Douai-Rheims Bible - Revision history

Nick at 11:06, 3 February 2025

Nick — Mon, 03 Feb 2025 11:06:13 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:06, 3 February 2025
Line 16:		Line 16:
	As a recent translation, the Rheims New Testament had an influence on the translators of the [[King James Version of the Bible\|King James Version]] (see below). Afterwards it ceased to be of interest in the Anglican church. The city is now spelled Douai, but the Bible continues to be published as the ''Douay-Rheims Bible'', and has formed the basis of some later Roman Catholic Bibles in English.		As a recent translation, the Rheims New Testament had an influence on the translators of the [[King James Version of the Bible\|King James Version]] (see below). Afterwards it ceased to be of interest in the Anglican church. The city is now spelled Douai, but the Bible continues to be published as the ''Douay-Rheims Bible'', and has formed the basis of some later Roman Catholic Bibles in English.

-	The title page runs: ''The Holy Bible, faithfully translated into English out of the authentic Latin. Diligently conferred with the Hebrew, Greek and other Editions.'' The cause of the delay was ''our poor state of banishment'', but there was also the matter of reconciling the Latin to the other editions. William Allen went to Rome and worked, with others, on the revision of the Vulgate. The Sixtine edition was published in 1590. The definitive [[Vulgate#The Clementine Vulgate\|Clementine]] text followed in 1592. These revisions of the Vulgate allowed Dr Worthington, in the preface, to say: "we have again conferred this English translation and conformed it to the most perfect Latin Edition."~~<ref>Bernard Orchard, ''A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture'', (Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1951). Page 36.</ref>~~	+	The title page runs: ''The Holy Bible, faithfully translated into English out of the authentic Latin. Diligently conferred with the Hebrew, Greek and other Editions.'' The cause of the delay was ''our poor state of banishment'', but there was also the matter of reconciling the Latin to the other editions. William Allen went to Rome and worked, with others, on the revision of the Vulgate. The Sixtine edition was published in 1590. The definitive [[Vulgate#The Clementine Vulgate\|Clementine]] text followed in 1592. These revisions of the Vulgate allowed Dr Worthington, in the preface, to say: "we have again conferred this English translation and conformed it to the most perfect Latin Edition."

	==Style==		==Style==
-	The Douay-Rheims Bible is a translation of the [[Latin Vulgate]], which is itself a translation from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. The Vulgate was largely created due to the efforts of Saint [[Jerome]] (345-420), whose translation was declared to be the authentic Latin version of the Bible by the [[Council of Trent]]. While the Catholic scholars "conferred" with the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] and [[Greek language\|Greek]] originals, as well as with "other editions in diuerse languages,"~~<ref>1582 Rheims New Testament, "Preface to the Reader."</ref>~~ their avowed purpose was to translate from the Latin Vulgate, for reasons of accuracy as stated in their Preface, but which also tended to produce, in places, stilted syntax and Latinisms. The following short passage ([[Epistle to the Ephesians\|Ephesians]] 3:6-12), taken almost at random, is a fair example, admittedly without updating the spelling conventions then in use:	+	The Douay-Rheims Bible is a translation of the [[Latin Vulgate]], which is itself a translation from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. The Vulgate was largely created due to the efforts of Saint [[Jerome]] (345-420), whose translation was declared to be the authentic Latin version of the Bible by the [[Council of Trent]]. While the Catholic scholars "conferred" with the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] and [[Greek language\|Greek]] originals, as well as with "other editions in diuerse languages," their avowed purpose was to translate from the Latin Vulgate, for reasons of accuracy as stated in their Preface, but which also tended to produce, in places, stilted syntax and Latinisms. The following short passage ([[Epistle to the Ephesians\|Ephesians]] 3:6-12), taken almost at random, is a fair example, admittedly without updating the spelling conventions then in use:

	:''The Gentils to be coheires and concorporat and comparticipant of his promis in Christ JESUS by the Gospel: whereof I am made a minister according to the gift of the grace of God, which is given me according to the operation of his power. To me the least of al the sainctes is given this grace, among the Gentils to evangelize the unsearcheable riches of Christ, and to illuminate al men what is the dispensation of the sacrament hidden from worldes in God, who created al things: that the manifold wisedom of God, may be notified to the Princes and Potestats in the celestials by the Church, according to the prefinition of worldes, which he made in Christ JESUS our Lord. In whom we have affiance and accesse in confidence, by the faith of him.''		:''The Gentils to be coheires and concorporat and comparticipant of his promis in Christ JESUS by the Gospel: whereof I am made a minister according to the gift of the grace of God, which is given me according to the operation of his power. To me the least of al the sainctes is given this grace, among the Gentils to evangelize the unsearcheable riches of Christ, and to illuminate al men what is the dispensation of the sacrament hidden from worldes in God, who created al things: that the manifold wisedom of God, may be notified to the Princes and Potestats in the celestials by the Church, according to the prefinition of worldes, which he made in Christ JESUS our Lord. In whom we have affiance and accesse in confidence, by the faith of him.''
Line 92:		Line 92:
	The question on the issue of the Douay Rheims’ Version’s influence on the King James Bible falls into two parts; 1)was there any influence?, and 2) if so how significant?		The question on the issue of the Douay Rheims’ Version’s influence on the King James Bible falls into two parts; 1)was there any influence?, and 2) if so how significant?

-	As a fact, the Old Testament “Douay” translation of the Latin Vulgate arrived too late on the scene to have played any part in influencing the King James Bible<ref>(as noted in Pollard, Dr Alfred W. Records of the English Bible: The Documents Relating to the Translation and Publication of the Bible in English, 1525-1611, London, Oxford University Press, 1911)</ref>.	+	As a fact, the Old Testament “Douay” translation of the Latin Vulgate arrived too late on the scene to have played any part in influencing the King James Bible.

-	However Dr James G Carleton in his book “The Part of the Rheims in the making of the English Bible” ~~<ref>Clarendon Press, Oxford 1902</ref>~~ argues for the influence of the Rheims New Testament, and states that it was mentioned in the “Translators to the Reader” preface of the King James Bible. On an examination of the preface there is no mention by name, but two comments which are not complementary and may refer to the translation; “Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the people's understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confess, that we forced them to translate it into English against their wills” and in a jibe against those preferring a Roman Catholic Translation - “Nay, if it must be translated into English, Catholics are fittest to do it. They have learning, and they know when a thing is well, they can manum de tabula.” ~~<ref>The latter phrase is from Cicero, Epistulae ad familiares – [Remove] your hand from the board!</ref>~~	+	However Dr James G Carleton in his book “The Part of the Rheims in the making of the English Bible” argues for the influence of the Rheims New Testament, and states that it was mentioned in the “Translators to the Reader” preface of the King James Bible. On an examination of the preface there is no mention by name, but two comments which are not complementary and may refer to the translation; “Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the people's understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confess, that we forced them to translate it into English against their wills” and in a jibe against those preferring a Roman Catholic Translation - “Nay, if it must be translated into English, Catholics are fittest to do it. They have learning, and they know when a thing is well, they can manum de tabula.”

	In Chapter two his analytical method is described and Carleton admits on page 28 of his book “We have do with presumptions not certainties”. Even given that caveat, the thesis that the Rheims New Testament influence the King James Bible is demonstrated by Carleton’s work. In other words the Translators of the King James Bible were influenced by the Rheims translation.		In Chapter two his analytical method is described and Carleton admits on page 28 of his book “We have do with presumptions not certainties”. Even given that caveat, the thesis that the Rheims New Testament influence the King James Bible is demonstrated by Carleton’s work. In other words the Translators of the King James Bible were influenced by the Rheims translation.
Line 102:		Line 102:
	The remaining question to be asked is; "how much influence did the Rheims New Testament have on the King James Bible"?		The remaining question to be asked is; "how much influence did the Rheims New Testament have on the King James Bible"?

-	Charles C Butterworth ~~<ref>ibidem</ref>~~ unlike Carleton set out to look not at the influence of an individual predecessor, but to examine and measure all the influences on the King James Bible. His results are as follows; Wycliff versions, including English Sermons 4%; Tyndale’s work, including the Matthew Bible 18%; Coverdale’s work, including Great Bibles 13%; Geneva Bible and Geneva New Testament 19%; Bishop’s Bible and its revision 4%; all other versions before 1611 3 %; King James Bible new material 39%; making 100% in total. This analysis tells where readings in the KJV are first to have been found, but all of the particular Wycliff readings, and many of the Coverdale readings (i.e. those not repeated in the Great Bible), will have been most accessible to the King James translators from Fulke's edition of the Rheims New Testament. Overall therefore, this study indicates that the influence of the Rheims New Testament amounted to around 8% of the text of the King James New Testament.	+	Charles C Butterworth unlike Carleton set out to look not at the influence of an individual predecessor, but to examine and measure all the influences on the King James Bible. His results are as follows; Wycliff versions, including English Sermons 4%; Tyndale’s work, including the Matthew Bible 18%; Coverdale’s work, including Great Bibles 13%; Geneva Bible and Geneva New Testament 19%; Bishop’s Bible and its revision 4%; all other versions before 1611 3 %; King James Bible new material 39%; making 100% in total. This analysis tells where readings in the KJV are first to have been found, but all of the particular Wycliff readings, and many of the Coverdale readings (i.e. those not repeated in the Great Bible), will have been most accessible to the King James translators from Fulke's edition of the Rheims New Testament. Overall therefore, this study indicates that the influence of the Rheims New Testament amounted to around 8% of the text of the King James New Testament.

	==Notes==		==Notes==
-	~~<references/>~~

	==References==		==References==

Beza 1598 at 09:14, 5 March 2016

Beza 1598 — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 09:14:08 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 09:14, 5 March 2016
Line 137:		Line 137:
	[[Category:Bible versions and translations]]		[[Category:Bible versions and translations]]
	[[Category:17th-century Christian texts]]		[[Category:17th-century Christian texts]]
		+
		+	{{Donate}}

Nick: /* Publication */

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:47:28 GMT

Publication

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:47, 9 May 2009
Line 53:		Line 53:
	This Challoner version, officially approved by the Church, remained the Bible of the majority of English-speaking Catholics well into the 20th century. It was first published in America in 1790 by Mathew Carey of Philadelphia. Several American editions followed in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, prominently among them an edition published in 1899 by the John Murphy Company of Baltimore. In 1941 the New Testament and Psalms of the Douay-Rheims Bible were again heavily revised to produce the New Testament (and in some editions, the Psalms) of the [[Confraternity Bible]], however so extensive were these changes, that it was no longer identified as the Douay-Rheims.		This Challoner version, officially approved by the Church, remained the Bible of the majority of English-speaking Catholics well into the 20th century. It was first published in America in 1790 by Mathew Carey of Philadelphia. Several American editions followed in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, prominently among them an edition published in 1899 by the John Murphy Company of Baltimore. In 1941 the New Testament and Psalms of the Douay-Rheims Bible were again heavily revised to produce the New Testament (and in some editions, the Psalms) of the [[Confraternity Bible]], however so extensive were these changes, that it was no longer identified as the Douay-Rheims.

-	[[Image:Challoner Douai Bible.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|Challoner's 1749 revision of the Rheims New Testament borrowed heavily from the [[~~King James Version of the Bible\|~~King James Version]].]]	+	[[Image:Challoner Douai Bible.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|Challoner's 1749 revision of the Rheims New Testament borrowed heavily from the [[King James Version]].]]

	==Names of Books==		==Names of Books==

Nick: /* Publication */

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:44:41 GMT

Publication

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:44, 9 May 2009
Line 53:		Line 53:
	This Challoner version, officially approved by the Church, remained the Bible of the majority of English-speaking Catholics well into the 20th century. It was first published in America in 1790 by Mathew Carey of Philadelphia. Several American editions followed in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, prominently among them an edition published in 1899 by the John Murphy Company of Baltimore. In 1941 the New Testament and Psalms of the Douay-Rheims Bible were again heavily revised to produce the New Testament (and in some editions, the Psalms) of the [[Confraternity Bible]], however so extensive were these changes, that it was no longer identified as the Douay-Rheims.		This Challoner version, officially approved by the Church, remained the Bible of the majority of English-speaking Catholics well into the 20th century. It was first published in America in 1790 by Mathew Carey of Philadelphia. Several American editions followed in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, prominently among them an edition published in 1899 by the John Murphy Company of Baltimore. In 1941 the New Testament and Psalms of the Douay-Rheims Bible were again heavily revised to produce the New Testament (and in some editions, the Psalms) of the [[Confraternity Bible]], however so extensive were these changes, that it was no longer identified as the Douay-Rheims.

-	[[Image:Challoner Douai Bible.jpg\|thumb\|~~320px~~\|Challoner's 1749 revision of the Rheims New Testament borrowed heavily from the [[King James Version of the Bible\|King James Version]].]]	+	[[Image:Challoner Douai Bible.jpg\|thumb\|350px\|Challoner's 1749 revision of the Rheims New Testament borrowed heavily from the [[King James Version of the Bible\|King James Version]].]]

	==Names of Books==		==Names of Books==

Nick: /* Publication */

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:42:54 GMT

Publication

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:42, 9 May 2009
Line 52:		Line 52:

	This Challoner version, officially approved by the Church, remained the Bible of the majority of English-speaking Catholics well into the 20th century. It was first published in America in 1790 by Mathew Carey of Philadelphia. Several American editions followed in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, prominently among them an edition published in 1899 by the John Murphy Company of Baltimore. In 1941 the New Testament and Psalms of the Douay-Rheims Bible were again heavily revised to produce the New Testament (and in some editions, the Psalms) of the [[Confraternity Bible]], however so extensive were these changes, that it was no longer identified as the Douay-Rheims.		This Challoner version, officially approved by the Church, remained the Bible of the majority of English-speaking Catholics well into the 20th century. It was first published in America in 1790 by Mathew Carey of Philadelphia. Several American editions followed in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, prominently among them an edition published in 1899 by the John Murphy Company of Baltimore. In 1941 the New Testament and Psalms of the Douay-Rheims Bible were again heavily revised to produce the New Testament (and in some editions, the Psalms) of the [[Confraternity Bible]], however so extensive were these changes, that it was no longer identified as the Douay-Rheims.
		+
		+	[[Image:Challoner Douai Bible.jpg\|thumb\|320px\|Challoner's 1749 revision of the Rheims New Testament borrowed heavily from the [[King James Version of the Bible\|King James Version]].]]

	==Names of Books==		==Names of Books==

Nick at 10:41, 9 May 2009

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:41:18 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:41, 9 May 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	[[Image:Douai-Rheims New Testament.jpg~~\|200px~~\|thumb\|~~right~~\|Douai-Rheims New Testament]]	+	[[Image:Douai-Rheims New Testament.jpg\|thumb\|250px\|Title page from the 1582 Douai-Rheims New Testament, "specially for the discouerie of the C<small>ORRVPTIONS</small> of diuers late translations, and for cleering the C<small>ONTROVERSIES</small> in religion."]]
		+
	The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Vulgate\|Latin Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the [[Hebrew]] and [[Greek]] source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was a strong effort by English [[Roman Catholic\|Catholics]] to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].		The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Vulgate\|Latin Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the [[Hebrew]] and [[Greek]] source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was a strong effort by English [[Roman Catholic\|Catholics]] to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].

Nick at 10:39, 9 May 2009

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:39:20 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:39, 9 May 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	[[Image:Douai-Rheims New Testament.jpg\|200px\|thumb\|right\|Douai-Rheims New Testament]]
	The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Vulgate\|Latin Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the [[Hebrew]] and [[Greek]] source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was a strong effort by English [[Roman Catholic\|Catholics]] to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].		The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Vulgate\|Latin Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the [[Hebrew]] and [[Greek]] source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was a strong effort by English [[Roman Catholic\|Catholics]] to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].

Nick at 10:37, 9 May 2009

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:37:01 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:37, 9 May 2009
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Although the [[Jerusalem Bible]], [[New American Bible]] (in the United States), the [[Revised Standard Version]], the [[New Revised Standard Version]] and the [[New Jerusalem Bible]] are the most commonly used in English-speaking Catholic churches, the [[Richard Challoner\|Challoner]] revision of the Douay-Rheims is still often the Bible of choice of English-speaking [[Traditionalist Catholic]]s.		Although the [[Jerusalem Bible]], [[New American Bible]] (in the United States), the [[Revised Standard Version]], the [[New Revised Standard Version]] and the [[New Jerusalem Bible]] are the most commonly used in English-speaking Catholic churches, the [[Richard Challoner\|Challoner]] revision of the Douay-Rheims is still often the Bible of choice of English-speaking [[Traditionalist Catholic]]s.

-	<<proof read to here!!!!!>>	+	<proof read to here!!!!!>

	==Origin==		==Origin==

Nick at 10:36, 9 May 2009

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:36:48 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:36, 9 May 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Latin Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the Hebrew and Greek source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was ~~an impressive~~ effort by English Catholics to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].	+	The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Vulgate\|Latin Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the [[Hebrew]] and [[Greek]] source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was a strong effort by English [[Roman Catholic\|Catholics]] to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].

	Much of the text of the 1582/1610 bible, however, employed a densely [[latinism\|latinate]] vocabulary, to the extent of being in places unreadable; and consequently this translation was replaced in 1752 by a version undertaken by bishop [[Richard Challoner]]. Although retaining the title ''Douay-Rheims Bible'', the Challoner revision was in fact a new version, taking as its base text the [[King James Bible]] rigorously checked and extensively adjusted for consistency with the Clementine edition of the Vulgate.		Much of the text of the 1582/1610 bible, however, employed a densely [[latinism\|latinate]] vocabulary, to the extent of being in places unreadable; and consequently this translation was replaced in 1752 by a version undertaken by bishop [[Richard Challoner]]. Although retaining the title ''Douay-Rheims Bible'', the Challoner revision was in fact a new version, taking as its base text the [[King James Bible]] rigorously checked and extensively adjusted for consistency with the Clementine edition of the Vulgate.

-	Although the [[Jerusalem Bible]], [[New American Bible]] (in the United States), the [[Revised Standard Version]], the [[New Revised Standard Version]] and the [[New Jerusalem Bible]] are the most commonly used in English-speaking Catholic churches, the [[Richard Challoner\|Challoner]] revision of the Douay-Rheims is still often the Bible of choice of English-speaking [[Traditionalist Catholic]]s.	+	Although the [[Jerusalem Bible]], [[New American Bible]] (in the United States), the [[Revised Standard Version]], the [[New Revised Standard Version]] and the [[New Jerusalem Bible]] are the most commonly used in English-speaking Catholic churches, the [[Richard Challoner\|Challoner]] revision of the Douay-Rheims is still often the Bible of choice of English-speaking [[Traditionalist Catholic]]s.
		+
		+	<<proof read to here!!!!!>>

	==Origin==		==Origin==

Nick at 10:32, 9 May 2009

Nick — Sat, 09 May 2009 10:32:53 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 10:32, 9 May 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Latin~~]] [[~~Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the Hebrew and Greek source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was an impressive effort by English Catholics to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].	+	The '''Douay-Rheims Bible''', also known as the '''Rheims-Douai Bible''' or '''Douai Bible''' and abbreviated as '''D-R''', is a translation of the [[Bible]] from the [[Latin Vulgate]] into [[English language\|English]]. The [[New Testament]] was published in one volume with extensive commentary and notes in 1582. The [[Old Testament]] followed in 1609–10 in two volumes, also extensively annotated. The notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong [[Polemics\|polemical]] and [[Patristics\|patristic]] character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the Hebrew and Greek source texts of the [[Vulgate]]. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold [[Roman Catholic\|Catholic]] tradition in the face of the [[Protestant Reformation]] which was heavily influencing [[England]]. As such it was an impressive effort by English Catholics to support the [[Counter-Reformation]].

	Much of the text of the 1582/1610 bible, however, employed a densely [[latinism\|latinate]] vocabulary, to the extent of being in places unreadable; and consequently this translation was replaced in 1752 by a version undertaken by bishop [[Richard Challoner]]. Although retaining the title ''Douay-Rheims Bible'', the Challoner revision was in fact a new version, taking as its base text the [[King James Bible]] rigorously checked and extensively adjusted for consistency with the Clementine edition of the Vulgate.		Much of the text of the 1582/1610 bible, however, employed a densely [[latinism\|latinate]] vocabulary, to the extent of being in places unreadable; and consequently this translation was replaced in 1752 by a version undertaken by bishop [[Richard Challoner]]. Although retaining the title ''Douay-Rheims Bible'', the Challoner revision was in fact a new version, taking as its base text the [[King James Bible]] rigorously checked and extensively adjusted for consistency with the Clementine edition of the Vulgate.