What Scripture translation is used for the red Ecclesia Dei booklets?

Anyone know? :hmmm:

Presumably the Douay-Rheims Bible, an English translation of the Latin Vulgate. You can view the Douay-Rheims online here: drbo.org.

No, it’s not the Douay. I have a Douay at home and know it well :smiley: .

I assumed it was the Confraternity Edition for NT Scripture, and mostly Douay-Rheims for OT Scripture. Not sure though…never looked it up.

DustinsDad

There really isn’t that much scripture in those red booklets you are referring to. At least not in the propers, which are proper to one Sunday only. The booklet’s purpose is not to be a weekly or daily missal but to be a learning tool for the TLM novice.

On another thread some posters (scholars) say that the D-R is not an English translation of the Latin Vulgate but is a translation of the Clementine Vulgate. Apparently by the time the D-R was done there were already no copies of St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate in existence.

By the end of the medieval period it was common for “the Vulgate” to contain slight variations dependent on manuscript, and corruptions from Jerome’s original were honestly acknowledged. Still, while the Vulgate refers in one sense to Jerome’s translation - I think keeping the same name in its revisions even after Latin ceased to be vulgar preserves this connotation - another sense of the term is simply the official Latin version of the Church, which may receive revisions over the years but always represents a definitive text for theological argumentation. So there is no meaningful distinction between “Latin Vulgate” and “Clementine Vulgate,” because the Vulgate is the Church’s official Latin translation of Scripture; if the claim had been to a translation from Jerome’s Vulgate (would that be Hieronyman?), a distinction would have been necessary.

The ordinary of the Mass is saturated with Scripture, so that even allusions could be translated based on a deference to a particular translation, but let’s not overlook the direct quotes just because other places only take up the scriptural language.

Off the top of my head I can think of…
Judica me
Lavabo
Sanctus
the institution narrative (a sort of Gospel harmony but nonetheless employing scriptural quotation)
Ecce Agnus Dei…Domine non sum dignus
and, of course, the Last Gospel

To me, it seems like the DRV, but it doesn’t have the -th at th end of verbs. It’s like a DRV made into more modern English. I was just wondering where they draw the readings from (especially the proper lesson and Gospel).

Also, someone above said the little red books are for novices but aren’t the same as a missal? Besides the order of the Mass and the propers, what else would be needed to pray the Mass? :confused:

This may be from the DRV, because it uses the word “ye” :thumbsup:

The little red books don’t actually have the propers, which is why they are insufficient of themselves. When they come to a proper element they do give a text, but it is either the most common text or simply an example of what fits there. My parish has the red books and then prints off a supplement with the propers. I don’t think my wife has fully caught on to the system, though, because I rarely see her consult the supplement.:wink: I try to let her use my missal sometimes, but she finds that a little complicated, so I let her be.

A missal, in contrast to the little red books, has all the material that had to be omitted to make the red books so little (and cheap). The ordinary of the Mass is typically in the center, with the proper of times on one side (usually before) and the proper of saints and votive and ritual Masses on the other side of that material, so you flip back and forth between the ordinary and proper in the course of a Mass.

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.