What is the Latin Vulgate Bible?

And as gradually, and almost imperceptibly, a Latin version of the scriptures came into notice, which soon displaced the Septuagint. It was a literal translation from that venerable document, as far as the Old Testament was concerned, and from the original Greek of the New Testament. The exact time and place when this version was made are quite uncertain; but from being called the Old Italic (Vetus Itala) in the 4th century, it must have been effected soon after the completion of the New Testament. It could not have been effected before that completion, because it contained the whole of the Canon; at the same time it must have come into being before the year 200, A.D., for it is referred to by the renowned Tertullian, an advocate of Carthage, who lived about that time. The age of the Old Italic may safely be placed in the first half of the second century; and its birth-place was very probably the neighbourhood of Carthage. It was here that Tertullian flourished, who was the first known christian writer who used Latin, and to the influence of whose name in the West the gradual adoption of Latin by other Christians has been traced.

For 200 years this Old Italic was the only authorised Bible in western Christendom. It was always quoted, and it obtained that veneration which once was paid to the Septuagint. Indeed by many Latin fathers it was considered faultless. As afterwards it was entirely superseded by the Vulgate, this Old Italic version, as a whole, perished. Fragments of it, however, found in various authors, have been collected and published by Flaminius Nobilius at Rome, in 1588, and again by Sabatier, at Rheims, in 1743.

After Origen's great revision of the Septuagint, in the middle of the third century, the world began to feel the inconvenience of having a disagreement between the Greek and the Latin scriptures; for while Origen's amended Greek text became the Textus Receptus, the Versio Itala agreed with the unamended Greek; and it occurred to Jerome, towards the close of the fourth century, to introduce the same changes into the Italic, that Origen had introduced into the Septuagint. This Jerome, one of the four great Latin fathers, and the patron, if not the inventor, of monastic institutions, is said to have performed the work hastily, and even carelessly, and yet this work — the corrected Italic — remains substantially in the Vulgate of the New Testament to this day, and in the Psalters of the Roman and the Gallican Missals.

Jerome himself, even while the work of correction was proceeding, became aware of its imperfection; he resolved, therefore, to apply not merely to the Septuagint, but to the Hebrew itself, for more thoroughly amending the Italic version. He laboured diligently, with the assistance of learned Jews, to acquire a knowledge of the Hebrew tongue, and then he recommenced his revision of the Italic. That part of this version, containing the Old Testament, was completely revised and re-edited; and yet we should be in error if we supposed that Jerome executed a new translation. He only did what our English translators did, he took the old translation for a basis, and amended those parts where he thought the Hebrew ought to be followed; but in substance the new edition resembled the old, and retained, in consequence, many of those peculiarities which the Vetus Itala had inherited from the Septuagint, such as the presence of the apocryphal books, the way of spelling the proper names, the titles of the books, the order in which the books stand, and especially that unnecessary retention of the word Dominus instead of Jehovah.

The New Testament; of course, he did not retouch, except to bring it up to the corrected Greek of Origen, and, for the same reason, (viz., because there was no Hebrew to go to) he might have been satisfied with the Septuagint version of the apocryphal books, in which version, indeed, they had originally appeared. But Jerome seems to have been so much under the influence of his learned Jewish friends, that he used certain Chaldee translations for correcting some of the books in the Apocrypha.

The improved edition of the entire scriptures, thus edited by Jerome, has been constantly styled the Vulgate (that is, the Versio Vulgata, or the version in common use); for during many centuries the western church knew of no other version. There can be no doubt of the importance of Jerome's labours; and yet we are told that it met, for some time, with the most decided opposition. In spite of the support given to it by Jerome's friend, Pope Damasus, people thought it was a needless innovation to alter that version of the Bible to which they were accustomed and it was not till about the year 600, (i.e. 200 years after the publication of Jerome's Vulgate), that it was fully sanctioned in the Latin Church. This victory it owed to the authority of Pope Gregory I, that great and good man, through whose exertions our Anglo-Saxon forefathers were converted to Christianity.

Of the Latin versions, that called Old Latin by Pope Gregory (styled the Great), follows the LXX (Vat.), and hence it is, as ancient, very useful in restoring the more ancient reading of that version. It appears to have been called 'Itala,' from a reading of Augustine's 'Christian Doctrine,' ii. 2, 15: In ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala ceteris praeferatur,' where 'usitata' is now read by some. The version was in fact no more in the usual Italian than in the African Latin. The late Dr. Wiseman's theory of an African origin for this version probably goes too far. We possess only fragments of the 'Itala.' For most material, see the Benedictine edition by Sabatier (1749). The Old Latin has held its ground in ecclesiastical use in Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the books of the Maccabees. It was called 'Vulgata' by Jerome.

The Latin version made from the Hebrew by Jerome (fourth century) gradually supplanted the Old Latin in ecclesiastical use. It is of value just as he is a witness for the Hebrew Text of his own day. He did a similar work for the Latin to Origen's for the Greek, but himself was the more learned. The Codex Amiatinus (sixth century) is the oldest copy we have of his version. Heyse and Tischendorf have used it for their edition of the Latin Bible (1873). Jerome's version of the Psalms never came into public use: it may be seen in the edition of the Psalter by Tischendorf, Baer and Delitzsch (1874). Much interesting information upon Jerome's work as a translator will be found in Cutts's book before cited.

The Vulgate is Jerome's version, called by this name from the days of Gregory (the Great), 200 years after its author. Cutts well says ('Jerome,' p.168): 'The Latin Bible which passed gradually into use under the name of Jerome was a strangely composite work. The Books of the Old Testament, with one exception (the Psalter), were certainly taken from his version from the Hebrew but this had not only been variously corrupted, but was in many particulars, especially in the Pentateuch, at variance with his later judgment.' It has been altered from time to time down to the end of the sixteenth century, when the Clementine Vulgate, which is the 'authorised' edition, first appeared. It is to this edition De Rossi refers when speaking of the Vulgate in the body of his book. — The Concordance of Dutripon would be of service in the use of the Vulgate.

The 'authorised' edition contains the Tridentine Canon, Jerome's Prefaces, Index of proper names and their meanings, &c.

The Latin. — Jerome (A.D. 345 (?)—420) found different Latin translations, and set to work to gather a correct text from the whole. It is called the Vulgate. This proves that Latin copies existed long before his time in order to become thus altered. The manuscripts before his time are called, in distinction from his, the Old Latin, or Italic, in allusion to Italy. It is not to be wondered at that the New Testament was soon translated into Latin, because of the early existence of the church at Rome. (Rom. 15:23.) The Old Latin may date from the second century.

171 In order to give the unlearned reader a further view of the available sources of information, we may add that the New Testament has been translated ever since the first centuries. We may name the Syriac, and the Latin translation, probably made in the second century; but the latter, corrected in the fifth century by Jerome, has thenceforth been known by the name of the Vulgate, and has always been used by the Roman Catholics. To these means of assistance must be added the numerous quotations from the sacred books which occur in writers after the death of the apostles, in one of them before the death of John, as they furnish us with more or less exactitude as to the readings of scripture in their time.

This is the name usually given to the Latin version of the scriptures, signifying that it is commonly received, and it is the book used and accredited by the Romish church; but there was a Latin version long before that church assumed any authority: indeed the apostle Paul wrote (about A.D. 58) that for 'many years' he had desired to visit the saints at Rome, and it is probable that during those many years the saints there had early copies of the Old Testament in the Latin tongue, and of the New Testament as the Gospels and the Epistles came into existence.

It is known by the evidence of Jerome [346-420] and Augustine [354-430] that in the fourth century there was a great variety of Latin interpretations, though more modern scholars have judged that many of them may be traced to some one unknown recension.

Augustine, however, judged that one of them differed from the rest in its clearness and fidelity, and it was distinguished by the name of Itala or Italic. This has led to the earliest Latin codices being associated with Italy, where, as already observed, there were certainly assemblies in the days of the apostles. Heb. 13:24.

Passing from the age of revelations, we may still trace God's care for His word, in the manner He provided for its dissemination through the medium of translations. As the knowledge of Greek declined, a Latin translation for the Christians in the western part of the Roman empire became a necessity, and, when needed, believers found their want met. For the Churches of North Africa, as early as the second century, a Latin translation had been made from the Greek, called the Vetis Latina. Subsequently some parts of the New Testament, the Gospels at least, were translated in North Italy, and called Versio Itala. Jerome first connected portions of these two, which, in his day, had become blended together, and afterwards translated the Old Testament directly from the Hebrew. As years passed on his version was mixed up with the preceding ones, and hence was formed that Latin version now known as the Vulgate. Containing some gross doctrinal errors, and others not affecting doctrine, it was, nevertheless, for centuries the only translation in which the Scriptures could be read by the greater part of the nations of Western Europe. From it Bede translated. From it Aelfric likewise in the 10th century translated portions of the Old Testament. From it Wicliff learnt God's truth, and then translated the New Testament for the benefit of his countrymen. Thus a Latin translation, first made for the Christians of North Africa, was destined to be the only source for ages from which God's saints would learn that truth which satisfies the soul. With the dawn of the Reformation access to the original sources was reopened; and the invention of printing brought within the reach of many the Scriptures in the original tongues. Then afresh translations were made. German, English, French, Italian, and Spanish versions by degrees appeared, made more or less directly from the Hebrew and Greek. Tyndale was the first who translated the New Testament for English readers. With the Greek before him he nevertheless was influenced by the Vulgate; and thus, even in the present day, the authorised version bears traces of the influence that translation once exercised over the Western Churches. Tyndale's New Testament appeared in 1525 A.D., the Old Testament a little later. After him Coverdale brought out a translation of the Bible in 1535; Matthews in 1537; Taverner in 1539; Cranmer's Bible appeared in that same year. The Genevan version was published in 1557-1560, and the Bishop's in 1568-1572. Some preferring the Genevan, others the Bishop's, at length in 1611 came out the Authorised version, which, after some years, was generally accepted as the English version. Here too we may trace the goodness of God. The value of having one version, not two or more in common use, is great. Before therefore the Colonial empire of Great Britain had attained to its colossal greatness; before the different denominations in England and her colonies had appeared, or been moulded into distinct separate bodies; before the English tongue had spread over so large a portion of the earth's surface, and jealousies between the mother country and her colonies had led the latter to regard with suspicion anything emanating by royal authority from the former, the Authorised version appeared; and, wherever the English language is spoken, or English enterprise has penetrated, thither that version has been carried, and wherever English or American missionaries have gone, and provided the natives with a translation in their own language, the influence of the Authorised version is felt, the value of one commonly accepted translation attested. Are these slight advantages? Was this the result of accident, or of design!

St. Jerome and the Vulgate.

A few particulars about St. Jerome, one of the most distinguished and learned Fathers of the Latin Church, may not be uninteresting. He was born, about A.D. 340, on the borders of the ancient country of Pannonia, one of the provinces subject to the Roman sway. Jerome's father was named Eusebius, not the celebrated ecclesiastical historian of that name. Eusebius, being a Christian and in affluent circumstances, provided his son with a liberal secular and theological education. Jerome was early sent to Rome, where he studied for several years under various masters, the most noted of whom was Donatus, perhaps the most accomplished grammarian of his age. Jerome seems to have been brought to the Lord when a young man, probably when prosecuting his studies in Rome. He soon gave himself up almost wholly to the study of the sacred Scriptures, and produced a number of commentaries on separate books of the Bible, besides numerous other works. Books in those days were exceedingly expensive. It is said that Jerome ruined himself by purchasing the works of Origen. Having gone to Palestine to make himself personally acquainted with the localities mentioned in Holy Writ, he resolved to become master of the Hebrew language, so as not to be dependent upon translations in the study of the earlier oracles of God — the Old Testament. In a few years he acquired an intimate knowledge of the language, which he soon turned to good account

From the second century till the days of Jerome, the Bible in use in Western Christendom was a translation from the ecclesiastical tongue — the Greek. The Septuagint, or Greek version of the Old Testament, executed about three centuries before Christ, was in common use even in Palestine in the days of our Lord and of His apostles. From the fact of this old and venerable document being frequently cited by the Lord and writers of the New Testament, it would have been regarded almost as a sacrilegious act to have questioned its exactness; besides which, Hebrew was only known comparatively to the few. The Greek New Testament and the Greek version of the Old, formed the basis of all Latin and other versions of the Bible till the days of Jerome, who was the first Christian scholar who attempted a translation direct from the original tongues. This valuable work, styled the Vulgate, was bitterly opposed at the time, and it was only after a lapse of 200 years that it was accorded general favour. Jerome's version was commonly spoken of as "The New Translation," to distinguish it from the Septuagint, the Old Translation. Pope Gregory — the best of the Roman Pontiffs — officially sanctioned the Vulgate of Jerome, who was certainly one of the most pious, and probably the most learned, of the Latin Fathers.

Let us remember that this famous Vulgate version of the Bible was originally founded on the Old Italic, which was a literal translation from the Greek. The New Testament and the greater part of the Apocrypha remained so, being only brought up to the revised text of Origen. But the Old Testament was corrected by means of the Hebrew, and the apocryphal books of Tobit and Judith by means of Chaldee translations.

There can be no doubt that if we could have the Vulgate, as it proceeded from Jerome, we should possess one of the most important versions of the Bible; but it is a matter of history that its text soon became corrupted. Two hundred years elapsed before it quite displaced the Old Italic; and on account of the two versions being both in use at once, they were in some places confused together, and old errors reintroduced into the Vulgate. Moreover, the transcribers, during the dark ages of Europe, were often ignorant men, who could not exactly copy what they had before them; and the readers were far too uncritical to notice or to care for any mistakes that might have crept in. Even so early as the time of Charlemagne, about the year 800, its defects were known, and the celebrated Alcuin attempted a revision of it. So likewise, in a later age, did Lanfranc, the learned Archbishop of Canterbury, in the reign of William the conqueror. But these attempts, and others like them, produced really very little result, beyond probably arresting the accumulation of errors; for none in those ages, even those accounted greatly learned, had any acquaintance whatever with either the Hebrew or the Greek, and could only compare one copy of the Vulgate with another.

Of course, all translations of the Bible, effected during those ages, were made simply from the Vulgate, as it then existed. The Anglo-Saxon version, for instance, which was gradually made during the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries, was only a daughter of the Vulgate; and when, at a much later epoch, viz. 1378, at the very beginning of Richard the Second's reign, John Wickliff published his English Bible, he had no original to appeal to but the Vulgate, as commonly met with, imperfect as it avowedly was. When printing was introduced, in the middle of the fifteenth century, it was first directed to multiply copies of the Vulgate. The first printed book that issued from the press of Gutenberg was the Vulgate, now known as the Mazarin Bible, preserved in the library at Paris. As soon as printing presses were established in the various countries of Europe, they issued copies of the Vulgate, from the MSS. which happened to come to the printers' hands. And it was then that the imperfections of this ancient version became manifest; for these printed Bibles differed in many important respects: which, then, was the true copy, or how could it be regained?

The Reformers did not hesitate to prefer the Hebrew of the Old, and the Greek of the New Testament, to any translation however venerable; but the Church of Rome, after a little delay, decided to adhere to what had existed for 1000 years. The Council of Trent, in 1546, took the subject of the scriptures into consideration, and finally determined that the Vulgate was the only authentic Bible, to which all other translations, and even the original itself, must conform. Still it was necessary to decide what was the Vulgate; and, after a great deal of discussion, the Popes undertook to produce a correct and an infallible, edition of the Vulgate, which should have the sanction of the church. In 1570, Sixtus V. issued this authorised Bible, forbidding, under an anathema, any further disturbing of the text. But the errors of this edition, called the Sixtine Bible, were too glaring to be passed over; and, consequently, in 1593, Clement VIII suppressed the work of his predecessor, and published a second infallible edition, known as the Clementine Bible, which is the edition now meant by the Vulgate, the only one appointed to be read. All subsequent Vulgates are nothing but reprints of the edition of 1593, with all its mistakes reproduced and perpetuated.

The Church of Rome did great injury to the cause of biblical knowledge by forbidding any improvement of the text of the Vulgate. By preferring a translation of a translation to the original itself, she has committed an absurdity (especially as Jerome, the author of the Vulgate, wished to go back to the Hebrew; and by pronouncing both the Sixtine and the Clementine editions, each in succession, infallibly true, she herself teaches men to question the dogmatic authority upon which alone she recommends the Vulgate to the people. The consequence of this lofty opinion of the Vulgate is, that no translation can be tolerated which is not made from it. Our own common version, for example, is repudiated by English Roman Catholics, and the Douay Bible and the Rheims New Testament are sanctioned, because they have been rendered from the Clementine edition of the Vulgate.

But it must not be forgotten that the Vulgate was really the basis of ours, as of all modern European versions. [?] The originals were only used to correct what was amiss in previous versions. Hence we find so many traces of the Vulgate in our English Bibles, some of which have been mentioned. It is worth remembering that that peculiarity common to our own, to the Vulgate, and the Septuagint, of substituting kurios, Dominus, or LORD for Jehovah, is, in every case, traceable to Jewish influence. The translators of the Septuagint were Jews; the guides of Jerome in his Hebrew were Jews; the reformers received their Hebrew from the Jews also.

The council commenced its deliberations-though only a few Spanish and Italian bishops had arrived-with examining the first and chief point in controversy between the church of Rome and the Reformers, concerning the rule which should be held as supreme and decisive in matters of faith; and, by its infallible authority, determined, "That the books to which the designation of Apocryphal hath been given, are of equal authority with those which were received by the Jews and Primitive Christians into the sacred canon; that the traditions handed down from the apostolic age, and preserved in the church, are entitled to as much regard as the doctrines and precepts which the inspired authors have committed to writing; that the Latin translation of the scriptures, made or revised by Jerome, and known by the name of the Vulgate translation, should be read in churches, and appealed to in the schools as authentic and canonical."