Editorial | “Fidelius, apertius, significantius”: The New Testament Translated and Edited by Erasmus of Rotterdam, 1516 | Marijke H. de Lang | |
Article | “Novum Testamentum editum est”: The Five-Hundredth Anniversary of Erasmus’s New Testament | J. K. Elliott | The 500th anniversary of Erasmus’s Novum Instrumentum commemorates
the first ...... View MoreThe 500th anniversary of Erasmus’s Novum Instrumentum commemorates
the first printed and published Greek New Testament in 1516. This article
emphasizes that Erasmus’s original motive for this publication was his new
Latin version verifiable by his accompanying the translation by a Greek
text. The latter was concocted from manuscripts he located in Basle; the
article describes the manuscripts used. It also assesses the five editions of
this bilingual text published in Erasmus’s lifetime. A discussion covers the
nature of his Latin compared to that of the Vulgate then currently in use and
the opposition which his version caused. Later editions of the Greek New
Testament are also described. An examination of the Comma Johanneum
(1 John 5.7-8) is included. View Less |
Article | Erasmus’s Translation of the New Testament: Aim and Method | Henk Jan de Jonge | Erasmus’s main aim in making his new translation of the New Testament
was to ...... View MoreErasmus’s main aim in making his new translation of the New Testament
was to present the writings of the apostles and evangelists in better, more
classical Latin than that of the Vulgate. He believed that the new age of
renaissance and humanism demanded a new translation of the Bible in Latin
and that its language must be adapted to the criteria of classical Latin. His
translation was neither meant to replace the Vulgate, nor to be used by
everybody; its target readership was primarily theologians, who could use
it as a study Bible. In his translation, Erasmus wanted to correct textual
corruption and translation errors that had crept into the Vulgate. He also
wanted to render the Greek in a clearer, purer, and more expressive
language, but most of all in a grammatically and syntactically more correct
Latin. He rejected the idea that each word in the original text must be
matched by a word in the translation: the idiom of the target language is
the first requirement of a good translation. Not words, but meanings must
be rendered. More generally, Erasmus wanted his translation to serve the
spreading of the “wisdom of Christ”: it was to serve the reform of church
and society and the spiritual and moral renewal of Europe. View Less |
Article | Erasmus and the Johannine Comma (1 John 5.7-8) | Grantley McDonald | Erasmus’s 1516 Latin–Greek New Testament edition differed from the Latin
Vu...... View MoreErasmus’s 1516 Latin–Greek New Testament edition differed from the Latin
Vulgate in several ways. A small number of textual variants with doctrinal
implications involved Erasmus in considerable controversy. Medieval Western
theologians had often relied on the “Johannine Comma” (the long reading
of 1 John 5.7-8), established in the Latin Vulgate during the late Middle
Ages, as an important scriptural foundation for the doctrine of the Trinity.
However, when Erasmus showed that this variant was not present in the
Greek manuscript tradition, he was accused of promoting Arianism. Erasmus’s
debates with the cleric Edward Lee and the textual critic Jacobus
Stunica exposed tensions between theologians, jealous of their authority
in scriptural interpretation, and humanists, who claimed to understand the
Bible better than theologians by virtue of their philological skills. This article
concludes by exploring the Inquisition’s failed attempt to find a consensus
on this issue in 1527. View Less |
Article | On the Reception of Erasmus’s Latin Version of the New Testament in Sixteenth-Century Spain | Alejandro Coroleu | As with other parts of Europe, in Spain the publication in 1516 of Erasmus’s
...... View MoreAs with other parts of Europe, in Spain the publication in 1516 of Erasmus’s
edition of the New Testament together with his Latin version of the text
soon ignited a series of scholarly controversies on his interpretation and
translation of the Gospels. Yet what began as a discussion on the validity
of Erasmus’s historical and philological approach to the study of Scripture
became a heated polemic on issues of doctrine that escalated in the early
1520s and culminated in the severe examination of Erasmus’s works at Valladolid
in 1527. This article aims at providing an overview of the reception
of Erasmus’s Novum Instrumentum in Spain in the years immediately after
the text was published in Basle. View Less |
Article | Erasmus’s Revision of the New Testament and Its Influence on Dutch Bible Translations: The Dossier Revisited | Wim François | This article re-examines the influence of Erasmus’s Latin–Greek New Testamen...... View MoreThis article re-examines the influence of Erasmus’s Latin–Greek New Testament
upon Dutch vernacular Bible translations. Whereas scholarship up
until the present has focused on the translation of Erasmus’s New Testament
published by Cornelis Hendricksz. Lettersnijder (Delft, 1524), this
article stresses that the Dutch New Testament published earlier in 1524 by
the Antwerp printer Adriaen van Berghen played a more crucial role in the
development of an Erasmian translation than has been assumed until now.
In the Dutch vernacular editions of the years 1525–1526, which the scholarly
literature has often labelled as combined Erasmian-Lutheran editions,
the influence of Erasmus’s text only decreased in favour of Luther’s translation.
Erasmus’s influence was felt in particular in the Low Countries by way
of the Catholicized or “Vulgatized” version published by Michiel Hillen van
Hoochstraten (Antwerp, 1527 and later editions). View Less |
Announcement | List of UBS Publications | | |