I vote Coverdale
I voted Grail because I've spent the most time praying with it (thanks to the LOTH) and I think it is a wonderful translation (for prayer; I can't speak to scholarly linguistic issues). That being said, I haven't spent any time yet with the Revised Grail, so I could end up liking it better. Also, I really like both the RSV and NABRE Psalters. So, in other words, tough call.
I vote for THE MESSAGE (Eugene Peterson)
The Coverdale Psalms. I chant them every morning and evening using Saint Dunstan's Plainsong Psalter. The Ordinariates and Anglican Use parishes are using Coverdale as well.
So perhaps I should have added Coverdale!
But Coverdale wasn't Catholic, was he? That's the Book of Common Prayer, isn't it? Goodness, why not include the Geneva Bible while we're at it? Anyway, I've read the Revised Grail Psalter and liked it, so I chose that version for being new and interesting. It was like reading the Psalms as responsorial psalms.
Fr Frei's little translation.
Wow, the vote is split up as much as when there were 16 Republican candidates for president. A bit surprised KJV was that high.
RSV. Definitely.I do have a soft spot in my heart for the original NAB Psalms, as I prayed them for decades. And the KJV as well for the sheer majesty of the translation.Does anyone know if the Book of Common Prayer still uses the Coverdale Psalms or a different translation?
Miles Coverdale was certainly not Catholic, but his Psalms are used in the Ordinariate and Anglican Use liturgical books. I also note that the translators of the KJV and NRSV were not, or at least not all, Catholics. Tate, the Coverdale psalms are still used in the BCPs of several Commonwealth countries but were replaced in the 1979 US BCP.
Both the 1928 and 1979 revisions of the Book of Common Prayer still have the Coverdale Psalms.
The English 1662 BCP is still in use, and of course it still has the Coverdale Psalms. The current American Book of Common Prayer (1979) has Psalms that are sort of based on the Coverdale Psalter but is still a very different translation with inclusive language. But the American 1928 BCP is still popular, and it has the Coverdale Psalms which were edited to be more faithful to the Hebrew text. I think the other current editions of the BCP in other English speaking countries still use the Coverdale Psalms as well.
Other - Revised English Bible.
Coverdale for me as well. I don't really care if it's anglican rather than catholic. There's nothing to stop a catholic from loving the daily offices from the 1662 BCP
I voted Grail. They're prayed daily because of the Liturgy of the Hours.
Common Worship's revision of the Coverdale psalter!
Biblical Catholic said "Both the 1928 and 1979 revisions of the Book of Common Prayer still have the Coverdale Psalms." That's incorrect. The former does, the latter does not.
I chose "other" (which meant Coverdale) but for me the Coverdale and RSV Psalms are both favorites. I would have preferred using the RSV-CE or RSV-2CE Psalms for my Morning and Evening Prayer, but I think that moves it away from being the Liturgical "Prayer of the Church" and turns it into a personal devotion. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.
"That's incorrect. The former does, the latter does not."The one used in the C of E does.
I voted KJV.I use the KJV as part of my devotional psalter...I have to say that, even as a Catholic, the KJV with Deuterocanonicals is used for my devotional reading. The Eastern Catholic Churches and even the Eastern Orthodox sometimes use the KJV or NKJV as the main translation for the liturgy in English. I would say a close second would be a tie between the Psalms translated from the Septuagint by the monks of Holy Transfiguration Monastery and Douay-Rheims Psalms.One translation that I am interested in praying would be the Scottish Metrical Psalter of 1650, because the English rhymes...I need to obtain a copy. I also intend on trying the Knox Psalms.Alas I feel like I will always stick with the KJV Psalter or even the Scottish Metrical Psalter of 1650.-Gladys
While no translation is perfect (and is always the product of its age in terms of textual criticism, etc.), I have found David Frost's Liturgical Psalter (1977) worthy of use for devotional purposes. It is available online at the bible.oremus.org website and for purchase at Amazon (in the form of the Cambridge Liturgical Psalter). It is rhythmic (in a Coverdalian kind of way), accurate (at least to scholarship standards circa 1970's), and manages to maintain a proper level of diction throughout (similar to the RSV and the original Grail). I think most scholars would follow the Masoretic text a little more closely today, but this is quibbling.Also, if Coverdale and its Early Modern English is what you're after, the Revised Psalter (1964) is worth considering. None other than C.S. Lewis and T.S. Eliot were on the translation committee and they did an admirable job of revising this classic (their revisions being referred to as "invisible mending" in the translator's notes). And speaking of poets, W.H. Auden and Chester Johnson worked on the ECUSA's revision of the Coverdale Psalter (published in the 1979 BCP). Both of these psalters are admirable in terms of poetic beauty (but lacking somewhat in accuracy compared to the Frost Liturgical Psalter).As a side note, I recently discovered Richmond Lattimore's New Testament (1996). It is available at Amazon. While I do have to insert Catholic phraseology from time to time while reading (e.g., "Hail, full of grace" rather than "Hail, favored one"), this is generally a stunning translation. Lattimore was a gifted translator (being both a poet and scholar).
I voted for the NABRE psalms but I also like the Common Worship psalter. One place you may look it up is on http://bible.oremus.org/.
I voted for NABRE
It's kind of ironic that the Grail Psalter is not available online as are all the others.
Douay. Challoner's revision of course, I'm a sucker for the old and reliable.
Post a Comment