The Greek version does not agree with the Latin.
The Greek version does not agree with the Latin.
[II] The Greek version does not agree with the Latin. Bellarmine produces only one difference from a comparison of the third and ninth chapters (De verbo Dei, bk. 1, c. 11). Sarah, whom the younger Tobias was about to marry, is said to have lived in Rages (Tobit 3:7), a city of Media, where Gabael is also said to have been (Tobit 4:1). On the other hand, when Tobias leaves Raguel and is about to celebrate his marriage to Sarah (Tobit 9:3), he sends the angel “to Gabael in Rages” to get money from him and at the same time to invite him to the wedding. If both Sarah and Gabael lived in Rages of Media, what need was there to send the angel to Gabael? Bellarmine gives the answer of Medina in De recta in Deum fide, bk. 3, c. 14, that in the Greek text c. 3 reads “in Ecbatana,” but because of scribal error the Latin reads incorrectly “in Rages.” Bellarmine also gives Lyra’s answer that there were two Rages in Media. However, he accepts neither answer. You see, were he to accept Medina’s answer, he would have to admit that the Greek version is pure but the Latin corrupt. Therefore he responds in a different way, namely, that in c. 3 “the actual city is not called Rages, but some neighboring area is, as when one is said to live at Rome who lives in Tusculum or elsewhere in the area right around Rome.” Lawyers, however, note that the name of the city is limited by the walls that surround the buildings of Rome (De verbor. signif., bk. Urbs. 2. ff.). One does not live in Rome, therefore, unless he lives in the buildings contained within the walls of Rome. Consequently, Michael Medina disapproves of this answer because it says clearly that Sarah lived in Rages, a city of Media. Yet the circumstances of the text obviously show that Gabael did not live in the neighborhood but in a more distant city, if the angel actually took animals and servants when he was about to set out for the city (Tobit 9:3). Moreover, the reason for sending him was because Tobias was unwilling to tolerate delays, but rather when the angel was on his way, Tobias was already preparing the wedding and arranging everything so he would be better equipped to return to his homeland. Had Gabael lived in the neighborhood, however, Tobias would have gone to him.
Now, even if this one difficulty had been solidly explained, what would happen to the remaining differences that we can draw out in great number if we would compare the Greek version in the Complutensian work with the Latin Vulgate version? In the introduction (Tobit 1:1), there are some things in the Greek that are not in the Latin. In Tobit 1:4 there are some things in the Latin that are not in the Greek. In Tobit 1:7 there is much in the Greek that is lacking in the Latin, and again there are things in the Latin that are not in the Greek. The same thing occurs in vv. 10, 16, 23, and 25. In Tobit 3:6 the Greek reads some things that the Latin does not have. In vv. 11-12 there are many things in the Latin that the Greek does not have. This also occurs in vv. 17-18, as well as in Tobit 4:6 and 13. Regarding the time when Tobias lost his sight there is disagreement. The Latin says he was fifty-six (Tobit 14:3); the Greek, fifty-eight (v. 2). Again, they disagree as to how long Tobias was blind. The Latin says four years (Tobit 14:3); the Greek, eight (Tobit 14:2). The Greek gives Tobias six sons (Tobit 14:5); the Latin, seven (Tobit 14:5). The Latin says that the elder Tobias lived 102 years (Tobit 14:2); the Greek gives him 158 years (Tobit 14:13). The Latin says that the younger Tobias lived for 99 years (Tobit 14:[16]); the Greek, 127 (Tobit 14:16). The Latin claims that Sennacherib was killed by his sons forty-five days later (Tobit 1:24); the Greek has fifty-five days. The Greek says that Jerusalem was going to be desolated and the house of the Lord burned (Tobit 1:6), but the Latin says that this already had happened.
Therefore the Papists should first consider carefully whether they wish to accept the Greek or the Latin version as canonical. Bellarmine says that “the Greek version of the Book of Judith is corrupt” (De verbo Dei, bk. 1, c. 12). He would undoubtedly say the same thing about the Greek version of Tobit.