Judith 13:23-31

[princz23]

The Essential Mary Handbook refers to these verses in reference to the Assumption of Mary into Heaven. My Catholic Women’s Bible NRSV, ends this chapter of Judith at verse 20. I like to read the scriptures before I meditate on the mystery as suggested by Pope John Paul II. Anyone know what these scriptures say?

 

[Jadesfire20]

The Essential Mary Handbook refers to these verses in reference to the Assumption of Mary into Heaven. My Catholic Women’s Bible NRSV, ends this chapter of Judith at verse 20. I like to read the scriptures before I meditate on the mystery as suggested by Pope John Paul II. Anyone know what these scriptures say?

Hi

My NAB bible also ends at verse 20. Could it be a typo in your Mary Handbook?

 

[Fidelis]

Jadesfire20:

Hi

My NAB bible also ends at verse 20. Could it be a typo in your Mary Handbook?

My RSV-CE also lacks these verses. Could be a typo. Does the Mary Handbook describe the passage at all?

 

[garysibio]

New Jerusalem Bible also ends at v 20.

Your reference may be a typo but there is also another possibility. Sometimes a Bible will follow a different numbering system. For example, the RSV-CE only has three chapters for Joel. The NJB ends Joel 3 at v 5 and puts the rest in Joel 4. Maybe the verses you are looking for start Judith 14 in your Bible.

 

[princz23]

Does the Mary Handbook describe the passage at all?

---

It simply says “For devotion to Mary”. I don’t see anything in Judith 14, but perhaps Judith 18-20 is some foreshadowing of what would be said about Mary later…18 …O daughter, you are blessed by the Most High God above all other women on earth; and blessed be the Lord God, who created the heavens and earth… 19 Your praise will never depart from the hearts of those who remember the power of God

This is similar to the conversation with Elizabeth…

Any thoughts?

 

[GrzeszDeL]

Unfortunately, folks, I am afraid that the truth here is much uglier. It is not that Princz’s handbook contains a typo; rather, every one of the Bibles you have mentioned (NAB, Jerusalem, NRSV and RSV-CE) are all degenerate. That is, all of them are missing chunks of the Bible. This is a particular pet peeve of mine, so if I start to offer an explanation it will probably devolve into an angry rant; suffice it to say, there is no such thing as a good English translation of the Bible. Those who can read Latin would do well to find a copy of the Vulgate (I can point you to a publisher if you want; send me a message). The text of the particular passage which Princz seeks reads as follows:

23 And Ozias the prince of the people of Israel, said to her: Blessed art thou, O daughter, by the Lord the most high God, above all women upon the earth. 24 Blessed be the Lord who made heaven and earth, who hath directed thee to the cutting off the head of the prince of our enemies. 25 Because he hath so magnified thy name this day, that thy praise shall not depart out of the mouth of men who shall be mindful of the power of the Lord for ever, for that thou hast not spared thy life, by reason of the distress and tribulation of thy people, but hast prevented our ruin in the presence of our God. 26 And all the people said: So be it, so be it. 27 And Achior being called for came, and Judith said to him: The God of Israel, to whom thou gavest testimony, that he revengeth himself of his enemies, he hath cut off the head of all the unbelievers this night by my hand. 28 And that thou mayst find that it is so, behold the head of Holofernes, who in the contempt of his pride despised the God of Israel: and threatened thee with death, saying: When the people of Israel shall be taken, I will command thy sides to be pierced with a sword. 29 Then Achior seeing the head of Holofernes, being seized with a great fear he fell on his face upon the earth, and his soul swooned away. 30 But after he had recovered his spirits he fell down at her feet, and reverenced her and said: 31 Blessed art thou by thy God in every tabernacle of Jacob, for in every nation which shall hear thy name, the God of Israel shall be magnified on occasion of thee.

Holy Mother Church has traditionally read this verse at various Marian feasts, so there is no excuse why Catholic translations like the NAB should omit it.

 

[Fidelis]

GrzeszDeL:

Unfortunately, folks, I am afraid that the truth here is much uglier. It is not that Princz’s handbook contains a typo; rather, every one of the Bibles you have mentioned (NAB, Jerusalem, NRSV and RSV-CE) are all degenerate. That is, all of them are missing chunks of the Bible. This is a particular pet peeve of mine, so if I start to offer an explanation it will probably devolve into an angry rant; suffice it to say, there is no such thing as a good English translation of the Bible. Those who can read Latin would do well to find a copy of the Vulgate (I can point you to a publisher if you want; send me a message).
…
Holy Mother Church has traditionally read this verse at various Marian feasts, so there is no excuse why Catholic translations like the NAB should omit it.

Fascinating. Is this also missing from the Douay-Rhiems?

 

[GrzeszDeL]

Fidelis:

Fascinating. Is this also missing from the Douay-Rhiems?

No. In fact, the quote I provided in my earlier post was taken from the online Douay-Rheims. That said, the DR has its own problems. Really, of all the English translations out there, I like the RSV-CE the best, but it is important to understand that even it has problems. As I said earlier, I recommend reading the Vulgate if at all possible, because the Church has made dogmatically clear that St. Jerome’s Vulgate is perfect.

 

[threej_lc]

GrzeszDeL:

I recommend reading the Vulgate if at all possible, because the Church has made dogmatically clear that St. Jerome’s Vulgate is perfect.

Woah there. Can you get me a source on that? My experience with the vulgate is it has just as many errors as RSV-CE and even KJV.

Josh

 

[GrzeszDeL]

threej_lc:

Woah there. Can you get me a source on that? My experience with the vulgate is it has just as many errors as RSV-CE and even KJV.

From the IV session of the Council of Trent:
If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema.

 

[Jadesfire20]

Man that stinks…what other passages are missing from the NAB that I don’t know about…? Also where could I get a good copy of the vulgate that won’t cost an arm and a leg? Time to revamp my latin skills…

 

[Joe_Kelley]

The truth is less sinister, or slyly desterous if you are left handed, than you assume. Judith 13:23-31 in the Douay Rheims is Judith 13:17-20 in tha NAB. My original Jerusalem Bible has both verse numberings.

Note that the chapter and verse arrangement is not part of the original Bible and is not inspired. they sometimes get a bit garbled from one edition to another.

 

[threej_lc]

GrzeszDeL:

From the IV session of the Council of Trent:If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema.

This is stating what is the official canon of the bible, using the vulgate as a reference, not declaring the vulgate infallible. It was a response to the the protestants who were removing books of the bible and claiming it as the true canon.

 

[GrzeszDeL]

Joe Kelley:

The truth is less sinister, or slyly desterous if you are left handed, than you assume. Judith 13:23-31 in the Douay Rheims is Judith 13:17-20 in tha NAB. My original Jerusalem Bible has both verse numberings.

Note that the chapter and verse arrangement is not part of the original Bible and is not inspired. they sometimes get a bit garbled from one edition to another.

Dear Joe,

I confess that I was not aware of the numbering discrepancy. In fact, I was under the impression that it was Jerome who first invented the citation system in the Bible, so I am a bit surprised to see that it varies. If anyone knows the reason for the discrepancy, I would be interested to hear the story.

In any case, the NAB is not quite off the hook here. If you compare the text of the DR with that of the NAB, you will see that there is still a sizable chunk of the text missing in the NAB (namely verses 27-31 in the DR). Ditto for the RSV-CE.

 

[GrzeszDeL]

threej_lc:

This is stating what is the official canon of the bible, using the vulgate as a reference, not declaring the vulgate infallible. It was a response to the the protestants who were removing books of the bible and claiming it as the true canon.

Dear Threej_lc,

I see that I did not quite make myself clear in my earlier post. I did not mean to give the impression that Trent had declared that every word in the Vulgate has been translated in the best possible way. I meant merely to indicate that we have it on the authority of the Church that there is nothing missing from Vulgate (in the way that there is from other versions), nor anything superfluous. I apologize for giving the impression that I thought that the Church had claimed that the Vulgate was absolutely without blemish.

That said, I really cannot speak to the issue of the accuracy of the Vulgate’s rendering of the OT (I do not know more than five words of Hebrew), but I cannot think of anything in the Vulgate’s rendering of the NT that I find unsatisfactory. Is there anything in particular that prompted your remark about more errors in the Vulgate than in the KJV?

 

[princz23]

Originally Posted by Judith XIII:23-31
23 And Ozias the prince of the people of Israel, said to her: Blessed art thou, O daughter, by the Lord the most high God, above all women upon the earth. 24 Blessed be the Lord who made heaven and earth, who hath directed thee to the cutting off the head of the prince of our enemies. 25 Because he hath so magnified thy name this day, that thy praise shall not depart out of the mouth of men who shall be mindful of the power of the Lord for ever, for that thou hast not spared thy life, by reason of the distress and tribulation of thy people, but hast prevented our ruin in the presence of our God. 26 And all the people said: So be it, so be it. 27 And Achior being called for came, and Judith said to him: The God of Israel, to whom thou gavest testimony, that he revengeth himself of his enemies, he hath cut off the head of all the unbelievers this night by my hand. 28 And that thou mayst find that it is so, behold the head of Holofernes, who in the contempt of his pride despised the God of Israel: and threatened thee with death, saying: When the people of Israel shall be taken, I will command thy sides to be pierced with a sword. 29 Then Achior seeing the head of Holofernes, being seized with a great fear he fell on his face upon the earth, and his soul swooned away. 30 But after he had recovered his spirits he fell

down at her feet, and reverenced her and said: 31 Blessed art thou by thy God in every tabernacle of Jacob, for in every nation which shall hear thy name, the God of Israel shall be magnified on occasion of thee.

I cannot read Latin, but I will take the suggestions under advisement when purchasing my next Bible. Thank you for the scriptures, I will print them out to read during my prayers!

 

[campion]

Joe Kelley:

The truth is less sinister, or slyly desterous if you are left handed, than you assume. Judith 13:23-31 in the Douay Rheims is Judith 13:17-20 in tha NAB. My original Jerusalem Bible has both verse numberings.

Note that the chapter and verse arrangement is not part of the original Bible and is not inspired. they sometimes get a bit garbled from one edition to another.

Okay, stupid question from a thick headed newbie: If Judith 13:23-31 is in the NAB’s 13:17-20, then where in the NAB is the D-R’s 13:17-20?? Make sense?

And how widespread is this conflict of verses and chapters among the varying versions???

I’m intrigued!!

 

[threej_lc]

GrzeszDeL:

Dear Threej_lc,

I see that I did not quite make myself clear in my earlier post. I did not mean to give the impression that Trent had declared that every word in the Vulgate has been translated in the best possible way. I meant merely to indicate that we have it on the authority of the Church that there is nothing missing from Vulgate (in the way that there is from other versions), nor anything superfluous. I apologize for giving the impression that I thought that the Church had claimed that the Vulgate was absolutely without blemish.

That said, I really cannot speak to the issue of the accuracy of the Vulgate’s rendering of the OT (I do not know more than five words of Hebrew), but I cannot think of anything in the Vulgate’s rendering of the NT that I find unsatisfactory. Is there anything in particular that prompted your remark about more errors in the Vulgate than in the KJV?

Okay, we’re on the same page then, cool.

I did not mean to say the KJV was more accurate then the vulage in total. I meant to say there are specific passages in the KJV which are better done then the Vulgate.

Josh

 

[Joe_Kelley]

campion:

Okay, stupid question from a thick headed newbie: If Judith 13:23-31 is in the NAB’s 13:17-20, then where in the NAB is the D-R’s 13:17-20?? Make sense?

And how widespread is this conflict of verses and chapters among the varying versions???

I’m intrigued!!

The verses in the NAB seem to be more finely divided than in DR, e.g. verse 2 DR is verse 2,3,&4 in NAB. It’s quite a garble but I think the text is all there. I think it may be a particular problem with the Deuterocanonical books, but I haven’t studied it in detail. [It confuses me so I just ignore the numberings where it occurs.]

Even worse is to try to figure the numberings in Daniel and Esther when the Deuterocanonical portions are spliced in as in the RSV-CE. I usually have to go to the NAB to match the readings.

 

[Fidelis]

Perhaps this excerpt from the NAB introduction to the Book of Judith might hold a key:

The unknown author composed this edifying narrative of divine providence at the end of the second or the beginning of the first century B.C. The original was almost certainly written in Hebrew, but the Greek text shows so much freedom in adapting from the Septuagint the language of older biblical books that it must be regarded as having a literary character of its own. It is this Greek form of the book, accepted as canonical by the Catholic Church, which is translated here. St. Jerome, who prepared (with some reluctance) a Latin text of Judith, based his work on a secondary Aramaic text available to him in Palestine, combined with an older Latin rendering from the Greek. The long hymn of Jdt 16 he took in its entirety from that earlier Latin text.

If the Vulgate is based on a different manuscript than that used in the NAB (and possibly other translations), this might explain some variances.