[Not gonna take it anymore]

I don’t expect much from the American bishops, after all they gave us the NAB translation whose copyright they own.

We also had the worst translation of the mass which was finally re-done a few years ago. (I believe 2011)

That was the gift of the American bishops as well. Hopefully the generation coming up will re-do the actions of the former generation of bishops in America.

[editor-surveyor]

>> “I don’t expect much from the American bishops, after all they gave us the NAB translation whose copyright they own.” <<

.
That which is copyrighted is strictly for profit, not for truth, or reading.
.

[AnAmericanMother]

I personally would be happy to contribute to an auto-da-fe at which every available copy of the NAB was consigned to the flames. It's not only a bad translation in the sense that it's inaccurate; it's also clunky-sounding and already badly dated because of its use of transitory 'modern' expressions.

The Douay-Rheims (Challoner revision) is pretty good but rather Latinate-sounding (no surprise there). It was heavily relied on in the KJV New Testament. The RSV (Catholic edition) isn't bad either. I was raised on KJV, but it has its drawbacks, among them inaccurate translation and scholarship that has been superseded. Its language, however, is without peer save for the Douay. The 17th century scholarly Englishman spoke and wrote the purest and most graceful English the world has ever seen -- whether he was in OxBridge, Westminster, or Douay.

My personal fave at the moment is the Knox Bible by the immensely scholarly and talented Msgr. Ronald Knox (he also wrote detective stories; pretty good ones). It is everything a 'dynamic translation' should be - unlike the poor excuse for same exemplified in the NAB and the "old, lame duck" Mass translation.