Psalm 23 on Douay-Rheims

  • Thread starter Thread starter water
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

water

Guest
On Douay-Rheims, how come the translation is quite different and the number of verses are different too ?

drbo.org/chapter/21023.htm

Other chapters have different number of verses as well.

Thanks
 
water said:
On Douay-Rheims, how come the translation is quite different and the number of verses are different too ?

drbo.org/chapter/21023.htm

Other chapters have different number of verses as well.

Thanks
Click to expand...
The numbering of the Psalms are all different in the Douay-Rheims. What we know of as the 23rd Psalm is actually the 22nd Psalm in the Douay-Rheims Version. Because of the numbering differences, I do not use the Douay-Rheims Version for the Book of Psalms. I will use another translation when I want to read or pray the Psalms.
 
water said:
On Douay-Rheims, how come the translation is quite different and the number of verses are different too ?

drbo.org/chapter/21023.htm

Other chapters have different number of verses as well.

Thanks
Click to expand...
The Psalms in the Douay-Rheims are the English translation of St Jerome’s translation into Latin of a Greek version of the Hebrew Psalms.

I, too, use another translation, that of the RSV-CE, for the Psalms instead of the D-R.
 
Douay-Rheims - vs - New American Bible

Psalms 1-8 ====== Psalms 1-8
Psalm 9 ======== Psalms 9-10
Psalms 10-112 === Psalms 11-113
Psalm 113 ====== Psalms 114-115
Psalms 114-115 == Psalm 116
Psalms 116-145 == Psalms 117-146
Psalms 146-147 == Psalm 147
Psalms 148-150 == Psalms 148-150
 
In the 16th & 17th centuries, when both the Douay Rheims, & the King James Bibles were done, the numbering of the verses, & the division of chapters, were still not yet standardized.
The translators of the DRV chose one way of dividing these; the KJV translators chose another.
Over the ensuing years, the system used in KJV has become pretty much accepted as standard for newer versions. (There are some changes, but the numbers are kept the same, even when a verse is no longer in the text).
The only place where this is a biggish sort of problem for the reader is in the Psalms…I actually, as I read the DRV, take a pencil & re-number the chapters in the margin, to make it easier to follow…
I really wish that someone would take up the idea of doinga printing of the Douay, which would have the numbering made standard. It would be much simpler…
 
Todd_Easton said:
Douay-Rheims - vs - New American Bible

Psalms 1-8 ====== Psalms 1-8
Psalm 9 ======== Psalms 9-10
Psalms 10-112 === Psalms 11-113
Psalm 113 ====== Psalms 114-115
Psalms 114-115 == Psalm 116
Psalms 116-145 == Psalms 117-146
Psalms 146-147 == Psalm 147
Psalms 148-150 == Psalms 148-150
Click to expand...
Rather, Greek numbering vs Hebrew Numbering. In a Catholic Context its also the Latin Vulgate numbering vs the Nova Vulgata Numbering.

And well for example the English Sacramentary, Spanish Roman Missal, Spanish Lectionary, Grail Psalter, Gregorian Missal, Graduale Romanum, Graduale Simplex, Spanish Bibles all use the Greek numbering.

On the other hand the English Lectionary, NAB, RSVCE, NRSV, GNB all use the Hebrew Numbering
 
water said:
On Douay-Rheims, how come the translation is quite different and the number of verses are different too ?

drbo.org/chapter/21023.htm

Other chapters have different number of verses as well.

Thanks
Click to expand...
St. Jerome translated the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) into Latin. Later, he translated the Hebrew Bible (i.e., the protocanonical books) into Latin. He didn’t bother with the deuterocanonical books because they were already translated as part of the translation of the Septuagint version.

For the most part, the Vulgate contains St. Jerome’s translation from the Hebrew. However, St. Jerome’s translation of Psalms from the Septuagint was very popular, especially among the Gauls. It was used in the liturgy and people were familiar with the way it sounded. Spain and a few other countries, however, preferred St. Jerome’s translation from the Hebrew. Ultimately, St. Jerome’s translation of Psalms from the Greek Septuagint rather than from the Hebrew Bible found its way into the Clementine Vulgate. The Douay-Rheims was a translation of the Clementine Vulgate, so it translates St. Jerome’s Latin translation of the Greek Septuagint when it comes to the book of Psalms rather than St. Jerome’s Latin translation of the Hebrew Bible when it comes to the book of Psalms.

In the Latin translation according to the Greek, the 22nd Psalm reads “Dominus regit me,” or “the Lord ruleth me.” In the Latin translation according to the Hebrews, the 23rd Psalm reads “Dominus pascuit me,” or “the Lord shepherds me.”

When the Nova Vulgata was issued, the revisers chose to correct St. Jerome’s Latin translation according to the Greek to bring it closer to the Hebrew text. I suspect they wanted to maintain the traditional phraseology as much as possible for liturgical reasons.

St. Jerome’s translation of Psalms from the Hebrew is actually much better than his translation from the Greek, and it’s a great pity that the Clementine Vulgate didn’t include the former rather than the latter.
 
SFH said:
St. Jerome translated the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) into Latin. Later, he translated the Hebrew Bible (i.e., the protocanonical books) into Latin. He didn’t bother with the deuterocanonical books because they were already translated as part of the translation of the Septuagint version.

For the most part, the Vulgate contains St. Jerome’s translation from the Hebrew. However, St. Jerome’s translation of Psalms from the Septuagint was very popular, especially among the Gauls. It was used in the liturgy and people were familiar with the way it sounded. Spain and a few other countries, however, preferred St. Jerome’s translation from the Hebrew. Ultimately, St. Jerome’s translation of Psalms from the Greek Septuagint rather than from the Hebrew Bible found its way into the Clementine Vulgate. The Douay-Rheims was a translation of the Clementine Vulgate, so it translates St. Jerome’s Latin translation of the Greek Septuagint when it comes to the book of Psalms rather than St. Jerome’s Latin translation of the Hebrew Bible when it comes to the book of Psalms.

In the Latin translation according to the Greek, the 22nd Psalm reads “Dominus regit me,” or “the Lord ruleth me.” In the Latin translation according to the Hebrews, the 23rd Psalm reads “Dominus pascuit me,” or “the Lord shepherds me.”

When the Nova Vulgata was issued, the revisers chose to correct St. Jerome’s Latin translation according to the Greek to bring it closer to the Hebrew text. I suspect they wanted to maintain the traditional phraseology as much as possible for liturgical reasons.

St. Jerome’s translation of Psalms from the Hebrew is actually much better than his translation from the Greek, and it’s a great pity that the Clementine Vulgate didn’t include the former rather than the latter.
Click to expand...
SFH,

Thanks for this great explanation of why the Psalms from the Clementine Vulgate are what they are. Indeed, Pope Pius XII in Divino Afflante Spiritu wrote:

“31. Moreover we may rightly and deservedly hope that our time also can contribute something towards the deeper and more accurate interpretation of Sacred Scripture. For not a few things, especially in matters pertaining to history, were scarcely at all or not fully explained by the commentators of past ages, since they lacked almost all the information which was needed for their clearer exposition. How difficult for the Fathers themselves, and indeed well nigh unintelligible, were certain passages is shown, among other things, by the oft-repeated efforts of many of them to explain the first chapters of Genesis; likewise by the reiterated attempts of St. Jerome so to translate the Psalms that the literal sense, that, namely, which is expressed by the words themselves, might be clearly revealed.”

The Motu Proprio by Pius XII issued in 1945 upon publication of the Liber Psalmorum - a new Latin translation based on the Hebrew - relates how the latter was in response to those many users of the Breviarium Romanum who had pleaded for a more readable and intelligible version of the Psalter than the Gallican. (Unfortunately, this document does not appear to be available online.) Since I am not able to read the Latin introductions to the Nova Vulgata, I cannot determine if this Liber Psalmorum is, in fact, the same that is in the Nova Vulgata. From the Introduction to the OT of the NAB, we learn that the Psalms of the 1970 edition used the same Hebrew base as the 1945 Liber Psalmorum.

For my part, I find the D-R Psalter particularly dense and, dare I say, clumsy. I prefer those either in the RSV-CE or in the 1970 NAB (the non-inclusive version).

Manfred
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top