Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Sacred Scripture
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old May 19, '09, 12:36 pm
John7 John7 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2008
Posts: 1,290
Religion: Catholic
Default inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

I'm starting (slowly) to read the Vulgate but was wondering which Vulgate is considered inerrant.
Vatican Vulgate
John 1.18 Deum nemo vidit umquam; unigenitus Deus, qui est in sinum Patris, ipse enarravit.

Clementine Vulgate
John 1.18 Deum nemo vidit umquam: unigenitus Filius, qui est in sinu Patris, ipse enarravit


Vatican Vulgate
Gen 3.15 Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem et semen tuum et semen illius; ipsum conteret
caput tuum, et tu conteres calcaneum eius”.

Clementine Vulgate
Gen 3.15 Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem, et semen tuum et semen illius: ipsa conteret
caput tuum, et tu insidiaberis calcaneo ejus
both differences, 'Filius/Deus' and 'ipsum/ipsa' as far as I know are not insignificant.
also, is there another name for the 'Vatican Vulgate' ?

thanks
__________________
I can smell the foul stench of satan
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old May 19, '09, 1:30 pm
tobinatorstark tobinatorstark is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 30, 2008
Posts: 3,127
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John7 View Post
I'm starting (slowly) to read the Vulgate but was wondering which Vulgate is considered inerrant.
Vatican Vulgate
John 1.18 Deum nemo vidit umquam; unigenitus Deus, qui est in sinum Patris, ipse enarravit.

Clementine Vulgate
John 1.18 Deum nemo vidit umquam: unigenitus Filius, qui est in sinu Patris, ipse enarravit


Vatican Vulgate
Gen 3.15 Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem et semen tuum et semen illius; ipsum conteret
caput tuum, et tu conteres calcaneum eius”.

Clementine Vulgate
Gen 3.15 Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem, et semen tuum et semen illius: ipsa conteret
caput tuum, et tu insidiaberis calcaneo ejus
both differences, 'Filius/Deus' and 'ipsum/ipsa' as far as I know are not insignificant.
also, is there another name for the 'Vatican Vulgate' ?

thanks

If you are referring to the one the Vatican's website. It is called the Nova Vulgata. Beware there is a "Vulgate" out there called "Biblia Sacra Vulgata" this isn't approved by the Catholic Church and was translated by Protestants. Many websites including www.drbo.org use it. The Nova Vulgata, which is what the Vatican has used since 1979 can be found here http://www.vatican.va/ The Clementine Vulgate was used from 1592-1979 and can be found here. http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/index.html
Other site that use the Biblia Sacra Vulgata are http://www.latinvulgate.com/, and should be avoided. I do however recomend drbo.org for the Douay-Rheims though
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old May 19, '09, 4:29 pm
Jehuty X Jehuty X is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 28, 2008
Posts: 234
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tobinatorstark View Post
If you are referring to the one the Vatican's website. It is called the Nova Vulgata. Beware there is a "Vulgate" out there called "Biblia Sacra Vulgata" this isn't approved by the Catholic Church and was translated by Protestants. Many websites including www.drbo.org use it. The Nova Vulgata, which is what the Vatican has used since 1979 can be found here http://www.vatican.va/ The Clementine Vulgate was used from 1592-1979 and can be found here. http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/index.html
Other site that use the Biblia Sacra Vulgata are http://www.latinvulgate.com/, and should be avoided. I do however recomend drbo.org for the Douay-Rheims though
// really??? i was thinking on purchasing Biblia Sacra Vulgata, but was not sure if it was the original or what...

// curiously, how do you know that it was translated by protestants???
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old May 19, '09, 5:57 pm
tobinatorstark tobinatorstark is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 30, 2008
Posts: 3,127
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehuty X View Post
// really??? i was thinking on purchasing Biblia Sacra Vulgata, but was not sure if it was the original or what...

// curiously, how do you know that it was translated by protestants???
The committee that translated it is a well known German Bible Society. Since Germany is mostly Protestant, most biblical societies are Protestant. There are not declarations of any kind by the Catholic Church. No Imprimatur, Nihil Obstat
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old May 20, '09, 5:31 am
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 23, 2005
Posts: 3,155
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

No particular edition of the Bible is necessarily free from translation or editorial or printing errors. The inerrancy of Scripture is above the particulars of any one edition.

The Neo-Vulgate (on the vatican.va website) does have some translation/editing errors.
Example:

[1 Timothy 2]
{2:11} Mulier in silentio discat cum omni subiectione.
{2:11} Let a woman learn in silence with all subjection.

{2:12} Docere autem mulieri non permitto, neque dominari in virum: sed esse in silentio.
{2:12} For I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to be in authority over a man, but to be in silence.

Neo Vulgate:
11 Mulier in tranquillitate discat cum omni subiectione;
12 docere autem mulieri non permitto neque dominari in virum, sed esse in tranquillitate.

Silence is changed to tranquility, apparently due to the influence of modern secular society.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old May 20, '09, 3:14 pm
Jerry-Jet Jerry-Jet is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2006
Posts: 2,855
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Ron Conte: What is the best version of the Vulgate ever? Is the Clementine really the best? Is it possible to improve it?

Have we learned anything in the year's since that would suggest that other possible words than the ones it used are more authenticaly in the Vulgate tradition?

While there is no way to know since we do not have an original manuscript penned by St. Jerome--speculate--how would the Cementine Vulgate and what St. Jerome originally penned differ if any?

Ron Conte: I know you have some issues with the Nova Vulgata so let me ask this: if you had been absolutely in charge of the project that resulted in the Nova Vulgata how would you have done it?

Do you think that there would have been a way to more accurately come up with what St. Jerome originally wrote?

Or do you think that the Vulgate tradition doesn't necessarily have to be exactly what St. Jerome wrote?

What is more important to find out about the Vulgate--what St. Jerome originally wrote or what the authentic tradition of the Vulgate was at the time of Trent?

I ask these questions not to argue--I don't know the answqers to these questions.

Exactly how different do you think the Vulgate is from what the original writers of scripture wrote?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old May 20, '09, 9:34 pm
Gottle of Geer Gottle of Geer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: July 12, 2004
Posts: 11,638
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John7 View Post
I'm starting (slowly) to read the Vulgate but was wondering which Vulgate is considered inerrant.
Vatican Vulgate
John 1.18 Deum nemo vidit umquam; unigenitus Deus, qui est in sinum Patris, ipse enarravit.

Clementine Vulgate
John 1.18 Deum nemo vidit umquam: unigenitus Filius, qui est in sinu Patris, ipse enarravit


Vatican Vulgate
Gen 3.15 Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem et semen tuum et semen illius; ipsum conteret
caput tuum, et tu conteres calcaneum eius”.

Clementine Vulgate
Gen 3.15 Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem, et semen tuum et semen illius: ipsa conteret
caput tuum, et tu insidiaberis calcaneo ejus
both differences, 'Filius/Deus' and 'ipsum/ipsa' as far as I know are not insignificant.
also, is there another name for the 'Vatican Vulgate' ?

thanks
## No edition of the Vulgate is or was inerrant - the issue is whether any of those is or was authentic & authoritative (as Pius XII explained in 1943, in Divino Afflante Spiritu): IOW, we're dealing with a matter of law, not of doctrine. The 1979 neo-Vulgata, which reads "ipsum", is now the Bible of the Latin Rite. As for the reading, it is accurate: it represents the Hebrew correctly - "ipsa" was a scribal error which found its way into the text; it is not the correct reading, & it is not a correct translation, & the Clementine Vulgate of 1592 (which included it because it used sources that included it) is no longer the Latin Bible used by the Latin Church & Rite.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old May 21, '09, 6:09 am
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 23, 2005
Posts: 3,155
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gottle of Geer View Post
## No edition of the Vulgate is or was inerrant - the issue is whether any of those is or was authentic & authoritative (as Pius XII explained in 1943, in Divino Afflante Spiritu): IOW, we're dealing with a matter of law, not of doctrine. The 1979 neo-Vulgata, which reads "ipsum", is now the Bible of the Latin Rite. As for the reading, it is accurate: it represents the Hebrew correctly - "ipsa" was a scribal error which found its way into the text; it is not the correct reading, & it is not a correct translation, & the Clementine Vulgate of 1592 (which included it because it used sources that included it) is no longer the Latin Bible used by the Latin Church & Rite.
It is not tenable to hold that ipsa is an error. The Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus cites that verse as referring to Mary crushing the head of the evil serpant.

"and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot."
(Ineffabilis Deus)

Also, the 1590, 92, 93, 98 editions of the Vulgate, by Pope Sixtus V and Pope Clement VIII all have ipsa, not ipsum.

{3:15} Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem, et semen tuum et semen illius: ipsa conteret caput tuum, et tu insidiaberis calcaneo eius.
{3:15} I will put enmities between you and the woman, between your offspring and her offspring. She will crush your head, and you will lie in wait for her heel.”

Both ipsa (referring to Mary) and ipsum (referring to Christ) are correct in this verse.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old May 21, '09, 6:15 am
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 23, 2005
Posts: 3,155
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

What is the best version of the Vulgate ever? Is the Clementine really the best? Is it possible to improve it?

1598 Clementine is best so far; yes, it can be improved -- see my attempt here:
http://www.sacredbible.org/vulgate2009/index.htm

Have we learned anything in the year's since that would suggest that other possible words than the ones it used are more authenticaly in the Vulgate tradition?
Learned from where? We have had the full Sacred Deposit of Faith from the time of Christ to the present. Certainly, some verses may be understood more clearly as time passes, but corrections or edits that presume to add to, subtract from, or change Scripture are not permissible.

While there is no way to know since we do not have an original manuscript penned by St. Jerome--speculate--how would the Cementine Vulgate and what St. Jerome originally penned differ if any?
Very substantially the same, but with numerous small contribuations from other persons over many centuries. The contributions would clarify the text, but not add, subtract, or change any of the truths.

I know you have some issues with the Nova Vulgata so let me ask this: if you had been absolutely in charge of the project that resulted in the Nova Vulgata how would you have done it?
As a light edit of the Clementine; see my own edit.

Do you think that there would have been a way to more accurately come up with what St. Jerome originally wrote?
We should not try to recapture Jeromes version, but to transmit to each generation exactly what was revealed when the books were written. Successive edits and translations can clarify, but they cannot add, subtract, or change.

Or do you think that the Vulgate tradition doesn't necessarily have to be exactly what St. Jerome wrote?
That's right.

What is more important to find out about the Vulgate--what St. Jerome originally wrote or what the authentic tradition of the Vulgate was at the time of Trent?
Neither, the original books in the truths that they present (not exactly the same letters in exactly the same order in the same language) must be transmitted.

Exactly how different do you think the Vulgate is from what the original writers of scripture wrote?
Any differences that do not pertain to the truths being taught, on both levels of meaning, are not relevant. We don't need the original manuscripts so that we have the right letters in the right order; we need the truths as expressed in any language or in all languages.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old May 21, '09, 9:05 am
David Zampino David Zampino is offline
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: September 24, 2005
Posts: 1,220
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tobinatorstark View Post
Since Germany is mostly Protestant, most biblical societies are Protestant.
I'm not going to debate the merits of the particular Bible Society -- but even during the Reformation, there were many German principalities who remained Catholic; there continued to be a strong Catholic presence in Germany; and there remains a strong Catholic presence in Germany.

I think that you'll find that there are actually more Catholics in Germany than there are Lutherans.
__________________
David A. Zampino
Tiber Swim Team -- Class of 2005


God is the Lord, of angels, and of men -- and of elves.
Legend and History have met and fused.

On Fairy Stories -- J. R. R. Tolkien
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old May 21, '09, 4:45 pm
centurionguard's Avatar
centurionguard centurionguard is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: April 23, 2008
Posts: 4,361
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Zampino View Post
I'm not going to debate the merits of the particular Bible Society -- but even during the Reformation, there were many German principalities who remained Catholic; there continued to be a strong Catholic presence in Germany; and there remains a strong Catholic presence in Germany.

I think that you'll find that there are actually more Catholics in Germany than there are Lutherans.


Quote:
The Catholic Church in Germany has about 25.7 million members. This means that 31.2 % of the 82.3 million Germans are Catholic. The Protestant Church has about the same membership, while the Orthodox Churches have 1.2 million members. About 4 % of the population are Muslims (nearly 3.3 million), the members of the Jewish Communities number a good 108,000. After the German unification, the non-denominational share of the population has increased considerably to almost one third.

The Church’s seven provinces are subdivided into 27 bishoprics with the archdioceses of Bamberg, Berlin, Cologne, Freiburg, Hamburg Munich-Freising and Paderborn. The archbishop, as the head of a province, bears the title of "metropolitan", and has certain supervisory duties vis-à-vis his suffragan bishoprics. Numerically, the Archbishopric of Cologne is the largest diocese with almost 2.2 million Catholics, the smallest being the bishopric of Görlitz with a good 31,000 Catholics. Diaspora areas, in which the Catholics represent a minority of the population, are in the east and north of the Federal Republic. The dioceses in which the Catholics constitute the greatest percentage of the population are Passau (88.9 %), Regensburg (73.5 %), Augsburg (65.5%), Würzburg and Trier. The smallest Catholic percentages of the population are to be found on average in the bishoprics in the new Bundesländer, such as Dresden-Meißen (3.4 %), Magdeburg (3.8 %) and Görlitz (4.1 %). The Archdiocese of Hamburg, which embraces the Bundesländer of Hamburg, Schleswig-Holstein and the Mecklenburg part of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, with 6.8 % Catholics, is characterized by extreme diaspora.

(statistical data: 2006)

Ron; I like your link. Been looking for this for a long time Thanks.
http://www.sacredbible.org/vulgate2009/index.htm
__________________
It takes courage to live through suffering; and it takes honesty to observe it. C. S. Lewis
To love means loving the unlovable. To forgive means pardoning the unpardonable. Faith means believing the unbelievable. Hope means hoping when everything seems hopeless.
G. K. Chesterton.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old May 21, '09, 4:58 pm
centurionguard's Avatar
centurionguard centurionguard is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: April 23, 2008
Posts: 4,361
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

The First Translation of Saint Jerome's Biblical Manuscripts was the Septuagint Version

See: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htm
__________________
It takes courage to live through suffering; and it takes honesty to observe it. C. S. Lewis
To love means loving the unlovable. To forgive means pardoning the unpardonable. Faith means believing the unbelievable. Hope means hoping when everything seems hopeless.
G. K. Chesterton.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old May 23, '09, 12:03 pm
John7 John7 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2008
Posts: 1,290
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

thanks everybody for your replies
__________________
I can smell the foul stench of satan
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old May 23, '09, 1:15 pm
Verbum Verbum is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Posts: 2,144
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Hi John,

After this amazing display of pet opinions, let's get back to your problem. Firstt of all, understand that the Vulgate has been approved as free of doctrinal error. This does not mean free of translation errors or free of translations resting on a wrong reading. Second, undersand what the Nova Vulgata is. It is the Vulgata brought up to date according to the latest findings of scholars. It aims to remain as close as possible to the original Vulgate, even to the point of using the same grammatical rules, not the rules of classical latin.

So if you buy the Nova Vulgata, you will have the best that the Church has to offer as Her offcial bible.

Ifyou decide to buy the Clementine Vulgate, be very careful. Some editions have neither punctuation nor capitals. That can be very difficult to read, especially if you're not a Latin scholar.

Verbum
__________________
In principio erat Verbum
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old May 23, '09, 1:44 pm
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 23, 2005
Posts: 3,155
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: inerrant Vulgate: Vatican or Clementine ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verbum View Post
First of all, understand that the Vulgate has been approved as free of doctrinal error. This does not mean free of translation errors or free of translations resting on a wrong reading.
Not correct.

The Council of Trent: "But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema."

The Council of Trent: "Moreover, the same sacred and holy Synod,--considering that no small utility may accrue to the Church of God, if it be made known which out of all the Latin editions, now in circulation, of the sacred books, is to be held as authentic,--ordains and declares, that the said old and vulgate edition, which, by the lengthened usage of so many years, has been approved of in the Church, be, in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions, held as authentic; and that no one is to dare, or presume to reject it under any pretext whatever."

There was no statement that Vulgate editions are necessarily free from doctrinal error (which might enter into a particular edition by a translation or editing error, or a copyist error). But if we exclude errors from translation, editing, or copying/printing, then we are merely saying that Sacred Scripture itself is without error.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verbum View Post
Second, undersand what the Nova Vulgata is. It is the Vulgata brought up to date according to the latest findings of scholars. It aims to remain as close as possible to the original Vulgate, even to the point of using the same grammatical rules, not the rules of classical latin.
Not correct. There are no 'latest findings' which were used to update the Vulgate; if so, give an example. Also, the editors deliberately departed from the Latin Scriptural tradition and from all past editions of the Vulgate, preferring instead to rely on Hebrew and Greek texts, and often rendering those texts loosely, not as close as possible to the 'original Vulgate'. Also, we do not have a copy of Jerome's version of the Vulgate, and the Vulgate existed prior to Jerome (the vetus latina), of which we also have no copies. Also, the Nova Vulgata, and the norm of using the Nova Vulgata in Bible translations, has been criticized by modern Scripture scholars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verbum View Post
So if you buy the Nova Vulgata, you will have the best that the Church has to offer as Her offcial bible.
What is the basis for this claim?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verbum View Post
If you decide to buy the Clementine Vulgate, be very careful. Some editions have neither punctuation nor capitals. That can be very difficult to read, especially if you're not a Latin scholar.
The numerous editions of the Clementine Vulgate of which I am aware all have punctuation and capitalization, e.g. the Leander van Ess edition, the Hetzenauer edition, the Vercellone edition, the Tweedale edition, the Colunga and Turrado edition.

Only the Stuttgart edition (the Beuron/Stuttgart Bible Societies text edited by Bonifatius Fischer in 1975), which is not properly a Vulgate edition at all, but is a Protestant critical edition, lacks punctuation and capitalization.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Sacred Scripture

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8304Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: GLam8833
5071CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: mountee
4356Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: johnthebaptist2
4035OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: 3DOCTORS
3853SOLITUDE
Last by: Prairie Rose
3616Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
3264Poems and Reflections
Last by: PathWalker
3212Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: Rifester
3202Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
3069For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: Theresa DeSensi



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 6:50 pm.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.