I am sure it banned certain heretical translations or translations not approved by the Church. Heretical groups often mistranslate Scripture in such a way to support their heresies. A perfect example of this would be the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation. Far from keepong the word of God from the people, the Catholic Church made sure everyone received it pure and unadulterated.I read a claim today that the Catholic Church banned all translations of the Bible except for the Vulgate in 500 AD. Like many things I there maybe a grain of truth in it, but a grain of sand does not make a sand castle. I am wondering where this claim comes from and what is true and untrue or misleading about it?
Thanks for the link. I’ve read through Rev. Graham’s book before and it has been an excellent source. I’ll go back through it and see if I can find anything dealing with this particular claim.
This claim comes from much earlier then the Albigensian. However I will look into them also.For those of us who don’t have the time to follow a long link:
There was once a group in France, the Albigensians who created a translation that twisted the words of God to fit their own warped religion. Until this heresy could be stamped out, the local Church in France banned all translations, but it was quickly lifted after the Albigensians were put down. This might be an example of what the OP was faced with. The Church has always provided translations (Luther’s wasn’t the first German translation, and Tynsdale’s wasn’t the first English translation), but wishes the translations to follow the original intent of the author. Things like adding “Alone” to “By Faith are you saved” tends to distort the original intent of St. Paul.
If you do a Church on Catholic Answers web-site for “albigensian”, you’ll probably find more info on this subject.
These people rarely provide solid sources - since much of their information comes from badly written anti-catholic tracts and ill-researched diatribes.
The claim that this happened in 500 A.D. is nonsense. In fact, there was never a point when the Catholic Church banned all translations of the Bible. During the later Middle Ages and after the Reformation (until the 20th century) the Catholic Church did attempt to prevent the publication of heretical translations (i.e., translations reflecting a point of view at odds with Catholic teaching. And at certain particularly volatile times and places during the late Middle Ages, and more generally after the Reformation (until the late 19th century, as far as I can tell), the Catholic Church restricted the production of (and accessibility to) vernacular translations in general (i.e., translations into the language of the people even if done from a Catholic perspective). Such translations were banned at least twice in the Middle Ages (in the 13th century in southern France and in the early 15th century in England) as a move against particular heresies (the translations in view were heretical, but the ban did not allow for the production of an orthodox alternative as far as I know). After the Reformation, vernacular translations were strictly controlled and generally lay people needed permission from their bishop or at least from their priest to own a copy of the Bible. The idea was never that reading the Bible was bad, but that it could be dangerous for people who were not intellectually and spiritually qualified. I think this was one of the most disastrous and evil policies in the history of the Catholic Church, but the fact is that Protestants have grossly exaggerated the practice and have in some cases made the ludicrous allegation that it represents some kind of Catholic hostility to the Bible.I read a claim today that the Catholic Church banned all translations of the Bible except for the Vulgate in 500 AD. Like many things I there maybe a grain of truth in it, but a grain of sand does not make a sand castle. I am wondering where this claim comes from and what is true and untrue or misleading about it?
PICKY PICKY~!
