Council of Toulouse

[Dan-Man916]

Someone asked me about the council of Toulouse which addressed the Albigensian heresy and made the charge that the Church banned people from reading the bible.

I know that they wanted to stamp out heretical bibles, but i’m trying to form a cohesive answer to him.

Can someone give me some insight about this.

 

[Catholic_Tom]

Dan-Man916:

Someone asked me about the council of Toulouse which addressed the Albigensian heresy and made the charge that the Church banned people from reading the bible.

I know that they wanted to stamp out heretical bibles, but i’m trying to form a cohesive answer to him.

Can someone give me some insight about this.

I’d be interested in this too

 

[Marie]

Dan-Man916:

Someone asked me about the council of Toulouse which addressed the Albigensian heresy and made the charge that the Church banned people from reading the bible.

I know that they wanted to stamp out heretical bibles, but i’m trying to form a cohesive answer to him.

Can someone give me some insight about this.

The Council of Toulouse did ban the possession of vernacular Bibles for the laity without a license; not because the Church wished to discourage the authentic study of Scripture, but because the Bible was used as a tool for the promotion of the Albigensian heresy. In the Middle Ages, Bibles contained glosses, either in between verses or in the margins. These glosses served to guide the reader’s interpretation of the text. A decently translated Bible could contain glosses which might lead the reader to reject the Church. Or the translation of the Bible could be perverted to support a heretical doctrine. For these reasons, some very poor and incorrectly translated bibles were burned.

The uncritical anti-Catholic also assumes that because there were relatively few bibles, knowledge of Scripture was limited. That was hardly the case. Catholics transmitted biblical knowledge in other forms. There were books which paraphrased stories in the Bible as is done today in children’s books. The visual arts abounded in Scriptural themes. Stained-glass windows were the poor man’s Bible. There were Miracle plays, which were the forerunners of modern Western theatre, as well as poems recounting Bible stories. Even the illiterate had access to the Bible through their families. Only a minority of people were literate during the Middle Ages, but sometimes one person in the family could read (often a woman) and the Bible, being the most widely-owned book in the Middle Ages, was read aloud.

The assumption driving this myth of bible-banning is that the Church, during the Middle Ages, was a big bad oppressor who wanted her flock to be ignorant so that it wouldn’t challenge her power and her doctrines.

So the charge that the Church was against knowledge of Scripture is entirely unfounded. It’s true that in some periods and some places vernacular versions of the Bible were rare or non-existent, but that’s not the same thing as saying that the Church did not want the laity to read the Bible.

 

[Catholic_Tom]

Marie:

The Council of Toulouse did ban the possession of vernacular Bibles for the laity without a license; not because the Church wished to discourage the authentic study of Scripture, but because the Bible was used as a tool for the promotion of the Albigensian heresy. In the Middle Ages, Bibles contained glosses, either in between verses or in the margins. These glosses served to guide the reader’s interpretation of the text. A decently translated Bible could contain glosses which might lead the reader to reject the Church. Or the translation of the Bible could be perverted to support a heretical doctrine. For these reasons, some very poor and incorrectly translated bibles were burned.

The uncritical anti-Catholic also assumes that because there were relatively few bibles, knowledge of Scripture was limited. That was hardly the case. Catholics transmitted biblical knowledge in other forms. There were books which paraphrased stories in the Bible as is done today in children’s books. The visual arts abounded in Scriptural themes. Stained-glass windows were the poor man’s Bible. There were Miracle plays, which were the forerunners of modern Western theatre, as well as poems recounting Bible stories. Even the illiterate had access to the Bible through their families. Only a minority of people were literate during the Middle Ages, but sometimes one person in the family could read (often a woman) and the Bible, being the most widely-owned book in the Middle Ages, was read aloud.

The assumption driving this myth of bible-banning is that the Church, during the Middle Ages, was a big bad oppressor who wanted her flock to be ignorant so that it wouldn’t challenge her power and her doctrines.

So the charge that the Church was against knowledge of Scripture is entirely unfounded. It’s true that in some periods and some places vernacular versions of the Bible were rare or non-existent, but that’s not the same thing as saying that the Church did not want the laity to read the Bible.

Hi Marie…what is your source?

 

[Dan-Man916]

interesting marie.

thanks

 

[Sarah_Jane]

But there is another possibility, and that is Toulouse, France, where a council was held in 1229. And, yes, that council dealt with the Bible. It was organized in reaction to the Albigensian or Catharist heresy, which held that there are two gods and that marriage is evil because all matter (and thus physical flesh) is evil. From this the heretics concluded that fornication could be no sin, and they even encouraged suicide among their members. In order to promulgate their sect, the Albigensians published an inaccurate translation of the Bible in the vernacular language (rather like the Jehovah’s Witnesses of today publishing their severely flawed New World Translation of the Bible, which has been deliberately mistranslated to support the sect’s claims). Had it been an accurate translation, the Church would not have been concerned. Vernacular versions had been appearing for centuries. But what came from the hands of the Albigensians was an adulterated Bible. The bishops at Toulouse forbade the reading of it because it was inaccurate. In this they were caring for their flocks, just as a Protestant minister of today might tell his flock not to read the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation.

Source : catholic.com/library/catholic_inventions.asp

 

[Marie]

Lots of sources.

Where We Got the Bible… Our Debt to the Catholic Church by Henry G. Graham

*Catholicism and Fundamentalism *
by Karl Keating

1. Bible forbidden to laymen, placed on the Index of Forbidden Books by the Council of Toulouse in A.D. 1229 a) [The] Index was established in 1543, so a council held in 1229 hardly could have listed a book on it…The council held in Toulouse dealt with the Albigensian heresy, a variety of Manichaeanism, which maintained that marriage is evil because the flesh is evil…In order to promulgate their views, the Albigensians used vernacular versions of the Bible to “substantiate” their theories…[and they] were twisting the Bible to support an immoral moral system. So the bishops at Toulouse restricted the use of the Bible until the heresy was ended. (C&F p.45)

The Bible was one of the very first books to be translated into English. Books that were translated later than the Bible include works such as Homer’s Iliad, Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the Odes of Horace, the Koran, and the Tragedies of Euripedes (see Paul Stenhouse, Catholic Answers to “Bible” Christians, pp. 40-41).

• The Catholic Church and the Bible* by Fr. Peter M.J. Stravinskas

Albigenses - Catholic Encyclopedia

newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm

The Glory of Christendom by Warren Carroll

Protestant writers:

Roman Catholicism has a high regard for Scripture as a source of knowledge . . . Indeed, official Roman Catholic statements concerning the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture would satisfy the most rigorous Protestant fundamentalist.

{Robert McAfee Brown, The Spirit of Protestantism, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1961, pp. 172-173}

There was never a time in the history of the western Church during the ‘Dark’ or ‘Middle’ Ages when the Scriptures were officially demoted. On the contrary, they were considered infallible and inerrant, and were held in the highest honour.

{Peter Toon, Protestants and Catholics, Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Books, 1983, p. 39}

After quoting 19 eminent Church Fathers to the effect that Scripture is infallible and held in the highest regard (bolstering his own thesis in this book), Harold Lindsell, former editor of Christianity Today and well-known evangelical scholar, has this to say about the Catholic reverence for Scripture:

The view expressed by Augustine was the view the Roman Catholic Church believed, taught, and propagated through the centuries . . . It can be said that the Roman church for more than a thousand years accepted the doctrine of infallibility of all Scripture . . . The church has always (via Fathers, theologians, and popes) taught biblical inerrancy . . . The Roman church held to a view of Scripture that was no different from that held by the Reformers.

{The Battle For the Bible, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976, pp. 54-56}

 

[BayCityRickL]

thank God for the preceding posts.

I ran into the half truth so often, particularly in Illinois, about Catholics supposedly being told to not read the Bible. I always remarked that I had never heard that in my lifetime and since I was in elementary school in the 1950’s, the Bible has been in my hands.

On the other side of the matter, there wasn’t strictly a Bible study in Catholic school. We had “religion” classes.

 

[Dan-Man916]

wow, thanks!!!

that’s good info.

 

[Catholic_Tom]

great info

 

[AnnieOakley2]

Someone asked me about the council of Toulouse which addressed the Albigensian heresy and made the charge that the Church banned people from reading the bible.

I know that they wanted to stamp out heretical bibles, but i’m trying to form a cohesive answer to him.

Can someone give me some insight about this.

Evidence:

The Bible was placed on Rome’s Index of Forbidden Books list by the Council of Toulouse/Toledo in the year 1229. It remained there until the index was discontinued at Vatican Council II. Anyone reading or owning a ‘forbidden’ book was anathematized, or cursed and remanded to hell for doing so.

Cannon 14 from the Council of Toulouse says that the Roman Catholic Church:

“Forbids the laity to have in their possession any copy of the books of the Old and New Testament… and most strictly forbids these works in the vulgar tongue.”

Roman Catholic apologist Karl Keating confirms this fact when he writes that, “the bishops at Toulouse restricted the use of the Bible until the [Albigensian] heresy was ended.” (Page 45, Catholicism and Fundamentalism, by Karl Keating). The peculiar thing is that the Bible remained on the Index of Forbidden Books for another 730 years.

Still More Evidence. This teaching was confirmed at the Council of Trent (Session IV, April 8, 1546 Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures). The Council of Trent went further, stating that anyone who dared study Scriptures on their own must “be punished with the penalties by law established.” With incredible audacity, the Council of Trent went so far as to forbid even the printing of and sale of the Bible! Anyone daring to violate this decree was anathematized, or cursed and damned to Hell for it. (Dogmatic Cannons and Decrees of the Council of Trent…, pages 11-13; Copyright 1977, 1912, with Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat. Tan Books and Publishers, P.O. Box 424, Rockford, IL 61105)

Still More Evidence Liguori, the most respected of Cannon Lawyers in the Roman Catholic Church, wrote that, “The Scriptures and books of Controversy may not be permitted in the vulgar tongue, as also they cannot be read without permission.”

And Yet Even More Evidence Pope Clement XI (1713), in his bull Unigenitus, wrote that “We strictly forbid them [the laity] to have the books of the Old and New Testament in the vulgar tongue.”

* FACT 2: Since Vatican Council II (1965) The Roman Catholic Church now permits her people to read the Bible, and even offers an 'indulgence' of three hundred days off of Purgatory time for doing, if they read in for at least fifteen minutes at one sitting. (The Holy Bible, Douay-Confraternity version Title Page overleaf.)
* FACT 3: Vatican Council II confirmed all pronouncements of the Council of Trent, which, as we see above, forbade the Bible to the people.

If you would like the source for the above; then send a PM…only because I do not want to post a non-Catholic site and risk violating the forum rules. Thanks for you understanding.

---

Forbidding the Bible to the people

“In early times the Bible was read freely by the lay people…New dangers came in during the Middle Ages…To meet those evils, the Council of Toulouse (1229) and Tarragona (1234) forbade the laity to read the vernacular translations of the Bible. Pius IV required bishops to refuse lay persons leave to read even Catholic versions of Scripture unless their confessors or parish priests judged that such reading was likely to prove beneficial.” (Addis and Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, The Catholic Publications Society Co., N.Y., 1887, p. 82).

“In early times, the Bible was read freely by the lay people, and the Fathers constantly encourage them to do so, although they also insist on the obscurity of the sacred text. No prohibitions were issued against the popular reading of the Bible. New dangers came during the middle ages. When the heresy of the Albigenses arose there was a danger from corrupt translations, and also from the fact that the heretics tried to make the faithful judge the Church by their own interpretation of the Bible. To meet these evils, the Council of Toulouse (1229) and Tarragona (1234) forbade the laity to read the vernacular translations of the Bible. Pius IV required the bishops to refuse lay persons leave to read even Catholic versions of the Scripture, unless their confessors or parish priests judged that such readings was likely to prove beneficial.” (Shea John Gilmary Ed, The Catholic Educator: A Library of Catholic Devotion and Instruction, New York, Peter J. Ryan, p 61).

Council of Toulouse, 1229, Canon 14: “We prohibit the permission of the books of the Old and New Testament to laymen, except perhaps they might desire to have the Psalter, or some Breviary for the divine service, or the Hours of the blessed Virgin Mary, for devotion; expressly forbidding their having the other parts of the Bible translated into the vulgar tongue” (Pierre Allix, Ecclesiastical History of Ancient Churches of the Albigenses, published in Oxford at the Clarendon Press in 1821, reprinted in USA in 1989 by Church History Research & Archives, P.O. Box 38, Dayton Ohio, 45449, p. 213).

Council of Trent: Rules on Prohibited Books, approved by Pope Pius IV, 1564: “Since it is clear from experience that if the Sacred Books are permitted everywhere and without discrimination in the vernacular, there will by reason of the boldness of men arise therefrom more harm than good, the matter is in this respect left to the judgment of the bishop or inquisitor, who may with the advice of the pastor or confessor permit the reading of the Sacred Books translated into the vernacular by Catholic authors to those who they know will derive from such reading no harm but rather an increase of faith and piety, which permission they must have in writing. Those, however, who presume to read or possess them without such permission may not receive absolution from their sins till they have handed them over to the ordinary. Bookdealers who sell or in any other way supply Bibles written in the vernacular to anyone who has not this permission, shall lose the price of the books, which is to be applied by the bishop to pious purposes, and in keeping with the nature of the crime they shall be subject to other penalties which are left to the judgment of the same bishop. Regulars who have not the permission of their superiors may not read or purchase them.” [back]

Copyright Dr Joe Mizzi. Permission to copy and distribute this article without textual changes.

 

[NHInsider]

Evidence:

Copyright Dr Joe Mizzi. Permission to copy and distribute this article without textual changes.

“Dr.” Mizzi runs an anti-catholic website. Having read a lot of old Catholic pedagogical material, I was very suspicious about the citations and went looking. Now some of the books are rare enough to be essentially unverifiable, but I was able to find a copy of the 1887 Catholic Dictionary, locate the quote, and discover that it was, in fact, cut short in such a way as to suggest that Catholics are and have been forbidden to read the Scripture.

The rest of the passage on page 82 says:

During this century, Leo XII., Pius VIII., and Pius IX. have warned Catholics against the Protestant Bible Societies, which distribute versions (mostly corrupt versions) of the Bible with the avowed purpose of perverting simple Catholics. It is only surprising that any rational being could have thought it possible for the Holy See to assume any other attitude towards such proceedings. It is right, however, to observe that the Church displays the greatest anxiety that her children should read the Scriptures, if they possess the necessary dispositions.

“You judge exceedingly well,” says Pius VI., in his letter to Martini, the author of a translation of the Bible into Italian, " that the faithful should be excited to the reading of holy Scriptures : for these are the most abundant sources, which ought to be left open to everyone, to draw from them purity of morals and of doctrine. This you have seasonably effected … by publishing the sacred Scriptures in the language of your country, … especially when you show that you have added explanatory notes, which being extracted from the holy Fathers preclude every possible danger of abuse."

It’s really easy to make it look like people have said bad things if you misquote them.

Having found this bit, I don’t think it’s necessary to run down the originals of the rest of Mizzi’s “quotes.” We can probably conclude that he did a similar editing job to make sure they said what he wanted them to say.

It’s called “bearing false witness.”

“Evidence” it is not.

 

[tdgesq]

Something else for anyone who might care. The Council of Toulouse was a local council. There have only been 21 ecumenical councils that bind the consciences of all Catholics. newadvent.org/library/almanac_14388a.htm

Non-Catholics do not understand this. Neither do they understand that local councils are designed to take care of local problems like the Albigensian heresy. Their decrees are not meant to be irreformable. That is why Keating’s comments in his book make so much sense.

 

[JayQueEll]

Hi All,

My first post, other than my Greetings post, and in an older thread but concerning a topic of interest to me which is how I arrived here in the first place–following a search engine link for Council of Toulouse.

How can we know the truth of this matter? In another forum, while discussing Catholic issues, an apologist stated that Keating and other Catholic resources (with a lot of title acronyms after their names) do not speak for the church because they are not infallible, thus reducing their words to mere opinions. If this is true, then even the apologist cannot speak for the church.

 

[Catholicdeacon]

Evidence:

The Bible was placed on Rome’s Index of Forbidden Books list by the Council of Toulouse/Toledo in the year 1229. It remained there until the index was discontinued at Vatican Council II. Anyone reading or owning a ‘forbidden’ book was anathematized, or cursed and remanded to hell for doing so.

Cannon 14 from the Council of Toulouse says that the Roman Catholic Church:

“Forbids the laity to have in their possession any copy of the books of the Old and New Testament… and most strictly forbids these works in the vulgar tongue.”

Hello Annie,

It is amazing how much difference those three little periods (…) in a quote make. Here is the WHOLE canon number 14.

“14. Forbids the laity to have in their possession any copy of the books of the Old and New Testament (except the Psalter, and such portions of them as are contained in the Breviary, or the Hours of the blessed Virgin), most strictly forbids these works in the vulgar tongue.”

Landon, E. H. (1909). Vol. 2: A Manual of Councils of the Holy Catholic Church (172).
Edinburgh: John Grant.

So as you see it was not the possesion of the whole bible but of SINGLE BOOKS of the bible that was prohivited, the psalter (i.e the psalms) was allowed.
The creation of any of these books in the vulgar tonge was prohivited to prevent poor and heretical translations.

The rest of your post is just the same tyred anti-Catholic retoric, that colapses when iluminated by historical facts.

Hint #1 The index was created in the 1500, not in the 1200,
Hint #2 Anathema? condemed to hell? I do not think you know the meaning of the word.

“Viva Cristo Rey!!”

Deacon Harbey Santiago.

There is a big difference between

 

[Catholicdeacon]

Hi All,

My first post, other than my Greetings post, and in an older thread but concerning a topic of interest to me which is how I arrived here in the first place–following a search engine link for Council of Toulouse.

How can we know the truth of this matter? In another forum, while discussing Catholic issues, an apologist stated that Keating and other Catholic resources (with a lot of title acronyms after their names) do not speak for the church because they are not infallible, thus reducing their words to mere opinions. If this is true, then even the apologist cannot speak for the church.

Greetings Jay,

To find the truth of the matter is simple. History is just a matter of public record, find the right sources and you will get an impartial presentation of the truth. In this case Just a quick search on the cannons of this council will suffice. History is “infallible” because it cannot be changed. The problem arises when history is interpreted and presented in certain ways to shore up a specific agenda. It is easy to demonize the Church by looking at some of the things her children have done in the past without stopping for a second to think… why? Why would the Church leadership do this in this specific time of history? Where they evil or did they have other reasons? Deep study of the historical period is needed to really come out with the truth.
In the case of Toulouse, this was a regional council called to combat the Albingence <sic?> heresy. The canons applied to that specific place at that specific time. To use them to say “You see the Church is EVIL!!!” is not only unfair but borders in malice.

About your comment on who speaks for the church: If you want to know the official stance of the Church just read the Catechism. Forget what others have to say, do your own research and ask the Holy Spirit to guide you.

“Viva Cristo Rey!!”
Deacon Harbey Santiago