Thoughts on the ESV Catholic Edition

Last year, the Augustine Institute put out the The Augustine Bible (ESV-CE). This is the first time the ESV Catholic Edition has become available to a North American market. While the ESV-CE did exist before this, it was notoriously hard to find, being previously confined to just India (where the Catholic bishops approved it for liturgical use). Those who are interested in this translation can check out the Augustine Institute’s promotional video for it here:

Protestants (and former Protestants) are familiar with the English Standard Version because of it is one of the favoured translations among conservative Evangelicals. The ESV is a revision of the RSV, which was produced in the 1950s, and is the first real commercially successful modern Bible version. It has since become dated in some of its wording, and it was also controversial in its day for how it translated Isaiah 7:14 (rendering it as “young woman” rather than as “virgin”). The RSV Catholic edition was produced in the 1966, and it was further revised into the RSV-2CE by Ignatius Press. The RSV-2CE takes out the remaining archaisms in the RSV (such as the use of thees and thous in prayer), and corrects the translation of Isaiah 7:14 back into “virgin.”

The production of the ESV began in 2001 when some Evangelical scholars wanted a translation that was both “essentially literal” and reasonably easy to read. They used the RSV as their base text, updated the language to remove archaisms, and corrected the translation of Isaiah 7:14. The text has been revised a few times since, with the final edition being published in 2016. A version with the apocrypha/detuerocanon was also published in 2009, but had since gone out of print, and is now difficult to obtain.

Now, given that the ESV now comes in a Catholic edition, should Catholics get this Bible? To answer this question, I’d like to compare the ESV text with the RSV-2CE, which is a tried and tested Catholic edition Bible. It’s also good to compare the two because they’re both revisions of the RSV, and 98% of the time they read exactly the same. There are a few places where the two translations are subtly different, however. One such difference is in Luke 1:28, which is a well known verse among Catholics. The two translations read thus:

And he came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” (RSV-2CE)

And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” (ESV-CE)

“Full of grace” and “favored one,” are two different ways of translating the Greek word κεχαριτωμένη, and as this Catholic Answers article explains, both are valid translations. In fact, the ESV-CE isn’t the only Catholic Bible that renders it this way. The NRSV-CE, NABRE and RNJB also render it the same way. However, since Catholics have traditionally used the translation “full of grace,” more traditionally-minded Catholics may prefer a translation that uses that wording.

Another area where the two translations differ is in the translation of ἐπίσκοπος. Traditional Bible versions such as the KJV and RSV render this word as “bishop,” and the RSV-2CE follows suit. A number of modern versions, however, such as the ESV-CE, translate it as “overseer.” A good example of this is 1 Timothy 3:1, where the two translations read thus:

The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task. (RSV-2CE)

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. (ESV-CE)

Other Catholic versions show even more diversity in rendering ἐπίσκοπος. The RNJB , for example, renders it as “presiding elder.” This is an inaccurate translation, since they conflate the Greek word for bishop (ἐπίσκοπος) with the Greek word for presbyter (πρεσβύτερος). While “overseer” is definitely better, it is still the less traditional rendering, and can be confusing to readers (after all, when was the last time someone referred to their pastor as their “overseer”?)

While these differences are minor, they can be deciding factors for someone deciding which translation to use. It seems that the ESV-CE is trying to cater to a niche that the RSV-2CE has already filled (i.e. conservative Catholics who want a Bible that is both accurate and readable). However, it has done so less effectively than the latter, because the wording of the RSV-2CE is more suitable to Catholic sensibilities than the ESV-CE.  Not only that, but the RSV-2CE is available in a variety of quality Study editions, such as the Didache Bible, Ignatius Study NT, and the Great Adventure Bible. While similar study Bibles might come out for the ESV-CE in the future, none are available at present.

So in conclusion, should a Catholic get the ESV-CE? It’s certainly not a bad choice to make, but it is still less good than than the RSV-2CE, and I would advise those who are still deciding upon a translation to choose the latter instead.