Bible Wars: The Catholics New American Bible

[Sleeping in EQ]

Our discussions of the KJV and JST have me thinking about the Catholic battles over their own English translation of the Bible. The New American Bible has been fought over like a bone between two junkyard dogs, and the result is that the NAB, the contemporary Bible approved for use by American Catholics (the days are numbered for the NJB and the RSV-Catholic Edition, no one is printing anything using them), is different from what is cited during Mass. The Vatican objected to the use of gender inclusive language and has been able to have its way in the Catholic rites and liturgy.

But that’s just one aspect of the difficulty. The NAB’s own editions are quite different as well, with the current edition having a revised NT and book of Psalms cobbled together more than 15 years after the OT translation.

But the real beef is that the NAB was authorized by Vatican II and conservative Catholics hate it. Its language has been made more contemporary. It isn’t based on the Latin manuscripts as is the old Douay-Rheims Bible. Instead, like other modern translations, it’s based on the critical texts. Its footnotes (which are quite good), have a post-Vatican II flavor and are thus seen as being too liberal. Protestants, Evangelicals, and Mormons are having their troubles with King James Only-ism. The Catholic equivalent is Douay-Rheims Only-ism.

All said, though, I think the NAB is a well done, word-for-word translation that also accounts for idiomatic flavoring. It’s especially useful for checking the NASB, because it has a way of exposing some of the overly literal and fundamentalist word choices in that translation (I think the NASB is a good translation, but don’t let the rigid word-for-word approach fool you into thinking there isn’t some bias in it. Any word choice will have connotation). The NAB is also a great Bible for reading aloud. It’s the only Catholic Bible of which I have a hard copy.

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

Our discussions of the KJV and JST have me thinking about the Catholic battles over their own English translation of the Bible. The New American Bible has been fought over like a bone between two junkyard dogs, and the result is that the NAB, the contemporary Bible approved for use by American Catholics (the days are numbered for the NJB and the RSV-Catholic Edition, no one is printing anything using them), is different from what is cited during Mass. The Vatican objected to the use of gender inclusive language and has been able to have its way in the Catholic rites and liturgy.

You have this backwards. I was raised Catholic and still keep up with things to some extent. The NAB is what is used in Mass and is the generally accepted version since approx Vatican II (possibly with minor revisions to the NAB, don't know about that, myself). The Candians have gone over to the NRSV, with the "inclusive language". The US were planning to do the same, but somehow there was opposition, presumably from conservatives who don't like replacing the usage of "men" with "humans" type thing. I'm sure there's more to it, but I don't keep up with the gory details, even in the day when I, myself, would read from the pulpit. (BTW, Catholic lay people read from the bible from the pulpit but only Deacons and Priests can editorialize. Oh, and Deacons and Priests are older than 15.)

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by hyrum

You have this backwards. I was raised Catholic and still keep up with things to some extent. The NAB is what is used in Mass and is the generally accepted version since approx Vatican II (possibly with minor revisions to the NAB, don't know about that, myself). The Candians have gone over to the NRSV, with the "inclusive language". The US were planning to do the same, but somehow there was opposition, presumably from conservatives who don't like replacing the usage of "men" with "humans" type thing. I'm sure there's more to it, but I don't keep up with the gory details, even in the day when I, myself, would read from the pulpit. (BTW, Catholic lay people read from the bible from the pulpit but only Deacons and Priests can editorialize. Oh, and Deacons and Priests are older than 15.)

Perhaps my sources are incorrect. They say that the NAB is not what is used in Mass. What is used is a revision of the NAB, that while based on the NAB, only exists for clerical use. A lay Catholic can't go out and buy and read this version. While Vatican II authorized the NAB, conservatives at high levels have gained influence since then and have monkeyed with it.

Here's a guy writing in First Things: A Journal of Religion, Culture, and Public Life:

"At present, three translations are approved for Catholic liturgical use: the New Jerusalem, the RSV, and the New American Bible (NAB). The lectionaries and the several publishers of Mass guides, however, use only the NAB.... The bishops had the NAB updated to the Revised New American Bible (RNAB), but Rome had objections to that and hurriedly appointed a committee to fix it up into what might be called the Amended Revised New American Bible (ARNAB), which will soon become mandatory in lectionary use. Technically, the RSV and New Jerusalem are still permitted but, with ARNAB as the mandatory translation of the future, nobody has any interest in printing lectionaries or Mass guides using those versions. There is the additional oddity that you cannot buy an ARNAB Bible, since only the pericopes (liturgical readings) exist in ARNAB-talk. So Catholics do not have a Bible for personal or group reading that uses the same text that they hear at Mass."

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

Perhaps my sources are incorrect. They say that the NAB is not what is used in Mass. What is used is a revision of the NAB, that while based on the NAB, only exists for clerical use. A lay Catholic can't go out and buy and read this version. While Vatican II authorized the NAB, conservatives at high levels have gained influence since then and have monkeyed with it.

Here's a guy writing in First Things: A Journal of Religion, Culture, and Public Life:

"At present, three translations are approved for Catholic liturgical use: the New Jerusalem, the RSV, and the New American Bible (NAB). The lectionaries and the several publishers of Mass guides, however, use only the NAB.... The bishops had the NAB updated to the Revised New American Bible (RNAB), but Rome had objections to that and hurriedly appointed a committee to fix it up into what might be called the Amended Revised New American Bible (ARNAB), which will soon become mandatory in lectionary use. Technically, the RSV and New Jerusalem are still permitted but, with ARNAB as the mandatory translation of the future, nobody has any interest in printing lectionaries or Mass guides using those versions. There is the additional oddity that you cannot buy an ARNAB Bible, since only the pericopes (liturgical readings) exist in ARNAB-talk. So Catholics do not have a Bible for personal or group reading that uses the same text that they hear at Mass."

I get lost in all the acronyms. Perhaps the RNAB is what I called the NRSV in my post, the concept is the same with the "inclusive language" and a few other changes for smoothing out the English. At the time I was keeping up with things, just a few years ago, the whole thing was in such a state of confusion that the training and study materials they gave to the lay lectors had two translations in them because they were printed in advance for the liturgical year and the publisher didn't know what the decision would be. This happened at least two years in a row.

To me this is about schematics of the readability, inclusive language. Perhaps to serious Biblical scholars its a bigger deal. I wasn't aware of any substantial changes in interpretation among the versions of the NAB nor between the revised version they were planning to use and the NRSV popular in some Protestant churches. And, yes, there is a Lectionary printed with the selected biblical texts to ease readability. The study guide books are provided to ensure what you study at home is exactly what you see on Sunday. I presumed that once the dust settled, you'd be able to buy a complete Bible in the same translation as the Lectionary and study guides.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by hyrum

I get lost in all the acronyms. Perhaps the RNAB is what I called the NRSV in my post, the concept is the same with the "inclusive language" and a few other changes for smoothing out the English. At the time I was keeping up with things, just a few years ago, the whole thing was in such a state of confusion that the training and study materials they gave to the lay lectors had two translations in them because they were printed in advance for the liturgical year and the publisher didn't know what the decision would be. This happened at least two years in a row.

To me this is about schematics of the readability, inclusive language. Perhaps to serious Biblical scholars its a bigger deal. I wasn't aware of any substantial changes in interpretation among the versions of the NAB nor between the revised version they were planning to use and the NRSV popular in some Protestant churches. And, yes, there is a Lectionary printed with the selected biblical texts to ease readability. The study guide books are provided to ensure what you study at home is exactly what you see on Sunday. I presumed that once the dust settled, you'd be able to buy a complete Bible in the same translation as the Lectionary and study guides.

Eveyone's hoping for that Bible to be available, but the politicking seems to never end!