The Revised New American Bible coming soon

I’m not optimistic.  My dislike for the NAB is well known to those who know me. I blogged about it here.  I realize that any scholar can – and will – defend any translation choice.  I know all it takes is one small, obscure rendering in a single manuscript, or even the idea that there could be such a reading of another language’s words, to justify any translation.  But half the time, when I read commentaries in our bulletins or other published materials, it seems as if the writer has to say something like ‘the NAB doesn’t really…’, or ‘unlike the NAB’s translation…’  If you have to say that too often, it doesn’t work. 

Plus, as I’ve said, it just reads bulky.  It doesn’t flow.  It’s comparing rap music to Mozart when you take some of the NAB’s translations compared to others.  It isn’t, to say it any other way, a beautiful translation.  Just like Nicholas Cage says in American Treasure: People don’t talk like that anymore (meaning the Declaration of Independence).  No they don’t.  And that’s a shame.  But remembering that language is the tool with which we speak about the Divine, once in a while it should sound like people used to talk.  And it should remind people that far from a burdensome mechanic with which we convey our thoughts, language should be at times pleasing to the eye and ear, especially when conveying truths about the most beautiful truth out there. 

So we’ll see, but again, not expecting much, and likely will still prefer the RSV and its siblings.