Click here for sample verses from the New Catholic Version
The Psalms • New Catholic Version (NCV)
Title: The Psalms. A St. Joseph Edition. With Helpful Appendix. An Index of Sunday Responsorial Psalms / and a Table of the Four- Week Psalter / for Morning and Evening Prayer
Date: © 2004, 2002.
Imprimatur: [No place] 2001, approved by the USCCB.
Publisher: Totowa N. J. (U.S.A.): Catholic Book Publishing Corp.
Contents: Roman Catholic Psalm- Book with ch. 1 - 150 translated after the Hebrew. Pss- headings and verse- numbering given, also cross- references and annotations.
Images: Cover, Title page
Location: Collection Bibelarchiv- Birnbaum, Karlsruhe, Baden. Germany
Comments: Paperback 16mo, 400 pp. The translation of this New Catholic Version »NCV« differs from the New American Bible though the book looks very similar to the dark green NAB Psalter. So far only the Psalms have been published. In the rescript it is stated that this version is for private use and study only and may never be used for liturgical purposes.
In the eleven page (general) preface, not dated, not authored, it is said in the paragraph "A St. Joseph Edition":
»Hence, it has become customary for Christians to make use of many translations of the sacred books in order to get to know the Bible and pray with its texts. Therefore, we thought it worthwhile to make available a Catholic Version of the Psalms in the renowned and exclusive format of our St. Joseph editions of Bibles and Missals. The St. Joseph Edition is an editorial system developed over a span of 50 years (…). [Any more information about the „Why another Catholic translation, who is responsible for it and what is the translation philosophy“ is not given. (sb)]
The Introduction, seven pp, deals with these topics: A Liturgical anthology • Various Attitudes toward God • Hebrew Poetry • The External Form • Hope Stimulated by Remembrance of the Past • Calls for Vengeance.
In the Appendix, 8 pp, one finds: Index of Sunday Responsorial Psalms • Table of Psalms in Four – Week Psalter for Morning and Evening Prayer.
The Catholic Book Publishing Company published a series of Psalters using the Revised New American Bible Psalm Book in 1992, the New International Version in 2000 and the New Catholic Version Psalm Book in 2002. (Catholic Book Publishing Company Psalter spines)
New Testament • New Catholic Version (NCV)
Title: The New Testament – New Catholic Version (NCV) • Saint Joseph Edition
With complete notes.
Date: ⓒ 2015 Catholic Book Publishing Corp.
Imprimatur and “Nihil obstat“ issued but without date and place. Approved by the CBC of the Philippines.
Publisher: Totowa N. J. (U.S.A.): Catholic Book Publishing Corp.
Contents: New Testament in the traditional oder – Contents (1 p); Abbreviations (1 p.) Prayers before & after Reading the Sacred Scripture (1 p); Preface (2 pp); General Introductions (14 pp). –– Prayer appendices I & II (18 pp); List of Popes (3 pp); 1 drawn map.
Images: Cover – title page – box excerpt.
Location: Collection Bibelarchiv–Birnbaum. Karlsruhe/ Baden. Germany
Comments: Vest Pocket edition 12mo; boxed; Dura–Lux adhesive binding. 720 pp. Scripture text in double column with paragraph headings. Each book is introduced. Copious endnotes and explanations with parallel & cross references after each book, but not all the references to the OT are indicated. Words of Christ in red.
In the Rescript it is stated: »This translation of the New Testament is intended for private use and study only and may never be used for liturgical purposes.«
In the Preface we read, »Following the highly acclaimed publication of the New Catholic Version of The Psalms in 2002, this translation of The New Testament has been accomplished by the same board of highly qualified Scripture scholars under the direction of Rev. Jude Winkler, OFM Conv., S.S.L. They were committed to render as perfectly as possible a translation of literal or formal equivalence. Numerous translations were consulted and decisions were made by consensus according to accepted principles of textual criticism. – With a deep desire to be faithful to God´s inspired words, the translators used the best available Greek texts to achive a dignified and accurate version of the sacred text in language that is clear and meaningful to today´s readers. – With extensive explanatory endnotes that reflect the most current consensus of Catholic scholarship, the New Catholic Version is a translation that can be trusted to provide the reader with a prayerful and fulfilling Bible experience suitable for private devotion and study.«
Birnbaum´s "nota bene":
Let me compare some verses of the NCV to other Roman-Catholic NT- texts with one eye on r-c traditions: It is helpful to read the verses in context.
● 1.) 1 Cor 9:5. The Greek in question here reads: ´adelfen gynaika‘. The term ´adelfos` means in this case ´sister`, the term ´gynaika` means female person or, wife. It is up to the reader, to interpret in favor of a sister in faith, or, a believing wife, which the apostle is taking along with him.
>NCV: »Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a believing wife like the other apostles…?«
>Challoner / Rheims (1752): »Have we not the power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles, …?« The Confraternity Version translates similar.
>NABre (2011): »Do we not have the right to take along a Christian wife, as do the rest of the apostles …?«
>NAB (1971) »Do we not have the right to marry a believing woman like the rest of the apostles …?«
>RSV–CE2 (2006): »Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles … ?« (Same in the RSV Catholic Ed. 1965 and the RSV Common Bible, Ecumenical Ed. 1973)
>NRSV–CE (2005): »Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a believing wife, as do the other apostles …? (Footnote: Gk a sister as wife)
>NT, St. Paul Catholic Edition (1994/ 2000): »Have we no right to travel with a Christian wife, as do the other apostles …?«
>New Jerusalem Bible (1990): »… And every right to be accompanied by a Christian wife, like the other apostles …«
>CTS New Catholic Bible (2007): »And the right to take a Christian woman round with us, like all the other apostles …«
>Christian Community Bible, revised (2013): »Have we not the right, to bring along with us a sister, as do the other apostles …?«
>Nicholas King (2004): »Clearly we wave the right to take a Christian wife around with us, like the other apostles …«
● 2.) Luke 1:28: The term in question is ´kecharitomenæ` (past participle passive), from the verb ´charito`, to make somebody happy, to favour, to grant grace, to bless.
The issue here is the rendering of the Latin Vulgate, for centuries the official language from which r-c Bibles had to be translated and which is still in use and in the ears of many believers in form of a prayer: The angel´s greeting to Mary who is `gratia plena´, full of grace, which the Challoner / Rheims translates from the Vulgate as does the Confraternity Version and others depending on the Latin.
>NCV (2015): »The angel came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace! The Lord is with you.“
>Challoner / Rheims (1752): »And the Angel being come in, said unto her. Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee.“« The Confraternity Version is identical as to the salutation.
>NABre (2011): »And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.“
>NAB (1971): »Upon arriving, the angel said to her: “Rejoice, o highly favored daughter! The Lord is with you.“
>RSV–CE2: »And he came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!"
>NRSV–CE (2005): »And he came to her and said, ´Greetings, favoured one! The Lord is with you`«
>New Jerusalem Bible: »He went in and said to her, ´Rejoice, you who enjoy God´s favor! The Lord is with you.´
>CTS New Catholic Bible (2007): »He went in and said to her, ´Rejoice, so highly favored! The Lord is with you.`
>NT, St. Paul Catholic Edition (1994/ 2000): »And when he came into her presence he said, ”Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!"»
>Christian Community Bible, revised (2013): »The angel came to her and said, “Rejoice, full of grace, the Lord is with you!"«
>Nicholas King (2004): »And going in to her he said, `Rejoice, you who have received favor: the Lord is with you.´
● 3.) John 2:3f. The term in question here is ´ti emoi kai soi, gynai`, so Jesus to his mother at the wedding at Cana; translated verbatim, ´what (with, or, between) me and you, woman`? A very similar text can be found in Mark 5:5f, where a demon– possessed man rejects Jesus with quite hostile words. The various translation examples show, how this interference in Jesus´ business is communicated to the "mother of God":
>NCV (2015): »Jesus responded, “Woman, what concern is this to us? My hour has not yet come.“«
>Challoner / Rheims: »And JESUS saith to her: Woman, what is that to me and to thee? My hour is not yet come.«
>The Confraternity Version (1941): » And Jesus said to her: “What wouldst thou have me do, woman? My hour has not yet come.“«
>NABre (2011): [And] Jesus said to her, “How does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet com.“«
>NAB (1971): »Jesus replied, “Woman, how does this concern of yours involve me? My hour has not yet come.“«
>RSV–CE2 (2006): »And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come."« Same wording in the 1965 and 1973 editions.
>NRSV–CE: »And Jesus said to her, `Woman, what concern is that to you and to me? My hour is not yet come.´«
>New Jerusalem Bible (1990): »Jesus said, `Woman, what do you want from me? My hour has not come yet.´«
>CTS New Catholic Bible: »Jesus said, `Woman, why turn to me? My hour has not come yet.´« Footnote: Lit. ´What to me and to you?`
>NT, St. Paul Edition: »Jesus replied, “What do you want from me, woman? My hour hasn´t come yet.“«
>CCB, revised (2013): »Jesus replied, “What concern is that to you and me? My hour has not yet come."«
>Nicholas King: »Jesus says to her, ´What is that to me and you, woman? My hour has not yet come.`«
● 4.) Luke 11:28. The words in question here are found in Jesus´ reply to a mother’s acclamation, »Blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts that nursed you!" (NCV). Is Jesus' answer more or less aptly to confirm the woman´s statement or is her statement inappropriate? Jesus says: ´menoun makarioi‘; ´menoun` is a particle with the meaning of increasing a statement or correcting it. Also, it can mean, ´rather`, or, ´quite the reverse`. So, can an attitude the son takes up towards his mother be read from his reply?
>NCV: »Jesus replied, “Blessed, rather, are those who hear the word of God and obey it.“«
>Challoner / Rheims: »But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.«
>Confraternity Version: «But he said, “Rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it.«
>NABre: “He replied, “Rather, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.“«
>NAB (1971): »“Rather," he replied, “blest are they who hear the word of God and keep it.“«
>RSV–CE2: »But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!"« Same wording in the 1965 and 1973 editions.
>NRSV–CE: »But he said, ´Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it!`
>New Jerusalem Bible: »But he replied, `More blessed still are those who hear the word of God andi keep it!´«
>CTS New Catholic Bible: »But he replied, `Still happier those who hear the word of God and keep it!´«
>NT, St. Paul Edition: »But he said, “Rather, Blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!"«
>CCB, revised (2013): »Jesus replied, “Truly blessed are those who hear the word of God, and keep it as well.“«
>Nicholas King: »But he said, On the contrary – happy are those who hear the word of God and keep it.´«
All the above examples of Scripture verses are taken from Roman–Catholic New Testaments. They show how wide the range of translation principles are in respect to rc- traditions and how the new NCV fits into it.
I’d like to quote two NCV– notes, one on Mat. 1:25, Engaged in no marital relations: literally, "did not know," "know" being the usual word for conjugal relations (see Gen. 4:1). The meaning of “he engaged marital relations with her …“ is “without his knowing her, she bore a son.“ The Hebrew word “until“ neither implies nor excludes marital conduct after Jesus´birth.
The note on Mat. 12:46, His mother and his brethren: “brethren“ here is used in the sense of “cousins“ or “relatives“. If they were true brothers of Jesus, the Gospel would say: “his mother and the sons of his mother“, which was the normal manner of speaking in Israel at that time. The church has never wavered in her teaching that Mary was a Virgin and that Jesus was her only son, just as he is the only son of the Father (Luk. 1:26)
[Remark: Luke 2:7 reads, »and she gave birth to her firstborn son« (NCV). Where does Scripture say that Jesus was her ´only` son? In Matthew 1:25 is it further said, "she gave birth to a son“, the Byzantine text family to which the textus receptus (TR) belongs, even adds, «her firstborn son«. If Scripture wanted to let us know that Jesus was Mary´s only son, it could have communicated it as such: ´she gave birth to her only son`: see the story of the son of a widow in Luke 7:11, where it is said, “ … a man who died was being carried out, the only son of his widowed mother. (NCV). So one can conclude that the r-c church maintains the perpetual virginity of Mary, the Scriptures do not.]
To find out how much these translations differ from non– Catholic versions, turn to your Bible for comparison. These examples may also help to deal with prejudices towards translations from the far side.