Did Jerome’s doctrine of Mariology affect his translation?

Upvote:4

This isn't a full-blown answer to your question, but instead a partial one. I suppose one would have to write some sort of magnum opus to answer all three of your questions in a way that does justice to them.

But as a sort of beginning, I do know that translators over time have moved away from away from the Vulgate because of its emphasis of Mary in places she does not belong. The best known example of this is Genesis 3:15. To so many Christians this is the protevangelium (the first gospel promise pointing to Christ) in the bible. Genesis 3:15 reads as follows:

‏”וְאֵיבָה אָשִׁית בֵּינְךָ וּבֵין הָאִשָּׁה וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ וּבֵין זַרְעָהּ הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ וְאַתָּה תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ עָקֵב׃“‎ (Gen 3:15 BHS-T)

“I will put hostility between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed. He will strike your head, and you will strike his heel.” (Gen 3:15 HCSB)

You'll notice the "he" vs. "he" construction. But in the Vulgate we find this:

“inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem et s*m*n tuum et s*m*n illius ipsa conteret caput tuum et tu insidiaberis calcaneo eius” (Gen 3:15 VULG-T)

Instead of "he will crush your head," it reads "She (ipsa) herself will crush your head." In this we see a strange, unfounded translation of a clearly masculine word in the Hebrew (הוּא) into a feminine word (i.e. Mary).

I hope this helps, at least a little in working toward the bigger, better explanation this question deserves.

More post

Search Posts

Related post