Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

"Secondly concerning the vernacular, we must remember that in the 5th century when St. Jerome translated the Bible from the original languages into Latin, Latin was the language of the people. This Bible is commonly called the Vulgate, the common version. Even after a thousand years, Latin still remained the universal language in Europe."

Vul"gar (?), a. [L. vulgaris, from vulgus the multitude, the common people; of uncertain origin: cf. F. vulgaire. Cf. Divulge.]

1. Of or pertaining to the mass, or multitude, of people; common; general; ordinary; public; hence, in general use; vernacular.

Vul"gate (?), n. [NL. vulgata, from L. vulgatus usual, common, p. p. of vulgare to make general, or common, fr. vulgus the multitude: cf. F. vulgate. See Vulgar, a.] An ancient Latin version of the Scripture, and the only version which the Roman Church admits to be authentic; -- so called from its common use in the Latin Church.

&hand; The Vulgate was made by Jerome at the close of the 4th century. The Old Testament he translated mostly from the Hebrew and Chaldaic, and the New Testament he revised from an older Latin version. The Douay version, so called, is an English translation from the Vulgate. See Douay Bible.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)

1 posted on 04/16/2012 2:13:16 AM PDT by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]

To: GonzoII

Not defending the actions of the Church, but through most of the Middle Ages there was little or no literature of any type in the vernacular languages.

The first vernacular language to really develop a literature was Italian with the Divine Comedy starting around 1300.

Prior to this the educated studied in Latin and were thus able to communicate with each other anywhere in Europe. The situation was similar in many respected to that in China, where the literate are able to communicate in the written language even when their “dialects” are as different as Swedish and Sicilian.

2 posted on 04/16/2012 2:34:23 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GonzoII
"As food for thought, if the Wycliffe or Tyndale Bibles were so good, why do Protestants today not use them as they do the King James Bible?"

At least 85% of the KJV is straight verbatium from the Tyndale bible. In fact the KJV has been called the 4th revision of the Tyndale bible. And John Tyndale was burned at the stake for creating his translation.

3 posted on 04/16/2012 3:08:59 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GonzoII

Good article. Of course, anything Warren Carroll touched was usually like that. ;) I was taught that, with regard to disposal of heretical materials, the ideal method was to burn them, to save others from being misled into error.

4 posted on 04/16/2012 3:15:56 AM PDT by sayuncledave (et Verbum caro factum est (And the Word was made flesh))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GonzoII

A laughable attempt to rewrite history as the handwashing continues.

5 posted on 04/16/2012 3:38:34 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GonzoII
Foxes Book of Martyrs
8 posted on 04/16/2012 5:24:43 AM PDT by TPOOH (I wish I could have been Jerry Reed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GonzoII

In 1582 the famous Douay-Rheims New Testament translation was completed, while the Old Testament was finished in 1609. Ironically the Douay-Rheims New Testament influenced the King James Bible. [2,3]


• 1 Now to the latter we answer, that we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet {Douai-Rheims}) containeth the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God.
• 2 As the King’s Speech which he uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King’s Speech, though it be not interpreted by every translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere.

• 6 The Romanists therefore in refusing to hear, and daring to burn the Word translated, did no less than despite the Spirit of grace, from whom originally it proceeded, and whose sense and meaning, as well as man’s weakness would enable, it did express.

***In 7th century Britain, before English was even a language, Caedmon, a monk of Whitby, paraphrased most of the Bible into the common tongue.****

§ 9 [The translating of the Scripture into the vulgar tongues.]

• 1 Now though the Church were thus furnished with Greek and Latin translations, even before the faith of CHRIST was generally embraced in the Empire: [S.Hieronym. Marcell, Zosim.] (for the learned know that even in S.Hierome’s time the Consul of Rome and his wife were both Ethnicks, and about the same time the greatest part of the Senate also) yet for all that the godly-learned were not content to have the Scriptures in the language which themselves understood, Greek and Latin, (as the good lepers [2King.7:9] were not content to fare well themselves, but acquainted their neighbours with the store that God had sent, that they also might provide for themselves) but also for the behoof and edifying of the unlearned which hungered and thirsted after righteousness, and had souls to be saved as well as they, they provided translations into the vulgar for their countrymen, insomuch that most nations under heaven did shortly after their conversion hear CHRIST speaking unto them in their mother tongue, not by the voice of their minister only, but also by the written word translated.
• 2 If any doubt hereof, he may be satisfied by examples enough, if enough will serve the turn.
• 3 First, S.Hierome [S.Hieron. præf. in 4. Evangel.] saith, Multarum gentium linguis Scriptura ante translata, docet falsa esse quæ addita sunt, etc., i.e. The Scripture being translated before in the languages of many nations, doth shew that those things that were added (by Lucian or Hesychius) are false.
• 4 The same Hierome elsewhere [S.Hieron. Sophronio.] affirmeth that he, the time was, had set forth the translation of the Seventy, suæ linguæ hominibus, i.e. for his countrymen of Dalmatia.
• 5 Which words not only Erasmus doth understand to purport, that S.Hierome translated the Scripture into the Dalmatian tongue, but also Sixtus Senensis, [Six. Sen. lib. 4. Alphon à Castro lib. 1. ca. 23.] and Alphonsus à Castro, (that we speak of no more) men not to be excepted against by them of Rome, do ingenuously confess as much.
• 6 So S.Chrysostome, [S.Chrysost. in Johan. cap. 1. hom. 1.] that lived in S.Hierome’s time, giveth evidence with him: The doctrine of S.John (saith he) did not in such sort (as the philosophers did) vanish away: but the Syrians, Egyptians, Indians, Persians, Ethiopians, and infinite other nations, being barbarous people, translated it into their (mother) tongue, and have learned to be (true) philosophers, he meaneth Christians.
• 7 To this may be added Theodorit, [Theodor. 5. Therapeut.] as next unto him both for antiquity, and for learning.
• 8 His words be these, Every country that is under the sun is full of these words (of the Apostles and Prophets) and the Hebrew tongue (he meaneth the Scriptures in the Hebrew tongue) is turned not only into the language of the Grecians, but also of the Romans, and Egyptians, and Persians, and Indians, and Armenians, and Scythians, and Sautomatians, and briefly into all the languages that any nation useth. So he.
• 9 In like manner, [P.Diacon. li. 12. Isidor, in Chron. Goth. Sozom. li. 6. cap. 37.] Ulpilas is reported by Paulus Diaconus and Isidor (and before them by Sozomen) to have translated the Scriptures into the Gothic tongue:
• 10 John Bishop of Seville by Vasseus, to have turned them into Arabic about the year of our Lord 717: [Vaseus in Chron. Hispan.]
• 11 Beda by Cistertiensis, to have turned a great part of them into Saxon:
• 12 Efnard by Trithemius, to have abridged the French Psalter, as Beda had done the Hebrew, about the year 800:
• 13 King Alured by the said Cistertiensis, to have turned the Psalter into Saxon: [Polydor. Virg. 5 histor. Anglorum testatur idem de Aluredo nostro.]
• 14 Methodius by Aventinus [Aventin. lib. 4.](printed at Ingolstad) [B. Rhenan. rerum German. lib.2.] to have turned the Scriptures into [Circa annum 900.] Sclavonian:
• 15 Valdo, Bishop of Frising, by Beatus Rhenanus, to have caused about that time the Gospels to be translated into Dutch rhythm, yet extant in the library of Corbinian:
• 16 Valdus, by divers, to have turned them himself, or to have gotten them turned, into French about the year 1160:
• 17 Charles, the fifth of that name, surnamed The wise, to have caused them to be turned into French, about 200 years after Valdus’s time, of which translation there be many copies yet extant, as witnesseth Beroaldus. [Beroald.]
• 18 Much about that time, even in our King Richard the Second’s days, John Trevisa translated them into English, and many English Bibles in written hand are yet to be seen with divers, translated, as it is very probable, in that age.
• 19 So the Syrian translation of the New Testament is in most learned men’s libraries, of Widminstadius’s setting forth; and the Psalter in Arabic is with many, of Augustinus Nebiensis’s setting forth.
• 20 So Postel affirmeth, that in his travel he saw the Gospels in the Ethiopian tongue; and Ambrose Thesius allegeth the Psalter of the Indians, which he testifieth to have been set forth by Potken in Syrian characters.
• 21 So that to have the Scriptures in the mother tongue is not a quaint conceit lately taken up, either by the Lord Cromwell in England, or by the Lord Radevil [Thuan.] in Polonie, or by the Lord Ungnadius in the Emperor’s dominion, but hath been thought upon, and put in practice of old, even from the first times of the conversion of any nation; no doubt because it was esteemed most profitable to cause faith to grow in men’s hearts the sooner, and to make them to be able to say with the words of the Psalm, As we have heard, so we have seen. [Ps.48:8]

11 posted on 04/16/2012 8:30:51 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson