The Latin Vulgate

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Of course it wouldn't be useful for all puposes...

[Guest Eremite]

The Challoner version (the only version we have now, as far as I know) was criticised when first published. Cardinal Wiseman thought that "to call it any longer the Doway or Rhemish version is an abuse of terms. It has been altered and modified till scarce any verse remains as it was originally published." Some even condemned it for being too Protestant.

It would be interesting to see a modern translation of the Vulgate (although which would be used, the original or the Nova Vulgata?)

I agree that its usefulness would be limited, as Biblical sources and scholarship have come a long way since St. Jerome.

[Cam42]

Nope....the versions we have now are fine. There is nothing wrong with the doctrine of any of the approved translations.

I prefer the RSV Catholic and the Navarre translations, but I am biased after all.

[son_of_angels]

The Nova Vulgata would definitely be the preference. Actually, however, it has always been the opinion of the Church that the Vulgate is almost, if not more, perfect than the Hebrew and Greek texts now extant. The reason for this is the unity of translation, and the use of texts no longer available that clearly show the development of Western Catholic thought.

When one says a modern translation, that should mean good, modern English, designed to address a greater than twelfth grade reading level, as opposed to the so-called "modern" translations which flood the market today, and make the Apostles sound like kindergarten teachers.

It would be an example of the intellectual heritage of which Roman Catholicism is the chief representative.

[Mrs. Bro. Adam]

While I like the RSV (not a fan of the NAB, Navarre is okay but it is simply the RSV with commentary) I think it would not be too bad a thing to have Catholic scholars give us a new translation based on the Hebrew and Greek instead of the Vulgate which itself is a translation. The RSV was put together by Protestants with Catholics helping them.

[Brother Adam]

^^^ That was me, not the Mrs.

[Aloysius]

the Vulgate was declared by the Council of Trent to be the inspired word of God free of any doctrinal error, as such we can consider St. Jerome to be the last person to use the pen upon the Word of God with God's assistance (we cannot say he was necessarily inspired, but perhaps... I wouldn't rule it out). In any event, the oldest manuscripts we have to translate from ARE NOT AS OLD as the manuscripts St. Jerome had to translate from. I wouldn't count out the Vulgate so fast.

while the ones translated from our oldest known manuscripts are also valuable and contain so many imprimaturs and nihil obstats that I would consider them free of doctrinal error, that doesn't necessarily mean they are closer to the original versions. We'll never quite know... unless you can find me the Aramaic Matthew and the papyrus written upon by Mark, Luke, or the Apostle John... otherwise all we have are a bunch of things that are just translations...

and St. Jerome translated things that were quite possibly the originals (he had access to the archives in Rome at the time... and it is possible at that time they had not yet been lost or destroyed by barbarians)

Anyway, there's nothing wrong with any of the ones approved by the Church, but I put my trust in the one that Trent declared to be the inspired word of God. And I personally believe that St. Jerome had divine assistance and that which is written in the vulgate, even if we use textual criticism and find it to be not close to the oldest known manuscripts, is what was intended to be in Sacred Scripture.

but alas, RSV is still good... NAB is annoying but there's no [i]doctrinal[/i] error I suppose (I don't know about the commentary though)... Navarre probably has the best modern commentary...

but the Vulgate rules. St. Jerome was reading all his secular books and God told him to translate the Bible... so he did... and now we have a translation that we can trust

[Brother Adam]

You know its funny I don't actually find the Navarre all that helpful. That's why I sold two of them to Dust and only kept the Gospel and Acts. I find the St. Jerome Bible Commentary much more helpful.

I also have a few really ancient Bible commentaries from the library of a priest who passed away at our parish.

Edited June 23, 2005 by Brother Adam

[Aloysius]

I had only heard good things from places like EWTN, never saw an actual navarre commentary though so you may be right

I got some ancient bibles which rock.

[Brother Adam]

It isn't necessarily a BAD commentary at all. If you want to read a Bible with the Fathers of the Church, its great, but if you are going to go debate a Baptist, you're not going to get far. They offer insight into the scriptures, but hardly exegesis.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I'd love a new, more accureate translation that is more faithful to the Vulgate. The RSV is good, but I don't think it translates Luke 1:28 correctly...

By the way... Anyone else hear that Ignatius Press is going to release a newer version oftheir RSV-CE with "translation tweaks"? Maybe my wishes will be fulfilled!

[luciana]

Yep, according to Mark Brumley of Ignatius Press ithe Insight Scoop blog, it'll be out Fall 2005!!

[quote]Re: the forthcoming revised RSV-CE, it features some translation tweaking, better typeface, more variety in bindings, and other such things. I'll give more info as time goes on.[/quote]
[url="http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2005/03/do_you_receive_.html"]http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2005/...u_receive_.html[/url]

[Guest Eremite]

The old Haydock commentary is pretty good. Even if you don't read the DR (which I don't), you can still use the commentary; it's excellent.

It's a bit pricey (I got mine for about 85), but it's worth it. It has nice covering, and comes with good pictures and stuff.

[url="http://www.catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/11050.html"]http://www.catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/11050.html[/url]

[Apotheoun]

I have a lovely translation of the Septuagint version of the Psalms by Alleluia Press. Ah, the Greek LXX.

[Mrvoll]

For years and years, the Church used the Latin Vugate with only one translation. It is time to revise the Douay-Rheims, bring back the Confraternity N.T. or create a new translation of the Latin Vugate

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Let's start a revolution! :dj: :director: :spammer:

[Cam42]

I still assert that the current translations are acceptable.

[Theoketos]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Jun 22 2005, 07:58 PM']You know its funny I don't actually find the Navarre all that helpful. That's why I sold two of them to Dust and only kept the Gospel and Acts. I find the St. Jerome Bible Commentary much more helpful.

I also have a few really ancient Bible commentaries from the library of a priest who passed away at our parish.
[right][snapback]619925[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


The only problem is that that commentary holds erroneous theories like crazy...such as that Luke did not author his Gospel or acts, the Markan priority theory, and it some times doubts the inspriation of the Bible. It seems to be the intellectual heir to the Liberal quest.

And the RSV is quite good.

Edited June 26, 2005 by Theoketos

[Pio Nono]

JMJ
6/27 - St. Cyril of Alexandria
[quote name='Cam42' date='Jun 26 2005, 06:06 PM']I still assert that the current translations are acceptable.
[right][snapback]624655[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I second this. Fr. John Echert, the Scripture scholar on EWTN's website, says that the RSV:CE is the best modern English translation of the Bible that's he's seen.

As for the Vulgate being useful for scholarship...this is true in a secondary way, perhaps. It doesn't make much sense to limit scholarship to these sources - they're translations and carry with them the defects of translations. Read the Greek.

[Cam42]

Well...who do you think taught me New Testament in college?

Did he teach you too, or was he gone by the time that you took NT?

Incidentally, did you know that he was just made pastor of St. Augustine (the indult parish, for you non-Minnesotans) and Holy Spirit? And Bryan Pederson is the assistant......

Can anyone say traditional?