A Look at the English Standard Version
Catholic Edition (ESV-CE) Bible

After several years of waiting and speculation, and just when it appeared that everybody had given up on the prospects of this becoming a reality, the English Standard Version Catholic Edition (ESV-CE) of the Bible was finally published at the beginning of 2018 in India.

Since there was so little information about the ESV-CE on the web at the time, I took a few photos and provided this review.

Note: About a year after I wrote this article, an edition of the ESV-CE was published in America by the Augustine Institute as The Augustine Bible. Later it was made available in digital form on Verbum.

The ESV-CE arrived from ATC Books in India. It took about two weeks to get from India to Japan after I placed the order. I'm happy with this Bible, and was glad to finally have it in my hands after ten months of trying to figure out how to order it and pay for it. The break came when I got instructions from them by e-mail.

This is the black bonded leather edition, and was the best edition available at the time.

This edition of the ESV-CE is slightly smaller than my RSV-2CE.

The ESV-CE edition that I bought was printed in black ink only, including the maps which were originally designed to be printed in full color. Although I prefer color maps, I was just happy to see that there are maps in this Bible because I always refer to them; they make reading the Bible much more interesting and understandable.

But recent editions of the ESV-CE do have color maps, so this is no longer an issue.

Later I discovered one advantage to black and white maps. Since they are printed on the same paper and with the same ink as the text of the Bible, I am able to underline and write on the maps with the same tools I use in the rest of the Bible.

In my case that would be a Uni Style Fit pen with 0.28mm Blue Black Refill for writing notes, and a Pentel Multi 8 Colored Pencil for underlining. I've experimented with many tools and decided these were the best for my Bible study.

I've written a separate article on the multi-colored pencil here.

Now I can customize the maps and add data that was not originally in these maps but appear in my Bible altlases. Consequently I refer to these maps all the time.

Speaking of customizing your Bible, I have created ESV-CE Bible PDF charts for reading the Bible straight through in a year. You can download the PDF, print, and glue to the blank pages in the back of your Bible (with restickable glue). You can find these and many more free resources on my Resources page.

This Bible is sewn bound, so it lays open flat, and there is absolutely no danger of having pages fall out. This is so much better than glue bound Bibles which have become so common these days.

The font is very readable, and the paper is white. In the photo below, the RSV-2CE is on the left, and the ESV-CE is on the right. The RSV-2CE might still be more readable, but it is probably a matter of personal preference.

Is the ESV-CE more accurate than the RSV-2CE?

When I first wrote this article several years ago I was pretty harsh on the RSV-2CE (Revised Standard Version, 2nd Catholic Edition). But now that I have read the ESV-CE (English Standard Version, Catholic Edition) from cover to cover many times, I must admit that there are issues with both translations and it comes down to a matter of personal preference.

The RSV came out first in the 1950's, and about fifty years later in the 2000's the ESV was produced as a revision of the RSV so it is a sort of "parent and child" relationship. Both translations are very similar and even identical for the most part, but there are a few places where I have found one to be more literal than the other, and it has become a toss-up.

In the ESV-CE disturbing parts such as Noah being the first tiller of the soil in Genesis 9:20 are changed to reflect the actual Hebrew text in the Old Testament. In this case the ESV-CE says that Noah began to till the soil (the first tiller of the soil was apparently Cain).

Noah was the first tiller of the soil. He planted a vineyard; (RSV-2CE)
Noah began to till the soil, and he planted a vineyard. (ESV-CE)

And I was happy to discover other more literal renderings in the ESV-CE. For example, the Greek word sarx in the New Testament is properly translated in the ESV-CE as flesh and not interpreted as worldly as it is in the RSV-2CE.

Flesh does not equal world, and such a translation approach could cause more problems than it solves. If there were at least a footnote alerting the reader to such substitutions, I could live with it. But there was no such footnote in this particular passage.

Of course, such cases seem to be few and far between and you can always pencil in your preferred reading in your preferred translation.

And I must point out that the ESV-CE is not totally free of meddling. In some cases it follows the RSV-2CE in making phrases more palatable and easier to grasp.

The phrase in bold text is actually two distinct terms which both the RSV-2CE and the ESV-CE combined into one concept. To their credit both translations have a footnote alerting the reader to this (although the footnote in the RSV-2CE seems to cause even more problems with its odd commentary). In the more literal Douay-Rheims Bible, both terms are included: effeminate and liers with mankind. Even the NRSV which is plagued with other types of politically correct meddling translates these terms more precisely as male prostitutes and sodomites. I guess the RSV-2CE and ESV-CE translators wanted to shield the reader from graphic imagery.

Smoothing over the original language because it is so graphic might spare us some unpleasant images but it can also deprive us of an occasional chuckle. Compare the English for males in any modern English translation of 1 Samuel 25:22, 34 with the Douay-Rheims (where it is 1 Kings rather than 1 Samuel). The Douay-Rheims (as well as the Protestant King James Version of 1611) translates the Hebrew text with the more accurate any that pisseth against the wall.

I believe that God gave us the words and concepts of the Bible in the context of certain languages and cultures and I would rather have a more literal translation and deal with potentially off-color phrases.

Conforming to modern culture

Speaking of culture, both the RSV-2CE and the ESV-CE modifiy descriptions to fit modern western culture, but in different places. The original literal reading may be a "speed bump" for new readers, but I think that in the long run a literal translation is the best option as one becomes more familiar with the culture of the Bible.

Here are two examples where the RSV-2CE goes with modern choices:

On the other hand, the ESV-CE has done away with girding the loins which is very prominent in the Bible, appearing many times in both literal and figurative usage.

Back in Bible times before trousers were invented, everyone wore a robe which could get in the way when running or fighting or doing heavy work. This required rolling up the bottom part and tucking it in the waist sash or tying it together to free up the legs.

It implies getting ready for work or battle, and we might say "roll up your sleeves" in modern culture.

Granted, first time readers will have no idea what it means to gird up one's loins, but after hearing it explained just once, this literal translation is very helpful and preferable.

The LORD himself used this phrase with Job. The RSV-2CE has the literal translation and the ESV-CE has a modern equivalent with a footnote giving the literal translation.

And it is a useful phrase which was often used figuratively, but loses something when watered down for modern readers (again the ESV-CE has a footnote with the literal rendering).

I think girding the loins is useful and colorful language which reminds you that you are reading the Bible, and I'm disappointed the ESV-CE did not retain it.

The RSV-2CE retains a lot of older English words and phrases while the ESV-CE updates these words to reflect current English. These may or may not be as helpful as girding the loins.

But Psalm 26:10 in both the RSV-2CE and ESV-CE still reads ...in whose hands are evil devices, which might conjure up images of phones going off during the Mass.

Is the ESV-CE Catholic enough?

There are some hot spots that Catholics like to check, and in those places the RSV-2CE outshines the ESV-CE.

The biggest one that everyone checks first is the Annunciation:

This will be a "deal breaker" for some folks.

For those who are curious about other Catholic hot spot passages, I have found them to be identical to the Protestant ESV. For example, all references to the "brothers" of Jesus are still "brothers" and not "brethren" as they appear in the RSV-2CE.

Here are some passages of interest:

Another point in favor of the RSV-2CE is the inclusion of cross references in the footnotes. The ESV-CE has very few cross references.

Also, you can get an RSV-2CE or the RSV-CE in several formats including a study Bible for the RSV-2CE and a nice pocket New Testament of the RSV-CE.

The RSV-2CE is so similar to the original RSV-CE (other than the removal of "Thees and Thous") that I am fine with using either one.

As you would expect, the ESV-CE has all the books of the Catholic Biblical canon, and has placed First and Second Maccabees after Esther in the historical books, rather than after Malachi in the prophetic books.

The introduction states that the ESV-CE is in accord with Liturgiam Authenticam and will "form the basis of the liturgical text in the Catholic Lectionary." I have read that the bishops in England and Wales are planning on using it in their liturgy as well (maybe they will correct the hot spots in their edition).

The ESV-CE is for the most part a very literal translation of the Bible, but it neglects Catholic Tradition in certain hot spots.

Audio Editions

When I first wrote this article there was no audio edition of the ESV-CE, but one is now available in the Bible in a Year section of the free Amen app by Augustine Institute. The audio tracks are divided into daily portions from three parts of the Bible. There is also a PDF chart available so you can check off the days as you go.

However, at the time I am typing this, the Amen app does not have the electronic text of the ESV-CE; only the audio Bible. You would have to also use a paper physical Bible or open up the ESV-CE in the Verbum app if you want to read as you listen. The Amen app does does not support split screen mode, so this is an awkward solution especially on a phone. I have done this for several years, but mainly with a larger tablet.

The free Catholic Bible Study App has announced that they will soon provide the audio for the RSV-2CE which will presumably play as you follow along with the text. The ESV-CE is currently my main Bible, but this new audio feature may tip the scales and cause me to return to the RSV-2CE.

As I get older, the ability to read the Bible on a backlit screen in a font that can be enlarged has become crucial, and the ability to listen to the Bible as I read it has become indispensable for dealing with wandering thoughts and distractions, and I also have better retention of contents that have entered through both my eyes and ears.

Conclusion

The bottom line is both the English Standard Version Catholic Edition and the Revised Standard Second Catholic Edition are excellent. The original ESV was a slight revision of the original RSV, so both are very similar and even identical for the most part. Which one is better for you will depend on your preferences, and possibly your dependence on electronic and audio editions.

Another excellent Catholic Bible that is faithful and literal and has electronic and audio options is the Douay-Rheims Bible. I have written a separate article about the advantages of this Bible.