Which Edition of Latin/Greek?

[thistle]

You can purchase, and quite cheap, either a copy of the Clementine Vulgate, ‘Biblia Vulgate Sacra Clementina’ or the Stuttgart edition of ‘Biblia Sacra Vulgata’, from Lulu publishing.
However, neither of these is exactly what St Jerome left to us.
That is as lost as Tatian’s Original Diatessaron.
What we have are copies of edited copies of modified copies of augmented copies.
The Clementine was one attempt to clean out the stables, and Stuttgart was another.
Rome seems to hold that the Clementine edition is near enough to the true copy, while the University of Stuttgart seems to think that its version is closer.
In truth, at least, as far as the Gospels are concerned, most of the differences are limited to variations of orthography between Classical Latin, and the Neoclassical of the Church. Of the rest, the great majority have only the slightest effect on a literal translation, leaving a tiny handful of significant differences.
I have no intention of trying to make significant the insignificant, so I will concentrate on the last case, but having finshed the comparison of Stuttgart and Clementine in Matthew, I have now allowed myself to see if Fuldensis gives any significant preference, and actually, so far, it seems fairly even-handed.
I am not trying to push CF, only to highlight strange readings which the work has brought to light.

Are you saying that when people talk about the Latin Vulgate they do not mean the translation by St Jerome?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Dear Thistle,
Of course, when people talk about the Latin Vulgate, they think they are talking about the work of St Jerome. That is the problem. That was my problem, when I found the Latin Vulgate on the net. I did not know that this was the Stuttgart Vulgate, which had variant texts from the Clementine Vulgate, which both have variant texts from the actual work of St Jerome.
What we all have are approximations to St Jerome’s work.
Rome thinks Clementine is good enough, The University of Stuttgart thinks its is better, but nobody knows.
The problem is made worse by the fact that, at least for the Gospels, St Jerome only lightly edited a very good African Latin, which could have originated in the Library of Alexandria. Further, many of his alterations were subsequently reversed. There is no simple answer to these questions. As to Greek, there is more than a suspicion that the extant Greek is dependant on the Alexandrian Latin. Wheels within wheels…

 

[thistle]

Dear Thistle,
Of course, when people talk about the Latin Vulgate, they think they are talking about the work of St Jerome. That is the problem. That was my problem, when I found the Latin Vulgate on the net. I did not know that this was the Stuttgart Vulgate, which had variant texts from the Clementine Vulgate, which both have variant texts from the actual work of St Jerome.
What we all have are approximations to St Jerome’s work.
Rome thinks Clementine is good enough, The University of Stuttgart thinks its is better, but nobody knows.
The problem is made worse by the fact that, at least for the Gospels, St Jerome only lightly edited a very good African Latin, which could have originated in the Library of Alexandria. Further, many of his alterations were subsequently reversed. There is no simple answer to these questions. As to Greek, there is more than a suspicion that the extant Greek is dependant on the Alexandrian Latin. Wheels within wheels…

Okay so does that mean there is not a single copy (old or new) of St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate in existance today?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Okay so does that mean there is not a single copy (old or new) of St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate in existance today?

Dear Thistle,
In a word, yes.
But that does not mean that every bit of St. Jerome’s work is lost. Much of it remains; indeed I would estimate from my work, that of the text that St. Jerome signed off, at least 85% is as found in the Clementine Vulgate, it we disregard variations in spelling, punctuation, and orthography. The trouble is: which 85%?
I believe the Codex Fuldensis is a witness to the ancient Alexandrian Latin Gospels, which St. Jerome only lightly edited. This being the case, we can infer, by correlating Clementine with Fuldensis, the Old Latin from which both works are derived. But beyond that there is much clutching at straws. The University of Stuttgart has tried, based on the Codex Amiatinus to get closer to St. Jerome’s Latin, and some of the varients in Stuttgart are supported by Fuldensis.
Ultimately, the best chance we have, is to look carefully at all the varients in the context of the era, and see if they make better, or worse sense, and judge accordingly. Hence for example, I judge the Stuttgart varient of the two sons in the vinyard to make better sense than the Clementine version, bearing in mind that this is in fact a question which has no correct answer, for both sons failed to do the will of their father.
The First DISOBEYED his father to his face. A very serious offence under Roman law.
The Second, or younger son accepted the command, but failed to comply with it. Under Roman law, as is the case with modern military law, that is a minor offence.
Hence the Pharisees are being judged, not for giving the right, or wrong answer, but for giving the answer that supports Roman law.
In our Lord’s malediction upon them, the Latin uses the ablative case in refering to the kingdom, so he is saying, not that tax collectors and protitutes will enter the Kingdom prior to the Pharisees, but rather that within the Kingdom, the Pharisees will have an inferior standing to them.
This latter reading also seems to make more sense.

 

[thistle]

Dear Thistle,
In a word, yes.
But that does not mean that every bit of St. Jerome’s work is lost. Much of it remains; indeed I would estimate from my work, that of the text that St. Jerome signed off, at least 85% is as found in the Clementine Vulgate, it we disregard variations in spelling, punctuation, and orthography. The trouble is: which 85%?
I believe the Codex Fuldensis is a witness to the ancient Alexandrian Latin Gospels, which St. Jerome only lightly edited. This being the case, we can infer, by correlating Clementine with Fuldensis, the Old Latin from which both works are derived. But beyond that there is much clutching at straws. The University of Stuttgart has tried, based on the Codex Amiatinus to get closer to St. Jerome’s Latin, and some of the varients in Stuttgart are supported by Fuldensis.
Ultimately, the best chance we have, is to look carefully at all the varients in the context of the era, and see if they make better, or worse sense, and judge accordingly. Hence for example, I judge the Stuttgart varient of the two sons in the vinyard to make better sense than the Clementine version, bearing in mind that this is in fact a question which has no correct answer, for both sons failed to do the will of their father.
The First DISOBEYED his father to his face. A very serious offence under Roman law.
The Second, or younger son accepted the command, but failed to comply with it. Under Roman law, as is the case with modern military law, that is a minor offence.
Hence the Pharisees are being judged, not for giving the right, or wrong answer, but for giving the answer that supports Roman law.
In our Lord’s malediction upon them, the Latin uses the ablative case in refering to the kingdom, so he is saying, not that tax collectors and protitutes will enter the Kingdom prior to the Pharisees, but rather that within the Kingdom, the Pharisees will have an inferior standing to them.
This latter reading also seems to make more sense.

You mean the Vatican does not have a copy? Do we know roughly when all copies disappeared because the Douay-Rheims was translated from the St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. Why wouldn’t Rome have a copy?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

You mean the Vatican does not have a copy? Do we know roughly when all copies disappeared because the Douay-Rheims was translated from the St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. Why wouldn’t Rome have a copy?

The Douay - Rheims is translated from the Clementine version.
St. Jerome’s Latin seems to have been degraded within his own lifetime.
No, not even the Vatican museum has an original manuscript of St. Jerome’s work. Bear in mind, that all copies, up to, and including the time of Caxton were manuscripts, and the orthography, and lack of punctuation or spacing made copying a scribe’s nightmare, especially when two near lines contained similar wording.
The most reliable method of copying a manuscript codex was to take the pages apart, that is, destroy the book, then give each page to a different scribe, who would then produce a copy, line by line, word by word, and letter by letter, identical in positioning.
So page 33 is copied to page 33, and that page has exactly the same number of lines, and each line is copied letter by letter, and checked by a reader before the next line is copied.
This was the best approximation to mass production, and the most accurate method thereof. But the master copy was destroyed in the process, being reduced to a stack of loose ‘papers’.
This is probably what happenned to St. Jerome’s Manuscript, and also what happenned to all the copies thereof, up to about ten generations, by which time, errors would have begun to creep into the text, dispite the reader’s best efforts.
Other sources of error are due the incorporation of scribal notes into the main text. Sometimes these can be seen as such, and these are now often put in parenthasis.
You see, it is not simple, on fact it is horrendously complicated, and much guesswork is involved.

 

[nguyencongbinh]

To my friend asking for a ‘Catholic Latin Gospel’ I still recommend Nova Vulgata as the first book because it’s the Official Text Of The Church – and because I am a Catholic; all other books – Clementine Vulgate included are only secondary. Of course, I heard some Catholics rejected the book because to them the Clementine was the book; I heard some Catholic scholars seemed too proud to consider their own work as the most perfect text and want to produce their new Latin version – it’s scholarly magnificent- but they look at Nova Vulgata just as an ‘ancient’ book without any exceptional values… I read Nova with respect because I belong to the Catholic Family and that it has been prepared for many years by many scholars and experts and the pope for me – a Catholic as a guidance for my salvation. To my understanding there was no Greek Catholic Text recognized by the Church but Nova followed the majority of the collected Old Greek manuscripts.

The First Good News written in Greek were hand duplicated throughout the first centuries. The original texts were lost. There are many preserved copies but each of them contained variations in words, sentences which were omitted by use of shortcuts or inadvertence in copying, or added-on emendating annotations mechanically copied down into the main text.

In the same way, St Jerome’s Hieronymi Vulgata came out as the official book of the Latin Church, but his original copy could never be identified among the numerous Hieronymi Vulgata copies and in reading them, we also found many variants if compared with the 1456 printed Gutenberg Vulgata. Some versions of the Old Testaments were also found poorly translated.

Looking for a better understanding of the Word was the common effort during the Reformation. The 1592 Clementina Vulgata was the answer of the Church in unifying and reviewing the multiple Vulgata texts but She was continuing to strive for a deeper and fuller meaning of the Word Of The Lord. It was reviewed again in 1914.Popes St. Pius X , his successors specially pope Pius XII as well as textual criticism scholars, called for an ‘evaluation’ of the various ancient manuscripts in order to re-discover the true texts as close as possible to the original texts written by the inspired authors themselves, employing the most advanced scientific researches and methods of modern times (Please see Divino Afflante Spiritu). There was thus a need for a *New Latin *translation in order to achieve the best translation of the Good News. For centuries, the flock was looking at the Church for Her guidance.

Nova is brought with great courage by Paul VI and John Paul II, the two great Catholic Church leaders whom God’s People have waited for 16 centuries. Inspired by the Holy Spirit through Vatican II, Our Mother The Church has restated Her eagerness to completely understand the Bible (see Dei Verbum). Nova Vulgata , The New Vulgate is an endeavor of The Church showing Her great courage to clarify Her standing as The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church fulfilling Her duties to preach the Gospel to God’s People. Nova Vulgata is not a review of Hieronymi Vulgata but a completely fresh and improved edition closer to tradition and the original texts rendered by team work efforts of a selected commission of bishops and experts. The
proposed text was widely circulated inviting for scholar analysis and criticism before being published. Pope Paul VI and finally Pope John Paul II were however in charge of full responsibility in the verification and approval. Nova was granted by John Paul in 1979 as a free gift to each of us. (Just enter www.vatican.va)
This generation is blessed with the Holy Spirit renewing graces through Vatican II and the leadership of courageous, holy and extraordinary Church leaders, and with Nova Vulgata. Even that the Gospel has been proclaimed in all languages in each Eucharist celebration as of 1970 but Nova Vulgata was declared by John Paul as the editio typica, the Master Copy, the Official Teaching of Our Mother The Church for use in liturgy.

In this Great Book there are many values beyond my understanding but it’s not hard to read – for instances, about the Annunciation, the Birth Of The Lord, the Holy Family, The Purity of Mary… as I had an opportunity to join some discussions in this Catholic Forum.
As a flock, we need a pastor blessed with the privilege of proclaiming the Word without error. So, I again recommend Nova as the great book for all Catholics to read and to learn- no more- no less since Clementine Vulgate has become a book of history. With best regards, 1/17/07 Nguyen Cong Binh

 

[Trevelyan]

To my friend asking for a ‘Catholic Latin Gospel’ I still recommend Nova Vulgata as the first book because it’s the Official Text Of The Church – and because I am a Catholic; all other books – Clementine Vulgate included are only secondary. Of course, I heard some Catholics rejected the book because to them the Clementine was the book; I heard some Catholic scholars seemed too proud to consider their own work as the most perfect text and want to produce their new Latin version – it’s scholarly magnificent- but they look at Nova Vulgata just as an ‘ancient’ book without any exceptional values… I read Nova with respect because I belong to the Catholic Family and that it has been prepared for many years by many scholars and experts and the pope for me – a Catholic as a guidance for my salvation. To my understanding there was no Greek Catholic Text recognized by the Church but Nova followed the majority of the collected Old Greek manuscripts.

The First Good News written in Greek were hand duplicated throughout the first centuries. The original texts were lost. There are many preserved copies but each of them contained variations in words, sentences which were omitted by use of shortcuts or inadvertence in copying, or added-on emendating annotations mechanically copied down into the main text.

In the same way, St Jerome’s Hieronymi Vulgata came out as the official book of the Latin Church, but his original copy could never be identified among the numerous Hieronymi Vulgata copies and in reading them, we also found many variants if compared with the 1456 printed Gutenberg Vulgata. Some versions of the Old Testaments were also found poorly translated.

Looking for a better understanding of the Word was the common effort during the Reformation. The 1592 Clementina Vulgata was the answer of the Church in unifying and reviewing the multiple Vulgata texts but She was continuing to strive for a deeper and fuller meaning of the Word Of The Lord. It was reviewed again in 1914.Popes St. Pius X , his successors specially pope Pius XII as well as textual criticism scholars, called for an ‘evaluation’ of the various ancient manuscripts in order to re-discover the true texts as close as possible to the original texts written by the inspired authors themselves, employing the most advanced scientific researches and methods of modern times (Please see Divino Afflante Spiritu). There was thus a need for a *New Latin *translation in order to achieve the best translation of the Good News. For centuries, the flock was looking at the Church for Her guidance.

Nova is brought with great courage by Paul VI and John Paul II, the two great Catholic Church leaders whom God’s People have waited for 16 centuries. Inspired by the Holy Spirit through Vatican II, Our Mother The Church has restated Her eagerness to completely understand the Bible (see Dei Verbum). Nova Vulgata , The New Vulgate is an endeavor of The Church showing Her great courage to clarify Her standing as The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church fulfilling Her duties to preach the Gospel to God’s People. Nova Vulgata is not a review of Hieronymi Vulgata but a completely fresh and improved edition closer to tradition and the original texts rendered by team work efforts of a selected commission of bishops and experts. The
proposed text was widely circulated inviting for scholar analysis and criticism before being published. Pope Paul VI and finally Pope John Paul II were however in charge of full responsibility in the verification and approval. Nova was granted by John Paul in 1979 as a free gift to each of us. (Just enter www.vatican.va)
This generation is blessed with the Holy Spirit renewing graces through Vatican II and the leadership of courageous, holy and extraordinary Church leaders, and with Nova Vulgata. Even that the Gospel has been proclaimed in all languages in each Eucharist celebration as of 1970 but Nova Vulgata was declared by John Paul as the editio typica, the Master Copy, the Official Teaching of Our Mother The Church for use in liturgy.

In this Great Book there are many values beyond my understanding but it’s not hard to read – for instances, about the Annunciation, the Birth Of The Lord, the Holy Family, The Purity of Mary… as I had an opportunity to join some discussions in this Catholic Forum.
As a flock, we need a pastor blessed with the privilege of proclaiming the Word without error. So, I again recommend Nova as the great book for all Catholics to read and to learn- no more- no less since Clementine Vulgate has become a book of history. With best regards, 1/17/07 Nguyen Cong Binh

Thanks for your post.

And thanks everyone for all your posts.