Why Did Protestants Stop Reading the Apocrypha?

Because they wanted cheaper Bibles.

In 2011 Ashland Seminary hosted a series of events celebrating the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. Part of that celebration included setting up a museum in which we displayed various manuscripts and Bibles dating back over 2,000 years. Included among the items on display was a page from a 1611 King James Bible. But the page was not from an Old or New Testament book, but was from 1 Maccabees, one of the books contained in the Apocrypha. When people touring the museum saw this they were usually quite surprised. They didn’t realize that the Apocrypha was part of that Bible.  Today, most protestant Bibles do not include the Apocrypha and few have ever read the Apocrypha. But history reveals that the Apocrypha has been a part of what we call the “Bible” longer than it has not. For example, the earliest most complete Bible discovered at the monastery on Mount Sinai (Codex Sinaiticus) contained the Apocrypha as well as a number of other books that were and are, in general, not considered canonical. The evidence of the 1611 King James shows that while the Bible has expanded and shrunk over history, what we commonly call the Apocrypha was usually a part of the Bible.

Yet, the situation today is such that finding an English language Bible with the Apocrypha is the exception to the rule. But why is that? Was it because Protestants finally got their theological house in order and excised the spurious books? Nope! It appears that the decision was influenced more by economics than theology. Over at the Anxious Bench Blog Philip Jenkins has a good post on the history of the Apocrypha and how it was eventually removed from most Protestant English Bibles.

English-speaking Protestants lost the Deuterocanon not through any calculated theological decision, but through publishing accident, and at quite a recent date. Prior to the early nineteenth century, Anglo-American Bibles included the apocryphal section, but this dropped out as printers sought to produce more and cheaper editions. Increasingly too, during the nineteenth century, anti-Catholic sentiment encouraged Protestants to draw a sharp line between the two variant Bibles. If Catholics esteemed books like Maccabees and Wisdom, there must be something terribly wrong with them.

You can read the full post here.

 

Rare Bible Discovered in Devon

A rare 16th century Bible which could be worth up to £10,000 if sold at auction has been discovered in a church in Devon.

The Telegraph:

The Bishop’s Bible, which is one of just 70 printed more than 400 years ago, was discovered during a clear out at St James’ Church in Teignmouth and could have ended up thrown in a skip.

It was found in poor condition by church reader Arthur Brooks, who rescued it from being discarded after recognising its potential value. It has now been restored and protected for future generations.

He said: “It was rotting away in a cupboard, the wooden and leather covers covered in beetles. The pages were like blotting paper and didn’t smell too good.”

Experts at Exeter Museum killed off the bugs and have restored the bible which was published by London firm Charles Barker in 1591 – the only Bible allowed to be printed at the time by the monarch Queen Elizabeth I.

The translated version in the book was largely replaced by that ordered by King James I in 1604 in an attempt to forge unity between England and Scotland. It was completed by 1611 and is widely regarded as the most influential book ever written in English.

The New ESV Bible.org

The latest version of the ESVBible.org is out.

We are pleased to announce that a redesigned ESVBible.org is now ready for public beta testing. It features a clean, minimal design, improved navigation, mobile web compatibility, and a new platform that sets the stage for future integration with mobile apps.

The new ESVBible.org is now available to all users. If you don’t already have an ESVBible.org account, it’s quick and easy to set one up.

 

Lutherans Latest to Reject New NIV Bible Over Gender Language

Good… The more the merrier. It’s a very poor translation of the Scriptures.

The updated NIV Bible has gained another critic: the Lutheran  Church-Missouri Synod. In a recent report, a panel of Lutherans cautioned  against use of the new NIV over gender-related issues.

“The use of inclusive language in NIV 2011 creates the potential for  minimizing the particularity of biblical revelation and, more seriously, at  times undermines the saving revelation of Christ as the promised Savior of  humankind,” the Commission on Theology and Church Relations Executive Staff  stated in an August report.

“Pastors and congregations of the LCMS should be aware of this serious  weakness. In our judgment this makes it inappropriate for NIV 2011 to be used as  a lectionary Bible or as a Bible to be generally recommended to the laity of our  church.”

The New International Version is reported to be the world’s leading  contemporary English Bible translation as it is known for being easy to  understand. It was announced in 2009 by global ministry Biblica that the popular  translation would be revised for the first time in 25 years.

The updated NIV (completed by members of the Committee on Bible Translation,  an independent body of global biblical scholars that has the sole authority to  update the text of the NIV) was released in 2011 and has drawn criticism largely  over its revised gender language.

Critics include the Committee on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and the  Southern Baptist Convention, which officially rejected the revised NIV last  year, saying it “alters the meaning of hundreds of verses, most significantly by  erasing gender-specific details which appear in the original language.”

Conservative Lutherans are the latest to express caution against use of the  2011 NIV.

The Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the LCMS has long  recognized that language evolves. It also acknowledged the intent of the  Committee on Bible Translation to try to communicate the meaning of the Bible’s  texts in English as it is used today.

But the commission took issue with some of the substitutions for masculine  singular pronouns.

“While there may be many examples in which such substitution does not change  the sense or inherent intent of the passage,” the commission reported, the  approach is advised against because “of its potential to alter  significantly the meaning of passages.”

Among the changes made in the updated NIV is the substitution of “he,” “him,”  and “his” for “they,” “their,” and “them.”

The commission provided two significant examples where such a revision proved  to affect the meaning of Scripture “adversely”…

There is more with examples here.

 

God’s Word in the King’s English

Why is the King James Bible still so revered?

The answer here.

 

New American Bible to be Revised into Single Translation

CNA:

The U.S. bishops have announced a plan to revise the New Testament of the New American Bible so a single version can be used for individual prayer, catechesis and liturgy.

“The goal is to produce a single translation,” said Cardinal Donald W. Wuerl of Washington, D.C. on June 14.

As he addressed his brother bishops at the spring meeting of the U.S. bishops’ conference, Cardinal Wuerl pointed to the central role of Sacred Scripture in the life of the Church.

He explained that the bishops’ committees on Divine Worship and Doctrine have both expressed a desire for a single translation, suitable for all pastoral applications, including individual prayer, study and devotional use, along with liturgical proclamation.

The new translation would “provide us one source of language when we speak the Word of God,” he said.

The process of creating the new translation will take “a long time” and will consist of numerous lengthy steps, Cardinal Wuerl acknowledged.

The New Testament translation was last revised in 1986. By way of comparison, the translation portion of revising the New American Bible’s Old Testament began in 1994 and was finished in 2001.

The Confraternity of Christian Doctrine will work with the Subcommittee on the Translation of Scripture Texts, to undertake the revision, he said. The group will “look at those texts to see that they are going to be able to be used for proclamation as well as for ordinary use.”

This work will utilize the same principles that guided the recent revision of the Old Testament in the New American Bible, as well as translation norms for Sacred Scripture, he added. “The Biblical scholars responsible for the revision will be sensitive then to the pastoral, the doctrinal, the liturgical considerations” as they work to produce a draft, which will then be presented “for review and preliminary approval” by the the Scripture translation subcommittee, the cardinal said.

The committees on worship and doctrine will then have an opportunity to review the texts.

Ultimately, the body of bishops “will be asked to approve the completed Biblical text for liturgical use,” so that it can then be submitted to Rome for the Vatican’s “recognitio,” after which the president of the U.S. bishops’ conference can grant it the “imprimatur.”

At that point, Cardinal Wuerl said, the revised translation of the New American Bible “will be able to be used in the lectionary at Mass.”

“So the end product will be one translation that we will all be using,” he explained, and all of the faithful will be “hearing the same words when we refer to specific texts.”

“That translation will be used in the liturgy, it will be used in study, it will be used in personal devotion, it will be used when we’re simply reading the text,” the cardinal said.

He emphasized that although the process will take a long time, it is currently an ideal time to begin, now that “we have all the pieces in place.”

I still think the RSV-CE is a far better version. But I believe it’s only approved for official use liturgically in the Ordinariates. As Timothy  (HT) puts it:

Of course, this is the death nail to any possibility of the RSV-2CE being used in the American Liturgy.

 

Ignatius Catholic Study Bible (Update) Old Testament

Timothy has the news:

Responding to a listener question on a recent Catholic Answers Live radio program, Fr. Fessio of Ignatius Press stated that he hoped the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible Old Testament would be completed in a year or two.  That, of course, is nothing new.  We heard that from Dr. Scott Hahn a few months backs on EWTN Bookmark.  What was interesting, however, was that it appears that Ignatius may not ultimately publish the complete ICSB in one volume, but rather two.  Citing the amount of commentary and study helps found in the ICSB, he said they are struggling to figure a way to publish it in one volume.  You can listen to the entire program here.  He answers the ICSB question around minute 32.

Now, what do you think about the real possibility of there never being a complete, one volume edition of the ICSB?  Personally, having examined many study Bibles over the past ten years, including ones like the ESV Study Bible and the NLT Study Bible, both of which contain more notes and study helps than the ICSB, I would be highly disappointed if it is only available in two distinct volumes.  Those two study Bibles I just mentioned are full of annotations, contain a ton of extra material in the appendix, and come in many different editions and covers.  The NLT Study Bible, which I am flipping through as I write this post, has well over 300 pages of extra material in the appendix and contains more cross-references and in-text theme notes/person profiles/maps than the ICSB.  The ESV Study Bible, like the recently revised NIV Study Bible, is produced with full-color charts, images, and in-text maps.  When you compare these three study Bibles to the overall look of the ICSBNT, there is a huge difference in appearance and the amount of material contained within.  While the material in the ICSB is outstanding, something that has never been in doubt, the overall look and production quality is sorely lacking.  And the possibility of there not being a one volume edition is simply mind-blowing.  Again and again I continue to wonder what is going on at Ignatius Press concerning the ICSB.  Do they have limitations on what they can do?  Have they looked at other study Bibles on the market?  Where is the promotional support for the ICSB and the RSV-2CE?

Come on guys, hurry up yet!

The Bible in one volume will definitely be my Bible of choice.

 

New Lectionary & ESV: The ESV is a Revision of the RSV

Here is some official clarification via Fr Somerville-Knapman:

Given the time we have devoted recently to the proposed new Lectionary based on the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible, including a brief comparison of an ESV sample text with other translations, and given the lively and interesting comments it has elicited, I made so bold as to email directly to the Most Reverend Mark Coleridge, the Archbishop of Canberra-Goulburn and Chairman of the International Commission for the Preparation of an English Language Lectionary (ICPEL), seeking some authoritative clarification on some of the questions raised in our discussions.

With admirable speed for a busy diocesan bishop, he very kindly sent a concise but richly informative reply which answers the questions I asked him, and also one I failed to ask him! Apart from chopping the head and the tail of the email which were brief and directed to me, I shall quote him in full:

…  In answer to your questions, the facts are these.  The ESV was chosen over the RSV because the ESV, in its 7% modification of the RSV, seeks to incorporate the fruit of more recent biblical scholarship, i.e. since the publication of the RSV.  In other words, the RSV is out-of-date.  We were looking for a more up-to-date version of the RSV; and when the NRSV proved impossible, we chose the ESV.  Unlike the copyright holders of the NRSV, the copyright holders of the ESV have shown themselves quite open to the kind of changes we would need or want to make for Catholic lectionary purposes; and the copyright arrangements for the project are now in place.  What will appear in the lectionary will be a modified form of the ESV.  This may in time look to the production of a Catholic edition of the ESV, though that is not decided.  I know too little of the permission given to the English ordinariate, but I doubt that it will have an effect on the lectionary we are producing.  That would depend on the Holy See.  It is very hard to say when the ESV lectionary will be ready for publication.  We have all but finished work on the first volume (Sundays and Solemnities), and it may be that the first volume will appear before the others.  But it depends on how quickly the bishops of the five Conferences get back to us within the process of consultation.  Many of them are keen to have a new lectionary as soon as possible, so it may be that we will have the entire new lectionary by 2014…

+Mark

So the rationale behind the choice of the ESV is made clear. The ESV is a revision of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) that takes into account the latest insights of biblical scholarship and textual criticism, and only 7% of the RSV is actually revised in the process. Moreover, using the NRSV (New RSV) was not a viable option due to the copyright holders not being open to the Church making the necessary modifications to the text for our use. The ESV’s copyright holders are amenable to our need to edit texts for the purposes of the Lectionary, and to bring certain passages into line with Catholic tradition.

Answering a question I wished I had asked (but didn’t!), given comments made by Theophrastus in another post here, it is conceivable that a full-blown, standalone Catholic edition of the ESV could be produced, though no decision has been made on that. As suggested yesterday, given the international, large-scale diffusion of the Catholic Lectionary, a Catholic ESV should be a viable proposition, at least economically. This would address the concerns raised over not having a Bible edition that matched the the texts of the Lectionary.

Archbishop Coleridge also kindly gave us some sort of ballpark figure for when the Lectionary might be implemented, given the variables of the time needed to revise the texts and for the necessary episcopal consultation process: 2014. This is sooner than I had expected, and is very heartening. Given that these processes often take longer than first envisaged, perhaps 2015 might be a safer bet, but still that is much sooner than I had expected. 2014 would be just wonderful, even if it were only the first volume…

 

A Complete Ignatius Catholic Study Bible in 2014 / 2015

It would seem as if an entire Ignatius Catholic Study Bible will be completed by 2014 or 2015.

I already have the New Testament and it really is good. I do hope they hurry along…

HT:  Timothy who notes:

The beginning of this interview I found most helpful, where Hahn essentially compares the ICSB to the NIV Study Bible. He notes, rightly so, that there are no Catholic study Bibles that have that mix of being both academic and theological, like the NIV Study Bible. I think we would all agree that the Catholic Study Bible from Oxford is clearly more academic.

Latest NIV Bible Translation Clearer on Homosexual Sins, Says Theologian

The Christian Post:

The latest version of the popular NIV Bible translation has had its verses on homosexuality reworded, making them clearer in denouncing the practice, a theologian who helped with the translation says.

These clarifications include the verse in 1 Corinthians 6:9, where the 1984 NIV version uses the phrase “homosexual offenders,” while the 2011 translation changes the phrase to “men who have sex with men.”

The Committee on Bible Translation, chaired by Dr. Douglas J. Moo, who also serves as Wessner Chair of Biblical Studies at Wheaton College, released the 2011 New International Version last year.

“Debates among Christians about the teaching of the Bible on homosexuality over the last twenty years sparked considerable scholarly interest in relevant words and texts,” said Moo in an interview with The Christian Post.

“This research showed that two Greek words in this verse referred, respectively, to the passive and active participants in male homosexual activity.”

Moo also explained the problem with the previous translation for a verse like the one in 1 Corinthians 6:9.

“The 1984 NIV rendering … did not make clear whether homosexual activity per se was being condemned or whether only certain kinds of ‘offensive’ homosexual activity was being condemned.,” said Moo.

“The updated NIV makes clear that the Greek words here indicate any kind of homosexual activity. The updated NIV also reflects the fact that the key Greek word here refers to males.”

According to Moo, other verses that were altered due to scholarship and to make the message clearer included Romans 1:26-27 and Leviticus 18:22…

More here.