Clementine Vulgate or New Vulgate?

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='StThomasMore' date='Apr 3 2006, 10:21 PM']I'm not in schism! I am not an any way, shape or form affiliated with the SSPX. Thnx for the link tho.
[right][snapback]934815[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I didn't say you were. But there are some here who are.

[Akalyte]

Why does Stthomasmore have the "hello I dont rep the church" sign but Eutychus doesnt? Another proof that protestant are being treated better than traditionalists. perhaps? I think someone might want to fix that.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Akalyte' post='1076453' date='Sep 27 2006, 07:47 AM']
Why does Stthomasmore have the "hello I dont rep the church" sign but Eutychus doesnt? Another proof that protestant are being treated better than traditionalists. perhaps? I think someone might want to fix that.
[/quote]

Or perhaps dUSt just hasn't gotten around to the latest round of phishys......but it could be me......

[Akalyte]

Yeah but I thought other moderators could fix those things? Stthomasmore says he's not schismatic, yet he is still "seperated brehren".

ok well sorry for the thread hijack.

I'll go with the newly, newly revised and revisable, new american liberal edition. lol

[Didymus]

how was this threads last post listed as Sep.27th?

[Knight of the Holy Rosary]

When someone votes in a poll the thread is bumped.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Akalyte' post='1076458' date='Sep 27 2006, 08:04 AM']
Yeah but I thought other moderators could fix those things? Stthomasmore says he's not schismatic, yet he is still "seperated brehren".
[/quote]
For the record... Mods cannot change your screen name or make you "phishy" or "hello... I don't rep the Church"

[Mr.Cat]

I use the Latin Vulgate proposed by Saint Jerome by the order of Pope Damasus to translate the Greek and Hebrew (Except St. Matthew who wrote his Gospel in Aramaic) into Latin to replace the Old African and Old Italian versions that were inadequate for pious and extensive use. Then later affirmed by the Particular Council of Rome in the 300’s for official use in the Latin Rite of the Church. [quote][b]Forth Session - Council of Trent[/b]
"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; [b][color="#FF0000"]let him be anathema[/color][/b]."

"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, [u]is to be held as authentic[/u],--ordains and declares, that the said old and vulgate edition, which, by the lengthened usage of so many years, [u]has been approved of in the Church[/u], [u]be, in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions, held as authentic; [b]and that no one is to dare, or presume to reject it under any pretext whatever[/b][/u]."
[url="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/trentall.html"]http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/trentall.html[/url][/quote]Thus you normally can catch me using the Douay-Rheims version translated in Rheims and finished at Douay, France in 1609 by a group of exiled Catholic Priests from England to combat the distorted King James Version that commissioned to be written in 1604 and finished around 1611. Therefore one could presumably extend the same protection that the Council of Rome and the Council of Trent extended to this proper and valid translation of the Latin Vulgate. I write this because I have no idea how to vote...

[Resurrexi]

The Clementine Vulgate was issued after the Council of Trent to make a standard version because copying errors had entered the text by monks copying it during the Middle Ages. The New Vulgate, a total revision of the Clementine Vulgate, was published in 1979. The changes between the two could be comparable to the changes between the Tridentine Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass, that is, drastic.

[Didymus]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1168784' date='Jan 17 2007, 11:07 PM']
The Clementine Vulgate was issued after the Council of Trent to make a standard version because copying errors had entered the text by monks copying it during the Middle Ages. The New Vulgate, a total revision of the Clementine Vulgate, was published in 1979. The changes between the two could be comparable to the changes between the Tridentine Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass, that is, drastic.
[/quote]

still the Bible...still the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

[qfnol31]

Can you point out some real differences between the two so that I may better answer the question?

I know some Greek and Latin and so I can tell you which seems to better fit, if you desire. I'm just curious if you have reasons other than nostalgia for this question?

[son_of_angels]

To be fair, the Clementine vulgate has never been "rejected" except by upstart scholars since the fifties, looking to cash in on the modern reordering of things. It has been replaced in most instances by a revision that shares its place with the Clementine vulgate.

However, I much prefer the Clementine vulgate because of its coherency and fair representation of the ancient Latin texts, rather than the New Vulgate, which is an actual revision of the Latin texts. Now, the New Vulgate is not a bad edition of the bible, I wouldn't say, it just simply isn't what people always recognized as the Vulgate Bible of St. Jerome. Wherefore, while being useful for purely biblical study, the Clementine is actually a better Latin bible, and one more approved by general usage.

Finally, as to the Greek/Latin debate...(don't take me too seriously)

Having studied the Greek edition I find that it is less satisfying than the Latin on several accounts, namely, that it is in Greek rather than Latin.
On a slightly more serious note, the Greek edition used by modern scholars today is not as antique as that used by St. Jerome, and not attested by long-time Church usage. Moreover, the Latin which is represented in the Vulgate is not simply popular Latin, but a form of the language specifically formed for Christian use from both the Greek new testament and the theologians and liturgists of that day. Hence, unlike Greek, which is expressing Christian thoughts with pagan/Hellenistic Jewish language, the Vulgate and Ecclesiastical Latin is, in fact, the first representation of a distinctly "Christian" language. This is why, in terms of accessibility to proper Western traditional meanings of the Bible, the Latin Bible is to be preferred. Finally, as regards early Christian liturgy, it is almost certain that within the first 300 years of the church Latin already began to be used in Africa for the Sacred Liturgy, and it is from here, not Rome, that the first Latin translations, heavily borrowed from by St. Jerome, were produced. These were not simply "new" versions produced out of a drive to translate the liturgy, but versions used among ancient Christians who had used a Latin liturgy, with Greek additions, for some time, while the Greek liturgy had continued to develop away from the forms used there. This makes the case for the Latin Bible, at least among Western Rite Christians, even stronger in my eyes, not to mention the fact that almost all Western doctrinal development came by the use of the LATIN and not the Greek Bible.

I laugh with glee.