It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


My 1977 Clementine Vulgate "The Nova Editio"

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 09:49 AM
I just bought a version of the Latin Vulgate, woohoo:

From the back: Colunga - Turrado / Biblia / Vulgata
From the inner cover page: «Biblia Sacra / Iuxta / Vulgatam Clementinam / Nova Editio /.../ Quinta Editio / Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos»
Loosely translates into: «The Holy Bible - New Edition Based on Clement's Vulgata - Fifth Edition [of] B.A.C.»

The Clement in mention here, is pope Clement VIII (Wikipedia link) who ruled the Roman Catholic Church between 1592 and 1605, around the time of the issuing of the final version of the protestant Geneva in 1599 while Francis Bacon &al were preparing the "Authorised Version" AKA the King James' Version or KJV in short. No less than three editions came in print in 1592, '93 and '98. After the 1598 Clementine Vulgate the Roman Catholic Church quit publishing bibles, leaving it to second and third parties.

The first Vulgate prepared by Pope Sixtus V was edited in 1590 but it was unsatisfactory from a textual point of view.[1] As a result this edition was short-lived.[2]
Clement VIII (1592–1605) ordered Franciscus Toletus, Augustinus Valerius, Fredericus Borromaeus, Robertus Bellarmino, Antonius Agellius, and Petrus Morinus to make corrections and to prepare a revision.[3] The revision was based on the Hentenian edition. It was printed on 9 November 1592, with a preface written by Cardinal Bellarmine. The misprints of this edition were partly eliminated in a second (1593) and a third (1598) edition.

Now, my version if the fifth edition, but not Clement's fifth version, that one doesn't exist. No this is the 1977 fifth edition of Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos' version of the Clementine Vulgate, first issued in 1959. The «Nova Editio» I suspect is a hint as to this being a reworked or doctored version of the Clementine text:

In 1959, Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos' issued a printing of the Clementine Vulgate omitting the Apocrypha, but containing excerpts from various magisterial documents and the Piana version of the psalms in addition to the vulgate version.

My 1977 BAC Vulgate was put together or edited by one Alberto Colunga and another prof. Laurentio Turrado. It does not include the usual apocrypha that normally comes with Catholic bibles, but it does contain the Comma Johanneum, a well known addition to 1. John considered a forgery, popular with the Medieval issuers of Catholic bibles, since it is the only place where the Trinity doctrine finds literal scriptural foundation in the Bible.

[eta]Apart from that, it seems to have corrected or omitted a few other common traps and snares, like the transitional verse between Rev. 12 and 13, where (this) Vulgate (version) uses the third-person singular form of Lat. 'sto' ("I stood") which is 'stetit' translating into "it/he stood" instead of what "the devil's Bible" says, taking on first person, rendered "I stood on the sand by the sea" (like in the 1599 Geneva and the 1611 KJV). However, the use of third person here suggests an accusation, so for all we know, both John (or the narrator/reader) and the Dragon "stood on the sand by the sea". Maybe a further doctoring into «'& WE' or '& THEY' stood upon the sand by the sea», could sort out the troubles, but that's mere speculation. I have been unable to find support for first or third person plural, so it would have to be a further forgery to end a dispute originated in a mistranslation or forgery.[/eta]

I expect to find more deviations from the critical Greek and Hebrew as well as Jerome and Clement &al, as I get to know this one better, and complete my checklist.

So, are anyone here familiar with this particular version of the Clementine Vulgate? Or the Latin Vulgate generally for that matter? What makes one edition different than the other? That kind of stuff. Anything in particular I should look for?
edit on 11-12-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: tidbits, a missing clause and Clement wiki

edit on 11-12-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: edited [eta] and corrected a typo and rewrote the eta-§ and misc syntactical changes

posted on Dec, 13 2014 @ 01:19 PM
A simple method to identifying which version of the Vulgate you own or ex. read online, is to cite Genesis 3:20 and see what transliteration is used for חוה (Eve, lit. "Chevvah"). The Clementine Vulgate (mine), has Heva, while the Stuttgart Vulgate uses Hava, and finally the Nova Vulgate holds Eva.

When I first opened my Clementine Vulgate, I read and first thought the 'Nova Editio' written inside meant that this was the so called 'Nova Vulgata', but with a bit of research, I learned that the 'Nova Vulgata' wasn't issued publicly until two years after mine had been released. The 'Nova Vulgata' is the official Catholic bible used from 1979 onwards, and is the text used in the Roman Rite, the Liturgy of the Hours and the Roman Lectionary these days. Before 1979 the text used in the Roman Rite and generally within the Roman Catholic Church, was the Clementine Vulgate of 1592.
edit on 13-12-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: חוה

posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 12:20 PM
I could add that Vulgata comes from Vulgar as in Vulgar Latin, Common Latin, the "vulgar tongue". My Latin dictionary says «Vulgatus, a, um adj common; ordinary; conventional; well-known»

new topics

log in