Bible Banning??? In Christianity???

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟376,565.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
This! Very well written and worth reading it all.
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ, let us remember:

a) There is a context to these councils: the reappearance of the Albigensians, Bogomils and Cathar heretics.
b) These are local councils for local problems dealing with temporary issues and not universal councils proclaiming eternal and universal practices.
c) John Wycliffe was not the first person to translate the Bible into English.
d) Contrary to popular opinion, Catholics were allowed, in many places and times prior to the Reformation to own vernacular Bibles.
e) The Catholic Church did not at all encourage Catholics to be ignorant of the Bible by hiding it in Latin. This is Protestant myth and polemic.
f) The Liturgy or the Mass is filled with Scripture, not only in the readings but in the prayers and whatever was not in the Mass could be found in the daily prayers (Mattins and Vespers) offered in the morning and in the evening in the Churches.

* * *

a) The Church of Toulouse and Tarragona encountered the reappearance of a certain breed of neo-Gnostic heretic which would horrify even modern-day Protestants. Generally they tended to believe that the material universe was created by a satanic demiurge who was either equal to God or God's oldest son. Jesus was an angel with a phantom body and not a material body. They encouraged sexual abstinence and discouraged marriage and temporal, material pleasures were all deemed sinful. They denied the Trinity, tending to believe in modalism or something similar. They denied the importance of Baptism, Holy Communion and they had only one sacrament called the Consolamentum which may seem similar to modern Protestant ideas of "baptism in the Spirit" but was ritualistic which Protestants tend to reject. After this one sacrament of theirs, they were expected to become vegetarians and abstain from all sexuality and at the end of their lives they would undertake a difficult fast which was believed to cleanse the soul from the material pollution of the body and this sacrifice, rather than the sacrifice of Christ, was often considered to be what reunified the believer to Christ.

b) The bishops of Toulouse and Tarragona reacted quickly. Knowing that pious orthodox Catholic Christians tended to be the illiterate, innocent peasants who clung to the true Christian faith and knowing that this heresy was being promoted and growing widespread among the richer, literate Bible readers, they acted quickly to stamp out this heresy. These local councils are not meant to be a universal declaration to the entire Catholic Church in all dioceses, nor was it meant to be a declaration that would stand forever.

c) John Wycliffe was not the first person to translate the Bible into English. He was the first person to translate the Bible in its entirety into English. In fact, we have evidence in history that the Bible was being translated into Old English, the language of the earliest Anglo-Saxon Christians as early as the 7th century A.D. Large sections of the Bible, particularly the Gospels, were translated into English centuries before Wycliffe or the Reformation and these translations tended to exist as separate books, since, in many parts of the world, the idea that the Bible was a library composed of several books had still survived. One of our English saints, the venerable St. Bede, is famous for his interlinear Latin-English translations. He was also not alone as many monks made many similar interlinear translations.

d) Before the Reformation and afterwards, literate and richer English-speaking Catholics proudly owned English Bibles and we have some of their wills surviving to the modern day which indicate that their Bibles were to be handed down in their family throughout the generations. The Douay-Rheims is a famous post-Reformation translation that was actually finished prior to the King James Version and many of the KJV turns of phrases were straight up borrowed from the Douay-Rheims.

e) The Latin Church did not need to translate the Latin Vulgate into the vernacular languages in Romanised Europe because the Romance-speaking populations could still understand Latin and actually thought of their vernacular (what we would call Old French, Old Spanish, Old Italian, etc.) as the same as the Latin language as late as 7th century. After this period, the mystery, nobility and learnedness of the older Latin was cemented in the minds of the laity and hierarchy alike and none of the Romance-speaking populations wanted the liturgy to be in anything but the language which their fathers had used. When the Catholic populations could not understand the Latin Mass, either in non-Romance speaking regions before the 7th century, or in Romance-speaking regions afterwards, they relied on translations made by the monks or oral transmission of the biblical stories passed on from parents to children.

f) The Mass readings for Sunday in ancient times go through most of the significant chunks of the New Testament and parts of the Old Testament in just one year. Coupled with the morning and evening prayer (Mattins and Vespers) which was prayed daily, much of the most important parts of the Bible is heard by the population in a whole year. After decades of praying and attending liturgy, the more pious Catholics knew Scripture in their bones. After Vatican II in the 1960s, almost the entirety of the Bible is covered in the Sunday Mass alone every three years and if we were to include weekday Masses and the Mattins and Vespers during the week, the entire Bible (as well as many commentaries written by the Fathers) is heard and proclaimed to the people every two years.

* * *

It is sad that after 500 years there is still so much anti-Catholicism among Protestants. Rather than doing research, many still seem to enjoy perpetuating the same myths. Why not simply live the faith as you understand it and share it with those who have not yet come to know Christ rather than spending time and energy slandering those who have clung to the faith throughout the centuries and have known no other God but Christ?
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
There was no whole sale slaughter of the Lollards, eleven were burned at the stake because they were traitors….
Lollardy movement that lasted half a century and exercised little or no influence especially, and didn't add much to the Protestant flood of heretical ideas.

The Lollards were the Reformation Mark I. A corrupt, Church unwilling to see power escape from its clutches, succeeded in putting that one down; with the help of a little brute force, but they had less luck when Mark II came along.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Landon Caeli

God is perfect - Nothing is an accident
Site Supporter
Jan 8, 2016
15,638
5,899
47
Silicon Valley
✟606,410.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Jesus came to me and told me how wrong I was about Islam and it threw me for a spin. I began re-reading Revelations, looking for clues, and I became shocked....

So Jesus told you that Islam is more holy than Catholicism? Wow.

No, its not a good thing if ones faith is based on the negative aspects of other denominations or faiths. Thats not living as Christ.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CrystalDragon
Upvote 0

mikpat

Active Member
Apr 25, 2016
201
52
91
Evans, GA
✟15,816.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
London Caeli, regarding #119

I have been on several religious forums over the years and almost every religious forum/topic will contain anti Catholics, babbling about some issue about the Catholic Church—-graven images, celibacy, Inquisition, the Jesuits, blah blah blah and more…..They eventually distract from many topics in order to get in their offal.
As the author states in his book——-"the New Anti-Catholicism, the Last Acceptable Prejudice." Bigotry hates a vacuum.

Sorry, but anti Catholicism has been ingrained in the American culture, myths, imagery and stereotypes built up over centuries can scarcely be expected to vanish in a short period.
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Sorry, but anti Catholicism has been ingrained in the American culture, myths, imagery and stereotypes built up over centuries can scarcely be expected to vanish in a short period.

Arrogance has a habit of attracting criticism.
 
Upvote 0

derGroßmütige

Schmalkaldic Heretic
Jun 8, 2009
76
37
✟15,694.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Engaged
Please do not slander me. Where did I try to justify the slaughter of tens of thousands... Why are you doing that to me?

You constantly trying to remove the label "Christian" from the heretics your church slaughtered, is "defending" it, because unfortunately, many Catholics still have the Crusade mindset that it's okay to kill pagans and muslims. Indeed that was the very justification the Church used, that they are "not" Christians.

Why are we discussing the number of people killed by "the catholic church" when the topic here is about bibles being banned.

You could just scroll back and see why. The REASON the Bible was banned was to suppress these "heresies" which the Catholic Church was violently suppressing and you were defending the Catholic actions, claiming they aren't "true Christians", etc. (despite the fact many of the biggest Cathar heresies have been adopted by the Vatican today, opposition to death penalty, equality for women, and vegetarianism were considered among their biggest heresies and Catholic inquisitors tested people by seeing if they would eat meat or kill animals, if they refused, they were executed as heretics).
I understand that ex-Catholics are typically the most outspoken people when it comes to trashing the Church, but the Hitler, the inquisition, witch burning, bohemia, Mariology heresies, reformation, etc.

Glad you don't disagree, sad you just shrug it off, upset you try to claim it off-topic when the topic is suppression of God's word (and the purpose being to prevent "heresy" which they violently suppress). It is all part of the pattern of the beast on seven hills.

Yes, once you wake up and join the ex-Catholics and realize the bitter truth about your beloved Church, you will fight for that truth to the end. It was not a happy occasion that I discovered the truth. It shattered my world view. I did not understand why Jesus came to me and told me how wrong I was about muslims (the caliphate being the antichrist, wanting a new crusade against them). It made me read Revelations all over again and made my jaw drop when I realized the woman (church/religion) riding a beast (nation) was not a Caliphate, but a Church. The Church I loved, clothed in "scarlet and purple" on the "seven hills" of Rome.

All scholars agree it has to be a religious state. You can continue, like I did, to think it's a future Caliphate, but there is nothing to support that when there is a clear seven-hill Church-nation clothed in "purple and scarlet", drunk with the blood of the saints (Inquisitions, crusades against Christian "heretics", etc.).

I think it's the ultimate plot twist. But leave it to the Great Author to do that!

Wow, another myth. I'll quit here.

Please do. None of your posts added anything to the conversation and you just reposted a Wikipedia section that didn't refute my argument, as if I needed education on it when I already know the whole story. And just denying doesn't constitute an argument. Put forward your own numbers on how many were killed in the Inquisition, witch hunts, heretic killings, canonical punishments (I.e. Goslar incident), crusades against christian "heretics", etc.

Do your own research and put forth the various numbers of estimated christians murdered in each of those conflicts. By the way, any number greater than zero and you still come to the same problem, your "Church"/Pope murdered Christians. Many of them for "heresy" that the Church now accepts as doctrine, many Cathar "heretical" positions that were the very reasons used to justify murdering Cathars, are not common Catholic positions.
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,759
12,242
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,195,822.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Only a catholic or orthodox would defend banning the bible. I don't believe a Godly man who loves the scriptures would ever ban the bible.
I beg your pardon? When have Orthodox defended such a thing?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Philip_B

Bread is Blessed & Broken Wine is Blessed & Poured
Site Supporter
Jul 12, 2016
5,462
5,543
72
Swansea, NSW, Australia
Visit site
✟422,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
orthodox always defend catholics in a debate with prots. At least that's my observation
As an Anglican I would have to say that has not been my observation, and I am not sure that the labels help. It seems that as wide open the gates that Christ wants to throw them, we still want to build walls.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,106
New Zealand
Visit site
✟86,375.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Back to OP title

In communist countries the bible was banned...but they didnt pretend to be christian.

There is no place for banning Bibles. The bereans searched the scripture everyday to see if the things preached were so. They werent even christians yet but Godfearers and wanted to learn who Jesus was and what he claimed to be. Was he truly the Messiah?

In every tongue, tribe and nation where the bible is now being distributed, people read it and become christians. We became christians when we take God at His Word and His word is in the Bible. He is the author and finisher of our faith.

Both the old and new testaments must be read by everyone, everywhere. You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,592
16,385
Flyoverland
✟1,256,821.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Thanks, but the context of the OP is the 13th century rules
The context is 13th century rules, but in the present tense.
How can we expect to be blessed by God when the source of his blessings is banned???
Note the 'is banned', different from 'was banned'.

So Paul Yohannan's comments are totally within scope. It is highly relevant to the discussion started by the OP what current practice IS, as well as putting into full context why these two regional councils did what they did. The OP is making a case about how evil the Catholic Church is for forbidding the Bible. In the OP the forbidding was in the present tense ('is' in the OP). Not the case. Nor were the two synods blanket forbidding of the Bible for all regions or all time, but for a specific region and time, in a context that has been explained.
 
Upvote 0

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,675
3,206
✟167,288.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
The context is 13th century rules, but in the present tense.

Note the 'is banned', different from 'was banned'.

So Paul Yohannan's comments are totally within scope. It is highly relevant to the discussion started by the OP what current practice IS, as well as putting into full context why these two regional councils did what they did. The OP is making a case about how evil the Catholic Church is for forbidding the Bible. In the OP the forbidding was in the present tense ('is' in the OP). Not the case. Nor were the two synods blanket forbidding of the Bible for all regions or all time, but for a specific region and time, in a context that has been explained.

It wasn't within scope of my response, because my response was withing the scope of the OP.

The only reason it's no longer banned is because it no longer can be banned. The cat is out of the bag. One can't undo what the reformation did in this regard, opening the scripture to the vast majority of the people on Earth. If the RCC was able to again impose such a ban, I believe they would in a heartbeat in an attempt to consolidate their power base.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,592
16,385
Flyoverland
✟1,256,821.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
It wasn't within scope of my response, because my response was withing the scope of the OP.
The original post clearly used 'is' rather than 'was'. Paul Yohannan was on target to discuss the contemporary situation even if you do not approve.
The only reason it's no longer banned is because it no longer can be banned. The cat is out of the bag. One can't undo what the reformation did in this regard, opening the scripture to the vast majority of the people on Earth.
Gutenberg did that, not the Reformation.
If the RCC was able to again impose such a ban, I believe they would in a heartbeat in an attempt to consolidate their power base.
Delusional.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

W2L

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2016
20,090
10,988
USA
✟213,573.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
That's why we are critical of anti-Catholic bigotry.

Its not bigotry on my part. I dislike all denominations. If its not all about Jesus then its something I will criticize. I hate division. The cc causes division.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dkh587
Upvote 0