• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Censorship?

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
It was a correction, "When the church of Rome though, completed her climb to the top of imperial support, she ended both the freedom to have the holy scriptures in the vernacular" is the opposite of the truth. That Catholics translated Biblical text into numerous languages of the people is a historical fact.
Since you are not going to start another topic, I will. So do you believe that allowing certain people to translate scripture but forbidding others to do so as if, oh I don't know, you own them, is not censorship? Who is the Catholic Church to claim ownership of the holy scriptures, and determine who can or cannot translate them into the languages of the various nations? So that all may read and hear the ultimate standard of truth for themselves. Here we are, please do show us all the translations the Catholic church had translated into native tongues that all might have access to this most important work for all professed followers of Jesus Christ to have. No doubt there are as many as there are or were languages of course, as there is no higher standard or revelation of truth above and beyond holy scripture, right?

Bring forth your evidence here, and I will bring forth the evidence of the RCC's censorship again, that all may examine both sides of the issue.
 

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
16,938
6,409
✟380,830.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
there is no higher standard or revelation of truth above and beyond holy scripture, right?

Oops

John 14:26
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

1 John 2:27
As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Many Christians unknowingly idolize the Bible, turning it into a false god by placing its authority above the Holy Spirit. Or simply from spiritual blindness.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Oops

John 14:26
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

1 John 2:27
As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Many Christians unknowingly idolize the Bible, turning it into a false god by placing its authority above the Holy Spirit. Or simply from spiritual blindness.
Oops

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

All authentic Christians uphold the holy scriptures as the standard of truth all other testimonies are to be judged by. The scriptures themselves claim to be "given by inspiration of God". They are therefore a standard which should not be contradicted. But to the contrary as the above God inspired scriptures state, they are -

"profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

All new professed revelations from God or the Holy Spirit, should then of course be compared to this standard for authenticity. If it contradicts the plain testimony of that already given by inspiration of God, the Holy Spirit, it is to be rejected.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,951
7,718
North Carolina
✟363,421.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Oops
John 14:26
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
1 John 2:27
As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.
John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
Many Christians unknowingly idolize the Bible, turning it into a false god by placing its authority above the Holy Spirit. Or simply from spiritual blindness.
A false conflict when the Holy Spirit does not contradict himself in his own God-breathed word (2 Tim 3:16). . .
 
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
16,938
6,409
✟380,830.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Oops

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

All authentic Christians uphold the holy scriptures as the standard of truth all other testimonies are to be judged by. The scriptures themselves claim to be "given by inspiration of God". They are therefore a standard which should not be contradicted. But to the contrary as the above God inspired scriptures state, they are -

"profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

All new professed revelations from God or the Holy Spirit, should then of course be compared to this standard for authenticity. If it contradicts the plain testimony of that already given by inspiration of God, the Holy Spirit, it is to be rejected.

Nothing in there says the scriptures is above the Holy Spirit in authority nor in standard nor revelation of truth according to your original question.
 
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
16,938
6,409
✟380,830.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
A false conflict when the Holy Spirit does not contradict himself in his own God-breathed word (2 Tim 3:16). . .

The Word of God never becomes the scriptures and Jesus never refers to scriptures as the Word of God. Because the Word of God has always manifested as a living entity - God >> Jesus >> Holy Spirit.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:14
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us...

John 14:17
the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.

John 14:26
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

The Word became flesh (Jesus) and made His dwelling among us (Holy Spirit). The Word of God never became the scriptures and it already dwells inside those the Holy Spirit finds its dwelling.

2 Corinthians 3:3
It is clear that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

Hebrews 10:15-16
15The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First He says: 16“This is the covenant I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord. I will put My laws in their hearts and inscribe them on their minds.”

It's ironic I have to quote scriptures about verses telling the Word of God did not become scriptures and rather telling us, if we have the Holy Spirit in us then we already have he Word of God in us.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Nothing in there says the scriptures is above the Holy Spirit in authority nor in standard nor revelation of truth according to your original question.
Nobody said anything about being above the Holy Spirit. To the contrary, they are Holy Spirit inspired. You speak about the scriptures and the Holy Spirit as though they are two different things, they are not. The scriptures are the testimony of the Holy spirit of God to humanity. From which alone, you or anyone else even knows about the Holy Spirit of God. You may of course choose to separate them if you wish, I will and do not. Without them, we could all just argue and claim that we are the one's who really have the Holy spirit of God, and everyone should listen to us. As many have and do. Nevertheless the Holy Spirit of God inspired the following testimony to prevent such a situation by providing a manual as it were, for checking the truth or authenticity of the countless different claims from humanity concerning it.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Pretty simple really.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,951
7,718
North Carolina
✟363,421.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The Word of God never becomes the scriptures and Jesus never refers to scriptures as the Word of God.
Both do in my Bible (Mt 15:6, Jn 10:35).
Because the Word of God has always manifested as a living entity - God >> Jesus >> Holy Spirit.
In yours below (Jn 14:17, 26), Jesus is not the Word of God, rather Jesus is the Word, who is God (Jn 1:1, 14). . .not the same thing.

The word of God is Scripture (Mt 15:6, Jn 10:35). . .the Word who is God is Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:1, 14).
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:14 - The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us...
John 14:17 - the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. -
John 14:26 - But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
The Word became flesh (Jesus) and made His dwelling among us (Holy Spirit). The Word of God never became the scriptures
It does in Mt 15:6, Jn 10:35.

The word of God was never not the Scriptures in NT teaching.
Nowhere in NT didactics is "word of God" ever used of anything but the Scriptures.
and it already dwells inside those the Holy Spirit finds its dwelling.

2 Corinthians 3:3
It is clear that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

Hebrews 10:15-16
15The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First He says: 16“This is the covenant I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord. I will put My laws in their hearts and inscribe them on their minds.”

It's ironic I have to quote scriptures about verses telling the Word of God did not become scriptures and rather telling us, if we have the Holy Spirit in us then we already have he Word of God in us.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: David Lamb
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS. 17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; 18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great. 19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. 20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.
 
Upvote 0

Bob Crowley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 27, 2015
3,980
2,503
71
Logan City
✟992,920.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
For a start the Catholic Church did not ban the reading of the Bible.


We often hear that the Catholic Church has forbidden the reading of the Bible! Have you heard this? Yeah, me too! But, this is another one of those big myths which has worked its way into the popular dialog but one that has not been proved from Church teaching and documents.
There are two good list of quotes from Church documents and leaders of the Church from the early centuries until today.

The second is a list of Catholic Bibles from ancient times that prove the charge against the Catholic Church false, since the Forewords and Prefaces prove that the Catholic Church PROMOTED the reading of Scripture.

You and I have both heard the myth: “The Catholic Church has forbidden Catholics from reading the Bible!”

I am not intending to say that Catholics, especially in the United States were always big Bible readers in the past. Certainly there was a deficit in this area — and a certain shyness coming from the problems of Protestantism and their Bible-thumping ways.

But it is a MYTH that Catholics did not read the Bible until the late 20th Century — until after Vatican II. Those who could read (many could not read over the centuries and even today ½ the world’s population is effectively illiterate) did read the Bible when they had them.1 Catholic biblical scholarship did not begin with Pius XII. It seems almost ludicrous to have to say that since we Catholics have had the best and the brightest of biblical scholars long before modern times — just consider Origen, Tertullian, St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Thomas Aquinas just to mention a few.

There has been a very long history of Bible reading, study and scholarship stretching back to the beginning of Christian/Catholic history….

As for chaining Bibles to lecterns that was to avoid them being stolen.


The accusation that the Catholic Church chained Bibles in order to keep them from the common people, is equally wrongheaded and historically misinformed. The exact opposite is true: Bibles were chained in libraries so that they would not be stolen, precisely because they were so valued and treasured (especially before the invention of the movable-type printing press in the mid-15th century), in order to be more accessible to all. Protestants did the same thing themselves for some 300 years. For example, Eton and Merton Colleges (Oxford) did not remove their chained Bibles until the 18th century.

It amazes me that some modern Protestants want to keep perpetuating the same falsehoods and myths in an age when Bibles are freely available to all in an age when most modern Westerners are literate, unlike medieval times.

I can go to the local Catholic book shop in the city and buy Bibles to my heart's content if I want to. Granted there may not be the same proliferation of translations as in a Protestant bookshop but how many different translations do you need?
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Nothing in there says the scriptures is above the Holy Spirit in authority nor in standard nor revelation of truth according to your original question.
Nor am I arguing any such thing. Rather and simply that God does not contradict Himself. The Holy Spirit is God, who inspired the writers of the truths related and expounded upon in holy scripture. The scriptures therefore being Holy Spirit inspired recorded truths, by which to compare other proclaimed truths for authenticity. If they contradict the testimonies of holy scripture already given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God, then they are to be considered false. Anybody can claim the Holy Spirit gave them teachings they are promoting, so the faithful must test the spirit of these proposed truths, against the already existing Holy Spirit inspired testimonies of holy scripture. It's not rocket science.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
For a start the Catholic Church did not ban the reading of the Bible.






As for chaining Bibles to lecterns that was to avoid them being stolen.




It amazes me that some modern Protestants want to keep perpetuating the same falsehoods and myths in an age when Bibles are freely available to all in an age when most modern Westerners are literate, unlike medieval times.

I can go to the local Catholic book shop in the city and buy Bibles to my heart's content if I want to. Granted there may not be the same proliferation of translations as in a Protestant bookshop but how many different translations do you need?
Quotes below from links above them.


Roman Catholic Repression of the Bible: The Roman Catholic church’s repression of the Bible in vernacular languages has been documented since the Middle Ages, with a few highlights being Pope John X in 920 banning the use of the Old Church Slavonic translation, the Second Council of Tarragona in 1234 banning ownership of a Bible in any Romance language, and Archbishop Richard Arundel’s 1409 prohibition of translating the Bible into English. Severe restrictions on the ownership of vernacular Bibles were laid out in Pope Pius IV’s Tridentine Index, being relaxed somewhat in 1896 by Pope Leo XII. The various bans and restrictions on vernacular Bibles focused on concerns that the laity, left to their own devices and apart from the direction of the clergy, would wrongly interpret the Scriptures. The aforementioned bans against English translations were accompanied by an opposition to John Wycliffe’s belief in the “priesthood of all believers,” a doctrine suggested by 1 Peter 2:9 in which followers of Christ are called “a royal priesthood” and thus, according to Wycliffe, not needing the mediation of priests to interpret the Bible. The ban on English Bible translations was also accompanied by the concern that the laity would read passages such as Ephesians 2:8-9—“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not of your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast”—according to Wycliff’s proto-Reformational hermeneutic and thus come into conflict with official Church teachings regarding matters of salvation.


Why Christians Were Denied Access to Their Bible for 1,000 Years​

Wouldn't you assume that the newly established Church would want its devotees to immerse themselves in the sanctioned New Testament, especially since the Church went to great lengths to eliminate competing Gospels? And wouldn't the best way of spreading the "good news" be to ensure that every Christian had direct access to the Bible?

That's not what happened. The Church actually discouraged the populace from reading the Bible on their own -- a policy that intensified through the Middle Ages and later, with the addition of a prohibition forbidding translation of the Bible into native languages....................

Since the Church sequestering their sanctioned Bible from the populace makes no sense, I was not surprised that some readers bristled when I recently wrote about the historic prohibitions against Christians reading the New Testament on their own, or worse, translating the Bible into a native language. One called me a liar. That too was not surprising. A few years earlier I gave a talk at an American Psychological Association meeting and afterwards lunched with a group of young Christians, some of whom also challenged my statements about the Bible prohibitions. I later sent them referencesdocumenting my claims, but never heard back from them. I've always wondered how they reacted to the citations I sent, which included:

Decree of the Council of Toulouse (1229 C.E.): "We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books."


Ruling of the Council of Tarragona of 1234 C.E.: "No one may possess the books of the Old and New Testaments in the Romance language, and if anyone possesses them he must turn them over to the local bishop within eight days after promulgation of this decree, so that they may be burned..."

Proclamations at the Ecumenical Council of Constance in 1415 C.E.: Oxford professor, and theologian John Wycliffe, was the first (1380 C.E.) to translate the New Testament into English to "...helpeth Christian men to study the Gospel in that tongue in which they know best Christ's sentence." For this "heresy" Wycliffe was posthumously condemned by Arundel, the archbishop of Canterbury. By the Council's decree "Wycliffe's bones were exhumed and publicly burned and the ashes were thrown into the Swift River."

Fate of William Tyndale in 1536 C.E.: William Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. According to Tyndale, the Church forbid owning or reading the Bible to control and restrict the teachings and to enhance their own power and importance.


Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

The following is excerpted from the book ROME AND THE BIBLE: TRACING THE HISTORY OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND ITS PERSECUTION OF THE BIBLE AND OF BIBLE BELIEVERS.

During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people. It was illegal to translate the Bible into the common languages, even though most people could not read the official Catholic Bible because it was in Latin, a language known only to the highly educated.

Consider some of the laws Rome made against Bible translation. These began to be made in the 13th century and were in effect through the 19th.

(1) In the year 1215 Pope Innocent III issued a law commanding “that they shall be seized for trial and penalties, WHO ENGAGE IN THE TRANSLATION OF THE SACRED VOLUMES, or who hold secret conventicles, or who assume the office of preaching without the authority of their superiors; against whom process shall be commenced, without any permission of appeal” (J.P. Callender, Illustrations of Popery, 1838, p. 387). Innocent “declared that as by the old law, the beast touching the holy mount was to be stoned to death, so simple and uneducated men were not to touch the Bible or venture to preach its doctrines” (Schaff, History of the Christian Church, VI, p. 723).

(2) The Council of Toulouse (1229) FORBADE THE LAITY TO POSSESS OR READ THE VERNACULAR TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE (Allix, Ecclesiastical History, II, p. 213). This council ordered that the bishops should appoint in each parish “one priest and two or three laics, who should engage upon oath to make a rigorous search after all heretics and their abettors, and for this purpose should visit every house from the garret to the cellar, together with all subterraneous places where they might conceal themselves” (Thomas M’Crie, History of the Reformation in Spain, 1856, p. 82). They also searched for the illegal Bibles.

(3) The Council of Tarragona (1234) “ORDERED ALL VERNACULAR VERSIONS TO BE BROUGHT TO THE BISHOP TO BE BURNED” (Paris Simms, Bible from the Beginning, p. 1929, 162).

(4) In 1483 the infamous Inquisitor General Thomas Torquemada began his reign of terror as head of the Spanish Inquisition; King Ferdinand and his queen “PROHIBITED ALL, UNDER THE SEVEREST PAINS, FROM TRANSLATING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE INTO THE VULGAR TONGUES, OR FROM USING IT WHEN TRANSLATED BY OTHERS” (M’Crie, p. 192). For more than three centuries the Bible in the common tongue was a forbidden book in Spain and multitudes of copies perished in the flames, together with those who cherished them.

(5) In England, too, laws were passed by the Catholic authorities against vernacular Bibles. The Constitutions of Thomas Arundel, issued in 1408 by the Archbishop of Canterbury, made this brash demand: “WE THEREFORE DECREE AND ORDAIN THAT NO MAN SHALL, HEREAFTER, BY HIS OWN AUTHORITY, TRANSLATE ANY TEXT OF THE SCRIPTURE INTO ENGLISH, OR ANY OTHER TONGUE, by way of a book, libel, or treatise, now lately set forth in the time of John Wyckliff, or since, or hereafter to be set forth, in part of in whole, privily or apertly, upon pain of greater excommunication, until the said translation be allowed by the ordinary of the place, or, if the case so require, by the council provincial” (John Eadie, The English Bible, vol. 1, 1876, p. 89). Consider Arundel’s estimation of the man who gave the English speaking people their first Bible: “This pestilential and most wretched John Wycliffe of damnable memory, a child of the old devil, and himself a child or pupil of Anti-Christ, who while he lived, walking in the vanity of his mind … crowned his wickedness by translating the Scriptures into the mother tongue” (Fountain, John Wycliffe, p. 45).

(6) Pope Leo X (1513-1521), who railed against Luther’s efforts to follow the biblical precept of faith alone and Scripture alone, called the fifth Lateran Council (1513-1517), which charged that no books should be printed except those approved by the Roman Catholic Church. “THEREFORE FOREVER THEREAFTER NO ONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PRINT ANY BOOK OR WRITING WITHOUT A PREVIOUS EXAMINATION, TO BE TESTIFIED BY MANUAL SUBSCRIPTION, BY THE PAPAL VICAR AND MASTER OF THE SACRED PALACE IN ROME, and in other cities and dioceses by the Inquisition, and the bishop or an expert appointed by him. FOR NEGLECT OF THIS THE PUNISHMENT WAS EXCOMMUNICATION, THE LOSS OF THE EDITION, WHICH WAS TO BE BURNED, a fine of 100 ducats to the fabric of St. Peters, and suspension from business for a year” (Henry Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages).

(7) These restrictions were repeated by the Council of Trent in 1546, which placed translations of the Bible, such as the German, Spanish, and English, on its list of prohibited books and forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Catholic bishop or inquisitor.

Following is a quote from Trent: “…IT SHALL NOT BE LAWFUL FOR ANYONE TO PRINT OR TO HAVE PRINTED ANY BOOKS WHATSOEVER DEALING WITH SACRED DOCTRINAL MATTERS WITHOUT THE NAME OF THE AUTHOR, OR IN THE FUTURE TO SELL THEM, OR EVEN TO HAVE THEM IN POSSESSION, UNLESS THEY HAVE FIRST BEEN EXAMINED AND APPROVED BY THE ORDINARY, UNDER PENALTY OF ANATHEMA AND FINE prescribed by the last Council of the Lateran” (Fourth session, April 8, 1546, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Translated by H.J. Schroeder, pp. 17-19).

These rules were affixed to the Index of Prohibited Books and were constantly reaffirmed by popes in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. These prohibitions, in fact, have never been rescinded. It is true that the Council of Trent did not absolutely forbid the reading of the Scriptures under all circumstances. It allowed a few exceptions. The priests were allowed to read the Latin Bible. Bishops and inquisitors were allowed to grant license for certain faithful Catholics to read the Scriptures in Latin as long as these Scriptures were accompanied by Catholic notes and if it was believed that these would not be “harmed” by such reading. In practice, though, the proclamations of Trent forbade the reading of the Holy Scriptures to at least nine-tenths of the people. Rome’s claim to possess authority to determine who can and cannot translate, publish, and read the Bible is one of the most blasphemous claims ever made under this sun.

The attitude of 16th century Catholic authorities toward the Bible was evident from a speech Richard Du Mans delivered at Trent, in which he said “that the Scriptures had become useless, since the schoolmen had established the truth of all doctrines; and though they were formerly read in the church, for the instruction of the people, and still read in the service, yet they ought not to be made a study, because the Lutherans only gained those who read them” (William M’Gavin, The Protestant, 1846, p. 144). It is true that the Bible leads men away from Roman Catholicism, but this is only because Roman Catholicism is not founded upon the Word of God!

Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and went even further by forbidding licenses to be granted for the reading of the Bible under any conditions (Richard Littledale, Plain Reasons Against Joining the Church of Rome, 1924, p. 91).

(8) The restrictions against ownership of the vernacular Scriptures were repeated by the popes until the end of the 19th century:

Benedict XIV (1740-1758) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and issued an injunction “that no versions whatever should be suffered to be read but those which should be approved of by the Holy See, accompanied by notes derived from the writings of the Holy Fathers, or other learned and Catholic authors” (D.B. Ray, The Papal Controversy, p. 479).

It was during the reign of Pope Pius VII (1800-1823) that the modern Bible society movement began. The British and Foreign Bible Society was formed in March 1804, the purpose being “to encourage a wider circulation of the Holy Scriptures without note or comment.” Other societies were soon created for the same exalted purpose. Germany (1804); Ireland (1806); Canada (1807); Edinburgh (1809); Hungary (1811); Finland, Glasgow, Zurich, Prussia (1812); Russia (1813); Denmark and Sweden (1814); Netherlands, Iceland (1815); America, Norway, and Waldensian (1816); Australia, Malta, Paris (1817); etc. One of the societies began distributing a Polish Bible in Poland. The Pope, instead of praising the Lord that the eternal Word of God was being placed into the hands of the multitudes of spiritually needy people, showed his displeasure by issuing a bull against Bible Societies on June 29, 1816. The Pope expressed himself as “shocked” by the circulation of the Scriptures in the Polish tongue. He characterized this practice as a “most crafty device, by which the very foundations of religion are undermined,” “a pestilence,” which he must “remedy and abolish,” “a defilement of the faith, eminently dangerous to souls.” Pope Pius VII also rebuked Archbishop Buhusz of Mohiley in Russia because of his endorsement of a newly formed Bible society (Kenneth Latourette, The Nineteenth Century in Europe, p. 448). The papal brief, dated September 3, 1816, declared that “if the Sacred Scriptures were allowed in the vulgar tongue everywhere without discrimination, more detriment than benefit would arise” (Jacobus, Roman Catholic and Protestant Versions Compared, p. 236).

Pope Leo XII (1823-29) issued a bull to the Bishops in Ireland, May 3, 1824, in which he affirmed the Council of Trent and condemned Bible distribution. “It is no secret to you, venerable brethren, that a certain Society, vulgarly called The Bible Society, is audaciously spreading itself through the whole world. After despising the traditions of the holy Fathers, and in opposition to the well-known Decree of the Council of Trent, this Society has collected all its forces, and directs every means to one object,--the translation, or rather the perversion, of the Bible into the vernacular languages of all nations. ... IF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES BE EVERYWHERE INDISCRIMINATELY PUBLISHED, MORE EVIL THAN ADVANTAGE WILL ARISE THENCE, on account of the rashness of men” (Bull of Leo XII, May 3, 1824; cited from Charles Elliott, Delineation of Roman Catholicism, 1851, p. 21). This Pope re-published the Index of Prohibited Books on March 26, 1825, and mandated that the decrees of the Council of Trent be enforced against distribution of Scriptures (R.P. Blakeney, Popery in Its Social Aspect, p. 137).

Pope Gregory XVI (1831-46) ratified the decrees of his predecessors, forbidding the free distribution of Scripture. In his encyclical of May 8, 1844, this Pope stated: “Moreover, we confirm and renew the decrees recited above, DELIVERED IN FORMER TIMES BY APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, AGAINST THE PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, READING, AND POSSESSION OF BOOKS OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES TRANSLATED INTO THE VULGAR TONGUE” (James Wylie, The Papacy, 1867, p. 182). This encyclical was delivered against Bible societies in general, and mentioned in particular the Christian Alliance, which was formed in 1843 in New York for the purpose of distributing Scriptures.....................................
There are many more quotes and info at the link which provided the quotes above, which will not fit in a single post here, for those interested.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,831
6,183
Minnesota
✟343,727.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The following is excerpted from the book ROME AND THE BIBLE: TRACING THE HISTORY OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND ITS PERSECUTION OF THE BIBLE AND OF BIBLE BELIEVERS.
During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people. It was illegal to translate the Bible into the common languages, even though most people could not read the official Catholic Bible because it was in Latin, a language known only to the highly educated.
Consider some of the laws Rome made against Bible translation. These began to be made in the 13th century and were in effect through the 19th.
It is sad that such blatant fabrications such as in that book, much born out of hatred, are still being circulated today. Many Catholics tirelessly preached and preserved the Word of God over the centuries, many were martyred because of it. Such false stories denigrate their sacrifices. Truly, if not for the Catholic Church, none of us would have the Bible today. At the time that the Catholic Church was choosing the books of the Bible, a process which spanned centuries, Latin was replacing Greek as the common tongue of the people in Europe. Since the vast majority of European Christians no longer spoke Greek but instead spoke Latin, in the late 300s the Catholic Church made the decision to translate the Bible into the common or "vulgar" language of the people, Latin, thus the Latin "Vulgate." There came a time in Europe where if you could read or write, that essentially meant you knew Latin. Remember too that for most of the history of Christianity, before the time of the printing press, when a Catholic named Gutenberg printed his first book(the Bible) most people were illiterate and individual ownership was rare. The time to hand-copy a Bible and the materials involved made ownership extremely expensive. Eventually Latin morphed into languages such as French, Spanish, and Italian, and many many translations of Biblical text were made by Catholics into many common languages.
Let's consider England. Venerable Bede, a Catholic monk, is perhaps best known for his translation in the 700s. Catholic King Alfred the Great had not finished his translation of Psalms before he died, that would have been in the 800s. Now a lot of Biblical texts by Catholics have been destroyed, remember Protestants in England seized Catholic monasteries and gave the land to wealthy Protestants and much that was Catholic was sold off or destroyed. But some do exist, you can find some of Alfred’s translations in a manuscript dated at around 1050. These are in the English of the Saxons: The Illustrated Psalms of Alfred the Great: The Old English Paris Psalter. Anyone doubting can see for themselves by following that link. When the Normans took over the English changed, the paraphrase of Orm is dated around 1150 and is an example of a Catholic translation into Middle English. When a Catholic named Gutenberg printed the first book on the printing press, of course the first book he printed was the Bible. It is known as the Gutenberg Bibles. Catholics who fled to France after the takeover of Protestantism in England were able to publish an English version of the Bible and efforts, at great peril, were made by Catholics to get an English version of that Bible, the Douay-Rheims, to the people of England. The Rheims New Testament was published in the year 1582, and the entire Bible was finished in 1609. The Protestant King James Bible, based much upon Catholic work, was published in 1611.
Now the Church has always considered the Bible the book of the Church, and has stated that the Bible is the Word of God, and thus is very particular about attempts to alter the Bible. The Catholic Church maintains that no one should add or subtract from the Bible. During the Protestant rebellion there was a lot of animosity, and individuals came up with their own Bible versions, not just their own translations, but included statements against the Catholic faith, a faith handed down from Jesus through the Apostles. This became a serious problem that the Church needed to address. The Church wisely came up with various approved lists of books and Bibles that are in compliance with Catholic teaching and in the case of Bibles are accurate translations. Today the Catholic Church employees scholars from multiple religions to made sure translations are accurate.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
It is sad that such blatant fabrications such as in that book, much born out of hatred, are still being circulated today. Many Catholics tirelessly preached and preserved the Word of God over the centuries, many were martyred because of it. Such false stories denigrate their sacrifices. Truly, if not for the Catholic Church, none of us would have the Bible today. At the time that the Catholic Church was choosing the books of the Bible, a process which spanned centuries, Latin was replacing Greek as the common tongue of the people in Europe. Since the vast majority of European Christians no longer spoke Greek but instead spoke Latin, in the late 300s the Catholic Church made the decision to translate the Bible into the common or "vulgar" language of the people, Latin, thus the Latin "Vulgate." There came a time in Europe where if you could read or write, that essentially meant you knew Latin. Remember too that for most of the history of Christianity, before the time of the printing press, when a Catholic named Gutenberg printed his first book(the Bible) most people were illiterate and individual ownership was rare. The time to hand-copy a Bible and the materials involved made ownership extremely expensive. Eventually Latin morphed into languages such as French, Spanish, and Italian, and many many translations of Biblical text were made by Catholics into many common languages.
Let's consider England. Venerable Bede, a Catholic monk, is perhaps best known for his translation in the 700s. Catholic King Alfred the Great had not finished his translation of Psalms before he died, that would have been in the 800s. Now a lot of Biblical texts by Catholics have been destroyed, remember Protestants in England seized Catholic monasteries and gave the land to wealthy Protestants and much that was Catholic was sold off or destroyed. But some do exist, you can find some of Alfred’s translations in a manuscript dated at around 1050. These are in the English of the Saxons: The Illustrated Psalms of Alfred the Great: The Old English Paris Psalter. Anyone doubting can see for themselves by following that link. When the Normans took over the English changed, the paraphrase of Orm is dated around 1150 and is an example of a Catholic translation into Middle English. When a Catholic named Gutenberg printed the first book on the printing press, of course the first book he printed was the Bible. It is known as the Gutenberg Bibles. Catholics who fled to France after the takeover of Protestantism in England were able to publish an English version of the Bible and efforts, at great peril, were made by Catholics to get an English version of that Bible, the Douay-Rheims, to the people of England. The Rheims New Testament was published in the year 1582, and the entire Bible was finished in 1609. The Protestant King James Bible, based much upon Catholic work, was published in 1611.
Now the Church has always considered the Bible the book of the Church, and has stated that the Bible is the Word of God, and thus is very particular about attempts to alter the Bible. The Catholic Church maintains that no one should add or subtract from the Bible. During the Protestant rebellion there was a lot of animosity, and individuals came up with their own Bible versions, not just their own translations, but included statements against the Catholic faith, a faith handed down from Jesus through the Apostles. This became a serious problem that the Church needed to address. The Church wisely came up with various approved lists of books and Bibles that are in compliance with Catholic teaching and in the case of Bibles are accurate translations. Today the Catholic Church employees scholars from multiple religions to made sure translations are accurate.
Actually, there were several different sources cited, not just a book, and there are many more that could be. You are correct about public education being very poor during the days of Roman Catholic spiritual and temporal rule. It was in fact a desire by many people to have and read the scriptures that created a desire to be able to read, and ultimately lead to far greater sources of education for average citizens of nations. You seem to think that some Catholics at some times, translating the scriptures for some people, negates the many times Catholic religious and political authorities forbade the translation of scripture into the vernacular. Not to mention even owning or reading such scriptures without their permission. With severe penalties even up to death by burning for doing so. All well documented histories which many such as yourself choose to ignore and downplay, while you share those lesser histories which included translating the scriptures before the church changed its policy, and or approving translations in languages that were basically dead to the average person. Pretending this version of history is true, while the history of forbidding the scriptures is false.

This of course is beside the fact that a great many people who wanted the scriptures to be published in the vernacular, and many more who wanted them in it as well, were Roman Catholics. Who were later branded as heretics for desiring such, and later still Protestants, for protesting this and other acts their leaders mandated upon all with or without their consent or agreement. As though our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ or His Apostles ever exemplified or called for such authoritarian control over the faithful by a united professed clergy and royalty.

There is a lot more to say about the histories you shared above, the details which will certainly add more pertinent information to the subject.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David Lamb
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,906
3,136
45
San jacinto
✟215,735.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Since you are not going to start another topic, I will. So do you believe that allowing certain people to translate scripture but forbidding others to do so as if, oh I don't know, you own them, is not censorship? Who is the Catholic Church to claim ownership of the holy scriptures, and determine who can or cannot translate them into the languages of the various nations? So that all may read and hear the ultimate standard of truth for themselves. Here we are, please do show us all the translations the Catholic church had translated into native tongues that all might have access to this most important work for all professed followers of Jesus Christ to have. No doubt there are as many as there are or were languages of course, as there is no higher standard or revelation of truth above and beyond holy scripture, right?

Bring forth your evidence here, and I will bring forth the evidence of the RCC's censorship again, that all may examine both sides of the issue.
So I suppose you're cool with the NWT and other purposefully deceptive translations? No need for quality control to ensure that copyists and translators are doing so with integrity and preserving what is in the original texts without deception?
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,831
6,183
Minnesota
✟343,727.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Actually, there were several different sources cited, not just a book, and there are many more that could be. You are correct about public education being very poor during the days of Roman Catholic spiritual and temporal rule. It was in fact a desire by many people to have and read the scriptures that created a desire to be able to read, and ultimately lead to far greater sources of education for average citizens of nations. You seem to think that some Catholics at some times, translating the scriptures for some people, negates the many times Catholic religious and political authorities forbade the translation of scripture into the vernacular. Not to mention even owning or reading such scriptures without their permission. With severe penalties even up to death by burning for doing so. All well documented histories which many such as yourself choose to ignore and downplay, while you share those lesser histories which included translating the scriptures before the church changed its policy, and or approving translations in languages that were basically dead to the average person. Pretending this version of history is true, while the history of forbidding the scriptures is false.

This of course is beside the fact that a great many people who wanted the scriptures to be published in the vernacular, and many more who wanted them in it as well, were Roman Catholics. Who were later branded as heretics for desiring such, and later still Protestants, for protesting this and other acts their leaders mandated upon all with or without their consent or agreement. As though our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ or His Apostles ever exemplified or called for such authoritarian control over the faithful by a united professed clergy and royalty.

There is a lot more to say about the histories you shared above, the details which will certainly add more pertinent information to the subject.
I named a number of translations into the common language of the people, I even provided a link to one. It's a horrific misrepresentation by the author to take scattered examples that popped up over the centuries where the Church was concerned about heresy and alterations of the Word of God (as I have previously explained) while suppressing information about all of the Catholic efforts to preach and preserve and translate the Word of God, century after center, and state:

"During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people."

"Everything she could???" Taking some local problems with heresy or altered Bibles that popped up (as I previously explained seemed a proper and justifiable action by the Church when necessary) and pretending that the Church that did all of that work, century after century, to bring the Word of God to the people "did everything she could" to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people is an outrageous misrepresentation by the author. I don't care how many citations there are from people who are willing to make such a false charge. As I've previously posted, the Catholic Church did take action when individuals added their own individual ideas to or altered the Bible. In Toulouse, an example cited in your post, it was a local council and local authorities who handled the problem over 800 years ago! Only extreme anti-Catholic bias would lend one to ignore all of that Catholic effort promoting God's Word and conclude there was some grand conspiracy within the Church to keep the Word of God from the people based on that and other such examples.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Fervent
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So I suppose you're cool with the NWT and other purposefully deceptive translations? No need for quality control to ensure that copyists and translators are doing so with integrity and preserving what is in the original texts without deception?
No, I am not cool with that. Nevertheless, neither I or any other has the write to forbid such by civil penalties up to the death sentence, in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Our Lord left no example or teaching to such effect. To the contrary, He said that His followers would be persecuted by the world as He was, not that they would persecute non beliers or those who disagreed among believers themselves. Such is the spirit of antichrist, not Christ. Let the truth be properly defended, not tyrannically mandated.

Isa 1:16 Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;
17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. 18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,906
3,136
45
San jacinto
✟215,735.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, I am not cool with that. Nevertheless, neither I or any other has the write to forbid such by civil penalties up to the death sentence, in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Our Lord left no example or teaching to such effect. To the contrary, He said that His followers would be persecuted by the world as He was, not that they would persecute non beliers or those who disagreed among believers themselves. Such is the spirit of antichrist, not Christ. Let the truth be properly defended, not tyrannically mandated.

Isa 1:16 Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;
17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. 18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
There are, admittedly, missteps in church history. But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater by painting things with such broad and inflexible brush. Especially not by mischaracterizing and misrepresenting what took place to fit a narrative.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
470
97
64
Campobello
✟29,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I named a number of translations into the common language of the people, I even provided a link to one. It's a horrific misrepresentation by the author to take scattered examples that popped up over the centuries where the Church was concerned about heresy and alterations of the Word of God (as I have previously explained) while suppressing information about all of the Catholic efforts to preach and preserve and translate the Word of God, century after center, and state:

"During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people."

"Everything she could???" Taking some local problems with heresy or altered Bibles that popped up (as I previously explained seemed a proper and justifiable action by the Church when necessary) and pretending that the Church that did all of that work, century after century, to bring the Word of God to the people "did everything she could" to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people is an outrageous misrepresentation by the author. I don't care how many citations there are from people who are willing to make such a false charge. As I've previously posted, the Catholic Church did take action when individuals added their own individual ideas to or altered the Bible. In Toulouse, an example cited in your post, it was a local council and local authorities who handled the problem over 800 years ago! Only extreme anti-Catholic bias would lend one to ignore all of that Catholic effort promoting God's Word and conclude there was some grand conspiracy within the Church to keep the Word of God from the people based on that and other such examples.
To the contrary and again, there are many examples to choose from which I have already provided on another thread which is now locked down. They were not just one time incidences but rather laws applied to entire nations, to be established and enforced by all good Catholics, many of which were maintained or continued though the papacies forbidden books list up until the 1960's. Many Catholics actually believed God gave the Pope and Vatican the right to control and or force so very many people who disagreed with them, into temporally mandated compliance with severe penalties for disobeying. Yet many others, mostly Catholics themsleves as well, disagreed with such puffed up exaltation of their leaders and wished for all to be able to read the scriptures for themselves. Being excommunicated, banished, imprisoned, tortured, or burned at the stake for daring to do so, against the wishes of established religious and political tyrrany.

These were religious and political leaders joining hands and assuming prerogatives God never gave them or anyone else. Apart from this, is my own experience with Catholic members of my family, who were told by their priests not to read the bible because it was to difficult for them to understand. Telling them to come to them with any questions they might have, rather than read the bible for themselves. This was in the 1980's, so from personal experience, it does you no good to try to convince me that this attitude did not exist within the Catholic denomination but on rare occasions throughout history.

Perhaps in the next few posts we will examine actual Papal Encyclicals exposing the intentions of Popes and the Vatican well into the 1800's, not to mention their continued support of forms of censorship to this very day as well. This tendency of the papacy is certainly not just a historic event, the attitude and support of censoring and authoritative forms of government and unelected officials, continues to this very day.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,831
6,183
Minnesota
✟343,727.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
To the contrary and again, there are many examples to choose from which I have already provided on another thread which is now locked down. They were not just one time incidences but rather laws applied to entire nations, to be established and enforced by all good Catholics, many of which were maintained or continued though the papacies forbidden books list up until the 1960's. Many Catholics actually believed God gave the Pope and Vatican the right to control and or force so very many people who disagreed with them, into temporally mandated compliance with severe penalties for disobeying. Yet many others, mostly Catholics themsleves as well, disagreed with such puffed up exaltation of their leaders and wished for all to be able to read the scriptures for themselves. Being excommunicated, banished, imprisoned, tortured, or burned at the stake for daring to do so, against the wishes of established religious and political tyrrany.

These were religious and political leaders joining hands and assuming prerogatives God never gave them or anyone else. Apart from this, is my own experience with Catholic members of my family, who were told by their priests not to read the bible because it was to difficult for them to understand. Telling them to come to them with any questions they might have, rather than read the bible for themselves. This was in the 1980's, so from personal experience, it does you no good to try to convince me that this attitude did not exist within the Catholic denomination but on rare occasions throughout history.

Perhaps in the next few posts we will examine actual Papal Encyclicals exposing the intentions of Popes and the Vatican well into the 1800's, not to mention their continued support of forms of censorship to this very day as well. This tendency of the papacy is certainly not just a historic event, the attitude and support of censoring and authoritative forms of government and unelected officials, continues to this very day.
Why included a mere local example in the small number you have posted if you have all of these better and great examples? Please provide your one best example, detailing how sweeping it was (the number of countries) and how long it was.

As to your last comments about the 1980s, that's absolutely true. There were a number of priests who said reading the Bible might be difficult or one could come away with misunderstandings. There were times when individual Bible study was indeed not encouraged, and most of the understanding of the Bible came from homilies at mass. In fact for the majority of the history of the Catholic Church the people were illiterate. That's a different subject than your claim of banning the Bible from the people and trying to hide the Word of God from the people. Attitudes about individual Bible study have changed and we can have a later discussion about that if you wish. I will say that prayer and a deep personal relationship with Jesus have been a priority over Bible study for many Catholics. But Bible-study can bring us closer to Jesus. Realize too that Catholics are NOT Bible-only, that one can be a saint without picking up a Bible, as were the Fatima children. As I have explained the Bible is a series of liturgical books that were used at readings at mass during the early centuries of the Catholic Church. Readings varied from area to area and the decision as to what books made the final 73 canon spanned centuries and did not come until the late 300s.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0