What's wrong with the Vulgate?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by AntennaFarmer, Jun 2, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. AntennaFarmer

    AntennaFarmer
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have seen a number of oblique (but negative) references to the Vulgate in discussions and literature of textual criticism. I think that is interesting because the Vulgate is quite old (400's I believe). I would like to know more about the problems with the Vulgate and even the Old Latin Bible that preceded it.

    Are the negatives mostly poor translation or the quality of the original language texts that it is based on? Is the Vulgate NT based on an Alexandrian, Byzantine or other Greek text? What can it tell us about the original language texts that were available to Jerome?

    A.F.
     
  2. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Whoever said the Vulgate is not a good translation does not know their Latin. Jerome's Vulgate was a revision of and a great improvement over the many "Old Latin" versions of his day. It unified and influenced the Latin language of it's day (late 5th century on) much like the KJV did the English of its day. I would compare it in translation philosophy and readability to the NASV. I have even occasionally consulted it in my own translation work--I did so today.

    "Despite a certain unevenness and even an occasional error in Jerome's work as reviser, the general standard of his labours is high. The Vulgate represents the solid judgement of a competent and careful scholar, passed on textual materials as old (or in some cases older) than those available to textual critics today" (The Early Versions of the New Testament, Bruce Metzger, p. 354-355).

    Concerning its Greek text-type, there are over 10,000 mss of the Vulgate, so there are as many opinions about its text-type as there are scholars. However, according to Metzger H. J. Vogels said it was Byzantine and I believe him, because the Vulgate has many passages omitted by Alexandrian mss, such as John 8:1-11, the longer ending of Mark 16, Acts 8:37, 1 John 5:7 etc., are included in the Vulgate. (My version is the 1911 Wordsworth & White edition, which has those last two in the apparatus, but there is plenty of evidence for them being in Jerome's original.) :type:
     
  3. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    That would depend on which "Vulgate" you are talking about. Jerome's Vulgate is of interest only to historians and textual critics. It was translated in 382 AD and was the official scriptures of the Roman Catholic Church until 1592 when it was replaced by the Clementine Vulgate. Both the Vulgate of Jerome and the Vulgate of Pope Clement are good, accurate translations of a predominately Western textform.
     
  4. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Forgive me for disagreeing, Dr. Cassidy, but the Clementine Vulgate is simply an official edition of Jerome's Vulgate. Here is a website, if you would care to read it and compare with Wordsworth/White's Vulgate with apparatus: http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/text.html
     
  5. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    It's a revision, not an edition. As is the Stuttgart Vulgate.
     
    #5 TCassidy, Jun 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 2, 2006
  6. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    The evidence speaks for itself.

    John 1:1-3 in Clementine's Vulgate:

    1 In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum.
    2 Hoc erat in principio apud Deum.
    3 Omnia per ipsum facta sunt: et sine ipso factum est nihil, quod factum est.


    John 1:1-3 in Wordsworth-White version of Jerome:

    1 In principio erat uerbum, et uerbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat uerbum.
    2 Hoc erat in principio apud Deum.
    3 Omnia per ipsum facta sunt: et sine ipso factum est nihil: quod factum est.


    See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate
     
  7. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Just because you can find verses that are unchanged in the Clementine Vulgate does not negate the fact it is a revision of Jerome's vulgate any more than the verses found in the KJV being identical to some verses in the Tyndale, Bishops', or Geneva bibles negates the fact the KJV is a revision, or that the NASB is a revision of the ASV just because some verses match word for word.
     
  8. william s. correa

    william s. correa
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nothing if God writes it!:Fish:
     
  9. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Matthew 24:3 (The Latin Vulgate)
    sedente autem eo super montem Oliveti accesserunt ad eum discipuli
    secreto dicentes dic nobis quando haec erunt et quod signum adventus
    tui et consummationis saeculi


    Matthew 24:3 (HCSB= Holman Christian Standard Bible)

    While He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached
    Him privately and said, "Tell us, when will these things happen?
    And what is the sign of Your coming
    and of the end of the age?

    Mat 24:3 (LKV1611 Edition):
    And as he sate vpon the mount of Oliues, the Disciples came vnto
    him priuately, saying, Tell vs, when shall these things be?
    And what shall be the signe of thy coming,
    and of the end of the world?

    Back of the $1 bill NOVUS ORDO SECLORIUM

    Consider the slogan: NOVUS ORDO SECLORIUM: usually translated 'new order for

    the ages"

    NOVUS - Latin word from which we get 'new'

    ORDO - Latin word from which we get 'order'

    SECLORIUM - latin word from which we get 'secular' (not religions, but
    of the world) also means "age".

    So Novus Ordo Seclorium can indeed mean 'new order for the ages"

    But Novus Ordo Seclorium can also mean: 'new order for the world' or 'new world order'.
     
  10. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    My verses were chosen at random, simply because I like the passage. I'd be happy to compare a whole chapter for you when I get time. Surely you would admit that a whole chapter virtually identical would mean an edition, not a revision.

    In the meantime, I'll bite. Please give me proof of your view that the Clementine Vulgate is a revision and not an edition. So far you've given none.
     
  11. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    <sigh> The Vulgate of Jerome was first published in 384 AD. It was then hand copied until 1455 when Johannes Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg first set it in moveable type thus helping to produce copies all identical to one another which had been impossible during the ages of hand copying.

    During the Reformation it because obvious that the Vulgate was in terrible shape. Even though Trent reaffirmed the Vulgate as the official bible of the Roman Catholic Church, it was noted that there was no standard for spelling, or ever for theoverall text, due to the countless editions, written and printed, produced during the Middle Ages. Over the course of the Middle Ages, the Vulgate had been corrupted by the changes made by human error in the countless number of hand made copies of the text. Readings from the Vetus Latina were introduced, and marginal notes were accidently placed into the text by careless copyists. Not one copy was the same as any other as scribes added, removed, misspelled, or mis-corrected verses.

    The first post-reformation revision was done by Pope Sixtus V, and was known as the Sixtine Vulgate. However, upon examination it became apparent that Sixtus’s knowledge of Latin was scarsly above that of the average school boy, so, upon his ascendency to the Holy See Clement corrected most of Sixtus’s errors and the new revision was known as the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate. Eventually the “Sixto” was dropped and it was known simply as the Clementine Vulgate.

    Among other differences, the Clementine Vulgate removed 3rd and 4th Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses and placed them in an appendix. Additionally the Clementine Vulgate used the Gallicanum version of the Psalms while copies of Jerome’s Vugates often contained one, two, or even sometimes three different versions of the Psalms. The first was the Psalterium Romanum which itself was a revision of the Vetus Latina. The second was the Gallicanum, which Jerome translated from the Greek Hexapla. The third was the Psalterium juxta Hebraicum which Jerome translated directly from the Hebrew.

    That is revision, not edition. Just as the KJV has been revised several times even though the KJVOs insist they are merely “editions” and not “real revisions.”
     
    #11 TCassidy, Jun 3, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 3, 2006
  12. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    I enjoyed everything in your post except for the <sigh>. Thank you for the good information. You have convinced me that the Pslams in the OT was revised, but I'm still not convinced about the rest of the OT or about the NT, about which you wrote nothing. I still plan to do some comparisons and see for myself.
     
  13. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Eugene Rice noted that Erasmus agreed with Jacques Lefevre d'Etaples and Paul of Middleburg that the Latin Bible in common use in their day had readings that Jerome said he had corrected (SAINT JEROME, p. 178).

    Richard Rolt pointed out that Erasmus wrote Pope Leo X that his design was not "to contradict the vulgar Latin, but to correct the faults that had crept into it" (LIVES OF THE PRINCIPAL REFORMERS, p. 39).
     
  14. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Where is the revision?

    See, that was my impression about the Vulgate, that there had been various efforts to restore Jerome's original, but not revisions per se. (Granting, of course, Dr. Cassidy his Psalms revision.;) )

    I've just been comparing 1 John 1 in the Clementine Vulgate to the Wordsworth/White Jerome, and here is what I get (other than the W/W tendency to use u instead of v and i instead of j).

    V. 6: veritatem non facimus in CV, non facimus ueritatem in W/W--no difference in meaning.
    V. 7: emundat in CV, mundat in W/W--no difference in meaning.

    That is all there is in 10 verses. Doesn't look like a revision to me. :smilewinkgrin:
     
    #14 John of Japan, Jun 4, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2006
  15. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Now Dr. Cassidy, I'm missing something here. Please enlighten me. I want to be teachable here. :thumbs:

    If Jerome wrote the Gallicanum Psalter, and some copies of Jerome's Vulgate used the Gallicanum Psalter, and the Clementine Vulgate used Jerome's Gallicanum, how is Clementine a revision of Jerome???
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...