Latin Vulgate

[praise_Jesus_1]

First I hope this is the right place for this thread.

Does anyone know where one can purchase the Latin Vulgate? I’ve seen some on amazon but there was a few different versions and I’m not sure which one would be the best.

As well I recently learned that there is an updated Latin translation that can be found on the Vatican website.

Does anybody know the reason for the updated translation? And as with the original Latin Vulgate does anybody know where I could purchase a copy of this?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Omyo12]

First I hope this is the right place for this thread.

Does anyone know where one can purchase the Latin Vulgate? I’ve seen some on amazon but there was a few different versions and I’m not sure which one would be the best.

As well I recently learned that there is an updated Latin translation that can be found on the Vatican website.

Does anybody know the reason for the updated translation? And as with the original Latin Vulgate does anybody know where I could purchase a copy of this?

Thanks in advance.

For the “original” I would recommend the “Stuttgart Vulgate.” This is purely a scholarly work. It was composed by both Catholics and Protestants. This is the closest we can get to St. Jerome’s version

Keep in mind that the “original” Vulgate that St. Jerome produced has been lost to time.

There is also the “Clementine Vulgate” which was used by the Vatican from 1592 to 1970. You can also get it side-by-side with the Douay Rheims (the Douay Rheims is a translation of the Clementine Vulgate)

Finally, the Nova Vulgata which is the one currently used by the Vatican. The reason for this new edition was to be more accurate to the “original” than the Clementine was.
(The Nova Vulgata is not really a new translation of the Hebrew and Greek but a revision of the Clementine Vulgate using critical texts of the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin)

 

[praise_Jesus_1]

Perfect. Thank you!

 

[DorianGregorian]

While the Nova Vulgata is of course a faithful translation. It should be noted that Pope Pius XII said about the Clementine Vulgate:

it is "free from any error whatsoever in matters of faith and morals” (Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943), paragraph 21).

So either version would suffice.

 

[Cranch]

praise_Jesus:

Something to keep in mind regarding the Stuttgart Vulgate: it uses no punctuation or capitalization. That can make reading a little tougher!

Here is another link to an older edition of the Clementine Vulgate than the one at Lulu: Colunga & Turrado edition. An earlier edition of this book was used as the basis for Tweedale’s Vulgate at Lulu.

 

[Omyo12]

Here is another link to an older edition of the Clementine Vulgate than the one at Lulu: Colunga & Turrado edition. An earlier edition of this book was used as the basis for Tweedale’s Vulgate at Lulu.

I’m not a huge fan of Tweedale’s layout. How does the Colunga & Turrado edition look?

 

[tobinatorstark]

For the “original” I would recommend the “Stuttgart Vulgate.” This is purely a scholarly work. It was composed by both Catholics and Protestants. This is the closest we can get to St. Jerome’s version

Keep in mind that the “original” Vulgate that St. Jerome produced has been lost to time.

There is also the “Clementine Vulgate” which was used by the Vatican from 1592 to 1970. You can also get it side-by-side with the Douay Rheims (the Douay Rheims is a translation of the Clementine Vulgate)

Finally, the Nova Vulgata which is the one currently used by the Vatican. The reason for this new edition was to be more accurate to the “original” than the Clementine was.
(The Nova Vulgata is not really a new translation of the Hebrew and Greek but a revision of the Clementine Vulgate using critical texts of the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin)

The Struggart is Protestant Translation.

 

[tobinatorstark]

First I hope this is the right place for this thread.

Does anyone know where one can purchase the Latin Vulgate? I’ve seen some on amazon but there was a few different versions and I’m not sure which one would be the best.

As well I recently learned that there is an updated Latin translation that can be found on the Vatican website.

Does anybody know the reason for the updated translation? And as with the original Latin Vulgate does anybody know where I could purchase a copy of this?

Thanks in advance.

I recommend the Clementine Vulgate over the Nova Vulgata, but either or is fine to read. Nova Vulgata I believe is only online. lulu.com as mentioned before is a good place to get one

 

[Cranch]

I’m not a huge fan of Tweedale’s layout. How does the Colunga & Turrado edition look?

The link appears to be for the 11th edition of 2002. I own the 4th edition published in 1965 from the same publisher which may not be similar. Mine is cloth bound, approx 5.25" x 8". Seems a hair under 8 point type. Two column layout with vertical rule between columns; paragraph format with boldface subheads; cross-references at the bottom of each column; page numbers at the top gutter and book name & chapter number at the outside top corners.

 

[Cranch]

The Struggart is Protestant Translation.

Wikipedia says the Nova Vulgata New Testament is based on the 1969 Stuttgart version (also known as the Biblia Sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem). I don’t know if that’s accurate or not, put the New Testament section of the Nova Vulgata Praenotanda contains the following passage listing the Stuttgart editors:

Ipse vero, qui recognitus est, textus Latinus continetur Bibliis Sacris iuxta Vulgatam Versionem estque anno 1969 a Sodalitate Biblica Virtembergensi, Stutgardiae sedem habente, foras datus, adiuvantibus B. Fischer, I. Gribomont, H.F.D. Sparks, W. Thiele et R. Weber; qui auctores expetierunt atque conisi sunt, ut ipsum exemplum s. Hieronymi nobis praeberent.

 

[tobinatorstark]

Wikipedia says the Nova Vulgata New Testament is based on the 1969 Stuttgart version (also known as the Biblia Sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem). I don’t know if that’s accurate or not, put the New Testament section of the Nova Vulgata Praenotanda contains the following passage listing the Stuttgart editors:

Ipse vero, qui recognitus est, textus Latinus continetur Bibliis Sacris iuxta Vulgatam Versionem estque anno 1969 a Sodalitate Biblica Virtembergensi, Stutgardiae sedem habente, foras datus, adiuvantibus B. Fischer, I. Gribomont, H.F.D. Sparks, W. Thiele et R. Weber; qui auctores expetierunt atque conisi sunt, ut ipsum exemplum s. Hieronymi nobis praeberent.

But it is still a Protestant translators translated by a Protstant Bible Institution

 

[BUENHECTOR]

The BAC Publishing House from Madrid Spain had published the Biblia Sacra. Juxta Vulgatam Clementinam. prepared by Alberto Colunga O.P. and Laurentio Turrado. The Tenth Edition ( Decima Editio) is from MCMXCIX (1999). BAC means “Biblioteca Autores Cristianos”. The address is Street Don Ramon de la Cruz 57. Madrid.Spain.Kindly check
www.bac-editorial.com . You can order this Vulgata Bible at any Saint Paul Books Store or Pauline Center in Usa. (New York, Miami, Washington etc…). Price around 80 dolars.You can check foe used copies at Alibris. com and also at Loome Book Store.St.Paul Minneapolis.The section of Psalms gives also the Pious XII Version of the Psaltery.

 

[Josh128]

But it is still a Protestant translators translated by a Protstant Bible Institution

To be fair its NOT a translation– they are not translating anything. It is an extremely critical scholarly attempt to recreate JEROMES original Vulgate by comparison/research on the earliest texts and commentary available.

Not sure if its the same as the “editio quinta” Biblia Sacra Vulgata by Gryson/Weber, though. This is the one I purchased last year and I am very impressed by it. It is supposed to be the best attempt at restoring Jeromes original Vulgate available today. All of the “disputed” passages of English bibles today (such as 1 Cor 9:5), OT references to “Christo”, contained in this version (sorrorem mulierem, sister woman) perfectly harmonize with what we would expect from original version and commentaries by Jerome .

I highly recommend it, just wish it were larger, an 8x10 size would be great.

 

[Ron_Conte]

The Stuttgart Latin Bible is NOT a Vulgate edition. The Latin is called Vulgate (common) because it was commonly used in the Church (for many centuries now). The Stuttgart was NEVER in use in the Catholic Church.

The Council of Trent gave a special place in the Scriptural life of the Church to the Latin Scriptural tradition, the old and vulgate (commonly-used) Latin Bible, specifically because of its long usage by the Living Tradition and the Living Magisterium. The Stuttgart was NEVER in use in the Catholic Church. It is a Protestant work published in the 1970’s. It is not Vulgate, and it is not Catholic.

In my opinion as a translator of the Latin Bible, the Stuttgart is not closest to St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. The Clementine Vulgate is the best extant representation and development of Jerome’s Vulgate.

The Tweedale Latin Vulgate is a new light edit of the Pope Sixtus V and Pope Clement VIII Latin Bible, approved by the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, published in London in 2005. Available free online here:
vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/index.html
And in print here:
lulu.com/product/paperback/biblia-sacra-juxta-vulgatam-clementinam/485499
And in print with english and latin side by side here:
baroniuspress.com/book.php?wid=56&bid=50

The Nova Vulgata has some serious scholarly issues. Some sections are merely a light edit of the Clementine Vulgate. Other sections are substantially revised and even retranslated based on the Hebrew and Greek. This causes the Nova Vulgata to depart from the Latin Scriptural tradition, so that the Nova Vulgata does not fit the statement of the Council of Trent on the authority of the ‘old’ Latin Vulgate. The Nova Vulgata has not been in use for centuries, and it is not representative of the oldest Latin editions. Also, certain sections of the Nova Vulgata have translated the Greek or Hebrew loosely, much like a paraphrase translation. This makes the NV unsuitable as the source text for a translation into the vernacular.

 

[crazzeto]

I wish I could read latin

 

[Josh128]

The Stuttgart Latin Bible is NOT a Vulgate edition. The Latin is called Vulgate (common) because it was commonly used in the Church (for many centuries now). The Stuttgart was NEVER in use in the Catholic Church.

The Council of Trent gave a special place in the Scriptural life of the Church to the Latin Scriptural tradition, the old and vulgate (commonly-used) Latin Bible, specifically because of its long usage by the Living Tradition and the Living Magisterium. The Stuttgart was NEVER in use in the Catholic Church. It is a Protestant work published in the 1970’s. It is not Vulgate, and it is not Catholic.

In my opinion as a translator of the Latin Bible, the Stuttgart is not closest to St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. The Clementine Vulgate is the best extant representation and development of Jerome’s Vulgate.

The Tweedale Latin Vulgate is a new light edit of the Pope Sixtus V and Pope Clement VIII Latin Bible, approved by the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, published in London in 2005. Available free online here:
vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/index.html
And in print here:
lulu.com/product/paperback/biblia-sacra-juxta-vulgatam-clementinam/485499
And in print with english and latin side by side here:
baroniuspress.com/book.php?wid=56&bid=50

The Nova Vulgata has some serious scholarly issues. Some sections are merely a light edit of the Clementine Vulgate. Other sections are substantially revised and even retranslated based on the Hebrew and Greek. This causes the Nova Vulgata to depart from the Latin Scriptural tradition, so that the Nova Vulgata does not fit the statement of the Council of Trent on the authority of the ‘old’ Latin Vulgate. The Nova Vulgata has not been in use for centuries, and it is not representative of the oldest Latin editions. Also, certain sections of the Nova Vulgata have translated the Greek or Hebrew loosely, much like a paraphrase translation. This makes the NV unsuitable as the source text for a translation into the vernacular.

I have a few issues/concerns with some things you stated up there—

First off, this is the Vulgate I have: amazon.com/gp/product/1598561782/ref=ox_ya_oh_product, from what Ive read, I believe it is the Stuttgart-- and it is considered the most critical attempt at recreating Jeromes original Vulgate. Its old testament is based off the Pope commissioned Benedictine critical edition of Jeromes Vulgate. The New Testament is a critical edition that was created from various sources of historcally important manuscripts in an attempt to produce the closest possible recreation of Jeromes work. It includes Jeromes prefaces and prologues, which the Clementine doesnt.

I have to disagree with you that the Clementine Vulgate is closer to Jeromes original translation to Latin. Im no bible scholar but Ive read in the book itself all the work that went into producing the “Biblia Sacra Vulgata”, which has been continuously updated and is in its 5th edition (2007), and it is extremely impressive.

One real world example of how its closer to Jeromes edition than the Clementine, I came across just the other day-- in 1 Cor 9:5, the Clementine Vulgate uses the phrase “mulierem sororem” , while the Stuttgart uses “sororem mulierem”-- if you read Jeromes commentary about that passage in one of his letters (forget at the moment, will post when I get a chance), he describes using the term “sororem mulierem”. In fact, many are critical of the “switcheroo” employed by the Clementine Vulgate for that passage, and agree that the old texts were not worded that way.

This is just one glaring example of the Stuttgart getting it right where the Clementine gets it wrong, perhaps there are others?

In other words, the Stuttgart is widely held as the best attempt at replicating Jeromes original texts-- as a translator of the Bible, can you cite examples that can prove otherwise?

 

[crazzeto]

There are some inaccuarcies about the Nova Vulgate in the above:

The Nova Vulgata (Bibliorum Sacrorum nova vulgata editio, ISBN 88-209-2163-4), also called the Neo-Vulgata or Neo-Vulgate, is currently the typical Latin edition published by the See of Rome for use in the Roman rite. The Second Vatican Council in Sacrosanctum Concilium mandated a revision of the Latin Psalter in accord with modern textual and linguistic studies, while preserving or refining its Christian Latin style. In 1965 Pope Paul VI appointed a commission to revise the rest of the Vulgate following the same principles.[47] The Commission published its work in eight annotated sections, inviting criticism from Catholic scholars as the sections were published. The Latin Psalter was published in 1969; the New Testament was completed by 1971 and the entire Nova Vulgata was published in 1979.[41] A second edition was published in 1986.

The foundational text of most of the Nova Vulgata’s Old Testament is the critical edition done by the monks of the Benedictine Abbey of St. Jerome under Pius X.[41] The foundational text of the books of Tobit and Judith are from manuscripts of the Vetus Latina rather than the Vulgate. The New Testament was based on the 1969 edition of the Stuttgart Vulgate. All of these base texts were revised to accord with the modern critical editions in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic.[48] There are also a number of changes where the modern scholars felt that Jerome had failed to grasp the meaning of the original languages, or had rendered it obscurely.[49]

The Nova Vulgata does not contain some books found in the earlier editions but omitted by the canon of Trent, namely the Prayer of Manasses, the 3rd & 4th Book of Esdras, and the Epistle to the Laodiceans.

In 1979, after decades of preparation, the Nova Vulgata was published and declared the Catholic Church’s current official Latin version in the Apostolic constitution Scripturarum Thesaurus[50] promulgated by the Pope John Paul II. The Nova Vulgata is the translation used in the latest editions of the Roman Lectionary, Liturgy of the Hours, and Roman Ritual.

The Nova Vulgata has not been widely embraced by conservative Catholics, many of whom see it as being in some verses of the Old Testament a new translation rather than a revision of Jerome’s work. Also, some of its readings sound unfamiliar to those who are accustomed to the Clementine.

In 2001, the Vatican released the instruction Liturgiam Authenticam, establishing the Nova Vulgata as a point of reference for all translations of the liturgy of the Roman rite into the vernacular from the original languages, “in order to maintain the tradition of interpretation that is proper to the Latin Liturgy”.

The Nova Vulgate is the new standard of the Church, it was introduced by Pope John Paul II.

 

[Josh128]

TTT

 

[Josh128]

Clementine

1 Cor 9:5 numquid non habemus potestatem **mulierem sororem **circumducendi sicut et ceteri Apostoli, et fratres Domini, et Cephas ?

Gen 3:14-15 Et ait Dominus Deus ad serpentem :
Quia fecisti hoc,
maledictus es inter omnia animantia, et bestias terræ :
super pectus tuum gradieris, et terram comedes cunctis diebus vitæ tuæ.
Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem,
et semen tuum et semen illius :
ipsa conteret caput tuum,
et tu insidiaberis calcaneo ejus.

Stuttgart

1 Cor 9:5 numquid non habemus potestatem **sororem mulierem **circumducendi sicut et ceteri apostoli et fratres Domini et Cephas

Gen 3:14-15 et ait Dominus Deus ad serpentem quia fecisti hoc maledictus es inter omnia animantia et bestias terrae super pectus tuum gradieris et terram comedes cunctis diebus vitae tuae inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem et semen tuum et semen illius ipsa conteret caput tuum et tu insidiaberis calcaneo eius

Ive seen a book for sale on that link selling the paperback Clementine revision, claiming that a single typo in the Latin Vulgate on Gen 3:15 was the “basis and foundation of Mariolotry and the Immaculate Conception by the Roman Catholic Church”. Anyone know what this is about? The Stuttgart and the Clementine agree here.

Can anyone explain the disputed “switch” of the terms sister and woman shown in the two versions? Whats the deal with that. Ive read that the Stuttgart is correct there.

 

[Geremia]

I wish I could read latin

You can; go here.