[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.