Chapter XXIV: Now if the laity are not only to be allowed to read Scripture but also invited, then it must surely be nec
CHAPTER XXIV: ON THE TRANSLATIONS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
§ 494. It is certain that the prophets wrote the books of the Old Testament in Hebrew and that the evangelists and apostles wrote those of the New in Greek. But if the laity, too, are to be not only admitted but also invited to read the Scriptures, it will certainly also be necessary for the sacred books to be translated into vernacular languages. Because few laypeople know the Hebrew and Greek languages, it is not only useful but also necessary to translate Scripture into a language that belongs to them so that the opportunity for them to read Scripture may be open. Instead of these translations of the Holy Scriptures being rejected, much rather, if they correspond faithfully to the original text, they are to be commended.
The permanent practice of the Church confirms this. (1) Moses and the prophets wrote in the common, vernacular language of the Hebrews so that all people could hear and understand the words of the Law read from the book (Deut. 31:11; 2 Chron. 34:30).
(2) Because, after the return from the Babylonian captivity, the pure Hebrew language was no longer publicly and commonly used among the Israelites, but was mixed with the Chaldaic idiom, it happened by the singular providence of God that the Scriptures were translated into the Chaldaic language then common among the Israelites. This produced the threefold Targum: the Babylonian, Onkelos, and Jerusalem.
(3) As time passed and, under the rule of the Greeks, the Greek language became known to nearly all people, it happened by the miraculous arrangment of God that, under the auspices of King Ptolemy of Egypt, seventy-two elders sent from Judea translated the books of the Old Testament into Greek (Justin, Dial. cum Tryphon., p. 231; Augustine, De civit. Dei, bk. 8, c. 11; etc.). In addition to this Septuagint translation that was accepted by the common usage of the Church, there were other translations: of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, etc.
(4) The evangelists and apostles did not write the books of the New Testament in the Hebrew language, which was no longer used by all the people of Israel but only by the more learned, but in Greek, which was common to almost all nations. Cicero, Pro Archia: “Things are read in Greek among almost all nations.” Augustine, Epistle 200: “This language is especially distinguished among the nations.” De civ. Dei, bk. 8, c. 2: “The Greek language is considered quite well-known among the rest of the nations.”
(5) When the Roman or Latin language began to become common in many nations because of the size of the Roman Empire, various translations into Latin followed. Jerome, preface to Joshua: “There are as many versions among the Latins as there are codices.” In De doctr. Christ., bk. 2, c. 11, Augustine bears witness that at his time “there were countless Latin translations.”
(6) When the teaching of the Gospel spread to all nations, there again followed translations of Scripture into various languages. Augustine, De doctrin. Christ., bk. 2, c. 5: “Consequently, it happened that divine Scripture, which came from one language, was spread far and wide through various languages by which it could be spread fittingly throughout the world, and became known to the nations for their salvation. When they read it, they hunger for nothing else except to discover the thoughts and will of those who wrote it, and through them, the will of God, according to which we believe such men spoke.” Chrysostom writes as follows: “The Syrians, Egyptians, Indians, Persians, Ethiopians, and countless other nations translated the divine dogmas into their own languages. Thus it happened that uncivilized people learned to philosophize” (homily 1 on John, vol. 3, col. 15). Jerome says, “The people of Palestine sang psalms at funerals in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Syriac for an entire week” (Epitaph. Paulae). Theodoret, De corrig. Graecor. affection., bk. 5, vol. 2, p. 521: “The Hebrews were converted not only into the Greek idiom but also into the Roman language, into Egyptian, Persian, Indian, Armenian, and Scythian, as well as Sarmatian. To say it simply, they spoke in all languages that nations use up to this present day.”
The Papists themselves cannot deny this. Eck (Enchirid., c. 2, de miss.) and Alphonsus de Castro (Adv. haeres., bk. 1, c. 13) admit: “Many peoples had the Scriptures in their own languages.” Harding, art. 3, sect. 8: “Armenians, Russians, Ethiopians, Dalmatians, Muscovites read the Scriptures in their own languages.” Methodius translated the Scriptures into Slavic, according to Aventinus (Annal., bk. 4); Jerome, into Dalmatian, according to Hosius (De sacr. vernaculo legend.) and Alphonsus de Castro (bk. 1, c. 13); Chrysostom, into Armenian, according to Sixtus Senensis (Annotat., bk. 6, 151); Ulfilas, into Gothic, according to Socrates (Hist. eccles., bk. 4, c. 33), where he adds: “that the barbarians might learn the oracles of God.” In Histor., bk. 1, c. 1, Bede says that at his time the Scriptures were being read in five languages of the Britons. Before Luther’s translation, there were three old Germanic versions of the Bible. The first was printed at Nuremberg in 1477, the second at the same place in 1483, the third at Ausgburg in 1518.
Bellarmine makes the exception: “I do not know whether Jerome translated the divine writings into the Slavonic language because I do not read this among the ancients. Nevertheless if he did do it, he did not do it so that Scripture might be read publicly in the Slavonic tongue but for the consolation of those people who could use it without peril” (De verbo Dei, bk. 2, c. 16). We respond. The reading of Scripture in and by itself can create danger for no one. “Whatever was written … was written for our instruction” (Rom. 15:4). Thus Jerome wanted it to be common to all people.