I certainly hope it's substantially better than the New American Bible I've had to read most of my life
The best modern English translation I've seen is the RSV-Catholic Edition ....are these new liturgical translations closer to the RSV-CE? The article doesn't really say....
I would really like to see some samples of the changes. I share your hope for improvements.
I must admit to an irrational reaction when the article talked about making the text understandable: the phrase "See Spot run." came to mind. (Luckily, the 1970's and 1980's are over and done.)
The best modern English translation that I've read, is the Revised English Bible (REB) published by both the Oxford Press & Cambridge Press. It's understandable and written to be proclaimed, a very elegant and well-written translation, IMHO.
And we know Luke 1 will saw "full of grace" because it must be proclaimed that way in the liturgy, as it does today but is not worded that way in the current NABRE. I'm excited for this new publication. Thank you Pillar for the update.
I haven't been alive half a century, yet the english language has shifted so substantially to have justified changing Holy Bible a fourth (or is it third?) time. Has this ever happened in history before? Perhaps in times of conquest?
The Anglicans went through quite a few attempts from the 1530s to the 1610s before they finally devised the King James. (And in fact the Psalms in the traditional Book of Common Prayer remained from an earlier version, the Coverdale version.)
Bible translations from the mid-20th century are uniquely horrible. There was an amazing level of arrogance at the time - for example, many bible translators simply moved around verses within the bible because "scholarship" told them that verse 20 was "originally" next to verse 5. (in biblical scholarship you can just make stuff up - such as the imaginary Q source which is so often referred to in the current new American Bible footnotes) Both the 1970's New American Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible butcher the scriptures in this way. The original Revised Standard Version of the Bible removed the woman caught in adultery from John 8 entirely.
Another thing they did at the time was to overcompensate for the archaic language in the Douay-Rheims and King James Bibles by talking down to the bible reader. The 1970's NAB does this, particularly in the New Testament, which you'll notice only lasted until 1986 except for the liturgy of the hours where it tortures Catholics even to this day.
I use the Jerusalem Bible critical 1966 edition for personal use and will continue to do so. It tends to follow the Greek when it diverges from the Hebrew, and since there are much older copies of the Greek than the Hebrew, excluding the Dead Sea Scrolls which tend to be closer to the Greek, I think it's probably closer to the original. Not as many copyists to introduce textual errors.
The obvious solution to moved Bible verses is to take a pen and draw an arrow to where they belong or put a note telling where they belong and where they come from on the appropriate pages.
Good luck and perseverance to all those working on this project. I am happy to still be able to worship in the TLM and employ the 1961 Roman Breviary for my personal prayer. No revisions needed.
“If they can't understand what they hear, they are missing one of the presences of Christ in the liturgy.” - Well, that is how it currently is with nasal cantors intoning the Psalm. Can't understand one word in ten.
Honestly I'm just hoping to be done with "Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace". If they retain that...well, I'll be frustration-mourner, teacher-complainer, translator-sometimes, and advocate of artful-translation.
Agreed! That's a horrific translation....should just go with the text we hear in Handel's Messiah - "Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace"
I was raised mostly high church Episcopalian, but occasionally we'd hit up the local Catholic parish, especially on holidays. My mother still simultaneously laughs and cringes with embarrassment when she recounts the story of me, age 6, at midnight mass, snorting and contemptuously repeating "GOD HERO?" loudly enough to be overheard in surrounding pews as that reading was proclaimed.
I have generally found "wonder-counselor" to be the most cringesome of the epithets. It sounds to me like something a psychologist in 1979 giving team-building seminars to office staff for an exorbitant amount of money would call himself.
So, in the abstract, I get the reason for wanting a unified Scripture translation to be used in the lectionary across the whole country—it guarantees that everyone hears the same words at Mass, and that unity is probably a greater good than allowing pastors or parishioners to choose their favorite translation.
...That said, if the USCCB thinks the current translation in the lectionary isn't up to snuff (I'm not inclined to disagree) *and* it hasn't even kept pace with its source translation, why go through the trouble of making a whole new translation, at least of the New Testament? Would it not be more straightforward to either update the lectionary to match the current NABRE (which is presumably still a licit Catholic bible) or simply vote to adopt an existing translation that's more preferable?
At least one (if not the primary) reason that they will NEVER use a better existing translation is the whole copyright business. We must have the USCCB taking in those royalty $$ regardless of how bad the translation, mustn’t we?
The readings for mass don’t come straight out of the Bible, they are excerpted and somewhat edited and printed into a lectionary, which is an expensive and time consuming ordeal.
Also in terms of Bible translation, there is good and better. Our current lectionary is based on the NAB with edits requested by the Holy See. And then the lectionary was approved by both the Holy See and USCCB. So it was determined to be “good”. So “not up to snuff” would not be an apt description, at least in the opinions of the hierarchs. Rather they are trying to make a good thing better and also have the readings of Mass match the text that comes straight out of the Bible as much as possible (since the lectionary is excerpted from its original context, some edits are needed to the lectionary text that wouldn’t be in the printed Bible).
1. Someone please hook up a generator to Msgr. Ronald Knox's grave, once again the amount of his rolling can help catapult the renewable energy sector.
2. If the new LoTH doesn't translate the Magnificat to read "My soul *magnifies* the Lord," if they're peppered with stupid abstract graphics, and/or if they still include those "psalm prayers" (I've never understood what those are or how they fit in rubrics), I'm going to mail glitter bombs to every chancery office.
3. Invest in Catholic Book Publishing Company stocks... TO THE MOON BABY!
Also, the 1-Volume Christian prayer is arranged so stupidly, totally wasted space. For some asinine reason beyond my imagination, the 1-Volume contains all four weeks of the psalmody for the Office of Readings but no readings (making it worthless), yet only includes 1 week of the psalmody for Midday Prayer (despite including all four weeks would barely add to the page count), making Midday Prayer effectively useless. And it could be 200 pages shorter by cutting out the overly-extensive melody instructions and poetry sections. You could've cut out the Office of Readings sections entirely and added the remaining weeks of Midday prayer, and you'd have a perfectly fine Diurnal!
Considering that the layout of the 1-Volume Christian prayer has remained almost entirely unchanged since first being put out in 1970, the editors at CPBCo. back then must've 100% been smoking that hippie hash, because that's the only explanation I can come up with.
Yes, this. I have the US edition that Ordinariate members complained a fair bit about, but I'm happy with it and love praying those offices although I haven't done so in a while. The language is so lovely. I like to joke that Cranmer must be looking up in chagrin, but in reality it's our duty to hope and pray that somehow he's looking down in joy, and I usually do so, despite the jokes.
Magnifies makes me think she's using a magnifying glass. Proclaims the greatness tells me what she's actually doing so I'm not just speaking meaningless gobbledygook.
It’s the actual translation. We switched from saying “one in being with” to “consubstantial,” which is the proper translation of “consubstantialem” in the Creed.
Second paragraph: "The USCCB official who oversaw the process told The Pillar that the approval would a major step in several liturgical projects for the U.S. Church, and that the Church will now" Was this written late at night? The Church will now - what? The suspense!
Very confused why the USCCB pres thinks it necessary to make Catholic breviary apps and single-use printers like Word on Fire or Magnificat wait to use the new translation until the traditional printers can catch up. Do the old-school printers see the apps and booklets as a threat to their business? Did they lobby the USCCB on this front?
In a group setting, you need everyone praying from the same text. I personally have no intention of subscribing to Word on Fire's booklets for howevermany months or, worse, using a phone app until the many-ribboned books I've been waiting for are ready to go.
Sure, but everyone in that group setting will be used to using the book version and will wait to get the new book version together. And there are lots of other groups that use booklets like Magnificat, or groups of young people that use apps. I'm not saying those need to be your cup of tea, but they are helpful for many people.
I fail to see why some individuals or groups choosing to wait for the full printed books, means that everyone must wait that extra length of time for the new translation.
On any given Saturday during Morning Prayer at my parish we have people using the single-volume Christian Prayer, the current volume of the four-volume set, printed handouts from eBreviary and an app. Situations like this is why it's wise to wait until everybody can play with the shiny new toy at the same time.
May I suggest an answer? Follow the money. The U.S. Bishops have copyrighted all these translations and they get royalties from the Missal companies. I sometimes think of all those missalettes that get haul to the town dump every new liturgical season; recovering them would be a fitting purgatory for bishops.
May I suggest to the U. S. Bishops. I just read and have read about the millions of dollars payout for Clergy Sexual Abuse. The Diocese of Oakland was today’s scandal (11/12/2024). I have lived through the Translation Wars between ICEL and the Vatican and that is pretty much over, I hope—having not read the new translation. May I point out a glaring occurrence when the citation of St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans. Consistently chapter 13 verse 14b is dropped from the Lectionary and the Breviary. What is Romans ch.13: 14b?; “14a Put on the LORD Jesus Christ, (14b) AND MAKE NO PROVISION FOR THE DESIRES OF THE FLESH.” While one could find Romans ch.13:14b somewhere in the three year cycle, but the majority of the time it is cut off. Just think what a difference this would have made if priests and religious were constantly reminded of this Divine admonition?
Please Bishops, reinstate this revealed command from God into the Lectionary and in particular, the Breviary.
As an aside, there are a lot of other ellipsis that drop off either hard sayings or politically incorrect verses. These ellipses date back to Archbishop Bugnini whose tenure as head of the Office of Worship was cut short by the discovery of his briefcase that he left after a meeting. The contents of which motivated Pope St. Paul VI to transfer him to Tehran, Iran. For the sake of full disclosure and transparency, the U. S. Bishops should call for the details to be exposed regarding the infamous Bugnini briefcase. Catholics have the right to know just who this man was who was himself so influential in developing the new Mass and public worship. (I bought Bugnini’s autobiography just because he listed all his assignments on the back cover. Ever wonder just how many Catholics are in Tehran?)
The Conference in Canada made significant emendation to their lectionary with the approval of Rome that often expanded readings somewhat to added better historical context and theological insight. I don’t know if the Canadian lectionary expanded the reading you sited though.
If you would like to see the U.S. lectionary edited and expanded so it adds more theological clarity, you should write a letter to both your local Bishop and the USCCB committee on Divine Worship, providing examples whenever possible of changes that you think would be helpful.
I would be mindful that a letter that is diplomatic and respectful and keeps on point would be better received than a letter with a more combative tone.
I was just about to comment the same thing! I hope that the bishops will consider bringing back in some of these unfortunately skipped-over verses of the lectionary pericopes, rather than just rubber stamping the verse selections and swapping in the new translation.
Did they say if the new liturgical NAB version will continue to carry the old and often deplorable footnotes that every NAB edition has been required to include? Or are these being updated as well? Those footnotes are the #1 reason why I opted out of the NABRE as a personal use Bible and adopted both the New Catholic Bible (often confused with the NABRE since it is also published by Catholic Book Company) and the Ignatius Study Bible.
Devin, if this is true, this is cause for great rejoicing! The original NAB(RE) notes are horrid. Where did you hear that we might be getting new footnotes for this translation?
My understanding is also there were also some edits made to the 2010 Old Testament. I am cautiously hopeful for the upcoming Bible translation/lectionary.
I am a bit of a Bible nerd and I am partial to the RSV-CE2 and REB, but most American Catholics have only been exposed to the Bible in the NAB tradition, so it makes since that the final lectionary/liturgical Bible continue in that line. By using a translation that the U.S. Bishops own, the USCCB avoids issues that other conferences have had adapting other translations.
Much of the English speaking world tried to adapt the NRSV into a lectionary, but the challenges of coordinating changes/edits between the copyright holders, multiple bishops conferences, and the Holy See were insurmountable.
I know that India and England have adopted the ESV, but I know they had a devil of a time negotiating with Crossway. And Crossway wouldn’t let all the changes in that they wanted.
Thanks for that explanation . Was hoping for ESV across the board except for the Psalms since those are locked in for sure . I just want lections that are identical to a Catholic Bible. So if understand, I would like a Catholic Bible that has the Abbey Psalms, and then NABRE2 for everything else that matches the other lections.
As for LOTH, I use Universalis and he runs a fine operation and at some point he will get the US translation in his app. I also use Divine Office since it has audio for everything at no extra cost . That will likely be greatly delayed since they have to record all that new material. And I am. It sure they even have the human or financial resources .
I certainly hope it's substantially better than the New American Bible I've had to read most of my life
The best modern English translation I've seen is the RSV-Catholic Edition ....are these new liturgical translations closer to the RSV-CE? The article doesn't really say....
The large-text NRSV-CE is awesome for visually-challenged faithful like me.
I would really like to see some samples of the changes. I share your hope for improvements.
I must admit to an irrational reaction when the article talked about making the text understandable: the phrase "See Spot run." came to mind. (Luckily, the 1970's and 1980's are over and done.)
The best modern English translation that I've read, is the Revised English Bible (REB) published by both the Oxford Press & Cambridge Press. It's understandable and written to be proclaimed, a very elegant and well-written translation, IMHO.
I know we in the ordinariate use a lectionary based off of the RSV-2CE which is very nice.
And we know Luke 1 will saw "full of grace" because it must be proclaimed that way in the liturgy, as it does today but is not worded that way in the current NABRE. I'm excited for this new publication. Thank you Pillar for the update.
That was my hope as well, however....she did say: “You’ll be able to buy a Bible that will substantially match the lectionary,”
"Substantially" is not the same as "exactly" 🫤
Some edits are necessary so that extracts are intelligible.
I haven't been alive half a century, yet the english language has shifted so substantially to have justified changing Holy Bible a fourth (or is it third?) time. Has this ever happened in history before? Perhaps in times of conquest?
The Anglicans went through quite a few attempts from the 1530s to the 1610s before they finally devised the King James. (And in fact the Psalms in the traditional Book of Common Prayer remained from an earlier version, the Coverdale version.)
Bible translations from the mid-20th century are uniquely horrible. There was an amazing level of arrogance at the time - for example, many bible translators simply moved around verses within the bible because "scholarship" told them that verse 20 was "originally" next to verse 5. (in biblical scholarship you can just make stuff up - such as the imaginary Q source which is so often referred to in the current new American Bible footnotes) Both the 1970's New American Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible butcher the scriptures in this way. The original Revised Standard Version of the Bible removed the woman caught in adultery from John 8 entirely.
Another thing they did at the time was to overcompensate for the archaic language in the Douay-Rheims and King James Bibles by talking down to the bible reader. The 1970's NAB does this, particularly in the New Testament, which you'll notice only lasted until 1986 except for the liturgy of the hours where it tortures Catholics even to this day.
I use the Jerusalem Bible critical 1966 edition for personal use and will continue to do so. It tends to follow the Greek when it diverges from the Hebrew, and since there are much older copies of the Greek than the Hebrew, excluding the Dead Sea Scrolls which tend to be closer to the Greek, I think it's probably closer to the original. Not as many copyists to introduce textual errors.
The obvious solution to moved Bible verses is to take a pen and draw an arrow to where they belong or put a note telling where they belong and where they come from on the appropriate pages.
Given the bishops’ track record for on-time delivery, who are the editors?
My soul doth magnify the Lord.
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour!
I betcha everybody calls me Happy.
Good luck and perseverance to all those working on this project. I am happy to still be able to worship in the TLM and employ the 1961 Roman Breviary for my personal prayer. No revisions needed.
It is nice to have no need to buy new books, no need to get used to new phrasing, and to be able to just chill.
At least since TLM priests are allowed to use the Douay-Rheims again...
I know you talked about this on the pod but I assume the NT text is not yet available somewhere and won't be for a while?
“If they can't understand what they hear, they are missing one of the presences of Christ in the liturgy.” - Well, that is how it currently is with nasal cantors intoning the Psalm. Can't understand one word in ten.
Well, there's this: https://sophiainstitute.com/product/st-isaac-jogues-illuminated-missal/
Although it'll be obsolete when they release the new lectionary in 10 years or so.
Honestly I'm just hoping to be done with "Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace". If they retain that...well, I'll be frustration-mourner, teacher-complainer, translator-sometimes, and advocate of artful-translation.
Agreed! That's a horrific translation....should just go with the text we hear in Handel's Messiah - "Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace"
I was raised mostly high church Episcopalian, but occasionally we'd hit up the local Catholic parish, especially on holidays. My mother still simultaneously laughs and cringes with embarrassment when she recounts the story of me, age 6, at midnight mass, snorting and contemptuously repeating "GOD HERO?" loudly enough to be overheard in surrounding pews as that reading was proclaimed.
Out of the mouths of babes!
I have generally found "wonder-counselor" to be the most cringesome of the epithets. It sounds to me like something a psychologist in 1979 giving team-building seminars to office staff for an exorbitant amount of money would call himself.
Sad to say, if they use the recent Old Testament re-translation from 2010, this passage will remain the same.
🤦♂️ Whelp, there goes my hope haha. They shall "dash it to pieces, like a potter's vessel."
So, in the abstract, I get the reason for wanting a unified Scripture translation to be used in the lectionary across the whole country—it guarantees that everyone hears the same words at Mass, and that unity is probably a greater good than allowing pastors or parishioners to choose their favorite translation.
...That said, if the USCCB thinks the current translation in the lectionary isn't up to snuff (I'm not inclined to disagree) *and* it hasn't even kept pace with its source translation, why go through the trouble of making a whole new translation, at least of the New Testament? Would it not be more straightforward to either update the lectionary to match the current NABRE (which is presumably still a licit Catholic bible) or simply vote to adopt an existing translation that's more preferable?
At least one (if not the primary) reason that they will NEVER use a better existing translation is the whole copyright business. We must have the USCCB taking in those royalty $$ regardless of how bad the translation, mustn’t we?
The readings for mass don’t come straight out of the Bible, they are excerpted and somewhat edited and printed into a lectionary, which is an expensive and time consuming ordeal.
Also in terms of Bible translation, there is good and better. Our current lectionary is based on the NAB with edits requested by the Holy See. And then the lectionary was approved by both the Holy See and USCCB. So it was determined to be “good”. So “not up to snuff” would not be an apt description, at least in the opinions of the hierarchs. Rather they are trying to make a good thing better and also have the readings of Mass match the text that comes straight out of the Bible as much as possible (since the lectionary is excerpted from its original context, some edits are needed to the lectionary text that wouldn’t be in the printed Bible).
1. Someone please hook up a generator to Msgr. Ronald Knox's grave, once again the amount of his rolling can help catapult the renewable energy sector.
2. If the new LoTH doesn't translate the Magnificat to read "My soul *magnifies* the Lord," if they're peppered with stupid abstract graphics, and/or if they still include those "psalm prayers" (I've never understood what those are or how they fit in rubrics), I'm going to mail glitter bombs to every chancery office.
3. Invest in Catholic Book Publishing Company stocks... TO THE MOON BABY!
Also, the 1-Volume Christian prayer is arranged so stupidly, totally wasted space. For some asinine reason beyond my imagination, the 1-Volume contains all four weeks of the psalmody for the Office of Readings but no readings (making it worthless), yet only includes 1 week of the psalmody for Midday Prayer (despite including all four weeks would barely add to the page count), making Midday Prayer effectively useless. And it could be 200 pages shorter by cutting out the overly-extensive melody instructions and poetry sections. You could've cut out the Office of Readings sections entirely and added the remaining weeks of Midday prayer, and you'd have a perfectly fine Diurnal!
Considering that the layout of the 1-Volume Christian prayer has remained almost entirely unchanged since first being put out in 1970, the editors at CPBCo. back then must've 100% been smoking that hippie hash, because that's the only explanation I can come up with.
I've moved to using the Ordinariate's Divine Worship: Daily Office (the Commonwealth Edition is beautifully put together) and never looked back.
I own a copy of that as well and it is a wonderful English language office. Much better than the LOTH, in my humble opinion.
Yes, this. I have the US edition that Ordinariate members complained a fair bit about, but I'm happy with it and love praying those offices although I haven't done so in a while. The language is so lovely. I like to joke that Cranmer must be looking up in chagrin, but in reality it's our duty to hope and pray that somehow he's looking down in joy, and I usually do so, despite the jokes.
Magnifies makes me think she's using a magnifying glass. Proclaims the greatness tells me what she's actually doing so I'm not just speaking meaningless gobbledygook.
It’s the actual translation. We switched from saying “one in being with” to “consubstantial,” which is the proper translation of “consubstantialem” in the Creed.
Second paragraph: "The USCCB official who oversaw the process told The Pillar that the approval would a major step in several liturgical projects for the U.S. Church, and that the Church will now" Was this written late at night? The Church will now - what? The suspense!
Very confused why the USCCB pres thinks it necessary to make Catholic breviary apps and single-use printers like Word on Fire or Magnificat wait to use the new translation until the traditional printers can catch up. Do the old-school printers see the apps and booklets as a threat to their business? Did they lobby the USCCB on this front?
In a group setting, you need everyone praying from the same text. I personally have no intention of subscribing to Word on Fire's booklets for howevermany months or, worse, using a phone app until the many-ribboned books I've been waiting for are ready to go.
Sure, but everyone in that group setting will be used to using the book version and will wait to get the new book version together. And there are lots of other groups that use booklets like Magnificat, or groups of young people that use apps. I'm not saying those need to be your cup of tea, but they are helpful for many people.
I fail to see why some individuals or groups choosing to wait for the full printed books, means that everyone must wait that extra length of time for the new translation.
On any given Saturday during Morning Prayer at my parish we have people using the single-volume Christian Prayer, the current volume of the four-volume set, printed handouts from eBreviary and an app. Situations like this is why it's wise to wait until everybody can play with the shiny new toy at the same time.
May I suggest an answer? Follow the money. The U.S. Bishops have copyrighted all these translations and they get royalties from the Missal companies. I sometimes think of all those missalettes that get haul to the town dump every new liturgical season; recovering them would be a fitting purgatory for bishops.
Great point.
But they get paid by the apps and booklet companies, too, who must also pay copyright fees.
May I suggest to the U. S. Bishops. I just read and have read about the millions of dollars payout for Clergy Sexual Abuse. The Diocese of Oakland was today’s scandal (11/12/2024). I have lived through the Translation Wars between ICEL and the Vatican and that is pretty much over, I hope—having not read the new translation. May I point out a glaring occurrence when the citation of St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans. Consistently chapter 13 verse 14b is dropped from the Lectionary and the Breviary. What is Romans ch.13: 14b?; “14a Put on the LORD Jesus Christ, (14b) AND MAKE NO PROVISION FOR THE DESIRES OF THE FLESH.” While one could find Romans ch.13:14b somewhere in the three year cycle, but the majority of the time it is cut off. Just think what a difference this would have made if priests and religious were constantly reminded of this Divine admonition?
Please Bishops, reinstate this revealed command from God into the Lectionary and in particular, the Breviary.
As an aside, there are a lot of other ellipsis that drop off either hard sayings or politically incorrect verses. These ellipses date back to Archbishop Bugnini whose tenure as head of the Office of Worship was cut short by the discovery of his briefcase that he left after a meeting. The contents of which motivated Pope St. Paul VI to transfer him to Tehran, Iran. For the sake of full disclosure and transparency, the U. S. Bishops should call for the details to be exposed regarding the infamous Bugnini briefcase. Catholics have the right to know just who this man was who was himself so influential in developing the new Mass and public worship. (I bought Bugnini’s autobiography just because he listed all his assignments on the back cover. Ever wonder just how many Catholics are in Tehran?)
The Conference in Canada made significant emendation to their lectionary with the approval of Rome that often expanded readings somewhat to added better historical context and theological insight. I don’t know if the Canadian lectionary expanded the reading you sited though.
If you would like to see the U.S. lectionary edited and expanded so it adds more theological clarity, you should write a letter to both your local Bishop and the USCCB committee on Divine Worship, providing examples whenever possible of changes that you think would be helpful.
I would be mindful that a letter that is diplomatic and respectful and keeps on point would be better received than a letter with a more combative tone.
Don't forget the glaring (and literally damning) omission of 1 Corinthians 11:27-29!
I agree.
That's the most important one to fix.
I was just about to comment the same thing! I hope that the bishops will consider bringing back in some of these unfortunately skipped-over verses of the lectionary pericopes, rather than just rubber stamping the verse selections and swapping in the new translation.
I think they're about to get a cardinal because they're on the peripheries.
Did they say if the new liturgical NAB version will continue to carry the old and often deplorable footnotes that every NAB edition has been required to include? Or are these being updated as well? Those footnotes are the #1 reason why I opted out of the NABRE as a personal use Bible and adopted both the New Catholic Bible (often confused with the NABRE since it is also published by Catholic Book Company) and the Ignatius Study Bible.
They will be redoing the notes entirely. I don’t think they have been even written yet.
Devin, if this is true, this is cause for great rejoicing! The original NAB(RE) notes are horrid. Where did you hear that we might be getting new footnotes for this translation?
My understanding is also there were also some edits made to the 2010 Old Testament. I am cautiously hopeful for the upcoming Bible translation/lectionary.
I am a bit of a Bible nerd and I am partial to the RSV-CE2 and REB, but most American Catholics have only been exposed to the Bible in the NAB tradition, so it makes since that the final lectionary/liturgical Bible continue in that line. By using a translation that the U.S. Bishops own, the USCCB avoids issues that other conferences have had adapting other translations.
Much of the English speaking world tried to adapt the NRSV into a lectionary, but the challenges of coordinating changes/edits between the copyright holders, multiple bishops conferences, and the Holy See were insurmountable.
I know that India and England have adopted the ESV, but I know they had a devil of a time negotiating with Crossway. And Crossway wouldn’t let all the changes in that they wanted.
Thanks for that explanation . Was hoping for ESV across the board except for the Psalms since those are locked in for sure . I just want lections that are identical to a Catholic Bible. So if understand, I would like a Catholic Bible that has the Abbey Psalms, and then NABRE2 for everything else that matches the other lections.
As for LOTH, I use Universalis and he runs a fine operation and at some point he will get the US translation in his app. I also use Divine Office since it has audio for everything at no extra cost . That will likely be greatly delayed since they have to record all that new material. And I am. It sure they even have the human or financial resources .