You're quite welcome, Vladimir.

It seem you and I share similar aesthetic tastes when it comes to texts  :farmer:

I have a Gryson Vulgate. Is this edition good?

I dunno. The reviews would be helpful in order to ascertain the quality that is to be expected from this work. I would not personally acquire it (since I have various editions of the Clementine Vulgate), unless I would engage in serious scholarly work that pertained to the Sacred Vulgate. In that case, this book would be indispensable.

There are two other editions of the Holy Scriptures published before the 1960's that I recommend with an earnestness that would delightfully unnerve a wide-eyed, casual observer:

1) The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Translated into English from the Original Greek by the Very Rev. Francis Aloysius Spencer, O.P., edited by Charles C. Callan, O.P. and John A. McHugh, O.P. (New York: McMillan, 1937) What I love about this edition is the very clear and outline-form topical arrangement of the texts and the citation of every reference to the Old Testament that occurs in the New Testament. The footnotes compare the translation to the Sacred Vulgate and other Greek MSS. It is very beautiful and useful!

2) The Layman's New Testament, Being The Rheims Text As First Revised By Bishop Challoner. Edited with Introduction & Notes by Father Hugh Pope, OP. (London: Sheed & Ward, 1927). This is the edition to get if you wish for a  basic but thorough understanding of the New Testament, with copious references to the Summa and Commentaries of the Angelic Doctor. It also has a nice topical arrangement with copious marginal notes. The text and marginal notes are on the left hand side page and the commentary on the right hand side page. This is a very good book, and not very rare at all!

The latter book is pertinent to the discussion about the revision of Bp. Challoner, and Father Hugh does a great job of comparing this first revision of his to the other English versions.

There is also the transliteration of the Sacred Vulgate authored by Msgr. Knox, which I find very beautiful and refreshing, but which I do not personally prefer to either the Douay-Rhemish translation, nor to Fr. Spencer's translation of the Greek New Testament. It was published by Sheed & Ward here in the States and by Burns & Oates on the other side of the Pond.

Search for these tomes on Amazon, but click on the link of the top of the page to start your Amazon.com session so CathInfo gets credit!

I think someone else must have commandeered your keyboard for a moment there.  :wink:

Ah, that was the "real life me" typing: rebel without a [grammatically adequate] cause. He pops out sometimes, despite my best efforts to suppress him.

As far as commentary that is of more spiritual (rather than apologetic) value, which version is better - the reprint or the Haydock?

Do you think that the Old Testament commentary in the reprint is priceless? To buy the New Testament reprint alone is only $50, which is rather tempting.

Buying a New Testament reprint + the Haydock would be $175  - $25 less than buying the entire Old and New Testament reprint. Maybe that would be an option.

I personally believe the commentary of the Douay-Rhemish reprints to be spiritually edifying as well as theologically educational, and that it is indeed worth the effort.

If you are scarce on funds, it would be a good idea to get the New Testament tome first.

Another option for you that occurred to me a moment ago would be the acquisition of the four-volume translation of the Great Commentary of Rev. Fr. Cornelius a Lapide upon the Gospels, published by Loreto Publications. This is indeed priceless!

I have attached some scans of the prefatory commentary for the Canticle of Canticles. I'm sorry it's so small, but it's the best I can do at this time. You may have to use a magnifying glass.

For whatever it is worth, I would say you can't go wrong with Haydock.

Hobble,

Where and how did you learn all this?  If you are theologically self-taught, I am really in awe.  Actually, I am in awe even if you aren't.   :applause:

Ha, look at this guy: "may be the case"? Self-serving subjunctives are symptoms of the Dunning–Kruger effect...  

Your own writing betrays that you cannot be subject to this pseudo-psychological effect by the name of Dunning-Kruger. It rather seems to develop into a kind of inferiority complex, which is for sure also not the healthy middle ground. Cui honorem, honorem!

Thanks for the info, anyway!