Why is Douay Rheims so awesome?

[HalupkiMonster]

All of my friends are telling me how awesome the Douay Rheims Bible is.

If you like it, why?

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Maybe because it's the anti-KJV and is a translation of the Latin? I dunno. The KJV is often much better, but it wasn't sanctioned by the Catholic Church so it's not often used by Catholics. The DRB is often treated by Catholics the same way the KJV is treated by Protestants - "onlyism" occurs; to a lesser degree, of course.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The Duay Rheims is translated from Latin.

The King James uses the Hebrew version of the Old Testament, where Catholic Bibles like the Duay Rheims and more modern translations, use the Greek Version of the Old Testament known as the Septuagint.

Personally, I don't care for the Duay Rheims.

Some like it because it's more Catholic.

Jim

 

[Dylan Michael]

I like it.
It is the one that I use most often, I like the way it reads. Kind of 'classic'.

To each his own.

 

[StevenMerten]

Hello HalupkiMonster,

I also have met a few Catholics who praise the Douay Rheims Bible. I have also met a few Catholics who praise the New Jerusalem Bible. I have done some reading of both. Personally, I do not know how anyone can beat the New American Bible. The NAB is what you hear at Mass. The US Bishops are constantly focused on it and there have been two updated versions since I started intensely reading my 1970 version of the NAB. If you go to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops site, which I recommend, it is all focused on the NAB. If you believe the Jesus is involved and active within His Church in the present, then it would be the NAB that Jesus also is focused on. I like the NAB. I think it is Jesus' choice of Bibles. The Douay Rheims Bible just cannot compete with the New American Bible.

Please visit: USCCB New American Bible
Books of the Bible

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Hello HalupkiMonster,

I also have met a few Catholics who praise the Douay Rheims Bible. I have also met a few Catholics who praise the New Jerusalem Bible. I have done some reading of both. Personally, I do not know how anyone can beat the New American Bible. The NAB is what you hear at Mass. The US Bishops are constantly focused on it and there have been two updated versions since I started intensely reading my 1970 version of the NAB. If you go to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops site, which I recommend, it is all focused on the NAB. If you believe the Jesus is involved and active within His Church in the present, then it would be the NAB that Jesus also is focused on. I like the NAB. I think it is Jesus' choice of Bibles. The Douay Rheims Bible just cannot compete with the New American Bible.

Please visit: USCCB New American Bible
Books of the Bible

And I still feel Catholic reading it.


Jim

 

[Anhelyna]

If you believe the Jesus is involved and active within His Church in the present, then it would be the NAB that Jesus also is focused on. I like the NAB. I think it is Jesus' choice of Bibles. I like the NAB. I think it is Jesus' choice of Bibles.

Ummm - and of course He has told you this !

If you would excuse the language it's horses for courses.

Personally I can't stand the NAB - but that's my personal opinion and I'm entitled to hold that view

 

[StevenMerten]

Ummm - and of course He has told you this !

If you would excuse the language it's horses for courses.

Personally I can't stand the NAB - but that's my personal opinion and I'm entitled to hold that view

Hello Anhelyna,

I feel, if you believe that God inspires scriptures and inspires and guides His Church in the present, then it would be the version of scriptures that the Church is using, that Jesus is also using, to guide His Flock, in the present, from heaven.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

LOL, so apparently the Catholic Church in America is Jesus' favored church, since apparently his favored translation is the NAB. Aren't a majority of English speaking countries using the Jerusalem Bible in mass? Has Australia switched to the ESV like the were talking about doing?

 

[Anhelyna]

MtoM

Slight correction - the Latin Catholic Church in America - cos the Ukrainians are likely to be using a Ukrainian translation

 

[Erose]

All of my friends are telling me how awesome the Douay Rheims Bible is.

If you like it, why?

I read it because currently it is the best translation of the Latin Vulgate, which is THE Bible of the Latin Church for over 1000 years. So when studying the writings of the Latin Saints from 1000AD on, they usually quote from the Vulgate.

I personally don't care too much for modern Bibles. Because quite frankly they are a hodgepodge of various biblical traditions, which make it up to the translator(s) to determine which route to go when there is a conflict. Which quite frankly I don't want to really trust.

One little secret, is that we no longer have the originals of the Inspired writings, and you have a various periods of editing of the scriptures. So you get what I call Biblical Traditions (ie. the Septuagint; Vulgate; Peshitto; Masoretic Text; Majority Text; Received Text; etc.) Take the OT for example. Most modern Bibles use a translation of the Masoretic Hebrew Text as a foundation for their OT. Well the Masoretic texts is a relatively modern edited version (700-900AD) of the Hebrew Text.

The Masoretic text came from a process of comparing the Babylonian, Palestinian, and Alexandrian Talmud writings with each other, and making a unified text that all Jewish people could refer to. The problem that they found which modern scholars have also discovered is that there are always passages that are not comparable. That either over a period of time evolved through the manuscript writing process; or through a process of editing.

Anyway back to the Vulgate. The Vulgate actually is a translation of Hebrew Manuscripts earlier than the Masoretic text. And when you compare certain passages there is a variation, you can see that the Vulgate in most circumstances reads older. For 99% of the Vulgate and Masoretic texts are in agreement with each other, but there are many verses in the Masoretic text that say the same thing as the Vulgate but use more words for example.

The Septuagint, i.e the Greek OT which is still used by our Eastern brethren, is an even older tradition than the Vulgate and the Masoretic texts. And if you compare them you can see that there is seems to be an revision process going on.

Anyway to make a long story short, for me I read bibles that are translated from fixed Biblical traditions, i.e. the Septuagint, Vulgate, Masoretic and Peshitto for example. The modern Bibles are a hodgepodge of various traditions, and when they conflict it then falls under the authority of the translator(s) to decide which tradition to use. Personally I don't like that. I wish modern translators would pick a tradition to translate and outline it in the title page. That would be great.

It also needs to be pointed out that when a Bible is given an imprimatur, it doesn't mean that it is 100% accurate in the translation; but rather it has no doctrinal errors.

 

[epiclesis]

Douay Rheims version definitely has a sense of the "classic" feel to it, but I don't always get a sense of what is trying to be described in it, so if that's what I'm reading, I often check another version just to see what it says. My favorite at the moment is my NRSV-CE - it translates well and no too differently, but enough, than the NAB. If you want to read the exact that you hear at Mass on Sunday in the US, then the NAB is your best bet.

 

[Erose]

Hello Anhelyna,

I feel, if you believe that God inspires scriptures and inspires and guides His Church in the present, then it would be the version of scriptures that the Church is using, that Jesus is also using, to guide His Flock, in the present, from heaven.

Steven,

It doesn't work that way. For example the NAB text doesn't have any doctrinal errors within it, for which it gets a imprimatur; but this doesn't mean that it doesn't have translational errors. One of the things you may notice is that sometimes the readings in the missal are not identical to the reading of the NAB, because there are passages in the NAB that are not acceptable for the missal. A perfect example is the rendering of "Hail, Full of Grace" which is in the missal, but not in the NAB. Even though "Full of Grace" is a better rendering of the Greek.

 

[ebia]

Hello HalupkiMonster, I also have met a few Catholics who praise the Douay Rheims Bible. I have also met a few Catholics who praise the New Jerusalem Bible. I have done some reading of both. Personally, I do not know how anyone can beat the New American Bible. The NAB is what you hear at Mass. The US Bishops are constantly focused on it and there have been two updated versions since I started intensely reading my 1970 version of the NAB. If you go to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops site, which I recommend, it is all focused on the NAB. If you believe the Jesus is involved and active within His Church in the present, then it would be the NAB that Jesus also is focused on. I like the NAB. I think it is Jesus' choice of Bibles. The Douay Rheims Bible just cannot compete with the New American Bible. Please visit: USCCB New American Bible Books of the Bible

Interesting that you assume that Jesus would be an American.

Remember that the NAB is not the mass version, nor widely popular, outside North America.

 

[HalupkiMonster]

Dear all,

thank you kindly for your answers. I picked up a copy of the Douay-Rheims today, and reading it over, it definitely has the more classical feel you all describe. I don't find it too difficult to understand what the words are trying to say, though I would KILL for a DR with study notes. Why on earth isn't that a thing?!

I like the NAB, but I really don't like the modern language used. I appreciate it for personal study and such, but as concerns devotional reading, the DR seems to be the ticket, but I've only had it for 4 hours.

My personal preference was always the NKJV, but comparing it to older translations, I could do without all of the liberty taken by the translators.

Another for you all - why is the Douay Rheims so difficult to come by, and why is it so dern expensive?

 

[StevenMerten]

LOL, so apparently the Catholic Church in America is Jesus' favored church, since apparently his favored translation is the NAB. Aren't a majority of English speaking countries using the Jerusalem Bible in mass? Has Australia switched to the ESV like the were talking about doing?

Hello Mike to Michael,

Yes, I should have clarified, the version of Bible will be a reflection of the Bishops in what ever country they are preaching God's Word, and the native tongue and understanding of vocabulary, in that specific land.

I think we all agree that when the Apostles first headed out to foreign nations, they were not reading Latin, Greek or Hebrew, to convert people of other languages. They translated God's Word to the language and understanding of vocabulary of the specific Land they entered into. We did not even have the Bible until the Church Herself decided to put it together in, what, I think 300 or 400 A.D.. The Bible and the Holy Spirit actively guiding the Church go hand in hand. They are not separate from one another.

When it comes to translating, preaching and understanding Jesus' words, the Bible, what Church leaders have put together as the Bible, guided by the Holy Spirit, translated into many different languages, in many different lands, it is the active work of the Holy Spirit through the Church. Why don't we all just read scriptures, as old as we can find them, in Greek, Latin and Hebrew? Even if we could, it is the Bishop's job, in His area, in that area's language, to convey Christ's teachings among the people, guided by the Holy Spirit.

Scriptures and the Holy Spirit actively guiding Catholic Leaders are not as separate as people, in general, tend to believe. It was Catholic Leaders, guided by the Holy Spirit, who put the Bible together. The Holy Spirit works through both the Bishops of a particular area on earth and their language, and through the Bible, which the Church put together, guided by the Holy Spirit.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The problem with the Douay Rheims is that it was written in the language and mindset of cultures long ago.

As a result, it can confuse people today who read it in a fundamental way.


Jim

 

[Anhelyna]

And try Reading from it to people who have difficulty in understanding English !

 

[ebia]

Dear all, thank you kindly for your answers. I picked up a copy of the Douay-Rheims today, and reading it over, it definitely has the more classical feel you all describe.

A difficulty that brings is that people tend to associate scripture with archaic, hard to understand, high literature. Yet that isn't true to its original generally, which very often is very down-to-earth.

I don't find it too difficult to understand what the words are trying to say,

Some cope better than others with the faux-Jacobean language, but that language is quite different and the reader is not always aware of the differences. Or when a change is obvious (thee, thou, etc) misunderstand the significance of that - for example thinking those pronouns are more formal when they are actually more informal.

My personal preference was always the NKJV, but comparing it to older translations, I could do without all of the liberty taken by the translators.

What makes you think the older translation is always the more accurate?

 

[StevenMerten]

Steven,

It doesn't work that way. For example the NAB text doesn't have any doctrinal errors within it, for which it gets a imprimatur; but this doesn't mean that it doesn't have translational errors. One of the things you may notice is that sometimes the readings in the missal are not identical to the reading of the NAB, because there are passages in the NAB that are not acceptable for the missal. A perfect example is the rendering of "Hail, Full of Grace" which is in the missal, but not in the NAB. Even though "Full of Grace" is a better rendering of the Greek.

Hello Erose,

Yes, the Church is constantly monitoring all translations for errors.

Christ's parable on the self-righteous Pharisee and the tax collector, is one area that I would ask the Church to take a look at modifying. And it is a big 'game changer'!

In Christ's parable on the Pharisee and the tax collector, as it reads now, in all translations, I believe, is that the Pharisee believes he has made himself righteous over the Tax collector, by his own doings of good works. If you put in the original Greek word 'eucharisteo' into our translations of the Bible, now it becomes the Pharisee thanking God that God made the Pharisee righteous, in the form of the Pharisee's good works, over the tax collector. It rereads the bible to read, that Jesus implies, the self righteous Pharisee thanked God for making him righteous, and the Pharisee did not believe his good works were from his own merits, but a gift from God. This identifies the self-righteous Pharisee with modern day Christians, who think their righteousness over others, in the form of good works, is a free, unearned, gift from God, and not their own doing.

NAB2 LUK 18:9 The Pharisee and the tax collector.

He then addressed this parable to those who were convinced of their own righteousness and despised everyone else. "Two people went up to the temple area to pray; one was a Pharisee and the other was a tax collector. The Pharisee took up his position and spoke this prayer to himself, 'O God, I thank [eucharisteo] you that I am not like the rest of humanity--greedy, dishonest, adulterous--or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week, and I pay tithes on my whole income.' But the tax collector stood off at a distance and would not even raise his eyes to heaven but beat his breast and prayed, 'O God, be merciful to me a sinner.' I tell you, the latter went home justified, not the former; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted."

Eucharisteo; with the dative it always stands where there is implied a kindness done, a favor, a charis, a grace for an undeserved gift received where it appears as thanks for any good experience.

Charis; from chairio, to rejoice, or chara, joy, favor, acceptance, a kindness granted or desired, a benefit, thanks, gratitude, grace. A favor done without expectation of return; absolute freeness of loving kindness of God to men finding its only motive in the bounty and freeheartedness of the Giver; unearned an unmerited favor.
​