THE DOUAY BIBLE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 253, 21 July 1919, Page 10

THE DOUAY BIBLE

Sir—ln your issue of July 8, Mr. W A. Downes affirms that the Douay Bible is authorised by and has the imprimatur of. the Church of Borne. It will therefore surprise him to learn that not a single one of all the various Bibles published as the Douay Bible has ever had Papal authority or any authoritative approbation other than that of some ono or more bishops. No united action has been taken to secure uniformity, and any bishop, is free to approve and make alterations. Hence we find it stated in Addir, and Arnold's Catholic Dictionary that Hie term "Douay" has bocome "misleading so many and "serious" are the changes, that have been made. Mr. Downes does not soem to be aware of the peat influence our Authorised Version has had on present Douay Bibles. ■ Perhaps he lias never seen a real Douay and Reims'. The book, on account o'f its rarity, may be worth now some .ClO. A few years ago I was much interested in the copy of the tth edition (1G33) in the Parliamentary Library, but regret to find now that the bonk can no longer be, found. Tho text can bo produced in Baxter's Hexapla, but not tho annotations,, and it is to the annotations I wished to refer in connection with the translation'of St. John i, 1. Here the Vulgate has "Dens erat verbum," whero tho temptation is to translate "God was tho Word," though the Latin words might be translated "The Word was God." The Vulgato did not reverse the order of Hio words because it preferred to follow the order in the Greek, but a well-known Greek usago excludes the translation "God was the Word." Now tho Douay, through failing to observe tho Greek, were betrayed by the Vnlfjate into tho very translation the Greek forbids. The slip was unfortunate, for tho Douay translation is made heretical in the teaching of all Christians. Had Tindalo (1531) been followed, tho. error would have been avoided ,for he wrote "Tho worde was God." It is not less interesting to notice that even Cranmer's Bible (1589) was similarly misled. 'But in 1611 King James's version rightly re. stored Tindale's translation. Later Douays followed in making the correction until the whole verse is word for word tho same as it is in our Authorised Version. It is easy to multiply instances, but this ono must suffice. There cnn.be no version -thai is incapable of improvement, and Mr. Downes does ill to grudge any indebtedness the Authorised Version may be under to (he Rheims translators. Every improvement should be welcomed on nil sides, and not bo made Hie snbiect of captious criticism. But if Mr. Downes insists on 6iich a enurse T would remind him that the debt has been repaid sevenfold.—l am, etc., ALPHA. July 12, 1919.