Human, I think what JCB is getting at here is the idea that the Vulgate is authoritative. It’s the King James debate, in the Roman Catholic flavor, except the Roman Catholics have a more impressive looking framework for it. How many Protestants have you come across who complain that what you just read from the NIV or NASB “doesn’t match the King James”? Same fundamental issue here.
An appeal to the Vulgate is silly though, since it actually doesn’t have tremendously different readings from translations today, save perhaps in a few instances, but a lot better than the Greek LXX which removes important Messianic prophecies. Thus I could still find “ye are saved by grace, through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast,” in Latin just as easily as I would in English or Spanish, and the Catholics would still hate us for saying it.
Eph 2:8 gratia enim estis salvati per fidem et hoc non ex vobis Dei enim donum est
“Human, I think what JCB is getting at here is the idea that the Vulgate is authoritative”
The Vulgate is authoritative because of the authority of the magisterium. The magisterium decided which books should be in scripture, and the list they came up with is the same list used in the Vulgate in the 4th century, and the same list at Trent.
So it’s not the same argument as the King James, as it stems from the argument that the magisterium of the church has the ultimate authority.
It’s not liable to the same critique as the King James version either, which rests on inspiration.