|
The
Vulgate
is a Latin version of
the Holy Bible, and
largely the result of
the labors of St
Jerome (Eusebius
Sophronius
Hieronymus),
who was commissioned
by Pope Damasus I in
382 A.D. to make a
revision of the old
Latin translations. By
the 13th century this
revision had come to
be called the versio
vulgata, that
is, the "commonly used
translation", and
ultimately it became
the definitive and
officially promulgated
Latin version of the
Holy Bible in the
Catholic Church.
Saint
Jerome had been
commissioned by Pope
Damasus to revise the
Old Latin text of the
four Gospels from the
best Greek texts, and
by the time of
Damasus' death in 384
A.D. he had thoroughly
completed this task,
together with a more
cursory revision from
the Greek Septuagint
of the Old Latin text
of the Psalms.
After
the death of the Pope,
St. Jerome who had
been the Pope's
secretary, settled in
Bethlehem, where he
produced a new version
of the Psalms,
translated from the
Hexaplar revision of
the Septuagint. But
from 390 to 405 A.D.,
St. Jerome translated
anew all 39 books in
the Hebrew Bible,
including a further,
third, version of the
Psalms,
which survives in a
very few Vulgate
manuscripts. This new
translation of the Psalms
was labelled by him as
"iuxta Hebraeos" (i.e.
"close to the
Hebrews", "immediately
following the
Hebrews"), but it was
not ultimately used in
the Vulgate. The
translations of the
other 38 books were
used, however, and so
the Vulgate is usually
credited to have been
the first translation
of the Old Testament
into Latin directly
from the Hebrew
Tanakh, rather than
the Greek Septuagint.
Saint
Jerome's
extensive use of
exegetical material
written in Greek, on
the other hand, as
well as his use of the
Aquiline and
Theodotiontic texts of
the Hexapla, along
with the somewhat
paraphrastic style in
which he translated
makes it difficult to
determine exactly how
direct the conversion
of Hebrew to Latin
was. In his prologues,
Jerome described those
books or portions of
books in the
Septuagint that were
not found in the
Hebrew as being
non-canonical: he
called them apocrypha,
but they are found in
all complete
manuscripts and
editions of the
Vulgate.
Of
the Old Testament
texts not found in the
Hebrew, St. Jerome
translated Tobit
and Judith
anew from the Aramaic;
and from the Greek,
the additions
to Esther from
the Septuagint, and
the additions
to Daniel from
Theodotion. The
others, Baruch,
Wisdom
of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus,
1
Maccabees and 2
Maccabees, 3
Esdras and 4
Esdras, the
Prayer of Manasses,
Psalm
151, and Laodiceans
retain in Vulgate
manuscripts their Old
Latin renderings.
Their style is still
markedly
distinguishable from
St. Jerome's. In the
Vulgate text, St.
Jerome's translations
from the Greek of the
additions
to Esther and Daniel
are combined with his
separate translations
of these books from
the Hebrew.
First Esdras is not accepted as canonical by the Catholic Church. It was rejected by the Council of Trent on April 8, 1546. The Catholic Bible included it in an appendix. However, it is accepted by the Greek Orthodox Church and Russian Orthodox Church. Second Esdras (4 Esdras in Latin Vulgate) is not accepted as canonical by the Catholic Church, although it is included in the Vulgate with First Esdras. It is accepted by the Russian Orthodox Church.
St. Jerome's Preface
to the Vulgate Version
of the New Testament
Addressed
to Pope Damasus, A.D.
383.
You
urge me to revise the
old Latin version,
and, as it were, to
sit in judgment on the
copies of the
Scriptures which are
now scattered
throughout the whole
world; and, inasmuch
as they differ from
one another, you would
have me decide which
of them agree with the
Greek original. The
labour is one of love,
but at the same time
both perilous and
presumptuous; for in
judging others I must
be content to be
judged by all; and how
can I dare to change
the language of the
world in its hoary old
age, and carry it back
to the early days of
its infancy? Is there
a man, learned or
unlearned, who will
not, when he takes the
volume into his hands,
and perceives that
what he reads does not
suit his settled
tastes, break out
immediately into
violent language, and
call me a forger and a
profane person for
having the audacity to
add anything to the
ancient books, or to
make any changes or
corrections therein?
Now there are two
consoling reflections
which enable me to
bear the odium—in the
first place, the
command is given by
you who are the
supreme bishop; and
secondly, even on the
showing of those who
revile us, readings at
variance with the
early copies cannot be
right. For if we are
to pin our faith to
the Latin texts, it is
for our opponents to
tell us which; for
there are almost as
many forms of texts as
there are copies. If,
on the other hand, we
are to glean the truth
from a comparison of
many, why not go back
to the original Greek
and correct the
mistakes introduced by
inaccurate
translators, and the
blundering alterations
of confident but
ignorant critics, and,
further, all that has
been inserted or
changed by copyists
more asleep than
awake?
I
am not discussing the
Old Testament, which
was turned into Greek
by the Seventy elders,
and has reached us by
a descent of three
steps. I do not ask
what Aquila and
Symmachus think, or
why Theodotion takes a
middle course between
the ancients and the
moderns. I am willing
to let that be the
true translation which
had apostolic
approval. I am now
speaking of the New
Testament. This was
undoubtedly composed
in Greek, with the
exception of the work
of Matthew the
Apostle, who was the
first to commit to
writing the Gospel of
Christ, and who
published his work in
Judæa in Hebrew
characters. We must
confess that as we
have it in our
language it is marked
by discrepancies, and
now that the stream is
distributed into
different channels we
must go back to the
fountainhead. I pass
over those manuscripts
which are associated
with the names of
Lucian and Hesychius,
and the authority of
which is perversely
maintained by a
handful of
disputatious persons.
It is obvious that
these writers could
not amend anything in
the Old Testament
after the labours of
the Seventy; and it
was useless to correct
the New, for versions
of Scripture which
already exist in the
languages of many
nations show that
their additions are
false. I therefore
promise in this short
Preface the four
Gospels only, which
are to be taken in the
following order,
Matthew, Mark, Luke,
John, as they have
been revised by a
comparison of the
Greek manuscripts.
Only early ones have
been used. But to
avoid any great
divergences from the
Latin which we are
accustomed to read, I
have used my pen with
some restraint, and
while I have corrected
only such passages as
seemed to convey a
different meaning, I
have allowed the rest
to remain as they are.
|
