My Top 5 Catholic Bibles #1

The Revised Standard Version (1st and 2nd) Catholic Edition: When Literal is Necessary

"And he said to them, 'Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.' And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart by themselves; and he was transfigured before them, and his garments became glistening, intensely white, as no fuller on earth could bleach them." - Mark 9:1-3

The RSV-CE remains as popular for Catholics today as when it was first published in the mid-60's. Actually, it could be argued that it is more popular today, particularly since it is still promoted by Biblical scholars as well as more conservative Catholics. The RSV-CE comes primarily in two editions these days, the original 1966 version, which contains archaic language and the 2nd Edition published by Ignatius Press, which eliminated archaic language and made various changes at points in the text. This post will focus mainly on the RSV-2CE.

Translation Philosophy 4.5/5
The RSV is the most literal modern Catholic translation on the market today. Catholics do not have an equivalent to the Protestant NASB. Therefore, the RSV serves as the most literal/formal modern translation, which certainly makes it useful when doing serious study. We have discussed on this blog on many occasions the various issues related to the RSV translation itself, most notably in the 2nd Edition. I will refer you to those posts here here and here.

I will, however, point out one specific area in Mark where the RSV shines, even though it may not appear so at first glance. As the Catholic Study Bible points out: "The pace of the story is urgent. Jesus moves rapidly from place to place; there is little wasted motion and a minimum of verbage (387)." Now one of the ways this is most evident in Mark is the constant use of the Greek word καὶ at the beginning of sentences. Most often this word is translated into English as "and". The RSV does a great job in maintaining the use of "and" in most cases, while a number of more recent translations try to make Mark a smoother read by not translating καὶ. Yet, I am not sure Mark is meant to be a smooth read. Events happen quickly and as the above quote from the CSB states: "The pace of the story is urgent." The RSV does the best job at producing that urgency in Mark.

Readability 4/5
For the most part, the RSV remains a pretty smooth read. In particular, the RSV-2CE, with the elimination of archaic language, helps to modernize the text a bit. There are, however, still places where the words chosen or the word order can make reading a bit more difficult. I notice this most often in the Psalms, but perhaps that is to be expected when using a more formal translation. (Psalm 65 is an example.)

One other area of note is in the RSV's use of inclusive language. As most of you know, it does not use inclusive language. As a matter of fact, Ignatius Press goes out of its way to promote that the RSV-2CE does not include "feminist" inclusive language. One of the main changes in the RSV-2CE is the consistent rendering of "sons of Israel" instead of "people of Israel." In this way, the RSV-2CE goes beyond the original RSV. As I have mentioned on this blog before, my thoughts on inclusive language have changed a bit in the last few years. Now a days, I am more open to the use of modest horizontal inclusive language, as found in the NJB and to a lesser extent the NABRE. Now that I do a lot of reading of the Scriptures out loud in class, with both youth and adults, I find that having limited horizontal inclusive language in a translation to be preferable.

Available Formats 3.5/5
The RSV is available in a number of printed formats, as well as on Kindle. Oxford University Press still prints the beautiful New Oxford Annotated Bible-RSV, which still remains a standard today for its size, durability, and concise, yet useful study notes. Oxford also produces an RSV-CE reading Bible, while Saint Benedict Press prints the RSV in various editions. The one thing that hampers these editions is their lack of cross-references. If you want the RSV-CE with cross-references, you have to go with the edition printed by Ignatius Press.

As noted earlier, the RSV-2CE is the child of Ignatius Press. The RSV-2CE comes in a standard edition, with cross-references, maps, and the original notes, in both hardbound, bonded leather, and paperback. Ignatius also prints a pocket edition of the New Testament and Psalms. The most notable edition of the RSV-2CE is found in the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament. Of course, the issue with the ICSB is not whether or not it is good and useful, but rather when it will be finished. (I feel a bit like Pope Julius II in the movie The Agony and the Ecstasy!) I have not heard back from Ignatius about any future editions of the RSV-2CE.

Miscellaneous 4/5
The RSV is historically one of the first truly ecumenical Bibles. Its influence is still felt today, not only by it still being in print, but also by its descendants the NRSV and ESV, and to a lesser extent the RSV-2CE. In addition, Ignatius Press has printed a Lectionary for the RSV-2CE if it is ever allowed in the USA.

Summary 16/20
However, I still wonder what the future holds for the RSV-CE or RSV-2CE. I pondered this question a few months back, which you can read here. When I look at the main project associated with the RSV, that being the ICSB, I am not sure I am willing to sit around and wait for its completion. Also, in the past those who felt the RSV was easily the best translation on the market, including myself, now have to contend with an improved NABRE as well as the ESV w/Apocrypha. We shall see what happens, but as of today, the RSV remains my #1 Catholic Bible....but barely.

My Top 5 Catholic Bibles #2

The New American Bible Revised Edition: A Great Upgrade and a Better NABRE

"The LORD is my shepherd; there is nothing I lack. In green pastures he makes me lie down; to still waters he leads me; he restores my soul. He guides me along right paths for the sake of his name. Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff comfort me." – Psalm 23 (NABRE)

Of all the Catholic Bibles, in English, that are available, the NAB(RE) is easily the most controversial. One does not have to look much further than any Catholic online forum, or even this blog, to see the NAB(RE) referred to as heretical, a paraphrase, inaccurate, or even the vehicle of some masonic take-over of the Church. Yes, I have heard or seen it described as all of those things, but thankfully, none of them are true. The revised NAB was published this year, and I think it is a considerable improvement over the previous edition. That is why it has jumped from #4 to #2 in my top 5 Bible rankings. So let's take a look at the NABRE. Please note that from now on, I will refer to this edition simply as the NABRE.

Translation Philosophy 4/5
When the original NAB was published 1970, it was the culmination of over 20 years of work by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. In many ways, the original NAB tended to follow a more dynamic-equivalence translation philosophy. This was certainly a philosophy that was current in the Church at the time, most notably in other translations like the Jerusalem Bible, but also in the way the Liturgy was translated. (On a side note, it is interesting how both the new Roman Missal and the NABRE have adopted a more formal approach to translation....which is a very good thing.) However, already in 1978, it was decided that the NAB NT needed to be redone. The Preface to the Revised NAB NT reads:

"The primary aim of the revision is to produce a version as accurate and faithful to the meaning of the Greek original as is possible for a translation. The editors have consequently moved in the direction of a formal-equivalence approach to translation, matching the vocabulary, structure, and even word order of the original as closely as possible in the receptor language. Some other contemporary biblical versions have adopted, in varying degrees, a dynamic-equivalence approach, which attempts to respect the individuality of each language by expressing the meaning of the original in a linguistic structure suited to English, even though this may be very different from the corresponding Greek structure. While this approach often results in fresh and brilliant renderings, it has the disadvantages of more or less radically abandoning traditional biblical and liturgical terminology and phraseology, of expanding the text to include what more properly belongs in notes, commentaries, or preaching, and of tending toward paraphrase. A more formal approach seems better suited to the specific purposes intended for this translation."

The revised NAB NT was published in 1986 and was certainly more literal than the original. (While I don't have room to give examples, see if you can compare the two versions of Mary's Magnificat in Luke 1.) It also included moderate uses of inclusive language. Work also began on a revised Psalter, which was published in 1991. This version was notable for its use of both horizontal and vertical inclusive language. While the revised NAB NT was included in the new Lectionary, the '91 Psalms were rejected due to its extensive use of inclusive language. Finally, the NABRE was published in March of this year, which completely updated the NAB OT, including the Psalms. The revised NAB OT is a more literal translation than its predecessor. Moderate inclusive language is used throughout, much like the revised NAB NT, but not as pervasive as the NRSV. The NABRE has rightly maintained the traditional "Son of Man" in Daniel 7 and Psalm 8, unlike a number of newer translations. The NABRE Psalms, likely due to a stricter adherence to Liturgiam Authenticam, are dramatically different than the '91 NAB Psalms. One only has to compare Psalms 1 in both versions to get a feel of the difference.

The NABRE made the news back in March for following the Hebrew "young woman" instead of the LXX "virgin" for Isaiah 7:14. I never felt that this should have been as newsworthy as it was, particularly since the RSV-CE, Jerusalem Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible did not follow the LXX either.

Overall, the NABRE is superior to the original NAB because it is a more formal-equivalence translation. One of my complaints about the previous edition was that it seemed like different portions of the NAB were translated with different translation philosophies. The revised NAB NT was formal, while the OT was dynamic and the '91 Psalms was all-over-the-place. For the most part, this has been largely corrected in the NABRE. My one main issue with the NABRE is that I think it could have gone a little further. Most notably in the book of Genesis, where some unique rendering persist. (See Genesis 1:1-2, 2:24, 3:1, 3:15, 4:1, and 12:3) For instance, the rendering of the Hebrew word basar as "one body" in Genesis 2:24 rather than "flesh" tends to "obscure the reference of Matthew (19:14) to that text." The previous quote is actually found in the NABRE notes which makes me wonder why a change was not made.

Readability 4/5
The NABRE is more consistently literal throughout, although probably a little less so than either the RSV or NRSV. This, of course, has its advantages and disadvantages depending on what you are looking for. For me, the biggest improvement, as mentioned above, is the NABRE Psalter. While I feel comfortable using that Psalter for study, I find that it is also a joy to read for longer periods of time. It flows much better than the previous two editions.

Available Formats 4/5
In the past, most NAB's looked the same. However, with this new translation comes hope for newer, more attractive formats and page layouts. The NABRE is being published by more publishers than before, with the likelihood of additional publishers to be announced in the near future. (Stay tuned for news regarding that.) The NABRE is now available in a Kindle version, online at the USCCB site, as well as in the much desired single-column format thanks to the folks at Little Rock. There also promises to be additional information available at the USCCB site, including the NABRE textual notes. Also, Oxford University Press will be publishing their Catholic study Bible with the NABRE shortly, and I shouldn't forget to mention the on-going Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture which is keyed to the NABRE. Time will tell whether or not the NABRE will be as available as the NRSV or RSV in different scholarly and devotional formats, but the future does look bright.

Miscellaneous 3.5/5
There are always two issues that come up when discussion is on the NAB(RE): 1) The Lectionary and 2) The NABRE notes/commentary. Probably one of the most frequent questions I get from people is why we cannot have a Bible that matches the readings heard at Mass. Well, the reality is that for the foreseeable future the Mass readings in the USA will include the original NAB OT and the revised NAB NT in an adapted form. Also, at some point, the Revised Grail Psalms will replace the current ones. That is just the reality of the situation, which I am sure can be confusing to the average Catholic in America.

Then, we come to the NABRE notes, which I am not going to discuss here. That discussion took place a few months ago, and generated over 70 comments. If you want to read that conversation, go here. Suffice to say, some people are happy with them, while some are vocally against them. I will just echo the comments I made at the end of that post: What should be the tone and content of the NAB(RE) commentary? Should those who have worked on the commentary assume that the typical Catholic reader would have some basic knowledge of the various theories in current Biblical scholarship?

Conclusion 15.5/20
The NABRE is a great improvement over the original NAB. I think many of the complaints against it have been answered and improved. It will be interesting to see how the NABRE does in the coming years. In the United States, the average Catholic is going to have a copy of the NAB(RE). It will continue to be the most available and most recognizably Catholic Bible in most bookstores.

My Top 5 Catholic Bibles #3

The New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition: A Translation in Transition

"Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross. Therefore God also highly exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." -Philippians 2: 5-11

I often mention on this blog how much I appreciate the NRSV. Though I have ranked the NRSV #3, I still feel it is a fantastic Bible. In many ways, there isn't much separating the top 3 in this subjective ranking of mine. The NRSV is easily the most ecumenical and scholarly translation in a Catholic edition. Yet, from my own experiences, its use among most Catholics falls far behind the top 2. Therefore, where does the NRSV fit among the main Catholic Bible translations in English?

Translation Philosophy 4/5
I have devoted a number of posts on this blog over the past few years looking at the translation philosophy of the NRSV, most notably here and here. (Please consult those posts for further details.) The NRSV, like the RSV, remains a literal/formal translation. That is why it is still the basis for a number of scholarly study Bibles on the market and is used in many scholarly works. The stated goal of the NRSV translators was to be "as literal as possible, as free as necessary." It certainly achieves that goal. The NRSV, not surprisingly, follows in the heritage of the RSV and KJV. This means that there is a familiarity for the reader who was brought up on either the RSV and KJV. While this often means that the NRSV follows a more literal/formal translation philosophy, there are places, specifically with its use of inclusive language, where the NRSV is "as free as necessary."

The NRSV is truly the first translation to be thorough and consistent in its use of inclusive language. While this is not an issue for the majority of instances, since the textual notes are clear when inclusive language is used for the most part, there are places where this can be distracting. For example, Matthew 10:38 says, "and whoever does not take up the cross and follow me is not worthy of me." Which cross? Christ's or our own? The Greek behind it refers to our own. One other major issue with the NRSV's use of inclusive language is that, even with the textual note, translating "one like a son of man" in Daniel 7 as "one like a human being" does not help the average Christian reader who is trying to understand this significant Christological title. The use of inclusive language in Bible translations is still a hot topic for both Protestants and Catholics. For Catholics, on one end of the spectrum is the NRSV, which thoroughly employs inclusive language, while on the other end is the RSV-CE, which even goes beyond the original RSV in avoiding inclusive language (see here) and is proud to advertise as such.

Readability 4/5
The NRSV is a very smooth read due to it being a modern translation which was published as a single unit, unlike the NAB. Also, since it follows in the heritage of the KJV, there is a sense of familiarity for the most part when one reads through it. Henry Hansbrough, editor of the NJB and author of the book The Story of the Bible states that in the NRSV, "The story-telling of the Old Testament is often scintillating." I find that to be quite true. In addition, archaic language has been eliminated from this revision of the old RSV.

Available Formats 3.5/5
This was somewhat hard to rate, simply because the NRSV is all over the place. While it is true that the NRSV comes in some unique editions, most notably from HarperOne, there are no Catholic editions that contain cross-references. This is something that HarperOne has said they will be addressing at some point in the near future, but we will see. Many of their formats are very unique, in particular the quasi-single column NRSV Catholic Standard Edition which is very attractive and innovative. They also publish a true thinline in the NRSV, which may be a first for any Catholic edition. Of course, the NRSV has also been published by Oxford and Cambridge, along with a few others in a study Bible format.

Miscellaneous 3.5/5
There clearly is a future for the NRSV, though it may be for those outside the USA. The Canadian bishops within the past few years received approval, finally, from Rome over an adapted form of the NRSV for the Lectionary. Rumors are that other English-speaking bishops conferences, like the UK and Wales, are doing the same. One could see in ten years or so the majority of English-speaking dioceses using some adapted form of the NRSV for Mass, while the USA (and a few others) using the NAB(RE) in some form. That being said, trying to predict what translation is going to be used in the liturgy in ten years may be a foolish endeavor.

As mentioned earlier, the NRSV is still going to remain popular in the scholarly world, most notably in its inclusion in study Bibles. Oxford recently published its fourth edition of the New Oxford Annotated Bible, and there are a number of others that utilize the NRSV. It would be interesting to see if in the future there would be a Catholic study Bible that utilized the NRSV. At this point, the only true Catholic study Bibles use either the RSV-2CE or NAB(RE) Bibles. There are also a plethora of study aids, like concordances, commentaries, interlinears, and dictionaries, that are keyed to the NRSV. That will probably not change for the near term.

Conclusion 15/20
There is a lot to like about the NRSV. I did not use the NRSV, at all, up until about four years ago due to the "problems" people told me about it. However, four years ago, I stopped by a local bookstore during the Christmas season and decided to purchase the NRSV Go-Anywhere Bible from HarperOne. I really enjoyed reading many of the renderings in that NRSV edition that I purchased, particularly in the Old Testament. Fast forward to today, I am now quite comfortable with the NRSV and refer to it often. While it is not my #1 Bible, it is still a solid translation, and one that may continue to grow in popularity among Catholics. Only time will tell.

My Top 5 Catholic Bibles #4

The New Jerusalem Bible: A Great Place to Start

"Because it is by grace that you have been saved, through faith; not by anything of your own, but by a gift from God; not by anything that you have done, so that nobody can claim the credit. We are God's work of art, created in Christ Jesus for the good works which God has already designated to make up our way of life." -Ephesians 2:8-10 (NJB)

If someone was new to the Bible and asked me for a recommendation, in most cases I would point them to the New Jerusalem Bible. I would also suggest that they get the full hardbound edition, with the single column layout and the copious notes. This dynamic, more literary translation, combined with some solid study tools, make the NJB a wonderful all-around Bible.

Translation Philosophy 3/5
The NJB, as a successor to the original Jerusalem Bible, is known for its more dynamic, yet literary quality. As Henry Wansbrough points out in his book The Story of the Bible: "The English Jerusalem Bible, having no basis in traditional English versions, has the freshness of freedom from traditional biblical language." In many ways, the NJB retains that same quality. While the original Jerusalem Bible closely followed the French Bible de Jérusalem, the NJB was translated directly from the original languages. The NJB is slightly more literal than the original. In particular, as the intro to the NJB states: "Key terms in the originals, especially those theological key concepts on which there is a majot theological note, have been rendered throughout (with very few exceptions) by the same English word, instead of by a variety of words used in the first edition (v)." One other unique quality to the NJB, like its predecessor, is the use of Yahweh instead of the LORD. The use of the Divine Name does give reading the Bible, particularly in the Psalms, a different tone, but one has to measure this with the recent request from the Vatican in 2008.

Another important note about the NJB translation is its use of inclusive language. It is the first major Bible translation to consistently use inclusive language throughout. In many ways, I find that the NJB has done the best out of all the recent translations. Henry Wansbrough notes: "It was the first complete Bible to make consistent use of inclusive language wherever possible, though without the extreme rigour of the later NRSV."

Readability 3/5
The NJB builds on the already, highly readable JB. Translation philosophy, including use of inclusive language, is constant throughout the OT and NT. I find that if I am in the mood to read long passages or an entire book in one sitting, the NJB does the job best. In addition, since it is not held to using traditional Biblical language, new insights can be gained. In many ways, the NJB makes for a great second Bible, along side a more formal one. It is still a fresh translation, twenty five years later.

Available Formats 3/5
While it is true that the NJB is available in only a limited number of formats, most notably the large hardbound study edition and other text only ones, the beauty of the hardbound edition makes up for it. Personally, I am still waiting for a true single-column edition for the more formal Catholic Bible translations that match the NJB. The single column NJB provides plenty of space for personal note taking, and plentiful cross-references, while also being easy on the eyes. If you look around the Internet, particularly on European book seller sites, you will find some additional editions of the NJB, including ones with leather covers.

Miscellaneous 1/5
With all that has been said about the NJB, one wonders if it will remain in use into the future. It is not the basis for any English language Lectionary and the École Biblique is working on a completely new project called The Bible in Its Traditions. It also does not have many scholarly works keyed to it, nor are there any supplemental texts, like a concordance, that uses the NJB.

Conclusion 10/20
When I was studying in Rome in 2000, not for theology but Roman History, I had the beginning of my conversion back to the Church. I was never in another church or anything, but just wasn't a practicing Catholic in many ways. While in Rome, I stopped into a bookstore by the Vatican that sold books in English and purchased a compact NJB. It was in leather too! I still have it today, and it serves as a reminder as to how far I have come since then. All by the grace of God, of course, along with a little help from my pocket NJB.

My Top 5 Catholic Bibles #5

The Douay-Rheims: Still a classic

"Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our supersubstantial bread. And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil." -Matthew 6:9-13 (DR)

The Douay-Rheims (DR) remains a classic, even today. Much like the King James Version, which was published shortly after the DR, the DR maintains a devoted following centuries after being produced. Since languages change over time, the DR has been "updated" at various points in her history. Some of the changes to the DR have been more extensive than others. Blessed Newman wrote a very helpful history about the various editions of the venerable DR, which you can read here.

Translation Philosophy 3/5
In many ways, the DR is probably the most literal/formal of all the available Catholic Bibles in English. The DR, unlike the others in this Top 5, was translated directly from the Latin, with some consideration given to the Hebrew and Greek. The online Catholic Encyclopedia has a wonderful article examining a number of the particularities of the translation. The article notes that "In the translation, many technical words were retained bodily, such as pasch, parasceve, azymes, etc. In some instances, also where it was found difficult or impossible to find a suitable English equivalent for a Latin word, the latter was retained in an anglicized form. Thus in Phil., ii, 8, we get He exinanited himself, and in Hebrews 9:28, Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many." This type of formal translation can certainly be helpful, since there is no NASB equivalent for Catholics. As stated earlier, the DR has been "updated" at various points in history, which means that most editions available today are not the original. The Challoner revision is the most extensive and for many the one that is contained in their DR edition. For a brief note on the changes made by Challoner, one can be read about them here. Finally, while the Church has declared the DR free from doctrinal error, this does not necessarily make it a more accurate translation than any of the more modern versions. (Jimmy Akin has provided an interesting article on this subject.)

One other note on the translation, which clearly does not employ inclusive language. However, through my praying of the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary, I noticed that the edition of the DR used does, at least in one instance, use inclusive language in Psalm 126: "Children are an heritage from the Lord, and the fruit of the womb a reward. Like as arrows in the hand of the mighty one: so are the children of those who have been cast out." Note that the Latin filii is translated children, which is often rendered as "sons". See the RSV, NRSV, and NABRE.

Readability 2/5
Archaic English is used throughout, which can make reading for long periods difficult for those who are not familiar with it. Personally, while I can work through the archaic language, it does slow things down slightly. I say this as one who prays the traditional Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary everyday, which uses the Douay-Rheims Psalter. In addition to the "thees" and "thous" there are words like "peradventure", "holpen", "superadded", among others that are not used much these days, which can slow down reading. This I grant you is all dependent on a person's preferences, but from my own personal reading and ministry work, the DR can be difficult for use in most situations.

Available Formats 1/5
The DR is still available from a number of Catholic publishers, most notably Baronius and Saint Benedict Press. (It is also available for Kindle.) Saint Benedict Press, in particular, has produced editions which are a bit more attractive than the usual facsimile reproductions. However, if one looks at what is available for a comparative translation, like the KJV, there is no question that the DR does not receive the same treatment as the the KJV. While there are KJV youth Bibles on the market, I wonder if there is a market for a Douay-Rheims version. In addition, I should also mention the Vulgate Bible project from Harvard University Press and the editions from Ex Fontibus Company. Overall, however, there is not much new for those who would like to go further with the DR. There are no DR study Bibles, thinlines, youth Bibles, etc... In many ways, this is a shame.

Miscellaneous 2/5
With the expanded use of the Extraordinary Form of the Liturgy, it is clear that the DR will remain alive and well in some capacity. There is also a renewed interest in the older pre-Vatican II breviaries, like the Little Office, which utilize the DR. But outside of more traditional Catholic circles, the DR is rarely used. I have led a number of Bible studies over the past few years and only a total of two people have ever brought a DR to the study. One wonders if there would be interest in an "update" to the DR, much like the NKJV is to the KJV. There is certainly no indication from the Vatican that future Scriptural translations into the vernacular are going to be based on the Latin, as opposed to the original languages. So, then, is there a future for the DR?

Conclusion 8/20
While I have ranked the DR #5, this does not mean I find it unacceptable for use or not worthwhile to have as reference. I have an early 20th century hardbound version, which I found at a used bookstore, that I consider a treasure. However, ever since the publication of Divino Afflante Spiritu, the course of Catholic Biblical studies has taken a definitive turn to emphasizing the original languages in research and translation.

Top 5 Criteria

In the coming days I will begin listing my top 5 favorite Catholic Bible translations in English. Before I begin, however, I want to list three considerations which will be factored into my rankings:

1) The five translations that I have chosen to rank are the Douay-Rheims, NABRE, New Jerusalem Bible, New Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition, and the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition. The rankings are limited to these five, since all of them come in Catholic editions and are easily available. This would exclude translations like the ESV w/Apocrypha, which does not come in a Catholic edition, and the original Jerusalem Bible, which is not easily available in its original edition. I should also note that I will consider the RSV-CE and the RSV-2CE as one translation, since the work Ignatius did was simply to eliminate archaic langauge and make the occasional change to a possible rendering due to theological or liturgical needs/desires. In the end, it is the same translation, certainly not equivalent to what they did with the ESV.

2) I just want to emphasize again that this top 5 is from my own perspective. I am sure many, if not most of you, will disagree with me, which I accept and in some ways expect! My perspective is formed by my own use of these translations for personal study and devotion, as well as my experiences teaching at the high school and leading Bible studies.

3) I will be "judging" these translations in four specific categories: 1) Translation philosophy; 2) Readability; 3) Available formats; 4) Miscellaneous issues. Translation philosophy will briefly look at how formal/literal a translation each is, with my preference for a reasonably formal translation, along with considering the use of archaic and inclusive language. Readability is probably the most subjective of the categories, since it will analyze how a translation has been used, in my experience, for longer sittings of reading as well as public reading. In this category, I will also look at the consistency of the translation from Old to New Testament. The third category will examine the available editions for each translation, including page formats, covers, styles, and the use of textual notes/cross-references. The final category will cover miscellaneous issue, like a translation's use in the Liturgy and scholarly books, it's ecumenical background, and considerations on what the future holds for that particular translation.

While I am sure few will agree 100% with my thoughts, I figure this will spark a nice conversation during the usually quiet summer months. Stay tuned.

Top 5 Catholic Bible Translations Preview

If any of you were reading this blog almost three years ago, one of my first posts was a list of my Top 5 Catholic Bible translations. At the time, I think perhaps my future wife and a co-worker were the only two who did! Well, a lot has changed over these past three years in regards to English language Catholic Bibles. I have certainly learned a great deal through my own studies and experiences in personal reading and ministry work, as well as through many numerous posts by all of you who taken the time to stop by this blog. Three years ago, I ranked the RSV, NRSV, NAB, NJB, and Douay-Rheims. I think it is time to revisit that top 5 list. So, over the next week or so, I am going to list my new Top 5. This is, of course, only one man's perspective, so I certainly don't think everyone will agree with me. And who knows, three years from now it could change.

So, I will open the comments up on this post for your top 5 favorite Catholic Bible translations into English. Please give a short reason why for each. Perhaps I will pick my favorite entry, who will then get a free box of Catholic Bible goodies.

(BTW, the summer contest for the Haydock Bible ends Saturday night, so get your entries in!)