Re: Corrupt Vulgate

Subject:RE>Corrupt Vulgate
Michael Bushnell wrote:
> I would also point out that the Vulgate is not under copyright, and
> for CCAT to attempt to maintain control when unnecessary is
> suspicious.

This seems to me a mistakenly suspicious view of "control."
The suggestion is that

> If the control over the
> vulgate text were maintained, then the text would not have been
> available *at all*.  At least there is currently a partial text
> around for easy access."

This misses the point of Bob Kraft's post altogether. The sort of
"control" that CCAT maintains is control over the integrity of the
text, not over access to the text. The text *is* available, and is
available in a full and reliable, and not merely partial, form--
precisely because of the sort of control being called suspicious here.

To the further objection that
> The only time when an incomplete or erroneous text is a problem is
> when having some assurance that one has a correct and complete text is
> important.
I would reply that this is always important and and therefore always a

I, for one, therefore wouldn't want CCAT to change its policies.

Don Westblade,  Dept of Religion     Hillsdale College
westblade@ac.hillsdale.edu           Hillsdale, MI