The RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE series of posts come up from time to time when I notice something changed in the second edition from the original. The changes that interest me are not so much the ones concerned with the removal of archaic language, but substantial alteration, like the change from "powers of death" to "hades" in Matthew 16:18. Since Ignatius Press hasn't provided a list of these changes, I hope you find these posts helpful. By the way, while on this occasion I noticed the difference while I was reading from the RSV-2CE, there is a source for looking up the changes and that is Emmaus Road's Catholic Bible Concordance RSV-CE. If you use the RSV-CE or RSV-2CE you really need to own this concordance.
This new change I noticed when I was reading through the Pauline Epistles. I found that the RSV-2CE translated the Greek word anthropos more literally as "man" and not as "nature" as found in the original RSV. If you compare how this term is translated in most other translations, you will see that even literal ones, like the NASB, go with either "self" or "nature." The Douay-Rheims and KJV went with "man" while Msgr. Knox rendered anthropos with "self."
Below are the instances from the NT in the RSV-CE:
RSV-CE(2CE):
"So we do not lose heart. Though our outer nature (man) is wasting away, our
inner nature (man) is being renewed every day." --2 Corinthians 4:16
"Put off your old nature (man) which belongs to your former manner of life and is
corrupt through deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit
of your minds, and put on the new nature (man), created after the likeness of
God in true righteousness and holiness." --Ephesians 4:22-24
"Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old nature (man) with its
practices and have put on the new nature (man), which is being renewed
in knowledge after the image of its creator." --Colossians 3: 9-10
Showing posts with label RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Sunday, September 16, 2012
RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE
I spotted this minor change during the second reading of this morning's Mass. The reading came from James 2:14-18, which I was reading in my pew with the original RSV-CE.
The RSV-CE reads: "If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food"
The RSV-2CE reads: "If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and in lack of daily food"
The change in the RSV-2CE is preferred to the original because very few people, if any, uses the term "ill-clad." While this is certainly not a major change, it is a reminder that the RSV-2CE has been revised more than simply getting rid of the "thees" and "thous". I have tried, over the past few years, to chronicle those differences, including not only the use of "chalice" in the Gospels and Psalms, "virgin" in Is. 7:14, and "exodus" in Luke 9:31, but also some of the additions and changes found in the wisdom literature of the Old Testament. I know that there are many more.
If any of you happen to spot any other changes, I am always interested in taking note of them. So please let me know. The only real way we can note the difference are through comparison reading of both editions, as well as by using the Emmaus Road RSV Concordance.
While I think the RSV-2CE remains the best translation available for English speaking Catholics, I continue to be dismayed at how little Ignatius Press does to promote it and to show, in detail, the changes that were made to the Second Edition. Perhaps this will change in the coming years with the completion of the the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, slated for completion in 2014 or 2015. I just hope that they realize that this completed study Bible needs to come in a one-volume edition that is able to be brought to Bible studies and classes. Fr. Fessio has hinted that that it may only come in two volumes, which will ultimately make the ICSB simply a reference book, not a true study Bible IMHO. If the NIV and ESV Study Bible, which have just as much commentary and come in color, can come in various sizes, so should the ICSB. Also, since it seems that the RSV-2CE will never become the main lectionary in larger English-speaking dioceses of the world, they should use their resources on maintaining the RSV-2CE as the best translation for serious study. So, focus on providing additional study aids to work with and suppliment the RSV-2CE and study Bible.(OK, I am done.)
The RSV-CE reads: "If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food"
The RSV-2CE reads: "If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and in lack of daily food"
The change in the RSV-2CE is preferred to the original because very few people, if any, uses the term "ill-clad." While this is certainly not a major change, it is a reminder that the RSV-2CE has been revised more than simply getting rid of the "thees" and "thous". I have tried, over the past few years, to chronicle those differences, including not only the use of "chalice" in the Gospels and Psalms, "virgin" in Is. 7:14, and "exodus" in Luke 9:31, but also some of the additions and changes found in the wisdom literature of the Old Testament. I know that there are many more.
If any of you happen to spot any other changes, I am always interested in taking note of them. So please let me know. The only real way we can note the difference are through comparison reading of both editions, as well as by using the Emmaus Road RSV Concordance.
While I think the RSV-2CE remains the best translation available for English speaking Catholics, I continue to be dismayed at how little Ignatius Press does to promote it and to show, in detail, the changes that were made to the Second Edition. Perhaps this will change in the coming years with the completion of the the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, slated for completion in 2014 or 2015. I just hope that they realize that this completed study Bible needs to come in a one-volume edition that is able to be brought to Bible studies and classes. Fr. Fessio has hinted that that it may only come in two volumes, which will ultimately make the ICSB simply a reference book, not a true study Bible IMHO. If the NIV and ESV Study Bible, which have just as much commentary and come in color, can come in various sizes, so should the ICSB. Also, since it seems that the RSV-2CE will never become the main lectionary in larger English-speaking dioceses of the world, they should use their resources on maintaining the RSV-2CE as the best translation for serious study. So, focus on providing additional study aids to work with and suppliment the RSV-2CE and study Bible.(OK, I am done.)
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Which is More Important:Translation or Edition?
I have been reflecting on the subject of this post for the past couple of days. I find that while I certainly have a preference for one translation over the others, see the various "Top Five Bibles" I have done during the past few years here, I find myself more attracted to using a Bible that is more functional, even if it isn't my preferred translation. Case in point, it is well known that my favorite Bible edition is the Cambridge NRSV Reference Bible with Apocrypha. I love the size, binding, premium leather cover, maps, cross-references, glossary, and overall feel and look of this Bible far more than any other Bible I own. It meets more of my daily needs than any other edition, no matter the translation. Yet, I tend to prefer the NABRE or RSV-2CE over the NRSV for various reasons. Although I think all three translations are quite good and very comparable, the NRSV just happens to be #3 for me these days. (I am quite comfortable using all three in almost any setting.) So, I find myself more and more being willing to use my third ranked translation as my everyday Bible precisely because it is packaged in an edition that contains those particular elements which I find attractive in a Bible edition.
I am curious to hear from you, my faithful readers, as to your thoughts on this subject?
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Sirach 24 in the RSV-2CE
So I was reading through Sirach 24 in the RSV-2CE recently and noticed that there are quite a few additions to it, in comparison with the original RSV-CE. As we have noted in some previous posts, the RSV-2CE does choose to side with the Douay-Rheims in a number of instances, against the RSV-CE. Whether that is a good or bad thing is not so much my concern, but rather it is frustrating that the RSV-2CE is lacking important textual notes indicating why a particular verse has been added (or removed). Sirach 24, in many ways, is a perfect example. Here are a few:
Sirach 24:1
Wisdom will praise herself, and will glory in the midst of her people. (RSV-CE)
Wisdom will praise herself and is honored by God, and will glory in the midst of her people. (RSV-2CE)
Wisdom shall praise her own self, and shall be honoured in God, and shall glory in the midst of her people. (DR)
Sirach 24:2
In the assembly of the Most High she will open her mouth, and in the presence of his host she will glory. (RSV-CE)
In the assembly of the Most High she will open her mouth, and in the presence of his host she will glory. In the midst of her people she is exalted; in holy fulness she is admired. In the multitude of the chosen she fins praise, and among the blessed she is blessed. (RSV-2CE)
And shall open her mouth in the churches of the most High, and shall glorify herself in the sight of his power, And in the midst of her own people she shall be exalted, and shall be admired in the holy assembly. And in the multitude of the elect she shall have praise, and among the blessed she shall be blessed. (DR v. 2-4)
Sirach 24:3
I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, and covered the earth like a mist. (RSV-CE)
I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, the first-born before all creatures. I ordained that an unfailing light should arise in the heavens, and covered the earth like a mist. (RSV-2CE)
I came out of the mouth of the most High, the firstborn before all creatures:
I made that in the heavens there should rise light that never faileth, and as a cloud I covered all the earth. (DR v. 5-6)
Sirach 24:12
I took root in an honored people, in the portion of the Lord, who is their inheritance. (RSV-CE)
I took root in an honored people, in the portion of the Lord, who is their inheritance, and my abode was in the full assembly of the saints. (RSV-2CE)
And I took root in an honourable people, and in the portion of my God his inheritance, and my abode is in the full assembly of saints. (DR 16)
Putting textual criticism issues aside for the moment, why are there no textual notes in the RSV-2CE to indicate these changes? Again, remember, there isn't even a preface to the RSV-2CE which states their philosophy for the 2nd Edition. The one thing that is very clear to me, the more I read the RSV-2CE, is that not only was the editing selective and geared toward lining it up with the Douay-Rheims, but that the description of the revision given by Ignatius as "minor revisions to some of the archaic language used in the first edition" is not telling the whole story. It is more extensive than that, and the only tool we have to seeing the changes does not come from Ignatius Press, but through the RSV Concordance offered by Emmaus Road.
Sirach 24:1
Wisdom will praise herself, and will glory in the midst of her people. (RSV-CE)
Wisdom will praise herself and is honored by God, and will glory in the midst of her people. (RSV-2CE)
Wisdom shall praise her own self, and shall be honoured in God, and shall glory in the midst of her people. (DR)
Sirach 24:2
In the assembly of the Most High she will open her mouth, and in the presence of his host she will glory. (RSV-CE)
In the assembly of the Most High she will open her mouth, and in the presence of his host she will glory. In the midst of her people she is exalted; in holy fulness she is admired. In the multitude of the chosen she fins praise, and among the blessed she is blessed. (RSV-2CE)
And shall open her mouth in the churches of the most High, and shall glorify herself in the sight of his power, And in the midst of her own people she shall be exalted, and shall be admired in the holy assembly. And in the multitude of the elect she shall have praise, and among the blessed she shall be blessed. (DR v. 2-4)
Sirach 24:3
I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, and covered the earth like a mist. (RSV-CE)
I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, the first-born before all creatures. I ordained that an unfailing light should arise in the heavens, and covered the earth like a mist. (RSV-2CE)
I came out of the mouth of the most High, the firstborn before all creatures:
I made that in the heavens there should rise light that never faileth, and as a cloud I covered all the earth. (DR v. 5-6)
Sirach 24:12
I took root in an honored people, in the portion of the Lord, who is their inheritance. (RSV-CE)
I took root in an honored people, in the portion of the Lord, who is their inheritance, and my abode was in the full assembly of the saints. (RSV-2CE)
And I took root in an honourable people, and in the portion of my God his inheritance, and my abode is in the full assembly of saints. (DR 16)
Putting textual criticism issues aside for the moment, why are there no textual notes in the RSV-2CE to indicate these changes? Again, remember, there isn't even a preface to the RSV-2CE which states their philosophy for the 2nd Edition. The one thing that is very clear to me, the more I read the RSV-2CE, is that not only was the editing selective and geared toward lining it up with the Douay-Rheims, but that the description of the revision given by Ignatius as "minor revisions to some of the archaic language used in the first edition" is not telling the whole story. It is more extensive than that, and the only tool we have to seeing the changes does not come from Ignatius Press, but through the RSV Concordance offered by Emmaus Road.
Monday, December 20, 2010
The Longevity of the RSV-2CE?
Over this past weekend, I spent some time reading and thinking about the RSV-2CE a bit. The question that kept coming up in my mind was whether or not the RSV-2CE would ever become a standard Catholic Bible for most English speaking Catholics. Part of this questioning on my part comes from a number of emails I have received from readers over the past couple years asking me which is better, the original RSV-CE or the new RSV-2CE. For me, it is a tough question to answer and not as clean cut as I would expect. When looking on choosing between the two RSV’s, I tend to focus on three general areas: Translation, Resources, and Marketing/Promotion/Outreach.
Translation
As pointed out in numerous posts on this blog, the RSV-CE and REV-2CE, while being very close, do contain some subtle differences. While certainly the most obvious difference is that the RSV-2CE has eliminated all archaic language, it still maintains the exact style and sentence structure as the original. Sometimes the comparison is made between the RSV-2CE and the ESV. I am not sure that comparison, however, is valid, since for the most part the RSV-2CE is not a true revision of the RSV, but rather a selective update of it. You can go back to some previous posts here to look at some of my reflections on this.
Another issue that surrounds the production of the RSV-2CE is how it is in conformity with Liturgiam Authenticam. On recent post, an anonymous comment stated: “I also think the RSV-2CE is a tad bit deceptive when it claims to be translated in conformity with Liturgiam Authenticam. As most people who've read LA know, one of the recommendations from LA was that Hebrew and Aramaic words like "Amen," "Raca," "Maranatha," and "Alleluia" not be translated like they are in the RSV. Given all the ridiculous changes made by Ignatius Press (e.g., "ass" to "donkey," "babe" to "baby," etc.), surely they could have make these other changes too. Hopefully, the next printing will include these changes.”
I think he (or she) makes some valid points. We do have some insight into the mind of Ignatius Press, with the comments left by Ignatius Press Editor Fr. Fessio almost two years ago. It might be worth checking those out again and evaluating them. I think a little more clarity on this issue from Ignatius Press would go a long way. Perhaps in a future edition of the RSV-2CE, they could add a new preface, not simply the old 1966 one.
The last thing to point out in regards to translation is that they both have the same textual basis. Quoting from an earlier post of mine: “The RSV-2CE's textual basis is still the one used by translators of the original RSV OT and NT. According to Philip Comfort's Essential Guide to Bible Translations: "The Old Testament translators generally followed the Masoretic Text. At the same time, they introduced a few different renderings bases on the famous Dead Seas Scroll of Isaiah." Thus, only the initial findings of the Dead Sea Scrolls were used for the OT. The Deuterocanonical/Apocrypha books were not changed from the original RSV. As for the New Testament, the RSV-2CE retains the textual basis behind the original RSV NT, which used primarily the seventeenth edition of the Nestle text (1941). None of the modifications done in the 1971 edition of the RSV NT are found in the RSV-2CE.” Thus, the textual basis for both RSV's is well over fifty years old.
Resources
Basically, both translations can be used with such Bible study tools like Emmaus Road’s RSV Concordance (which includes the RSV-2CE changes in an appendix), the Navarre series, or even the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. Since they are so similar, there is really no issue. However, will there be future study tools that utilize the RSV-2CE over the RSV-CE? I am not sure. Certainly the slow-to-finish Ignatius Catholic Study Bible utilizes the RSV-2CE, but I can also point out that the Navarre Bibles as well as the recently released Catholic Scripture Study International Study Bible from St. Benedict Press went with the RSV-CE. So, I guess only time will tell on this issue. If I were to guess right now, I would think there would be more use of the original RSV.
Marketing/Promotion/Outreach
The original RSV-CE is over forty years old, but maintains a strong following in Catholic academic, apologetic, as well as Bible study circles. Certainly the influx of converts to the Catholic Church, many with high views of Scripture like Scott Hahn, has helped make the RSV-CE more mainstream. Oxford University Press continues to print the New Oxford Annotated Bible-RSV as well as individual readers editions of the RSV-CE. The original RSV-CE continues to be published by Ignatius Press and St. Benedict Press. St Benedict Press, in particular, has produced some very attractive editions over the past year or so, and I would think that there would be some more in the future, hopefully including cross-references.
The RSV-2CE should be promoted more than it is currently. The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, which is a fantastic resource that utilizes the RSV-2CE, is under promoted and unless the average Catholic sees it at a local bookstore, he or she probably doesn’t know it even exists.
Conclusion
This is of course my opinion, but I think the RSV-2CE will remain a niche translation. The RSV-CE is well established and published by more than one publishing house. It continues to live on in many different study tools, as well as devotional books. While there is much to like about the RSV-2CE, the fact that it is not promoted more broadly by Ignatius and does not come in various editions and style will keep its “popularity” fairly low in the overall Catholic Bible market.
Ultimately, the question is this: If you were a regular Catholic, who did not know the differences between the various Catholic translations, and wandered into a Barnes and Noble or Borders to buy a Catholic Bible, which one would you likely purchase? Most likely an NAB or NRSV, simply because there are more of them available, in many more attractive editions.
Translation
As pointed out in numerous posts on this blog, the RSV-CE and REV-2CE, while being very close, do contain some subtle differences. While certainly the most obvious difference is that the RSV-2CE has eliminated all archaic language, it still maintains the exact style and sentence structure as the original. Sometimes the comparison is made between the RSV-2CE and the ESV. I am not sure that comparison, however, is valid, since for the most part the RSV-2CE is not a true revision of the RSV, but rather a selective update of it. You can go back to some previous posts here to look at some of my reflections on this.
Another issue that surrounds the production of the RSV-2CE is how it is in conformity with Liturgiam Authenticam. On recent post, an anonymous comment stated: “I also think the RSV-2CE is a tad bit deceptive when it claims to be translated in conformity with Liturgiam Authenticam. As most people who've read LA know, one of the recommendations from LA was that Hebrew and Aramaic words like "Amen," "Raca," "Maranatha," and "Alleluia" not be translated like they are in the RSV. Given all the ridiculous changes made by Ignatius Press (e.g., "ass" to "donkey," "babe" to "baby," etc.), surely they could have make these other changes too. Hopefully, the next printing will include these changes.”
I think he (or she) makes some valid points. We do have some insight into the mind of Ignatius Press, with the comments left by Ignatius Press Editor Fr. Fessio almost two years ago. It might be worth checking those out again and evaluating them. I think a little more clarity on this issue from Ignatius Press would go a long way. Perhaps in a future edition of the RSV-2CE, they could add a new preface, not simply the old 1966 one.
The last thing to point out in regards to translation is that they both have the same textual basis. Quoting from an earlier post of mine: “The RSV-2CE's textual basis is still the one used by translators of the original RSV OT and NT. According to Philip Comfort's Essential Guide to Bible Translations: "The Old Testament translators generally followed the Masoretic Text. At the same time, they introduced a few different renderings bases on the famous Dead Seas Scroll of Isaiah." Thus, only the initial findings of the Dead Sea Scrolls were used for the OT. The Deuterocanonical/Apocrypha books were not changed from the original RSV. As for the New Testament, the RSV-2CE retains the textual basis behind the original RSV NT, which used primarily the seventeenth edition of the Nestle text (1941). None of the modifications done in the 1971 edition of the RSV NT are found in the RSV-2CE.” Thus, the textual basis for both RSV's is well over fifty years old.
Resources
Basically, both translations can be used with such Bible study tools like Emmaus Road’s RSV Concordance (which includes the RSV-2CE changes in an appendix), the Navarre series, or even the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. Since they are so similar, there is really no issue. However, will there be future study tools that utilize the RSV-2CE over the RSV-CE? I am not sure. Certainly the slow-to-finish Ignatius Catholic Study Bible utilizes the RSV-2CE, but I can also point out that the Navarre Bibles as well as the recently released Catholic Scripture Study International Study Bible from St. Benedict Press went with the RSV-CE. So, I guess only time will tell on this issue. If I were to guess right now, I would think there would be more use of the original RSV.
Marketing/Promotion/Outreach
The original RSV-CE is over forty years old, but maintains a strong following in Catholic academic, apologetic, as well as Bible study circles. Certainly the influx of converts to the Catholic Church, many with high views of Scripture like Scott Hahn, has helped make the RSV-CE more mainstream. Oxford University Press continues to print the New Oxford Annotated Bible-RSV as well as individual readers editions of the RSV-CE. The original RSV-CE continues to be published by Ignatius Press and St. Benedict Press. St Benedict Press, in particular, has produced some very attractive editions over the past year or so, and I would think that there would be some more in the future, hopefully including cross-references.
The RSV-2CE should be promoted more than it is currently. The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, which is a fantastic resource that utilizes the RSV-2CE, is under promoted and unless the average Catholic sees it at a local bookstore, he or she probably doesn’t know it even exists.
Conclusion
This is of course my opinion, but I think the RSV-2CE will remain a niche translation. The RSV-CE is well established and published by more than one publishing house. It continues to live on in many different study tools, as well as devotional books. While there is much to like about the RSV-2CE, the fact that it is not promoted more broadly by Ignatius and does not come in various editions and style will keep its “popularity” fairly low in the overall Catholic Bible market.
Ultimately, the question is this: If you were a regular Catholic, who did not know the differences between the various Catholic translations, and wandered into a Barnes and Noble or Borders to buy a Catholic Bible, which one would you likely purchase? Most likely an NAB or NRSV, simply because there are more of them available, in many more attractive editions.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE: Psalm 85
Back in December I devoted a series of posts looking at the differences between the old RSV-CE and the Ignatius RSV-2CE. In these posts, I was not concerned so much about the elimination of the archaic language, which is both substantial and helpful to the modern Bible reader, but rather the various undocumented changes to the actual translation. In most cases, I found that the updated RSV-2CE was correct in making the adjustments it did, and really the only case which I found somewhat unnecessary was the use of "chalice" instead of "cup". Of course, this whole process of spotting the differences between the two would have been helped by a little more specific information from Ignatius Press, but nothing, as far as I know, has ever been released. The only real help, besides actually reading both editions side by side, came with the publication of the Emmaus Press Catholic Bible Concordance, which contained a section at the back noting the differences. As noted, the changes were significant. I have always wondered how the changes in the RSV-2CE matched up with the changes found in the other recent update of the original RSV, the English Standard Version. Perhaps we will never know.
This brings me to this post, which came about through my reading of Psalm 85 last night with my wife. We are still using the fine book Praying the Psalms with the Early Christians as a nightly devotional, which I highly recommend. While reading through it, which uses the original RSV-CE as it's base text, I noticed that there are a few translational choices that were made, outside of the elimination of the archaic language. So I have decided to show the original RSV-CE below, with the main translational differences in the RSV-2CE found in bold where appropriate:
Psalm 85
LORD, thou wast favorable to thy land;
thou didst restore the fortunes (captives) of Jacob.
Thou didst forgive the iniquity of thy people;
thou didst pardon all their sin. [Selah]
Thou didst withdraw all thy wrath;
thou didst turn from thy hot anger.
Restore us again, O God of our salvation,
and put away thy indignation toward us!
Wilt thou be angry with us for ever?
Wilt thou prolong thy anger to all generations?
Wilt thou not revive us again,
that thy people may rejoice in thee?
Show us thy steadfast (merciful) love, O LORD,
and grant us thy salvation.
Let me hear what God the LORD will speak,
for he will speak peace to his people,
to his saints, to those who turn to him in their hearts.
Surely his salvation is at hand for those who fear him,
that glory may dwell in our land.
Steadfast love (Mercy) and faithfulness will meet;
righteousness and peace will kiss each other.
Faithfulness will spring up from the ground,
and righteousness will look down from the sky (heaven).
Yea, the LORD will give what is good,
and our land will yield its increase.
Righteousness will go before him,
and make his footsteps a way.
Some comparisons to consider:
1) NRSV: Remains identical in the points highlighted above with original RSV
2) ESV: Remains identical in the points highlighted above with the original RSV
3) Douay-Rheims: The changes made to the RSV-2CE match the Douay-Rheims
4) NJB: Uses "captives" instead of "fortunes", as well as "heaven" instead of "sky"
Again the conclusion that we can make is that the RSV-2CE sides with the Douay-Rheims in most cases. It would be helpful, at some point, to have a complete chart of these changes. So far, the reasoning behind the changes have only been hinted at a year and a half back when Fr. Fessio commented on this blog. While not being specific, his response at least gives us the rationale for what went on between Ignatius Press and the Vatican. I hope to show some more instances of the differences between the two as I spot them.
This brings me to this post, which came about through my reading of Psalm 85 last night with my wife. We are still using the fine book Praying the Psalms with the Early Christians as a nightly devotional, which I highly recommend. While reading through it, which uses the original RSV-CE as it's base text, I noticed that there are a few translational choices that were made, outside of the elimination of the archaic language. So I have decided to show the original RSV-CE below, with the main translational differences in the RSV-2CE found in bold where appropriate:
Psalm 85
LORD, thou wast favorable to thy land;
thou didst restore the fortunes (captives) of Jacob.
Thou didst forgive the iniquity of thy people;
thou didst pardon all their sin. [Selah]
Thou didst withdraw all thy wrath;
thou didst turn from thy hot anger.
Restore us again, O God of our salvation,
and put away thy indignation toward us!
Wilt thou be angry with us for ever?
Wilt thou prolong thy anger to all generations?
Wilt thou not revive us again,
that thy people may rejoice in thee?
Show us thy steadfast (merciful) love, O LORD,
and grant us thy salvation.
Let me hear what God the LORD will speak,
for he will speak peace to his people,
to his saints, to those who turn to him in their hearts.
Surely his salvation is at hand for those who fear him,
that glory may dwell in our land.
Steadfast love (Mercy) and faithfulness will meet;
righteousness and peace will kiss each other.
Faithfulness will spring up from the ground,
and righteousness will look down from the sky (heaven).
Yea, the LORD will give what is good,
and our land will yield its increase.
Righteousness will go before him,
and make his footsteps a way.
Some comparisons to consider:
1) NRSV: Remains identical in the points highlighted above with original RSV
2) ESV: Remains identical in the points highlighted above with the original RSV
3) Douay-Rheims: The changes made to the RSV-2CE match the Douay-Rheims
4) NJB: Uses "captives" instead of "fortunes", as well as "heaven" instead of "sky"
Again the conclusion that we can make is that the RSV-2CE sides with the Douay-Rheims in most cases. It would be helpful, at some point, to have a complete chart of these changes. So far, the reasoning behind the changes have only been hinted at a year and a half back when Fr. Fessio commented on this blog. While not being specific, his response at least gives us the rationale for what went on between Ignatius Press and the Vatican. I hope to show some more instances of the differences between the two as I spot them.
Monday, November 30, 2009
RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE Part 4 (final)
Well, this will be the final post focusing on the differences between the RSV-CE and the RSV-2CE. Consider this last post a sort of lightning round. I am just going to list a few more differences between the two which I find interesting or amusing.
Let the lightning round begin:
1) Exodus
The RSV-2CE, following the NAB revised NT, translates literally the Greek term exodos as "exodus" instead of original RSV's "departure" in Luke 9:31.
2) Covenant
The RSV-2CE translates "Ark of the Testimony", as found in Exodus 25:16, as "Ark of the Covenant". This change occurs 36 times in the Old Testament. (Not sure about that one.)
3) Donkeys
The RSV-2CE substitutes the term "donkey" for "ass" 151 times in the entire Bible. Is there a difference between the two? I think someone told me once that there was a difference, but I sure prefer saying "donkey", particularly when teaching Scripture to a bunch of high school kids.
4) Angels
The RSV-2CE goes with "angels" over "god/gods" in the Psalms 8, 82, 97, and 138.
5) Virgin
The RSV-2CE follows the LXX in Isaiah 7:14 with "virgin" instead of "young woman".
In the end, while there are a number of differences between the two editions, I think if you are comfortable with the original RSV-CE than there is really no need to get the update. The one exception would be whether or not you find the archaic language unbearable. Some of the changes in the RSV-2CE I prefer, like the use of "exodus" in Luke 9:31 and the change from "ass" to "donkey". However, I am still not sold on the use of "chalice" and "mercy" in the RSV-2CE, as oppose to what the original RSV-CE.
Finally, let me just point out that if you are interested in seeing all the differences, which are far more than I had initially thought, you really need to get the recently released The Catholic Bible Concordance: Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition by Emmaus Road Publishing. Along with the added RSV-2CE information, it has proven to be a very handy, yet compact exhaustive concordance. Those at Emmaus Road should be proud of this publication, which was so needed for serious Catholic Bible readers and students. It certainly reaffirms my belief that the RSV-CE will remain the most scholarly/literal translation of the Bible in the English-speaking Catholic world for the foreseeable future.
Let the lightning round begin:
1) Exodus
The RSV-2CE, following the NAB revised NT, translates literally the Greek term exodos as "exodus" instead of original RSV's "departure" in Luke 9:31.
2) Covenant
The RSV-2CE translates "Ark of the Testimony", as found in Exodus 25:16, as "Ark of the Covenant". This change occurs 36 times in the Old Testament. (Not sure about that one.)
3) Donkeys
The RSV-2CE substitutes the term "donkey" for "ass" 151 times in the entire Bible. Is there a difference between the two? I think someone told me once that there was a difference, but I sure prefer saying "donkey", particularly when teaching Scripture to a bunch of high school kids.
4) Angels
The RSV-2CE goes with "angels" over "god/gods" in the Psalms 8, 82, 97, and 138.
5) Virgin
The RSV-2CE follows the LXX in Isaiah 7:14 with "virgin" instead of "young woman".
In the end, while there are a number of differences between the two editions, I think if you are comfortable with the original RSV-CE than there is really no need to get the update. The one exception would be whether or not you find the archaic language unbearable. Some of the changes in the RSV-2CE I prefer, like the use of "exodus" in Luke 9:31 and the change from "ass" to "donkey". However, I am still not sold on the use of "chalice" and "mercy" in the RSV-2CE, as oppose to what the original RSV-CE.
Finally, let me just point out that if you are interested in seeing all the differences, which are far more than I had initially thought, you really need to get the recently released The Catholic Bible Concordance: Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition by Emmaus Road Publishing. Along with the added RSV-2CE information, it has proven to be a very handy, yet compact exhaustive concordance. Those at Emmaus Road should be proud of this publication, which was so needed for serious Catholic Bible readers and students. It certainly reaffirms my belief that the RSV-CE will remain the most scholarly/literal translation of the Bible in the English-speaking Catholic world for the foreseeable future.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE part 3
The most numerous and consistent change from the RSV-CE to the RSV-2CE concerns the use of the Hebrew word ben in the Old Testament. Used most often in the Pentateuch, this change occurs some 526 times in the RSV-2CE Old Testament.
A well-known example comes from Exodus 1:9, which the original RSV-CE translates: ""And he said to his people, "Behold, the people of Israel are too many and too mighty for us.""
In most Bibles, including the RSV-CE, KJV, Douay-Rheims, NAB and NRSV, the translators go with either "the people of the children of Israel" or "the children of Israel" or just simply "the Israelite people". The RSV-2CE revisers went with "the sons of Israel" consistently. The NASB comes closest to the RSV-2CE by translating this phrase "the people of the sons of Israel", which seems to be the most literal rendering of the Hebrew. I wonder why the RSV-2CE revisers didn't simply go with the NASB rendering?
Monday, November 23, 2009
RSV-CE vs. RSV-2CE Part 2
The next change that I am going to post on, between the RSV-CE and RSV-2CE, is the use of cup/chalice. The RSV-2CE changes on 17 occasions the standard translation of the Greek poterion from cup to chalice. The occurs in the New Testament on 16 occasions, most notably during the Last Supper. There is also one case in the Old Testament where the RSV-2CE, translating the Hebrew word kowc, goes with chalice. It is found at Psalm 116:13.
Here is an example, not from the Last Supper: "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the chalice that I am to drink?" They said to him, "We are able." He said to them you will drink my chalice, but to sit..." (Matthew 20:22-23)
So what do you think? I am not too sure that I like the change, since I don't really think it is necessary. In my honest opinion, I think the RSV-2CE revisers meant to heighten the Eucharistic tone of those passages by substituting "chalice" for the more simple "cup".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)