As many an avid Catholic Bible-reader knows, a couple of years ago on Pints with Aquinas, Jeff Cavins hinted at the possibility of a future premium edition of the Great Adventure Catholic Bible (GACB). Ascension Press recently released the Second Edition of the GACB, making some minor modifications to the text formatting, and publishing some exciting new editions—including a single-column journaling edition and a premium edition! Since there are already multiple reviews of the GACB on this website (most recently here), I’ll highlight some of the main differences in the premium edition.
Size and Quality
The Bible measures in at 9.5 x 6.5 x 1.75 inches. It’s certainly not a thinline Bible, but it doesn’t feel too clunky to carry around, either. It would be comparable to most large-sized Bibles that one might buy. The premium edition has a smyth-sewn binding, a goatskin leather cover with calfskin liner (edge-lined, not paste-down), perimeter stitching and gilding, five raised spine hubs, and gilt edges. The colored book indexes inside the Bible almost function like art-gilding, being visible when the Bible is opened.
The cover is a beautiful and supple goatskin, and is thick enough to not be overly floppy—though it has definitely softened a little over the past couple of weeks of daily use. It keeps its shape in when open in my hand, thanks in large part to the thick cardstock endpapers. If you’ve ever seen the Premier Collection purple NRSV w/ Apocrypha from Zondervan, I would say that this goatskin is comparable to that Bible. The “Great Adventure” imprint on the cover is perhaps a source of controversy, but I think it stands out more in photos than in real life. The cover still feels very clean, in my opinion.
The print quality is very bold and consistent throughout, and the red-lettering is nice and dark. The paper thickness is 40 GSM, which is one of the many strengths of this edition. The text is line-matched, and there is very little ghosting regardless. This Bible, while a premium edition, still feels rugged—it’s not a Bible I would worry about carrying around with me. There are three double-sided silk ribbons, which are of a high quality and nice thickness, but—in my opinion—are a little too short. They are certainly useable, and this is probably just a matter of opinion, but I replaced them with longer ribbons.
Changes to the Second Edition
There are 32 new footnotes in the Second Edition of the GACB, as well as cross-references to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The pages are formatted a little differently, and in such a way that the pages can include cross-references, CCC references, and notes, but still feel pretty clean.
Obviously, this isn’t a full study-Bible, but it has more resources than a basic daily-reader might. And, those resources are dispersed nicely throughout. The fonts and formatting of the Timelines charts have been redone, and are much sleeker this time around. There is some new material in the front the Bible, including a guide for reading the Bible in a year.
Also, the maps in the back are redone, and they look far more professional than the original GACB maps—which weren’t bad, but were a little cartoony.
One place that I think should have been changed that is still unchanged is the rendering of Mary’s response in Luke 1:34. It still reads: “How can this be, since I have no husband?” instead of “How will this be, since I do not know man?” Other RSV-2CE editions (including the new thinline from Catholic Bible Press) made this change, and I’m curious as to why it wasn’t made when this new edition of the GACB was published. It’s a small thing, really, and that’s what pens are for.
Final Thoughts
This is a truly-premium Catholic Bible, in a respected translation that generally balances precision and readability very well, with enough study tools and outside resources to be helpful for any reader. Especially at its price-point ($125), I would highly recommend this edition of the Great Adventure Catholic Bible for those who want a premium Catholic Bible, but who are leery of paying double the price for a Schuyler or Cambridge Bible “with Apocrypha”. Even if you aren’t completely sold on the Great Adventure material, this is easily the highest quality specifically-Catholic Bible on the market, and it will live up to your expectations.
Putting this as a complement sandwich, I like the fact they used Goatskin on this, and the study helps for it. I also like how the Didache Bible set something of a precedent for including CCC references, and that it’s in a Bible that seems practical to carry around instead of a true tome like the DB.
Now for what I don’t like, I can’t get over the huge compass on the front of it. Even a small, tasteful compass centered and under “Holy Bible” would have been better. Seems a bit gaudy, especially on Goatskin. More minor nitpicks are that I can’t see colored text in the footnotes bringing much to the table. I’ve never thought the kind of light blue looked good, especially not on Bible paper.
All that aside, God is good, and the Bible is being read!
A review of a premium edition Catholic Bible.
Is the Second Coming soon?
Would love to see a review of the updated standard blue one as well.
With the full integration of textual notes, pastoral notes, biblical cross-references, and CCC references, all in a fairly clean, systematic layout, I really hope the Augustine Institute is taking notes for their CSV Bible plan. To echo what Adam said, if Ignatius can do it with both the Didache Bible and the ICSB, and Ascension can now do it with the GACB, surely the Augustine Institute will follow.
As for why they didn’t update the Luke 1:34 reading, my going theory is the fact that since Fr. Mike read the old reading in the corresponding BIY podcast episode, they don’t want to confuse people since a non-insignificant number will be using this Bible to read along with the podcast.
I’m glad this exists. We need more premium Catholic Bibles. But it’s disappointing that Luke 1:34 wasn’t updated.
Curious about the journaling edition. I really, really want a single-column RSV2CE that’s not a note-taking Bible, just text. But if this one looks impressive enough, and on par with the Ave layout, I could settle for it.
Why doesn’t Ignatius do goatskin, especially for the Complete Study Bible
I really don’t think goatskin would work for the full Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. It’s too floppy and would provide no structure to a book that size. A leather-wrapped hardcover would be really nice, though.
A floppy goatskin cover would rip right off a large, heavy Bible like the ICSB.
I feel like we Catholics now have a nice range of choices, but scattered among many options.
The GACB is a handsome book, and it looks even nicer now with the new maps. It’s still a “plain” reader’s Bible to me, uncluttered by notes, printed in a large, readable font and has decent space in the margins for scribblings. It seems to have used up much of its “budget” on the full color printing needed to support the “Great Adventure” system. Not a lot of bells and whistles.
There’s Catholic Bible Press’ “Saint Joseph” Bibles. These look nice and have a good amount of footnotes, color photos, maps, introductory articles etc. My personal feeling is that they are too uncritical in accepting historical critical positions, but I also think there’s a good amount of useful historical and pastoral notes. Though they did not say it, I suspect the ability to substitute their pastoral notes is a factor in their ditching the NAB translation in favor of the NCB.
There’s also the ICSB. That’s a whole other category.
Personally I’ll stick to my GACB and soon the full ICSB. I’d like a St Joseph Bible some day but I really only need one regular reader and I already have the GACB.
The NCB is a peculiar one. There’s almost no public information on what went into the translation or the notes. The few “learn more” links on the company’s own website are dead. I want to like it, but the notes are a weird mix of pastoral and historical-critical, and the text, though better than the NABRE, is still kind of flat and lifeless.
My guess is the company just wanted its own in-house translation for its own publications so it wouldn’t have to keep paying out to license the NABRE text. With that done, they just aren’t promoting it much beyond selling NCB editions on their website.
Not to mention the lack of corrections to known typos, some of which have existed since just the New Testament version was available.
I think if a company is willing to finance a 30 year Bible translation effort, they’re entitled to their house translation. That takes some dedication IMHO. Reviews on this site indicate it’s a respectable translation.
One thing the NCB has in its favor in my book is that it fills a niche since all RSV (2)CE Bibles outside of the ICSB are a little short on study notes, whereas the ICSB might be overkill. Where the GACB might be too bare and ICSB might be too much, and when the NAB(RE)’s notes are not to once’s taste, the NCB might scratch that itch.
My son and I found a couple of these in Barnes and Nobles. Even the St. Joseph’s edition had a typeface that is stiff and clunky. It was nice and dark. The publisher’s page revealed that it is printed in the most unfortunate location on planet earth.
Mostly beautiful bible ruined by the tacky compass on the cover.
Agreed.
I would take a plain one every time, but the blind-stamping isn’t nearly as egregious in person as it is in photos.
I am a Protestant convert and used to have tons of great options to choose from Cambridge, Schuyler, Allan, etc, and while this isn’t my exact preference (that would be something like the Schuyler Canterbury but with Douay-Rheims text) this is the first time since converting I have found an in-print Catholic Bible I think is actually “fine” in the binding sense.
At the moment, it doesn’t even have an real competitors in the quality department. Definitely recommended.
You could always get a DR text-block you like, and get it rebound. Check out Mooseworks on Etsy. Great quality, with a crazy fast turnover.
Yes, and I have had a few rebound, but there are two issues. The first is that high quality DR text blocks on in short supply. Even the best modern printed ones (Baronius Press) are just so-so quality, and getting vintage ones is better, but inconsistent. Also none of the vintage ones are line-matched.
The related problem is that it becomes very hard to recommend or gift a copy, which is often the first thing that happens when someone sees a nice Bible. They ask, “Oh, that’s lovely, where can I get one of those?” The answer, “Check eBay until you see specifically the 1914 printing by CPB, one in good shape, with the larger engravings and gilt edges, then win the auction, then send it to be rebound” is just too much.
Having something nice which is actually in print is such a welcome change.
I’m curious about the “32 new footnotes”. That’s a rather sparse addition, and they probably had good reason to add just those few. Whatever footnotes we had in the original GACB came from the 1966 RSVCE.
Jeazle Peet. Most of these comments are either unrelated to the GACB or just complaints. No wonder more Catholic companies don’t try new things.
Though it has never put a scrap of gold or silver in my pocket, I believe that the Great Adventure Catholic Bible has done me good, and will do me good; and I say, God bless it!
Amen, Father JT!
I’m very impressed with the quality of this Great Adventure Bible. When the first edition first came out, it had a glued binding and fake leather cover. Ascension listened to us Bible snobs (guilty as charged) and released it with sewn binding, and now they’re available with premium goatskin leather. I’m grateful they listened and responded by giving us the first premium Catholic Bible in a long time (I have an old premium sheepskin JB I found at a Half Price books, so they did make some good ones years ago). Thanks for the review!
I disagree.
If we are to merely bow deeply when a company produces an item, then how will the product grow and become better?
I’ve spoken with folks who produce the GACB, and they enjoy reading this page, and welcome all the criticism, concern, observations, lauds, etc. They say that it is good that there are people who care so much about the presentation, and preparation, of Sacred Scripture, that it lead them to “take a chance” in producing a high quality edition.
I don’t know who Jeazle Peet is, but since you replied to my comment I want to make clear that I was not complaining. I own a GACB and like it. I am genuinely curious about the “32 new footnotes”. Why add those in a Bible that is mostly “clean”? Might they address a few of the most common questions coming out of the Bible in a Year podcast?
I didn’t mean to reply to your comment. Sorry.
“Jeazle Peet”: An obscure expression heard mainly in the mid-west. A way for folks living in the Bible Belt to sigh “Jesus Christ”, without the presumption that they are not taking the Lord’s name in vain.
If only they’d make something like this with the ESV-CE
The RES-2CC and the ESV-(CE) are both refinements of the RSV Revised Standard Version. Personally I would rather deal with and trust Ignatius and Ascension than Crossways. Not so much that I have differences with Crossways, but recognizing their general negative opinion of Roman Catholics. In todays tumultuous times, there is a need for Christians of all denominations to work together to combat the many assaults on our faith.
I have not seen a detailed comparison of the RSV, ESV, and RSV-2CE. From comments I have read they are pretty close.
ESV-CE is based on similar mss to the Nova Vulgata. RSV-2CE uses a shorter Tobit text. The longer text is actually mentioned in a note in the GACB… but alas. What I want is a revision that calls out EVERY SINGLE divergence from the textual basis for the Nova Vulgata with a note. This would, for example, capture the alternate prayer of Esther from the Old Latin.
My theory about the NCB is that they used the RSV and tinkered with it a bit to create this new translation. I doubt the translators know much (or any) Hebrew or Greek. Just a theory.
Well, the NCB uses some interesting LXX and DSS manuscript choices, and the longer version of Tobit, which would indicate that it’s more than a copy edit of a current translation. Otherwise, I would agree with you. I’d really like to see a comprehensive analysis of the scholarship behind it by Fr. Winkler and his team. It’s a cool translation, in my opinion.