Question Regarding a peculiar Latin Translation

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZDHayden
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

ZDHayden

Guest
Hello all. I have recently discovered the Biblia Sacra ex Sebastiani Castellionis, which is distinct in that it uses more of a Classical rather than Ecclesiastical vocabulary. I read somewhere that it was placed on an Index in the 1700s, and was criticized greatly by both Protestants and Catholics for “placing Christian thought in the idiom of the Pagans”.

Does anyone know of any information other than this about this particular translation? I’ve heard from Classicists that the translation is wonderful in its beauty - but what of its orthodoxy? From what I’ve seen, the criticism is merely about the usage of a more Classical vocabulary and style.

Any information is greatly appreciated!
 
ZDHayden said:
Hello all. I have recently discovered the Biblia Sacra ex Sebastiani Castellionis, which is distinct in that it uses more of a Classical rather than Ecclesiastical vocabulary. I read somewhere that it was placed on an Index in the 1700s, and was criticized greatly by both Protestants and Catholics for “placing Christian thought in the idiom of the Pagans”.

Does anyone know of any information other than this about this particular translation? I’ve heard from Classicists that the translation is wonderful in its beauty - but what of its orthodoxy? From what I’ve seen, the criticism is merely about the usage of a more Classical vocabulary and style.

Any information is greatly appreciated!
Click to expand...
Nope…
 
I haven’t read the book but it’s possible that the writing could have come from Roman influence (like our legal system) rather than the Christian influence. For example, the Classical oratio (“speech”) is Christianized to “prayer.”* Gratia *(singular form of “thanks”) is the Church’s "grace (of God). One can easily see the connection but I think it’s reading too much into it when one associates Latin with paganism. IMO, modern English is a lot closer to anti-Roman barbarism than Christian Latin is to our concept of paganism.
 
I did some research on the translator, who, when he was young, was a devout Catholic, but, after seeing local authorities burning Protestants, left the Church. He was apparently skilled in numerous languages, and his translation does have the full cannon; I checked. My question I guess regards his accuracy and orthodoxy.
 
Hmm this is rather interesting: Luke 1:28, from which the first part of the Hail Mary comes, reads as this:

Ad eam ingressus angelus, dixit: salve accepta, cui Dominus adest, quaeque es mulierum fortunatissima.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top