www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings RSV vs RSV-CE

Does anyone know the difference between the RSV translation (Oxford Univ. Press with Apocrypha) and the RSV-CE (Catholic Edition published by Ignatius Press)?
Thanks!
Silouan, monk

The Oxford edition contains the expanded OT Canon of the Orthodox Church. Aside from that the RSV-CE has tweaked some verses to conform with the mind of the Church. For example, the RSV has: Rejoice highly favored daughter! the RSV-CE has the traditional: Hail, Mary, full of grace! The notes have been amended as well. Both are very good translations and the RSV-Oxford is currently the only bible in English with the full Orthodox Canon.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Unfortunately, the RSV, in whatever edition, has its OT translated from Kittel's rendition of the Hebrew Masoretic text rather than from the Septuagint. And the NT is trnaslated from the Alexandrian text, popular since Westcott & Hort, rather than from the Received Text. The Catholic edition did make a few changes, which are listed in the back. These include Is. 7:14 "Virgin" instead of "young woman." For the NT and for the protocanonical books of the OT, there is the English Standard Version, which is a slight revision of the RSV to remove some more of the modernist renditions.

Porter

Oh that the Church would render an edition of the RSV-CE with the Orthodox Canon. Now that would be a Bible that I would immediately purchase.
Stephanos I

Dear Brothers,

I concur with the translation diffulties pointed out by Porter. These observations have long frustrated me as well. This is why I have some high hopes for the new English translation of the Septuagint being published by the OSB writers.

To reply to Stephanos' observation, there has actually been translations made like the one you mention. The Armenian Orthodox Church in America published the RSV-CE with our full Orthodox Canon. It is identical to the RSV-CE but with the additions of 151st Psalm, the Prayer of Manesseh and 1 and 2 Esdras. It is the primary text my family uses for prayer and Bible study.

The differences between the RSV and the RSV-CE are notable. Many of the numerous deletions made in the NT by the original publishers of the RSV have been resotred in the RSV-CE. One example is the "woman caught in adultery" passage in the Gospel according to St. John. The version published by Ignatius Press catalogs these restored passages in the back.

Hope this helps,
Ghazar

So, then, would you recommend the Jerusalem Bible (not the New Jerusalem)? I think Sharon likes the NJB as I also do. The other day, in Confession, my penance was Psalm 51 (Miserere). I checked both the RSV-CE and the JB. The JB brought tears to my eyes whereas the RSV-CE almost seemed emotionless. Maybe its just me.
Blessings +
Silouan, her monk

Dear MonkSilouan,

I like the NT of the NJB but I find the over-all OT of the JB and NJB unnacceptable. This is primarily b/c I don't like the Massorectic text on which they are based. I think its substantially different from the texts used by the Apostles and our Holy Fathers. I think books like the Psalms should be translated with an eye to their Christological meaning. Most modern texts like the JB, etc. make a conscious effort to avoid doing this. There are other reasons.

But if you find the text acceptable and it brings you closer to God, then that should be enough. I still have high hopes for the new English edition of the Septuagint due out next year.

In the meantime RSV-CE suffices due to the fact that it has been paritally corrected to be more in line with the Traditional text used by Chirstians (e.g. "The pierced my hands and feet Ps 21/22). I just correct the areas which are left uncorrected (e.g. Sacrifice thou hast not desired but a body hast thou prepared for me, Ps 39/40).

Hope this helps,
Ghazar

p.s. Ps 50/51 in the JB has the verse which is found to be erroneously translated and nearly heretical.

They put on the lips of the Psalmist: "remember I was born guilty, a sinner from the moment of my conception" (Ps 51:5).

This verse is understood very differently in the Orthodox tradition which translates it literally from the Septuagint, "For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me" (Ps 50:7 LXX) as even St. Jerome translated this in Latin. We believe we are born damaged but certainly not "totally depraved" or guilty.