Is it allowed to translate the Vulgate?

Thoughts on the meaning of integrity and bindingness of the Scripture on the basis of the "canon formula"

Abstract

Translating a text is at the same time a necessity and a deep intrusion into a texts delicate semantic texture and interrelatedness with a specific ideal and material world. The meaning of a text can, however, not be fixed for good. This article looks at the canon formula, trying to unfold its possible meanings on the basis of different currents of tradition from both Mesopotamia and Egypt. The widely accepted intertextual link between the canon formula and Assyrian vassal treaties underscores loyal action in line with the (legal) texts as the dominant meaning of the so-called canon formula. Parallels from Egyptian texts, however, would moreover point to the necessity of exact transmission as a possible reading of the same formula. Identical reproduction of texts is, of course, highly important in the cultures of the Ancient Near East. Loyalty and identity seem to be main topics in the discourse on canon. This explains why it is useful to react to both the necessity of continually adapting tradition to a changing world and the necessity of returning to a remote and hard to understand tradition.