Second, from the dignity of its commendation.
Second, from the dignity of its commendation.
§ 519. (II) From the dignity of its commendation. “This Vulgate version is either Jerome’s or it is that common, ancient one that Augustine calls the Itala. If it is that ancient one, it has the great testimony of Augustine (De doctr. Christ., bk. 2, c. 15); if it is Jerome’s work, it has the testimony of all the ancients who were able to see it.”
We respond. (1) The ancients did praise it, but by no means did they consider it authentic, as we proved earlier with their own words (§ 315). (2) By the weight of this argument there will be two authentic versions because Augustine praises both the Itala and Jerome’s versions. Isidore says that that version “is preferred to the rest” of the versions but not to the actual sources (Etymolog., bk. 6, c. 5). (3) The hypothesis of the argument—that that version is the work of Jerome—is doubtful and uncertain, as we have shown in § 514. (4) By their commendation, the fathers cannot make authentic any translation of Scripture that in itself is not authentic any more than the Church can make canonical a book that is not canonical. Bellarmine admits this (De verbo Dei, bk. 1, c. 10). (5) Jerome himself speaks in a different way about his own translation: “It is one thing to be a prophet; it is another to be a translator” (preface to the Pentateuch). (6) Many have extolled the Greek Septuagint translation also, including Justin, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, Cyril, Augustine, etc. Nevertheless Jerome corrected it according to the norm of the Hebrew text, and no one calls it authentic.