Nova Vulgata


#1

I would love to have a physical copy of the vulgate to read from as I continue to learn Latin. I know the whole text of the Nova Vulgata is available on the Vatican website. I can’t sit at the computer and read a book. To me, there is just something special about holding a physical book in my hands that I need. I did some research and read old forum posts about this. I know that edition is out of print. Some older forum posts on this topic mentioned various internet stores, none of which currently have the Nova Vulgata for sale. Does anyone know if the Vatican publishing company is going to reprint this? Will it be available for purchase anytime soon?


#2

Try finding an old one used. A good site I use for used books is www.AbeBooks.com They do have antique books available for sale too, but you’ll really spend some bucks on that.

Glenda


#3

Check Logos1986 second edition:
Nova Vulgata: Bibliorum Sacrorum Editio (NVUL)


#4

Looks good. I think I might buy it for me for Christmas. Thanks for the link. It costs way too much and Abe’s or Amazon.

Glenda


#5

The website says, “Images for illustration only. You are buying an electronic license to this content, for use with listed Logos-compatible devices and services.”


#6

All I can find at that link is an electronic version, which is exactly what I don’t want. It’s just my personal preference. I can’t read from an electronic book. Thank you for your reply though.

I’m beginning to think my quest for this book is going to come to an unsatisfying end. There are some used versions available online, but nothing in a price range I can afford. I can’t understand why this book is not available? Latin is still the official language of the church right?


#7

If you cannot find the NV, would something like the Biblia Sacra Vulgata (Stuttgart critical edition) be an acceptable alternative?


#8

Sorry, I misunderstood. If you get a digital version you could have it printed on printer paper but it would be really large on that type of paper. I looked so more and there are some other versions available in hardback. I think the New Vulgate copyright expired.

Would you like the Clementine Vulgate? There is a softcover reprint for $50 at ChurchLatin.

churchlatin.com/Books.aspx?CategoryID=19


#9

The Stuttgart edition is a Protestant critical edition of the Vulgate which is inteded to, as far as I understand, be what they think medieval Vulgate Bible ought to have looked like. The Clementine is the standardized Vulgate that we are most familiar with. Unlike th two preceding, the Nova Vulgata is, again, as far as I understand, a Vulgate retranslated to conform more closely to the versions in the original languages and is in many places very different from the traditional Vulgate versions. I say this because these Bibles fulfill different wishes. The Stuttgart Bible probably will not fulfill the wishes of someone who wants a Bible corresponding to the Masoretic Text (although it does have a Hebrew-based psalter alongside the traditional one). Similarly, the Stuttgart will contain different readings from the Clementine Vulgate in various places. Off the top of my head, in Psalm 1:5 the Clementine reads in concilio justorum while the Stuttgart reads in congregatione justorum.


#10

Hello Mysto.

But the intro. and commentary and index etc. are German! I’m having enough trouble with the Latin! Help!

Glenda


#11

Hello Everyone. The Stuttgart Bible in the above link has a few pages available at the Amazon site but they are written in German and Latin. Now my Latin isn’t that great but looking through the Preface where the sources are listed, I found too many different sources and I think, if my translational skills are accurate enough, they’ve tampered with several Old Testament books, in particular the same ones that have been tossed by Luther. This copy is a sort of compromise collection from several different sources. Bottom line, it isn’t a true Vulgate. It is an updated translation alright, but they translated back into Latin from other places and their Latin sources are from some very questionable places among them the “house of Pelagius” who is on my list of bad guys in the movie. It also lists Eusebius as a reference source. It is a real crazy quilt of sources and not a newer Vulgate with some errors fixed as was the assignment from Rome at the end of V2. Definitely** not** the one the OP is looking for and it isn’t the Latin Bible for this gal either. Thank God I can read a little Latin and the Preface is available at Amazon.

Glenda


#12

Very much so. Hopefully the Nova Vulgata will become more easily available in real book form in the future. It would be a wonderful way for Catholics to learn Latin among other things.


#13

Nope. The edition was produced by the Wurttemberg Bible Society and the Vetus Latina Institut, who are Benedictines. The editors were Roger Gryson, Professor Emeritus at the Catholic University of Louvain-la-Neuve, and Roger Weber, of the Pontificia Abbazia di San Girolamo in Urbe. The closest that it gets to being Protestant is using a text edited by two Anglicans as the basis for its NT.

The preface to the first edition states “An international and interconfessional team of five editors was thus constituted with the full approval of the religious authorities involved and the work now bears the Imprimatur of the Cultural Office of the Archbishop of Freiburg-im-Breisgau.” The fourth edition, which I have, does not make any reference to an imprimatur, perhaps because it was replaced by the Nova Vulgata as the standard Catholic version.


#14
  1. How can a critical edition ever have too many sources?
  2. They have not “tampered with” anything: their edition of the OT is that of the Pontificia Abbazia di San Girolamo in Urbe, apart from where they needed additional material from the Vetus Latina Institut library or from other collections. In other words, its OT is the OT used for the Nova Vulgata.
  3. The first edition, before the Nova Vulgata replaced it, bore an imprimatur.
  4. It is the most widely-accepted academic version of the text, although it was not designed to be as liturgically-handy as the Nova.

#15

Hello Mystophilus.

I think we are talking about two different volumes. The one I don’t like that is part of this thread is made in Stuttgart Germany and is listed at Amazon. It has nothing at all to do with the Vetus folks. And actually I’m looking for a simple re-issue of the original Vulgate of St. Jerome. I’ve set myself a goal of purchase at a certain point as my Latin improves, so I’m not in any hurry. I thought the link provided to the Nova Vulgata was a good one, since it is the recommended edition the V2 folks desired at a reasonable price. However it is an electronic copy and not an actual BOOK! Rats! I’ve also looked into the possibility of the two-volume Clementine Bible but that would be a step-down from my original goal. So, I keep my eyes open till I find what I’m looking for. I already have a NT in Latin with a D/R English on the same page, but I want the whole enchilada - St. Jerome’s Vulgate and a very good Concordance to go with it.

Glenda


#16

Hi Stephen,

If you have a Kindle e-reader, you can get the Nova Vulgata for 4.98.

amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=nova+vulgata

Verbum

PS You can also read KIndle books on various tablets, notably Android


#17

For those who are using the Vatican website

List of Nova Vulgata Typographical Errors in the edition at the vatican.va website


#18

Hi Glenda,

We are actually talking about the same thing, and I think that someone has led you astray regarding it. The BSV Stuttgart is the most recent Catholic, and the best current scholarly edition of the Vulgate.

It was edited by Roger Gryson, Professor Emeritus at the Catholic University of Louvain-la-Neuve and board member of the Vetus Latina Institut, and Roger Weber, of the Pontificia Abbazia di San Girolamo in Urbe, under the auspices of both the VLI and the Wurttemberg Bible Society. The first edition was given an imprimatur by the Cultural Office of the Archbishop of Freiburg-im-Breisgau.

The Abbey were the ones originally given the task of the producing a modern, critical edition of the Vulgate, ultimately the Biblia Sacra Vulgata, and then of producing the OT edition for the Nova Vulgata after V2. The BSV was published first, in 1969. Ten years later, the NV came out, as the modern edition for church use. The BSV had, however, found its own place as the standard version for mediaeval scholars. It still holds that place.

And actually I’m looking for a simple re-issue of the original Vulgate of St. Jerome.

The BSV includes all of Jerome’s prefaces, in their original locations, as well as both versions of the Psalter: the Gallican, Jerome’s revision of the Old Latin, which Alcuin introduced into versions of the Vulgate at the beginning of the C9th, and the Hebrew, Jerome’s translation from that language, which had been the norm for the Vulgate before Alcuin. To put QNDNNDQDCE’s comment about Ps 1:5 into that context, in concilio justorum is the Gallican, in congregatione justorum the Hebrew, and the Stuttgart has both. If you want the closest current view of Jerome’s original, the BSV is better than the NV.

Having said that, the NV is the one approved for liturgical use.


#19

Hello Mysto.

Excuse me, but if you look up the Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, the publisher of said book, you find out it is the German Bible Society which traces it roots back to 1710 *and is the proud publisher of among together things, authentic copies of Martin Luther’s translation of the Bible. * It isn’t a Catholic Bible publisher and they don’t publish Catholic Bibles.

I’ve read a few pages of the Preface in which it lists various sources such** as Eusebius and Pelagius, Eusebius not being a bad guy, but Pelagius most definitely is among the bad guys. ** Now, if they are a Protestant Bible publisher proud of preserving the original translation of Martin Luther’s Bible and continue to publish all types of Protestant literature, and by happenstance have enlisted some Benedictines to lend some appearances of credibility to their “scholarship,” do you really think I should trust them with the task of furthering authentic Catholic scholarship, namely my own? Common sense says otherwise. Does the fox and the hen house ring any bells for you?

Oh, Mystophilus, one other thing. If I’m looking to spend some money on a Latin Bible, why as a Catholic do I want to drop that money into the hands of Protestants? I’d rather line the pockets of the Vatican Publishing house which is the source for the V2 sanctioned Nova Vulgata. The Stuttgart version is a Protestant response to V2’s request. Should I spend my money there only to be told in Latin that Pelagius and Eusebius are worthy scholars and have had their works incorporated into this newer “imaginibus et collationibus” effort to deceive yet another generation of pseudo-scholars of Scripture. Um, excuse me again but we know the use of imagination in translation is the whole reason Luther got himself in the fix he got himself in. I am no fool. And once again I thank God I can read and understand a little Latin.

Glenda


#20

P.S. A description of the imaginative and collaborative efforts of this version of the Bible is written here in Wikiland:

"This edition, alternatively titled Biblia Sacra Vulgata or Biblia Sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem**, is a “manual edition” in that it reduces much of the information in the large multivolume critical editions of Oxford and Rome into a handheld format, providing variant readings from the more significant Vulgate manuscripts and printed editions. The first editions were published as two volumes, but the fourth (1994) and fifth (2007) editions were published as a single volume with smaller pages. The text has not been modified substantially since the third edition of 1983, but the apparatus has been rewritten for many books in more recent editions, based for example on new findings concerning the Vetus Latina from the work of the Vetus Latina Institute, Beuron. Like the editions of Oxford and Rome, it attempts, through critical comparison of the most significant historical manuscripts of the Vulgate, to recreate an early text, cleansed of the scribal errors of a millennium. It does not thus always represent what might have been read in the later Middle Ages.**

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate#Weber-Gryson_.28Stuttgart.29_edition

There ya go: they admit the created a “manual edition” that is** reduced**, that means some words were taken out to make it smaller, so as to fit easily in the hand. AND if that isn’t enough to warn you, the next part should “It does not thus always represent what might have been read in the later Middle Ages.” It has been tampered with. The primary sources are both Roma and OXFORD - Anglican Oxford. Again the fox and the hen house come to mind.

Now you can think this is trust worthy scholarship, but me and my money will go to Rome.

Glenda

P.S. It is worth mentioning that the Protestants are expert in using Bibles and Bibles studies to dupe ignorant persons and have done so for hundreds of years. Is this any different or is it aimed at those who think they can out smart the devil?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.