Quote: (04-29-2018 02:07 AM)stugatz Wrote:
The Douay-Rheims Bible I've been told is a much closer translation of the Latin Vulgate, and predates the King James by a number of years. It's the Catholic Church's official Bible - well, those that aren't converged and trying to hand out easy-to-read versions, anyway.
No, the 1750 version - the Challoner - is the current official one.
Quote:Quote:
Cardinal Wiseman said regarding Challoner's version: "To call it any longer the Douav or Rheimish Version is an abuse of terms. It has been altered and modified until scarcely any verse remains as it was originally published."
I think Wiseman is over-selling it - many passages match, many do not.
Quote:Quote:
If one looks at the reasons for Bp. Challoner's work one can understand why he did what he did, but it is definitely inferior. He removed pretty much everything against the Protestants, soft pedaled doctrine, and made the translation in line with the King James Bible.
This was done for a reason. Under British penal laws being -caught with the Douay Rheims Bible was an executable offense. Henry VIII set up the Church of England as the only official church in his realm, and Catholics were hounded, persecuted, and executed. The Douay Rheims gave true Catholic doctrine and could not be permitted by the authorities.
So Catholics in England were not allowed the Douay Rheims Bible, and indeed had no bible until Challoner (who was a convert) made his edition and put it between the covers as the Douay Rheims in the 1700s. This was watered down enough to be allowed by the Crown to English Catholics.
This is von Peters discussing his 'modern english' retyping. I've ordered it from Lulu and will compare it to my printed-from-pdf copy of the 1610 combined version. Here's a screenshot they provided.
So, the Challoner softening is the one you're more likely to end up with if you buy a 'Douay-Rheims'. Sometimes you'll find an 1899 version. Any of the other 'modern English translations' of the original version sold by Bible Companies - which are rare, though do pop up now and then - remove all the margin notes and footnotes, which are instructive enough to be mandatory reading, IMHO.
Quote:Quote:
The King James Version is flat-out beautifully written, though, and has far better flow. I'd say read that one first, read the Douay-Rhiems next, and then move on to whatever suits you.
If I wanted to obscure truth, I'd use the appearance of beauty to seduce.
Protestant belief is not Roman Catholic belief. They're not interchangeable, though selling that idea that all faiths are equal roads to God is a stated goal of the subversives in the church in order to bring about a One Word Church.
I wonder why Roman Catholics are the only ones who were warned about this subversion years in advance. We know to expect a Great Apostasy.
Meanwhile, Episcopalians:
Quote:Quote:
Episcopal Church Of D.C. Will No Longer Acknowledge GOD As Masculine
Here were the Bishops and Deputies voting:
"Hair above the chin, subversion from within."