Talk:Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Bible (Rated start-Class) This article is supported by WikiProject Bible, an attempt to promote the creation, maintainance, and improvement of articles dealing with the Bible. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) WikiProject Christianity      (Rated start-Class) Christianity Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. WikiProject Catholicism (Rated start-Class) Catholicism Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, which collaborates on articles related to the Roman Catholic Church. To participate, edit this article or visit the project page for details. Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. ??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.

Contents 1 Merger 2 Request for clarification 3 Catholics did not add books 4 Revisitng the merge issue 5 Why can't they copyleft bibles?

[edit] Merger

I _really_ think this should be merged with the main article on the RSV. I don't see the need for a separate article. iHoshie 05:50, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This bible is really quite distinct from the RSV. You'll find alot of Catholics to disagree with you Carolynparrishfan 00:28, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Since this "debate" seems to be over, I'm removing the "merge" template. Carolynparrishfan 21:20, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request for clarification

In the article as it is, one does not clearly see the difference between RSV-CE and NRSV-CE. It should also become clearer in the header that RSV-CE is the Catholic bible.--Robin.rueth 09:59, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

• Actually, the Catholic Bible is the Neo Vulgata, and the official English-language Catholic Bible is the New American Bible (see the Vatican website for both), despite the constant claims by so-called "traditionalists" of its "rejection".

The notion of the Catholic bible is complex like many things in the Church. Here's my outline:

1. First would be the earliest manuscripts in Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, or Greek which the Church acknowledges as authentic.
2. Then would be the authorized translation of then in language of the Roman Rite (Latin). This is the Nova Vulgata. The unsigned commenter above used the Greek modifier "Neo" for a Latin word. This translation has been updated since the time of St. Jerome as new manuscripts are found. The latest revision is discussed on the Vatican web site
3. Then next would come liturgical use translations. These are approved by liturgical committees of bishops, the national conferences of bishops, and finally the Congregation for Divine Worship.
4. Then next would come the translations given an Imprimatur by bishops.
5. Finally would come any translation which includes the deutero-canonical books which complete the Catholic canon. patsw 00:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Catholics did not add books

The wording previously implied that in the RSV-CE Books were added by the Catholics. Things like this fuel a common Protestant misconception that Catholics added books to the Bible to support thier beliefs. While it may be debatable if these books are inspired or not, these books were later subtracted, not added by the Catholics. We are talking about books in the Old Testement that would have been included in the text that Jesus knew and used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.145.193 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Revisitng the merge issue

Both this article and the corresponding section in Revised Standard Version are a jumbled mess, and frankly I'm a little loathe to propse a merge that I couldn't actually accomplish. But I just don't see how this article can be justified as anything but as section(s) in the main RSV article. It doesn't even appear to be a single thing. Mangoe 11:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why can't they copyleft bibles?

Lawyers for the New Living Translation and Amplified bibles in particular are hounding the web just like the RIAA. Unlike music though, isn't the word of god supposed to be spread freely? Why not a copyleft license such as the GFDL (GNU Free doucmentation license) or the CC-by-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike). The copyleft is very important. It prevents proprietarization of derivitative works (including shell-wrapping if the copyleft is strong like the GNU-GPL)

Every modern translation seems to need lots of permission and even royalties to give away free copies (only digital copies - .txt .pdf .doc - can be manufactured cheaply by individuals). And the ones who are translating for charity rather than money are going public domain. Copyleft is the way to go. Lest you will find another big business modding your translation a bit and selling it with full-restrictions copyright. Copyleft gurantees the entire recipient downline to be able to copy and spread the gospel freely.--GreatInca 22:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)