Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion related to learning about the faith (Catechetics), defense of the Faith (Apologetics), the Liturgy and canon law, motivated by a desire to grow closer to Christ or to bring someone else closer.

Saint Augustine of Hippo is considered on of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time and the Doctor of the Church.
Learn More: Saint Augustine

Jan 13th 2013 new

(Quote) Jon-930321 said: I get some dirtly looks from the older folk at church...I think they think I'm reading somethin...
(Quote) Jon-930321 said:

I get some dirtly looks from the older folk at church...I think they think I'm reading something else haha.

--hide--

I bet they do! wink I sometimes make the mistake of taking their chosen place in a particular pew and being given dirty looks. rolling eyes

Jan 13th 2013 new

(Quote) Sandra-871852 said: Paul, I am going to search online and find out about the Faith Data Base. I do have a K...
(Quote) Sandra-871852 said:

Paul, I am going to search online and find out about the Faith Data Base. I do have a Kindle application on my PC and Netbook. I have the Kobo/Nook/Adobe Digital Editions PC applications too. I prefer reading from a computer or Ereader. I love books but realized they take up a lot of room, and are hard to part with when moving. Especially when some movers thought it would be a piece of cake to move my boxes and were so tired/exhausted at the end of the day because the boxes were filled with books. They asked, "What are you a librarian or something?" Now all my books are very lightweight!

--hide--

I know what you mean. When my late wife and I moved to this place we had over 100 boxes of books.

The Faith Databases has 10 Biblical texts, 88 Council Documents from all 21 Ecumenical Councils, 400 early Church writings, 165 writings from the Doctors of the Church, 74 books from Blessed John Newman, 112 books by Chesterton, 1300 Papal writings and encyclicals, the Old catholic encyclopedia along with many other features such as art and bible maps. An illustrated Church history and the ability to search the catechism and the Code of canon Law.

You can download to your PDA from the program.

Go to

http://www.faithdatabase.com

Price is a few cents under $40. Apprently yiou can now buy it on disk, or a dowloaded version and their are add-ons you can buy.

Jan 13th 2013 new

(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: It's always best to base decisions like this on direct data rather than indirect data...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:

It's always best to base decisions like this on direct data rather than indirect data (in this case, analysis of the actual text vs. the authority of the issuer). The USCCB are the same folks who brought you the old translation of the Mass that Rome rejected and replaced last year. Their Bible translation likewise has some issues.

--hide--

I'm pretty sure that was a revision of the missal, not an outright rejection, to get it closer to the Latin. We would not have been using that missal for decades if it was wrong, Rome would make sure of that! It was approved for use, and Rome has now revised it, so here we are.


The Vatican has the NAB on their website; below is the link. It is approved for use, so you won't have to worry about that.


www.vatican.va


Any Bible with an Imprimatur is authorized for use, so keep a lookout for that as well.



The missal readings in the new missal are based on this version (NAB); I have a Romain Daily Missal and it is word for word out of that Bible. Of course I'm not sitting there with the big missal that the priest uses though, so I don't know what version that is...everything I've seen online points to the NAB or Douay.

I like that Faith Database! I'm gonna buy it...something to read when it gets slow...



Jan 14th 2013 new

(Quote) Jon-930321 said: I'm pretty sure that was a revision of the missal, not an outright rejection, to get it closer ...
(Quote) Jon-930321 said:

I'm pretty sure that was a revision of the missal, not an outright rejection, to get it closer to the Latin. We would not have been using that missal for decades if it was wrong, Rome would make sure of that! It was approved for use, and Rome has now revised it, so here we are.

The Vatican has the NAB on their website; below is the link. It is approved for use, so you won't have to worry about that.

www.vatican.va

Any Bible with an Imprimatur is authorized for use, so keep a lookout for that as well.

The missal readings in the new missal are based on this version (NAB); I have a Romain Daily Missal and it is word for word out of that Bible. Of course I'm not sitting there with the big missal that the priest uses though, so I don't know what version that is...everything I've seen online points to the NAB or Douay.

I like that Faith Database! I'm gonna buy it...something to read when it gets slow...

--hide--

The Roman Missal is promulgated in Latin; the various translations are approved and promulgated separate from the Missal. I don't believe there were any changes to the Missal itself last year; if there were, they were very minor. What was changed was the English translationny places was not even close to the Latin source.

Rome does not issue the English translatiuon: it was create/revised by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) and approved by the USCCB before being sent to Rome for final approval.

Why Rome initially approved the previous translations and then permitted them to be used for as long as they did, I don't know; however, it was Rome that forced the USCCB to update the translations, so yes it is fair to say Rome (eventually) rejected the old ones.

In the US, priests are requires to use the approved lectionary, based on the NAB, for Scriptural readings. While the NAB is approved for liturgical use, that doesn't necessarily make it thew best choice for private use. While some may prefer the NAB, the are a variety of other choices that may be preferable to others. A little time spent investigating up front may result in a much better long-term experience for the reader.

Jan 14th 2013 new

(Quote) Sandra-871852 said: Jerry, I found the links very helpful. Thank you. There are many choices in Bibles for many diff...
(Quote) Sandra-871852 said:

Jerry, I found the links very helpful. Thank you. There are many choices in Bibles for many different reasons.

The first link didn't work.

I have saved these links because of all the new-for me- information about the history of the Bible and different translations. I can compare the different translations with the online link. I may end up getting more than one Bible for my Kindle, if available. An ereader makes it easier to carry the a book/Bible and read anywhere. The font can be enlarged more than a large print Bible.

--hide--

Sandra, The Aquinas and More page (the first link) does not work from the Google search results, where I first obtained it (and viewed the page at the time), so there may be a problem with the web site. You may want to try it again Monday or Tuesday.

Jan 14th 2013 new

(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: The Roman Missal is promulgated in Latin; the various translations are approved and promu...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:

The Roman Missal is promulgated in Latin; the various translations are approved and promulgated separate from the Missal. I don't believe there were any changes to the Missal itself last year; if there were, they were very minor. What was changed was the English translationny places was not even close to the Latin source.

Rome does not issue the English translatiuon: it was create/revised by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) and approved by the USCCB before being sent to Rome for final approval.

Why Rome initially approved the previous translations and then permitted them to be used for as long as they did, I don't know; however, it was Rome that forced the USCCB to update the translations, so yes it is fair to say Rome (eventually) rejected the old ones.

In the US, priests are requires to use the approved lectionary, based on the NAB, for Scriptural readings. While the NAB is approved for liturgical use, that doesn't necessarily make it thew best choice for private use. While some may prefer the NAB, the are a variety of other choices that may be preferable to others. A little time spent investigating up front may result in a much better long-term experience for the reader.

--hide--

Jerry, not to belabor a point that isn't really the focus of the post, but here is the USCCB says:


"The Roman Missal is the book containing the prescribed prayers, chants, and instructions for the celebration of Mass in the Roman Catholic Church. Published first in Latin under the title Missale Romanum, the text is then translated and, once approved by a recognitio by the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, is published in modern languages for use in local churches throughout the world. In 2002, Pope John Paul II introduced a new edition of the Missale Romanum (editio typica tertia, the “third typical edition” [since the Second Vatican Council]) for use in the Church. Soon after, the complex work of translating the text into English began. As the Church in the United States and throughout the English-speaking world prepares to introduce the new edition of the Missal, so does the Church in other countries as the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia is translated into other languages. The process of implementing a new edition of the prayers of the Mass is not new, but has occurred numerous times throughout the history of the Church as the Liturgy developed and was adapted to particular circumstances to meet the needs of the Church."


old.usccb.org

An acutal Q&A from the USCCB is here: usccbmedia.blogspot.com



So it appears what happened was that the Pope introduced a new Latin version of the Missal, then was translated into English, approved by the Vatican (as was the previous version), then published. The USCCB isn't going to just "wing it" with the missal and then was rejected. I have read in a few places that they used more modern and sticter techniques when translating this time around, but it wasn't that the old version was rejected at all. It in fact was approved by the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments - NOT the USCCB. I think its important to note that because you kind of threw them under the bus a little bit, when in the end they are subject to the Vatican and the Pope. The USCCB did ask to delay the implementation of this Missal, but was denied so far as I remember, because the USCCB didn't like how some of the passages were translated (i.e. the Eucharistic passage and some other areas from what my Priest was talking about).


All of that aside, I like the NAB...I also like the Douay, but its much harder to read. I don't think you can go wrong with the version read in Church, but that's just my personal preference. I like it on digits a lot though, but at home I'd rather read from the actual book so I can highlight or make notes or other stuff.


Jon

Jan 24th 2013 new
I might be a little late chiming in, Sandra, but I like the Ignatius Revised Standard Catholic Edition. I hear a lot of apologists say this is the best translation for studying the Bible and doing apologetics, as it is a more word-for-word translations than the dynamic versions like the NAB. The Ignatius Study Bible New Testament is also excellent and has very enlightening study notes by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch. They have it for Kindle now but I haven't checked out how well they handled all the footnotes. You may want to download a sample and see if it works for you.
Jan 24th 2013 new
My parish has several PhD scripture scholars who went to Catholic U. They say that the RSV-Catholic Edition is the most accurate translation available for Catholics in modern English.
Jan 24th 2013 new

(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: The Roman Missal is promulgated in Latin; the various translations are approved and promu...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:

The Roman Missal is promulgated in Latin; the various translations are approved and promulgated separate from the Missal. I don't believe there were any changes to the Missal itself last year; if there were, they were very minor. What was changed was the English translationny places was not even close to the Latin source.

Rome does not issue the English translatiuon: it was create/revised by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) and approved by the USCCB before being sent to Rome for final approval.

Why Rome initially approved the previous translations and then permitted them to be used for as long as they did, I don't know; however, it was Rome that forced the USCCB to update the translations, so yes it is fair to say Rome (eventually) rejected the old ones.

In the US, priests are requires to use the approved lectionary, based on the NAB, for Scriptural readings. While the NAB is approved for liturgical use, that doesn't necessarily make it thew best choice for private use. While some may prefer the NAB, the are a variety of other choices that may be preferable to others. A little time spent investigating up front may result in a much better long-term experience for the reader.

--hide--


From what I've seen, the Roman Missal went through two editions (one published in 1975, another published in 2002) since the introduction of the 1973 "interpretation" in English by the ICEL. The ICEL presented its interpretation in English of the second typical edition in 1999, which was rejected by the Roman congregations. The translation (of the third typical edition) that we now have in English, is the only one that was ever approved by Rome from what I can find.

Jan 24th 2013 new

(Quote) Jon-930321 said: Jerry, not to belabor a point that isn't really the focus of the post, but he...
(Quote) Jon-930321 said:

Jerry, not to belabor a point that isn't really the focus of the post, but here is the USCCB says:


"The Roman Missal is the book containing the prescribed prayers, chants, and instructions for the celebration of Mass in the Roman Catholic Church. Published first in Latin under the title Missale Romanum, the text is then translated and, once approved by a recognitio by the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, is published in modern languages for use in local churches throughout the world. In 2002, Pope John Paul II introduced a new edition of the Missale Romanum (editio typica tertia, the “third typical edition” [since the Second Vatican Council]) for use in the Church. Soon after, the complex work of translating the text into English began. As the Church in the United States and throughout the English-speaking world prepares to introduce the new edition of the Missal, so does the Church in other countries as the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia is translated into other languages. The process of implementing a new edition of the prayers of the Mass is not new, but has occurred numerous times throughout the history of the Church as the Liturgy developed and was adapted to particular circumstances to meet the needs of the Church."


old.usccb.org

An acutal Q&A from the USCCB is here: usccbmedia.blogspot.com



So it appears what happened was that the Pope introduced a new Latin version of the Missal, then was translated into English, approved by the Vatican (as was the previous version), then published. The USCCB isn't going to just "wing it" with the missal and then was rejected. I have read in a few places that they used more modern and sticter techniques when translating this time around, but it wasn't that the old version was rejected at all. It in fact was approved by the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments - NOT the USCCB. I think its important to note that because you kind of threw them under the bus a little bit, when in the end they are subject to the Vatican and the Pope. The USCCB did ask to delay the implementation of this Missal, but was denied so far as I remember, because the USCCB didn't like how some of the passages were translated (i.e. the Eucharistic passage and some other areas from what my Priest was talking about).


All of that aside, I like the NAB...I also like the Douay, but its much harder to read. I don't think you can go wrong with the version read in Church, but that's just my personal preference. I like it on digits a lot though, but at home I'd rather read from the actual book so I can highlight or make notes or other stuff.


Jon

--hide--


If you've ever done translation work (whether for your mother and father who do not speak English, or for work or school), you'd know that what the ICEL presented as a translation in 1973 for liturgical use was no translation whatsoever. :) It was not much more than a subjective interpretation.

Posts 11 - 20 of 25