Looking for a Latin Vulgate

  • Thread starter Thread starter gallo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gallo

Guest
I’m looking for a copy of the Latin Scriptures, but I am unfamiliar with the different additions out there. Currently, I am considering the Biblia Sacra Juxta Vulgatam Clementinam, but know nothing about it. I just ran across it online and it is closer to my price range.
I don’t enjoy reading the Latin online (eg, the Vatican website) because my eyes start “bulging” after a short period of time so a printed copy would be delightful.

Any Latin scholars that could recommend an inexpensive version? I am particularly wanting to use it for reference.
 
I’m looking for a copy of the Latin Scriptures, but I am unfamiliar with the different additions out there. Currently, I am considering the Biblia Sacra Juxta Vulgatam Clementinam, but know nothing about it. I just ran across it online and it is closer to my price range.
I don’t enjoy reading the Latin online (eg, the Vatican website) because my eyes start “bulging” after a short period of time so a printed copy would be delightful.

Any Latin scholars that could recommend an inexpensive version? I am particularly wanting to use it for reference.
The Clementine Vulgate was the official edition of St. Jerome’s translation for nearly 400 years. Probably the cheapest version available is found here. This version can also be downloaded for free from here as a PDF which you could print at home. A more conventional (and expensive) option is here.

The Vulgate Amazon carries is not the Clementine but the Stuttgart edition (info here). It was first published in 1969 and contains no punctuation.
 
Concur with [user]Cranch[/user]. I would add: Check used book sources as well – That is how I came to have a 1965 print of the “expensive” option he points out, which I did not realize at the time was such a “steal” at ~$20. (Search for “biblia sacra vulgata”) 👍

tee
 
If you decide on the Clementine vulgate, watch out!. Some editions have no punctuation. It is hell.
As noted earlier, the versions without punctuation are made from the Stuttgart text, not the Clementine.

It is worth mentioning that the only place on the Web to present the Stuttgart text with the additions to Esther is the German Bible Society’s own online Bible page. It also correctly has Weber’s text for the additions to Daniel, which are either missing or from the Clementine in nearly every other site that presents the Vulgate. Thanks to Michael Marlowe’s terrific bible-researcher site for this info.
 
If you’re serious about this, you should get the Nova Vulgata, which contains the latest corrections. There is no cheap edition of the whole Nova Vulgata bible. And the easiest, best place to get it is at the Vatican Bookstore.

paxbook.com/algorithmiS/servusPrimus?iussum=monstraScriptumEditum&numerus=23019
The Vatican Bookstore does offer as well a version of the *Nova Vulgata *which is not *much *pricier than the ACL’s (AUC’s) Clementine.

Bibliorum Sacrorum Nova Vulgata editio minor

(Though shipping may be a killer)

tee
 
Hi Gallo,

If you’re serious about this, you should get the Nova Vulgata, which contains the latest corrections. There is no cheap edition of the whole Nova Vulgata bible. And the easiest, best place to get it is at the Vatican Bookstore.

paxbook.com/algorithmiS/servusPrimus?iussum=monstraScriptumEditum&numerus=23019

Verbum

If you decide on the Clementine vulgate, watch out!. Some editions have no punctuation. It is hell.
Aside from punctuation, what is the difference between the Nova Vulgata and the Clementine Vulgate? Is the Nova Vulgata just the New Testament?
 
For those out there who know Latin–how much does the Nova Vulgata differ from earlier versions of the Vulgate?
 
Hi Jerry,

The changes are relatively few and far between. Perhaps the Psalms are where you will find the most changes. Here is Psalm 1 :

PSALMUS** 1**

Nova Vulgata
1 Beatus vir, qui non abiit in consilio impiorum
et in via peccatorum non stetit
et in conventu derisorum non sedit,
2 sed in lege Domini voluntas eius,
et in lege eius meditatur die ac nocte.
3 Et erit tamquam lignum plantatum secus decursus aquarum,
quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo;
et folium eius non defluet,
et omnia, quaecumque faciet, prosperabuntur.
4 Non sic impii**, non sic**,
sed tamquam pulvis, quem proicit ventus.
5 Ideo non consurgent impii in iudicio,
neque peccatores in concilio iustorum.
6 Quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum,
et iter impiorum peribit.

Vulgata
beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in cathedra derisorum non sedit
sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte
et erit tamquam lignum beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in cathedra derisorum non sedit
sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte
et erit tamquam lignum transplantatum iuxta rivulos aquarum quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo et folium eius non defluet et omne quod fecerit prosperabitur
non sic impii sed tamquam pulvis quem proicit ventus
propterea non resurgent impii in iudicio neque peccatores in congregatione iustorum
quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum et iter impiorum peribit

Verbum
 
Hi Jerry,

The changes are relatively few and far between. Perhaps the Psalms are where you will find the most changes. Here is Psalm 1 :

PSALMUS** 1**

Nova Vulgata
1 Beatus vir, qui non abiit in consilio impiorum
et in via peccatorum non stetit
et in conventu derisorum non sedit,
2 sed in lege Domini voluntas eius,
et in lege eius meditatur die ac nocte.
3 Et erit tamquam lignum plantatum secus decursus aquarum,
quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo;
et folium eius non defluet,
et omnia, quaecumque faciet, prosperabuntur.
4 Non sic impii**, non sic**,
sed tamquam pulvis, quem proicit ventus.
5 Ideo non consurgent impii in iudicio,
neque peccatores in concilio iustorum.
6 Quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum,
et iter impiorum peribit.

Vulgata
beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in cathedra derisorum non sedit
sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte
et erit tamquam lignum beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in cathedra derisorum non sedit
sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte
et erit tamquam lignum transplantatum iuxta rivulos aquarum quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo et folium eius non defluet et omne quod fecerit prosperabitur
non sic impii sed tamquam pulvis quem proicit ventus
propterea non resurgent impii in iudicio neque peccatores in congregatione iustorum
quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum et iter impiorum peribit

Verbum
Verbum,

I could be wrong, but it would appear that you quoted from the Stuttgart Vg, not the Clementine; the latter is the work of a Protestant Bible society, the latter is the basis of the Douay-Rheims.
 
Verbum,

I could be wrong, but it would appear that you quoted from the Stuttgart Vg, not the Clementine; the -]latter/-] former is the work of a Protestant Bible society, the latter is the basis of the Douay-Rheims.
For the sake of clarity, I fixed that typo above. 😉
 
PSALMUS** 1**

Nova Vulgata
1 Beatus vir, qui non abiit in consilio impiorum
et in via peccatorum non stetit
et in conventu derisorum non sedit,
2 sed in lege Domini voluntas eius,
et in lege eius meditatur die ac nocte.
3 Et erit tamquam lignum plantatum secus decursus aquarum,
quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo;
et folium eius non defluet,
et omnia, quaecumque faciet, prosperabuntur.
4 Non sic impii**, non sic**,
sed tamquam pulvis, quem proicit ventus.
5 Ideo non consurgent impii in iudicio,
neque peccatores in concilio iustorum.
6 Quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum,
et iter impiorum peribit.

Vulgata
beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in cathedra derisorum non sedit
sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte
et erit tamquam lignum beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in cathedra derisorum non sedit
sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte
et erit tamquam lignum transplantatum iuxta rivulos aquarum quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo et folium eius non defluet et omne quod fecerit prosperabitur
non sic impii sed tamquam pulvis quem proicit ventus
propterea non resurgent impii in iudicio neque peccatores in congregatione iustorum
quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum et iter impiorum peribit

Verbum
Hi Manfred,

The Vulgate is the Vulgate is the Vulgate

Verbum
Your excerpt labeled “Vulgata” got badly scrambled somehow. Here is what the Stuttgart Vulgate should look like:1 Beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum et in via peccatorum non stetit in cathedra derisorum non sedit
2 sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte
3 et erit tamquam lignum transplantatum iuxta rivulos aquarum quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo et folium eius non defluet et omne quod fecerit prosperabitur
4 non sic impii sed tamquam pulvis quem proicit ventus
5 propterea non resurgent impii in iudicio neque peccatores in congregatione iustorum
6 quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum et iter impiorum peribit

Here is the Clementine Vulgate:1 Beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum,
Et in via peccatorum non stetit,
Et in cathedra pestilentiæ non sedit ;
2 Sed in lege Domini voluntas eius,
Et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte.
3 Et erit tamquam lignum quod plantatum est secus decursus aquarum,
Quod fructum suum dabit in tempore suo :
Et folium eius non defluet ;
Et omnia quæcumque faciet prosperabuntur.
4 Non sic impii, non sic ;
Sed tamquam pulvis quem proiicit ventus a facie terræ.
5 Ideo non resurgent impii in iudicio,
Neque peccatores in concilio iustorum :
6 Quoniam novit Dominus viam iustorum,
Et iter impiorum peribit.

A close comparison will show not only that the Stuttgart Vulgate and Clementine Vulgate are not the same, but that (in this case at least) the Nova Vulgata is much closer to the Clementine. The problem with using the Psalter to compare and contrast the Stuttgart, Clementine and Nova Vulgata is that they use different base Psalters. The Clementine uses Jerome’s Gallican Psalter (his second revision made from the Greek), the Stuttgart uses Jerome’s “Hebrew Psalter” (his third revision made from the Hebrew). Supposedly the Stuttgart Vulgate also contains the Gallican Psalter but it is the Hebrew Psalter that appears online. Finally, the Nova Vulgata uses a new translation published in 1969 and made from the Masoretic text. 1

It is worth emphasizing that Jerome’s translation was declared “authentic” by the Council of Trent and that the Clementine was the official version of Jerome’s work which resulted from the post-council efforts to standardize the Vulgate in the 16th century. The Stuttgart edition is based on various Latin critical editions of the Vulgate and first came out in 1969. (Note to Manfred: one of these critical editions is the Old Testament by the Benedictines commissioned by Pius X.) I’m not saying which is better—supposedly the Nova Vulgata New Testament is based on the Stuttgart edition. But in regards to their details, saying “The Vulgate is the Vulgate is the Vulgate” isn’t accurate. 2
 
For the sake of clarity, I fixed that typo above. 😉
Cranch,

As you know, it was not I who stated that “the Vulgate is the Vulgate is the Vulgate”.

In my brief message, wherein I referred to the Stuttgart first and the Clementine second, the “former” was intended to refer to the Stuttgart, the “latter” to the Clementine. (But I see how confusion could arise, since the OP quoted Psalm 1 from the Nova Vulgata first, the Stuttgart second.) :hypno:
 
Cranch,

As you know, it was not I who stated that “the Vulgate is the Vulgate is the Vulgate”.
Yes, I do (and did) know that.
In my brief message, wherein I referred to the Stuttgart first and the Clementine second, the “former” was intended to refer to the Stuttgart, the “latter” to the Clementine.
I understood this too, except you didn’t write “former…latter”, you wrote “latter…latter”:
Verbum,

I could be wrong, but it would appear that you quoted from the Stuttgart Vg, not the Clementine; the latter is the work of a Protestant Bible society, the latter is the basis of the Douay-Rheims.
That’s when I changed your reference to the Stuttgart to “former”. Am I missing something? I hope you don’t take this as beating a dead horse. It’s just that these little forum disconnects make me crazy! 🙂
 
Hi Cranch,

I was not aware that the two editions used different Jerome psalters. Live and learn. Sorry for seeming obdurate.

So the Vulgate is the Vulgate is the Vulgate, but the Psalter of the Vulgate is not, is not, is not the Psalter of the Vulgate.

Verbum
 
… you didn’t write “former…latter”, you wrote “latter…latter”:

That’s when I changed your reference to the Stuttgart to “former”. Am I missing something? I hope you don’t take this as beating a dead horse. It’s just that these little forum disconnects make me crazy! 🙂
Cranch, you are correct! My bad. :doh2:

Verbum,

Please stop writing that “the Vulgate is the Vulgate is the Vulgate”; it’s simply not true, as any article on the various Vg editions can attest. :dts:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top