typically), so that there is plenty of room to add pictures, artistic script, etc. that illustrates the word.
While much of what is being produced there is not going to win art prizes or inspire coming generations on artistic merits, I actually think this is a good thing. Just like I think amateur singing and even Karaoke are good things - there is no "high art" without a solid base of amateur interest, and I for one would love illumination to return to bibles.
This is something I could see myself attempting, unlike text underlining / highlighting and writing comments in the margins. Creating art with the intention to enhance one's own (and perhaps other's) appreciation of the bible seems like a good thing to me, even if one isn't particularly good at it from a technical point of view.
I would be very cautious about anything that has anything to do with Ron Conte.
He is a very troubling individual , there are multiple entire websites devoted to exposing his heretical and cultish teachings.
I would not touch this journaling bible with a ten foot pole for the simple fact it uses a "translation" made by Ron Conte Jr.
The Douay Rheims has no copyright and is an approved translation - they should've went with that.
I agree with Jason, the Drawn to Faith team should have used the DR.
I don't know why Conte didn't just replace obsolete words and words that have changed meaning. Some of the English in this translation is ugly, for example he uses 'darknesses' instead of darkness in Genesis.
I've never read, or attempted to read, the CPDV, but I have read the introduction to the text, and frankly, that was enough to permanently put me off ever reading the rest. I concur that Conte has some very extreme, fringe beliefs that do not represent the mainstream of Catholic thought.
He wrote darknesses because that is what the Latin says: "tenebrae."
The Latin bible is actually very interesting to read and interpret because of underlying nuances. Too often when I hear about Latin and the Church, it usually centers around the liturgy or about how people can't understand or even how the Vulgate was "abandoned" to make way for modern translations based off of the original languages.
I don't hear about the merits of this translation. And by merits I mean its peculiarities that make it a good text for meditating on and understanding God's word.
"Darknesses" for example. I think that is a more interesting and telling picture about what was going on Creation. That "small' difference really helps to establish a time of chaos by imagining a time of various shadows....
"Darknesses" is not good English. If there are nuances, I would prefer them from the original language, not Latin.
'If there are nuances, I would prefer them from the original language, not Latin."
That's not a Catholic mindset there.
Even though some radical traditionalist Catholic do exaggerate it sometimes even going so far as to claim that the Vulgate is 'divinely inspired', the fact of the matter is that, both historically and theologically, the Vulgate is an extremely important translation. The fact that the Vulgate is as old and highly esteemed as it is, and given its influence, it is an important testimony to the way that Catholics have historically understood the Bible.
I don't think it would be an exaggeration to say that, in the west, the Vulgate has actually much more influence than the original Greek and Hebrew texts of the Bible. For nearly 1,000 years, virtually all knowledge of Greek and Hebrew disappeared in the west, and the Latin Vulgate was the ONLY Bible that anyone read because no one was capable of reading the original languages.
it is, I think, significant, that while there are about 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, there are more than 10,000 Latin manuscripts of the New Testament, nearly twice as many. That statistic alone really shows you how important the Vulgate is to Western Christianity.
The Catholic Church does not share the Protestant fixation on 'the original languages' and trying to find 'the oldest Greek and Hebrew texts' of the Bible. As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the Vulgate, being the product of 5th century Patristic scholarship, and that 5th-century scholarship was itself the product of a tradition going back to the earliest Latin translations of the Bible which seem to have been done sometime in the second century, is far more reliable than the critical Greek and Hebrew texts which are used today, and are based on 19th and 20th century scholarship.
The way I see it, St Jerome and his predecessors and successors are far more reliable that Erasmus and his successors.
Given the monumental importance of the Vulgate, I think there is great value in a modern English translation of the Vulgate. Too bad there really isn't one, not even Knox, because his version doesn't use modern English.
Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint have been grossly undervalued in our own time, due to this misguided modern mindset that only 'the original languages' are important.
"That's not a Catholic mindset there.
Even though some radical traditionalist Catholic do exaggerate it sometimes even going so far as to claim that the Vulgate is 'divinely inspired', the fact of the matter is that, both historically and theologically, the Vulgate is an extremely important translation. The fact that the Vulgate is as old and highly esteemed as it is, and given its influence, it is an important testimony to the way that Catholics have historically understood the Bible."
Trust me y'all, the Latin's nuances can be quite beautiful. Another example would be Luke 1: 30.
"Maria invenisti enim gratiam APUD Deum;" instead of just using the more common "cum," here we have a word that means to be in the company of others/someone, or even "under one's house" in the sense of enjoying their protection/ rule/ or being part of their household. Honestly, the Latin can be quite beautiful and, like I have said before, great for meditation!
"Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint have been grossly undervalued in our own time, due to this misguided modern mindset that only 'the original languages' are important."
Also this ^
The problem is someone who translates "tenebrae" as "darknesses", which is nonsense in English, either hasn't really understood the Latin, or isn't accomplished enough in English (even if he is a native speaker), or at the very least has not understood the principles of translation. If your translation is nonsense in the target language, it's not a translation.
I hear you concerning the English word choice. I probably would have gone with "shades of darkness," shadowy darkness," or even "dark shades."
Isn't "tenebrae" = "shadows"?
(or is there a clearer [even if longer] translation... Explicitly, which connotations are in the original?
Yes it does mean "shadows", which is a dark "thing" in and of itslef if you know what I mean. My suggested translations only try to emphasize the darkness so I guess you could say I was being dynamic or optimal :)
Post a Comment