Letter 89

Ambrose of MilanSabinus, Guardian (Defensorem)|c. 385 AD|ambrose milan
From: Ambrose, Bishop of Milan
To: Sabinus, Bishop of Piacenza
Date: ~393 AD
Context: A letter to Sabinus discussing Jerome's new Latin translation of the Bible from the Hebrew original, expressing cautious admiration for the scholarship while questioning the wisdom of departing from the established Septuagint text.

Ambrose to Sabinus — greetings.

You have asked what I think of Jerome's new translation [Jerome was in the process of producing what would become the Vulgate, the standard Latin Bible of the Western Church, translating the Old Testament directly from the Hebrew rather than from the Greek Septuagint]. The honest answer: I think it is brilliant, and I think it is dangerous.

Jerome's learning is beyond dispute. He is the most accomplished Latinist of our generation, and his command of Hebrew is unmatched in the Western Church. The translation itself is elegant, precise, and often illuminating. Where the old Latin texts were clumsy or obscure, Jerome is clear. Where they were inaccurate, he is faithful to the original.

But — and this is a substantial "but" — the Septuagint [the Greek translation of the Old Testament, produced in Alexandria in the third and second centuries BC] has been the Bible of the Church since the apostles. The New Testament quotes the Septuagint, not the Hebrew. The councils based their definitions on the Septuagint. The entire liturgical tradition presupposes it. To replace the Septuagint with a translation from the Hebrew is to suggest that the Church has been reading the wrong Bible for three and a half centuries.

Jerome would say — does say — that truth matters more than tradition. He is right. But he underestimates the disruption. When congregations hear familiar passages rendered in unfamiliar language, they do not think "This is more accurate." They think "Someone has tampered with the word of God." And their suspicion is not entirely unreasonable.

My counsel: let Jerome's translation circulate among scholars. Let it inform our commentaries. But do not rush to replace the established text in the liturgy. Time will sort out what is best, and a hasty change will produce confusion rather than clarity.

What do you think, brother? I value your judgment on this.

Farewell.

Modern English rendering for readability. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek for scholarly use.

Related Letters