The Institutes of the Christian Religion
- Thread starter MRC
- Start date
- Status
Berean
Puritanboard Commissioner
I recently got a new copy of the Institutes. It came with the 22 volume set of Calvin's Commentaries that I purchased from Monergism.com. This copy is the Beveridge translation. This particular version is in one volume from Hendrickson Publishers (ISBN: 9781598561685). It's been newly typeset, which makes it easier to read.
MRC
Puritan Board Freshman
Honestly, I have no idea what this means. Would you mind posting a de-code for the newly reformed like me?
Thanks.
Mike, you're gonna find that people come down on different sides of this issue. However, it's important to realize that everyone holds that the original manuscripts of the Institutes, both in the French and the Latin, were directly inspired by Calvin himself and therefore infallible (except for some passages on head coverings and possibly the Sabbath, but we really don't know). From there you'll see some groups that maintain a McNeill-Battles-Only stance, insisting that the extra reference numbers in the MB text were part of the original manuscripts and therefore quite imperative to the reader's sanctification. Plus they tend to like two books instead of one as it fills the bookshelf nicely. Those who prefer the Beveridge and others will counter that all of Calvin's doctrine is consistent even with the most recent translations. They will add that there is no proof that these extra reference numbers even existed in the original manuscripts and that some of the earliest copies showed no evidence of them. It should also be known that there are a few hardliners that will only read translations from the Latin version as we all know that French is just silly.
Wayne
Tempus faciendi, Domine.
Calvin wrote five major Latin editions of his Institutes.
The final Latin edition in 1559 has served as the basis for four English translations:
by Thomas Norton in 1561
by John Allen in 1813
by Henry Beveridge in 1845
and lastly by Ford Lewis Battles in 1960
Just last year Elsie Anne McKee published her English translation of Calvin's 1541 French edition.
The final Latin edition in 1559 has served as the basis for four English translations:
by Thomas Norton in 1561
by John Allen in 1813
by Henry Beveridge in 1845
and lastly by Ford Lewis Battles in 1960
Just last year Elsie Anne McKee published her English translation of Calvin's 1541 French edition.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Is there a big difference between the Latin and French?
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
k.
glorifyinggodinwv
Puritan Board Sophomore
Battles is using considered the translation to use when quoting Calvin in a scholarly setting and has numerous references, etc. Personally, I've enjoyed reading Beveridge in my devotional reading.
DMcFadden
Puritanboard Commissioner
Depends on your philosphy of translation (dynamic equivalent or formal correspondence) and your particular needs.
For the 1559 edition, scholarly convention would tilt toward Battles. Even apart from the footnotes, this is the book the English citations tend to follow. Beveridge is a "more literal" approach to translation and I personally prefer it.
I read Battles in seminary and Beveridge last year. I like Beveridge better and it is about 20% of the cost.
For those of us who have to say Je ne parle pas français , McKee is a Godsend. The French edition is reputed to be quite personal and pastoral and missing some of the "inside baseball" polemics of the day. Still, other than for scholarly endeavors, I would think that you would want to read a translation of the 1559 edition translated by Norton, Allen, Beveridge, or Battles.
For the 1559 edition, scholarly convention would tilt toward Battles. Even apart from the footnotes, this is the book the English citations tend to follow. Beveridge is a "more literal" approach to translation and I personally prefer it.
I read Battles in seminary and Beveridge last year. I like Beveridge better and it is about 20% of the cost.
For those of us who have to say Je ne parle pas français , McKee is a Godsend. The French edition is reputed to be quite personal and pastoral and missing some of the "inside baseball" polemics of the day. Still, other than for scholarly endeavors, I would think that you would want to read a translation of the 1559 edition translated by Norton, Allen, Beveridge, or Battles.
Backwoods Presbyterian
Puritanboard Amanuensis
Don't forget our current antipathy towards Calvin's view of Worship and the State.
JM
Puritan Board Doctor
- Status
Similar threads
