PART A:

THE ORIGINAL

AND

UNCORRUPTED

DOUAY-RHEIMS

HOLY BIBLE

(1582, 1609, 1610 A.D.)

The Douay-Rheims Holy Bible Translated from the Latin Vulgate

Many readers (Catholic and non-Catholic alike) wonder why the original English Catholic version of the Holy Bible was translated from the ancient vulgar Latin and not the original languages of Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). The reasons for this were provided by the translators themselves in the preface to the 1582 New Testament1 as well as in the preface to the first tome (1609) of the Old Testament.2

Excerpt from the Preface to the 1582 New Testament

The following 10 reasons (excerpted3 from the preface to the 1582 New Testament) concerning the Greek text are self-explanatory:

[...]

Many cauſes vvhy this nevv Teſtament is trãſlated according to the auncient vulgar Latin text. Novv to give thee alſo intelligence in particular, moſt gentle Reader, of ſuch thinges as it behoueth thee ſpecially to knovv concerning our Tranſlation: Vve tranſlate the old vulgar Latin text, not the common Greeke text, for theſe cauſes.

i. It is moſt auncient. It is ſo auncient, that it vvas vſed in the Church of God aboue 1300 yeres agoe, as appeareth by the fathers of thoſe times.

2. Corrected by S. Hierom. It is that (by the common receiued opinion and by al probabilitie) vvhich S. Hierom aftervvard corrected according to the Greeke, by the appointment of Damaſus then Pope, as he maketh mention in his preface before the foure Euangeliſtes, vnto the ſaid Damaſus: and in Catalogo in fine, and ep. 102.

3. Commẽded by S. Auguſtine. Conſequently it is the ſame vvhich S. Auguſtine ſo commendeth and allovveth in an Epiſtle to S. Hierom. Ep. 10.

4. Vſed and expounded by the fathers. It is that, vvhich for the moſt part euer ſince hath been vſed in the Churches ſeruice, expounded in ſermons, alleaged and interpreted in the Commentaries and vvritings of the auncient fathers of the Latin Church.

5. Only authentical, by the holy Councel of Trent. The holy Councel of Trent, for theſe and many other important conſiderations, hath declared and defined this onely of al other latin tranſlations, to be authentical, and ſo onely to be vſed and taken in publike leſſons, diſputations, preachings, and expoſitions, and that no man preſume vpon any pretence to reiect or refuſe the ſame. Seſſ. 4.

6. Moſt graue, leaſt partial. It is the graueſt, ſincereſt, of greateſt maieſty, leaſt partialitie, as being vvithout al reſpect of controuerſies and contentions, ſpecially theſe of our time, as appeareth by thoſe places vvhich Eraſmus and others at this day tranſlate much more to the aduantage of the Catholike cauſe.

7. Preciſe in folovving the Greeke. It is ſo exact and preciſe according to the Greeke, both the phraſe and the word, that delicate Heretikes therfore reprehend it of rudenes. And that it follovveth the Greeke far more exactly then the Proteſtants tranſlations, beſide infinite other places, we appeale to theſe. Tit. 3, 14. Curent bonis operibus praeeſſe. προίστασθαι. Engl. bib. 1577, to mainteine good vvorkes. and Hebr. 10, 20. Viam nobis initiauit, ένεκαίνισεν. Engliſh Bib. be prepared. So in theſe vvordes, Iuſtificationes, Traditiones, Idola &c. In al vvhich they come not neere the Greeke, but, auoid it of purpoſe.

8. Preferred by Beza him selſ. The Aduerſaries them ſelues, namely Beza, preferre it before al the reſt. In praefat. no. Teſt. an. 1556. And againe he ſaith, that the old Interpreter tranſlated very religiouſly. Annot. in 1 Luc. v. 1.

9. Al the reſt miſliked of the Sectaries them ſelues, eche reprehending an other. In the reſt, there is ſuch diuerſitie and diſſenſion, and no end of reprehending one an other, and tranſlating euery man according to his fantaſie, that Luther ſaid, If the vvorld ſhould ſtand any long time, vve muſt receiue againe (which he thought abſurd) the Decrees of Councels, for preſeruing the vnitie of faith, becauſe of so diuers interpretations of the Scripture. Cochlae. c. 11 de Cano. Script. authoritate. And Beza (in the place aboue mentioned) noteth the itching ambition of his fellovv-tranſlators, that had much rather diſagree and diſſent from the beſt, then ſeeme them ſelues to haue ſaid or vvritten nothing. And Bezas tranſlation it ſelf, being ſo eſteemed in our countrie, that the Geneua * Engliſh Teſtaments be tranſlated according to the ſame, yet ſometime goeth ſo vvide from the Greeke, and from the meaning of the holy Ghoſt, that them ſelves which proteſt to trãſlate it, dare not folow it. For example, Luc. 3, 36. They haue put theſe wordes, The ſonne of Cainan, which he wittingly and wilfully left out: and Act. 1, 14. they ſay, Vvith the vvomen, agreably to the vulgar Latin: where he ſaith, Cum vxoribus, vvith their vvives. The nevv Tesſt. printed the yere 1580 in the title.

i0. It is truer then the vulgar Greeke text it ſelf. It is not onely better then al other Latin trãſlations, but then the Greeke text it ſelf, in thoſe places where they diſagree.

[...]

Excerpt from the Preface to the First Tome (1609) of the Old Testamant

The translators of the 1609 and 1610 Old Testament continued this argument (some points of which are reiterated from the preface to 1582 New Testamant), in this case, commenting on the Hebrew as well as on the Greek. The following is their rationale, again, self-explanatory (excerpted4,5 from the preface to the first tome (1609) of the Old Testament):

[...]

VVhy we tranſlate the old Latin text. But here an other queſtion may be propoſed: VVhy we tranſlate the Latin text, rather then the Hebrew, or Greke, which Proteſtantes preferre, as the fountaine tongues, wherin holie Scriptures were firſt written?

More pure then the Hebrew or Greke now extant. To this we anſwer, that if in dede thoſe firſt pure Editions were now extant, or if ſuch as be extant, were more pure then the Latin, we would alſo preferre ſuch fountaines before the riuers, in whatſoeuer they should be found to diſagree. But the ancient beſt lerned Fathers, & Doctors of the Church, do much complaine, and teſtifie to vs, that both the Hebrew and Greke Editions are fouly corrupted by Iewes, and Heretikes, ſince the Latin was truly tranſlated out of them, whiles they were more pure. And that the ſame Latin hath bene farre better conſerued from corruptions. Tertulliã li. 5. cont Marcion. S. Ambroſe. li. 3 de Spirit. San. c. 11. S. Ierom: li. 1. con. Iouiniã. So that the old Vulgate Latin Edition hath bene preferred, and vſed for moſt authentical aboue a thouſand and three hundered yeares. For by this verie terme S. Ierom calleth that Verſion the vulgate or common, which he conferred with the Hebrew of the old Teſtament, and with the Greke of the New; which he alſo purged from faultes committed by writers, rather amending then tranſlating it. in 49. Isaiae.Though in regard of this amending, S. Gregorie calleth it the nevv versiõ of S. Ierom: who neuertheles in an other place calleth the ſelf ſame, the old Latin Edition, iudging it moſt worthy to be folowed. li. 20. c. 24 mora. Epiſt. dedicat. ad Leandr. S. Auguſtin calleth it the Italian. li. 2. Doct. Chriſt. c. 14[.]

Receiued by al Churches. S. Iſidorus witneſſeth that S. Ieroms verſion was receiued and approued by al Chriſtian Churches. lib. 6 Etymol. c. 5 & li. 1 de Diuin offic. c. 12.

Turned into Greke. Sophronius alſo a moſt lerned man, ſeing S. Ieroms Edition so much eſtemed, not only of the Latines, but alſo of the Grecians, turned the Pſalter & Prophetes, out of the ſame Latin into Greke. Of latter times what shal we nede to recite other moſt lerned men? S. Bede S. Anſelme, S. Bernard, S. Thomas, S. Bonauenture, & the reſt? VVho al vniformly allege this only text as authentical.

All others growne out of vſe. In ſo much that al other Latin Editions, which S. Ierom ſaith were in his time almoſt innumerable, are as it were fallen out of al Diuines handes, and growne out of credite and vſe. Prefat. in Ioſue.

S. Ierom excelled al other Doctors in tranſlating & expounding holie Scriptures. If moreouer we conſider S. Ieroms lerning, pietie, diligence, and ſinceritie, together with the commodities he had of beſt copies, in al languages then extant, and of other lerned men, with whom he conferred: and if we ſo cõpare the ſame with the beſt meanes that hath bene ſince, ſurely no man of indifferent iudgement, wil match anie other Edition with S. Ieroms: but eaſely acknowlege with the whole Church Gods particular prouidẽce in this great Doctor, as wel for expounding, as moſt eſpecialy for the true text and Edition of Holie Scriptures. Neither do we flee vnto this old Latin text, for more aduantage.

His Edition free from partialitie. For beſides that it is free from partialitie, as being moſt ancient of al Latin copies, and long before the particular Controuerſies of theſe dayes beganne; the Hebrew alſo & the Greke when they are truly tranſlated, yea and Eraſmus his Latin, in ſundrie places, proue more plainly the Catholique Romaine doctrine, then this which we relie vpon. So that Beza & his folowers take alſo exception againſt the Greke, when Catholiques allege it againſt them. Luc. 22. v. 20.6

Preferred before al other Editions by Beza. Yea the ſame Beza preferreth the old Latin Verſion before al others, Prefat. Noui. Teſtam. Anno 1556. & freely teſtifieth, that the old Interpreter tranſlated religiouſly. Luc. 1. v. 1.7

None yet in England allowed for ſufficient. VVhat then do our countriemen, that refuſe this Latin, but depriue themſelues of the beſt, and yet al this while, haue ſet forth none, that is allowed by al Proteſtants, for good or ſufficient.

[...]

Nota Bene

It is of paramount importance to remember that Saint Jerome (c. 347–420 A.D.) based his translation on the ancient Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of the second and third centuries, manuscripts that had long since perished by the time of the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century. With his mastery of the Hebrew and Greek languages, Saint Jerome was able to perfectly and permanently preserve the authentic ancient texts by translating them into the (unchangeable) Latin Vulgate before they were lost or corrupted.

The reader is advised to review the entirety of the prefaces cited.


— FINIS —


The corruption of the original Douay-Rheims Bible through the Challoner revision is explained in Part B: The Corrupted Challoner Revision of the Douay-Rheims Holy Bible (1749–1752).


UPDATE May 1, 2024: PLANE GEODESY has undertaken a project to provide a highly readable transcription of The Apocalypse of Saint John the Apostle from the 1582 Rheims New Testament. Check it out. See Blog C: The Apocalypse of Saint John the Apostle.


  1. THE NEVV TESTAMENT OF IESVS CHRIST, TRANSLATED FAITHFVULLY INTO ENGLISH, out of the authentical Latin, according to the beſt corrected copies of the ſame, diligently conferred vvith the Greeke and other editions in diuers languages: Vvith Argvments of bookes and chapters, Annotations, and other neceſſarie helpes, for the better vnderſtanding of the text, and ſpecially for the diſcouerie of the Corrvptions of diuers late tranſlations, and for cleering the Controversies in religion, of theſe daies: In the English College of Rhemes. PRINTED AT RHEMES, by Iohn Fogny. 1582. See preface titled, the preface to the reader treating of these three points: of the translation of holy scriptvres into the vulgar tongues, and namely into Engliſh: of the cauſes vvhy this nevv Teſtament is tranſlated accoring to the auncient vulgar Latin text: & of the maner of tranſlating the ſame.↩️

  2. THE HOLIE BIBLE FAITHFVLLY TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH, OVT OF THE AVTHENTICAL LATIN. Diligently conferred with the Hebrew, Greeke, and other Editions in diuers languages. With Argvments of the Bookes, and Chapters: Annotations: Tables: and other helpes, for better vnderſtanding of the text: for diſcouerie of Corrvptions in ſome late tranſlations: and for clearing Controversies in Religion. By the English College of Doway. Printed at Doway by Lavrence Kellam, at the ſigne of the holie Lambe. M. DC. IX. See preface titled, to the right vvelbeloved english reader grace and glorie in Iesus Christ everlasting.↩️

  3. Captions and references appearing in the left and right margins of the 1582 New Testament source pages from which this information has been excerpted are in coloured font, being placed before and after the relevant text respectively. References that were included in the main text of the source pages have been transcribed accordingly in non-coloured font.↩️

  4. Captions and references appearing in the left and right margins of the 1609 Old Testament source pages from which this information has been excerpted are in coloured font, being placed before and after the relevant text respectively. References that were included in the main text of the source pages have been transcribed accordingly in non-coloured font.↩️

  5. Whereas the source from whence this excerpt was taken consists of one very long paragraph, it has been divided into several shorter sections in accordance with relevant captions and references for easier reading.↩️

  6. See the 1582 New Testament, THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LVKE, ANNOTATIONS Chap. XXII, specifically the commentary on the verse 20 phrase, Which ſhall be ſhed.↩️

  7. This is a reiteration of the second part of the 8th reason per the list of 10 reasons above from the 1582 New Testament wherein the reference is to the annotations to Luc. 1. v. 1., i.e., Annot. in Luc. 1. v. 1. (from Beza’s 1556 New Testament).↩️


WEB PAGE CONTROL
REVISION 0 1 2
DATE 2021-FEB-07 2023-DEC-30 2024-MAY-01