I haven't. If such a thing exists, I imagine it would be one of the following, depending on the key chosen:

SATTB
SAATB
SATBarB

While the first would be more "classic" mid-16th century English, the second and third would likely be arrangements reflecting the supply of voices today...

CPDL's editions include the original in C (AATB or TTBB) as well as in E and F (SATB). And, of course, they are freely downloadable.

Thanks, as always, friends . . . I'm well aware of the variety of transpositions for the four-part original, and I was just hoping that someone had seen one of the "re-voicings" that Proulx speaks about. Ah, well.

For fun, I decided to make an 3-voice arrangement of it for TBarB (pdf and midi attached). Any feedback would be appreciated.

I don't have any of the voicings requested, but here is a Latin motet (Bone Pastor) for the same music that some of you may find useful.

While I haven't revoiced this piece, I have adapted the SATB to have/fit Catholic text, rather than the version that reads/sounds quite Protestant. ;)

While I prefer to use the DR for Bible quotes, I decided to go with the translation currently in the lectionary in the US: "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of truth"

My only question is 'why would one make a version of this motet with a different text than its original one'. I think that all the 'yous' sound horrible, not to mention tampering with rhythm and putting musical accents on weak syllables and putting verbal accents on weak beats. Why is this necessary at all? Since this is an anthem (an ornament to the liturgy) and not a part of the ritual text itself, it need not hie to the lectionary version of this text.

I really do hate to play the spoil-sport (or 'sprit') because it is apparent that you have taken great and conscientious pains in arranging this version. But why? It isn't necessary. The revised text doesn't flow and sounds forced. And the beauteous original is perfectly fitting as an anthem as it is.

Well, I posted, above, the main reason why.
While I understand that this music + text is beloved by many, for one reason or another, I have a similar aversion to the Tallis, as the text is traditionally performed, as do you to the version I just shared.
I cringe every time I have to sing the "original" version, as I find it hard to believe that it was the text originally set to it, if truly to be used as a piece in Catholic liturgy. It sounds so, incredibly Protestant; especially with its "e'en" (honestly, that word means nothing at all in biblical context, and is just there for some false sense of flow to the text) and its naive presentation to the world of translating Paraclete as "Comforter" (I get that this translation uses "Advocate," but it still feels more authentic than the fuzzy feeling of "comforter - since in the Divine Praises they changed "comforter" back to "Paraclete," it would be nice if they'd do so for the lectionary, as well). Even saying, "I will pray the Father," is awkward.

As for the accents of various words, I'm still open to ideas as to how one might prefer their placement, but within the context of this text.
Thank you for your input.

FWIW, I know if I were in a congregation and encountered a revision of the text, I would be utterly distracted by it - it's one of the few Tudor English anthems that is much more widely encountered in Roman Catholic parishes than typical polyphony of the period (in the sense that it's likely to beone of the very first additions to the repertoire of choirs trying to move beyond what has been Typical Contemporary Practice). And I am no traditionalist! The director who does this should understand that, in sparing him/herself annoyance, the annoyance is merely transferred to folks in the pews. The Law of Conservation of Annoyance, and all that.

PS: "Comforter" is not a distinctively Protestant term for the Holy Spirit. It's also an English Catholic term. One can find any number of older English-language Catholic churches titled Holy Comforter, though it's less common than Holy Spirit for contemporary dedications. (Charlottesville, Virginia's oldest Catholic parish, with that title, dates to the 19th century, for example.) Let not the Coverdale Bible text be assumed to be the ultimate tainted source in that regard.

Yf ye loue me, kepe my commaundementes. And I wyl praye the father, and he shal geue you another comforter, that he maye byde wt you for euer: euen ye sprete of trueth.

I was wondering about all those churches with the name Holy Comforter.

The problem is that an early (and presently somewhat outmoded) meaning for Comforter is one who provides strength and/or support, one upon whom one may call (this second is almost precisely the meaning of Paraclete).

In my own "If Ye Love Me" (with the Roman Missal text, just updated in another thread) - I use Paraclete but allow for substituting either Advocate or Comforter.

The Catholic churches that I've been at and sung at have seen fit to include all sorts of Anglican repertoire - anthems from Gibbons, Stanford, Stainer, Walton, Howells, and many more, a huge repertoire of English organ music, and even repurposed sections of the Ordinary. None have been thought of as foreign or inappropriate in even the strictest Catholic liturgy.

If ye love me is one of the most neutral and well-recognized anthems I can think of. The new text does nothing else to satiate the rubrics and merely destroys the lyric flow. I can see no reason to use it, and I think your concerns (though well-intentioned) are not necessary.