[Siobhan]

I still use my 1966 Jerusalem Bible - Reader's Edition. I now have a Knox New Testament which I think is the kind of language we should use at Mass. I have a Catholic edition Revised Standard Version Bible which I go to when I have a more technical question.

I would recommend the Knox New Testament to everyone. The whole Bible in Knox's translation isn't in print -- at least I haven't been able to get ahold of one. Our big family Bible is Douay-Rheims.

[Salvation]

I have not heard of the Knox New Testament before. Catholic, obviously, or you wouldn't be using it. Thanks for the info.

[Salvation]

I use a St. Joseph's New American Bible.

My son has an old English Douay-Rheims that he loves.

[Maximilian]

I would recommend the Knox New Testament to everyone. The whole Bible in Knox's translation isn't in print -- at least I haven't been able to get ahold of one. Our big family Bible is Douay-Rheims.

I have a copy of both the Knox Old Testament and New Testament. But I would not recommend them. When I bought them I expected them to be a more modern update of the Douay-Rheims -- kind of like a Challoner for the 20th century. But instead they are very modern renderings, in fact a foreshadowing of what was to come. Notice that the article places the Knox translation under the category of "dynamic translations."

You can't go wrong with the Douay-Rheims. I don't understand why the author felt compelled to insert those gratuitous slurs against supporters of the Douay-Rheims. Apparently he believes that people of like me haven't even read the title page of our Bibles. What evidence does he have for the claims of ignorance he ascribes to those who still read the same Bible that was the official Catholic Bible in English for almost 400 years?