Did the Church kill people with non-Latin Bibles?

[thetazlord]

Of course Protestant governments aren’t going to execute people for opposing the Church which the Protestants had rejected. And the Protestant governments executed people in horrific ways too–at the instigation of Protestant clergy. I’m afraid you are so concentrated on what the Church supposedly did–that she should get ALL the blame—that you really can’t see the forest for the trees.

Governments, then as now, will act if they feel threatened no matter who they feel is threatening their way of life. Churchmen don’t always act as they should, either–no matter whose church they represent. To focus on the Catholic Church alone and keep insisting Catholics that must bear the brunt of all the wrongdoing is one-sided and simply not the case. Pope John Paul II apologized for such wrongdoing, but that’s not good enough for some people. Why keep on dredging up old hurts? History is what it is. Let’s admit that mistakes, grave mistakes, were made on all sides and move on.

No offense, but you are the one not seeing the forest for the trees. No one is saying that governments solely representing the Catholic religion are the ONLY ones that are corrupt, & not obeying Christ. If fact, in another post & admitted that Protestant ones have also been just as guilty. The point is, that unlike today, Catholic governments executed people like William Tyndale & John Hus…because they spoke out against the authority of the pope & translated Bibles in the “vulgar” language, such as English, which is the topic of this post! If you don’t like the comments made that are related to OP, which are backed up by history, I suggest you don’t comment on them or read them if it bothers you. God bless.

 

[thetazlord]

As you say, honest Protestants will not deny that Protestants were doing the same thing. Honest Catholics will do likewise.

The most important thing for those on both sides is to try to educate those who are still spreading the more inaccurate and accusatory versions of history. The ones that really serve no useful purpose.

Peace
James

Agreed! And you are an honest Catholic, as I am an honest Protestant/ex-catholic. Sadly, many on this forum aren’t - on both sides. They don’t want to admit what actually happened in history the events related to the OP.

Grace to you,
thetazlord

 

[thetazlord]

Oh yeah…the Protestants are just all kind of lily white when it comes to violence against us Catholics.

And we all know that there as never a reason that my Irish ancestors might have to design and use the Paidrin Beag in order to practice our faith nor does Protestant persecution of us Catholics continue to this day Orange Order playing the Famine Song at St Patrick’s .

And then again we all know that here in the states there has never been prejudice and mistreatment of us or else there was no reason that many of us Irish/American Catholics joined the Saint Patrick’s Battalion and we Catholics have never suffered violence at the hands of the Know Nothings.

And of course St. Thomas More and St. John Fisher might well rise up to speak to the issue.

The point is that this is just a few examples of the kindness of Protestants towards us Catholics even to this day… And we never did kill anyone for a non-Latin Bible…IOW a vernacular translation, because the church already had a lot of good vernacular translations long before Luther and others came along…the issue wasn’t the language but the heretical and anti-Catholic notes they contained. You’d know all this if you had really done your homework…like reading Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church.

Finally, I have to wonder why it is that some of you n-Cs come here to CAF, which is the internet home for so many of us Catholics and want to preach against what we believe…so many of you seem to have no other mission which is odd since this is not about spreading the Gospel, which should be a Christian’s first priority after personal holiness.

No one is denying that Protestants, as well as Protestant governments such as Ireland, have seen Protestant-on-Catholic violence & murder. That too was wrong, evil, & un-christlike. But that’s not the concern being made. The concern is the denial of “some” Catholics on this forum who deny the Catholic church’s responsibility of stepping in & admonishing & even ex-communicating government officials, who were Catholic, who BURNED ALIVE people like William Tyndale & John Hus for speaking out against the authority of the pope and/or translating the Bible into the “vulgar” language, like English (or in Luther’s case, German). The argument being made was that the Catholic church didn’t actually “rule” over these Catholic governments, but by saying that, they are not seeing the forest for the trees. Could the Catholic church have stepped in & did something about it? And since they didn’t, are the as responsible as the Catholic-led governments that murdered people that did the above. That is the issue that is related to the OP.

 

[thetazlord]

Okay, hold up.

You think the Holy Roman Empire and the Pope were at one?

Hahahahaha!

Seriously, folks, there is a HUUUUUGE chunk of European history that is all about “The Holy Roman Emperor tries to beat up on the Pope. The Holy Roman Emperor tries to get control of who is Pope. The Holy Roman Empire and France fight each other, and they both try to use the Pope as a chess pawn. The Holy Roman Empire tries to take over the Papal States. The Swiss Guards die defending the Pope from the Empire’s soldiers.” And so on.

Like the old saying goes, “Not holy, not Roman, not an empire.” You’d be better off thinking of it as “large chunks of Europe country.” Basically bits of today’s Germany, Austria, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, etc., but different bits at different times.

The whole point of most of European medieval history, in pretty much every country, is that the Church and the State were not at all one. The only way that happened was if the king got total control of everybody who was appointed bishop and abbot and abbess, and none of the bishops and abbots and abbesses dared give him backtalk, and then he somehow managed to engineer the papal election. But even then, the whole point of the matter was that the priorities of a churchman (even a really toadying, king-loving one) were not the priorities of the king.

In many cases, the Reformation was a really great excuse for getting rid of churchmen and church-trained bureaucrats who didn’t agree with a king or prince. If you could get rid of a lot of noblemen at the same time for not going along with the king’s new religion, the king could centralize everything and grab all the money.

Of course, the next stage was the Enlightenment, when kings decided it was even more convenient not to believe in God at all, and thus things got even more centralized.

This led to backlashes deciding that countries had no need for kings, either…

But yes, it’s a relatively modern idea that the church should abjectly serve the state, and it was invented by kings who wanted anything but the medieval system. You could argue that it somewhat derives from the ancient Roman system, where pagan priests received tax writeoffs and important ones were appointed by the Republic and Empire, because keeping the gods happy was part of public safety and defense.

This has nothing to do with the OP, nor addressing the issue that these governments were Catholic-led.

 

[thetazlord]

Um…Ireland?

My comment has nothing to do with Ireland. I was addressing when the government in England was Catholic-led. Try to stay relevant to what’s being addressed.

 

[thetazlord]

No one here has made any such claim. Iliteracy was the norm in the Middle Ages. People learned Scripture from listening to sermons/homilies or by viewing art at their churches (which was spectacular, unlike our modern, stripped down parishes, but I digress). The only claim we’ve made is that the Bible was translated into vernaculars long before Martin Luther or Tyndale did. The reason their translations were banned is because they were poor translations skewed to support Protestant theology. Whole books/parts of books were omitted and words deliberately mistranslated/left out/added. The Church quite rightly warned the faithful about this and banned those translations from being read at Mass or in the Divine Office.

Yes, and they were extremely expensive because each copy had to be hand written before the printing press became the normal means of making copies of any documents. Poor people coulldn’t afford them. Men in monasteries/abbeys dedicated their lives to making copies, which was a long, laborious endeavor.

And yet in a matter of months after Tyndale was murdered by being BURNED ALIVE at the stake, the English government allowed Bibles to be translated into English & placed in churches. Since illiteracy was the “norm” in medieval England, shouldn’t the church have taken the responsibilty to educate them, by say…taking teaching them the BIBLE in their own “vulgar” language???

 

[thetazlord]

Right! instead they executed Catholics for being Catholic and fellow Protestants for not adhering to their particular form of Protestantism.

Big improvement.

No one is saying that right. If fact, it’s not even the issue I was addressing, nor does it have anything to do with the OP. This is a totally different & unrelated subject that belongs on another thread. I agree, BTW, that action by Protestants were evil as well. But I’m not the one denying the evil of those people who call themselves “Christian,” nor denying their responsibility, like some people are doing here.

 

[1ke]

I think you misunderstood me. That was sarcasm.

I am in no way asserting that the government officials were wrong or evil. Since, in fact they were neither.

They were suppressing sedition and treason. You may disagree that fomenting religious dissent and rebellion qualify as sedition and treason, but that is not how society operated in their day. It most certainly was seditious, treasonous, and threatened the social order.

Sedition and treason are still, today, in many places punishable by death. Some countries give life in prison. Governments are within their rights to do so. Our definition of what things are treasonous and seditious has changed over time, for a variety of reason. What has not changed is that the government has a right and obligation to secure the common good, including punishing these crimes.

 

[estesbob]

Just a humorous aside–because of the dangling participle in the title of this thread, I had visions of elderly clerics whacking heretics with bibles, both on the head and on the buttocks. :knight2:

I was going to comment that generally they used swords and axes.

 

[Della]

No offense, but you are the one not seeing the forest for the trees. No one is saying that governments solely representing the Catholic religion are the ONLY ones that are corrupt, & not obeying Christ. If fact, in another post & admitted that Protestant ones have also been just as guilty. The point is, that unlike today, Catholic governments executed people like William Tyndale & John Hus…because they spoke out against the authority of the pope & translated Bibles in the “vulgar” language, such as English, which is the topic of this post! If you don’t like the comments made that are related to OP, which are backed up by history, I suggest you don’t comment on them or read them if it bothers you. God bless.

I stated that YOU are putting the brunt of the blame on the Church, which you are. Please reread my post.

And Protestants hanged, quartered, disemboweled, and BURNED “heretics” alive!!! All at the urging of Protestant ministers and under Protestant civil leaders. You need to read more than anti-Catholic history.

When so many false translations came out the Church responded by creating a reliable one for Catholics. For this you want to castigate the Church instead of praising her.

Again, you bias is clearly showing. And I’m done dealing with it.

 

[CarolNoel]

I stated that YOU are putting the brunt of the blame on the Church, which you are. Please reread my post.

And Protestants hanged, quartered, disemboweled, and BURNED “heretics” alive!!! All at the urging of Protestant ministers and under Protestant civil leaders. You need to read more than anti-Catholic history.

When so many false translations came out the Church responded by creating a reliable one for Catholics. For this you want to castigate the Church instead of praising her.

Again, you bias is clearly showing. And I’m done dealing with it.

Well said Della. I think (he or she) has a bit of an issue since (he or she) said they are ex catholic.

 

[zz912]

The concern is the denial of “some” Catholics on this forum who deny the Catholic church’s responsibility of stepping in & admonishing & even ex-communicating government officials, who were Catholic, who BURNED ALIVE people like William Tyndale & John Hus for speaking out against the authority of the pope and/or translating the Bible into the “vulgar” language, like English (or in Luther’s case, German).

1. Tyndale was killed because of King Henry VIII, you know, the one who SEPARATED from the Catholic Church and created the Anglican Church. So why are you blaming the Catholic Church for the actions of an Anglican king?
2. Tyndale wasn’t executed for speaking out agains the Pope or for translating the Bible. He was executed for speaking out against Henry VIII for wanting a divorce and marrying Anne Boleyn.
3. Hus wasn’t executed for speaking out against the Pope or translating a Bible.

With this many basic, factual errors, will you ever consider that your opinions may be faulty?

 

[thetazlord]

I think you misunderstood me. That was sarcasm.

I am in no way asserting that the government officials were wrong or evil. Since, in fact they were neither.

They were suppressing sedition and treason. You may disagree that fomenting religious dissent and rebellion qualify as sedition and treason, but that is not how society operated in their day. It most certainly was seditious, treasonous, and threatened the social order.

Sedition and treason are still, today, in many places punishable by death. Some countries give life in prison. Governments are within their rights to do so. Our definition of what things are treasonous and seditious has changed over time, for a variety of reason. What has not changed is that the government has a right and obligation to secure the common good, including punishing these crimes.

This has nothing to do with the OP. The issue is that any individual, body of people, or religious organization, who claims to be representatives of Christ on earth who burns people alive for speaking out against the authority of the pope, or their particular religious denomination are not following Christ - and I dare say - are not Christians, whether they be Catholic, Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, etc. And the power & influence that Catholic church had in the days of Tyndale & Hus who were murdered - yet did nothing - deeply troubles me as a former Catholic.

 

[thetazlord]

I stated that YOU are putting the brunt of the blame on the Church, which you are. Please reread my post.

And Protestants hanged, quartered, disemboweled, and BURNED “heretics” alive!!! All at the urging of Protestant ministers and under Protestant civil leaders. You need to read more than anti-Catholic history.

When so many false translations came out the Church responded by creating a reliable one for Catholics. For this you want to castigate the Church instead of praising her.

Again, you bias is clearly showing. And I’m done dealing with it.

And, again, I’m not denying the heinous acts of Protestants. But that’s not what the OP is about. If you want to start a post on the heinous acts of Protestants, feel free. I’m trying to stick to the topic. And, again, as a Protestant, I don’t condone their acts. My concern is the minimalist attitudes of “some” Catholics on this thread who attempt to distract from the inconvenient truth of medieval Catholic-led governments by bringing up Protestant ones who committed equally atrocious acts. Sorry, but history is not on your side.

 

[thetazlord]

1. Tyndale was killed because of King Henry VIII, you know, the one who SEPARATED from the Catholic Church and created the Anglican Church. So why are you blaming the Catholic Church for the actions of an Anglican king?
2. Tyndale wasn’t executed for speaking out agains the Pope or for translating the Bible. He was executed for speaking out against Henry VIII for wanting a divorce and marrying Anne Boleyn.

I’m afraid you don’t know your history very well. Henry the VIII was originally a Catholic, who early on awarded the him with the title of “defender of the Catholic faith.” His excommunication from the Catholic church resulted from him seeking a divorce from his first wife because she would not bear him a son, & desiring to marry his pregnant mistress, Anne Boleyn. He then embraced the new Protestantism & made himself “head” of the Church in England. But this has nothing to do with Tyndale. Tyndale had to leave England because his life was in danger for “breaking the law” for translating Bibles into English so particular common folk who “were” literate could either read it or hear it read for themslves in their OWN English language, because England - at that time - was still Catholic-led. When he was in exhile, he befriended someone who later betrayed him, turned him into the authorities, & returned him to the Catholic-led England. Tyndale stood trial, refused to recant, & was the tied to a stake, choked out, & then burned ALIVE at the stake, after - according to eyewitnesses - yelled out “Lord! open the king’s eyes!” If the King of England was Protestant at that time, he would not have allowed that, nor had Tyndale burned at the stake.

1. Hus wasn’t executed for speaking out against the Pope or translating a Bible.

With this many basic, factual errors, will you ever consider that your opinions may be faulty?

I never said that Hus was executed for translating the Bible into English. That was in reference to Tyndale, not Hus, which is why I wrote “and/or.” And Hus indeed did speak out against the pope, which - along with other things about the Catholic church he spoke out against - got him burned at the stake. The Catholic church in the Middle Ages did not deal with people who spoke out against them the same way they do now. If you want a good book the mentions Hus, I just read one called “Slave,” by John MacArthur. He provides the actual quotes related to Hus that got him executed.

 

[thetazlord]

Well said Della. I think (he or she) has a bit of an issue since (he or she) said they are ex catholic.

No, I have an issue with the minimalist attitude of “some” Catholics here who deny the atrocities of the Catholic-led executions of Protestants who translated the Bible into English, like Tyndale, as well as Protestants like Hus who were executed for speaking out the pope. It’s one thing to admit, & say it was wrong. It’s another thing to deny it ever happened. “That” is what I have an issue with, not because I am an ex-catholic.

 

[Church_Militant]

No one is denying that Protestants, as well as Protestant governments such as Ireland, have seen Protestant-on-Catholic violence & murder. That too was wrong, evil, & un-christlike. But that’s not the concern being made. The concern is the denial of “some” Catholics on this forum who deny the Catholic church’s responsibility of stepping in & admonishing & even ex-communicating government officials, who were Catholic, who burned alivepeople like William Tyndale & John Hus for speaking out against the authority of the pope and/or translating the Bible into the “vulgar” language, like English (or in Luther’s case, German). The argument being made was that the Catholic church didn’t actually “rule” over these Catholic governments, but by saying that, they are not seeing the forest for the trees. Could the Catholic church have stepped in & did something about it? And since they didn’t, are the as responsible as the Catholic-led governments that murdered people that did the above. That is the issue that is related to the OP.

Yet…since the church was not the government…and since the church does not rule over governments that was out of our control.

Besides…telling us that the church should excommunicate every sinner shows a ludicrous lack of understanding of what excommunication is. It’s also fairly hypocritical of n-cs to even suggest such since you guys don’t do anything at all even remotely similar and you have every bit as many “sinners” among you.

Why even make any such remarks.

Furthermore…the OPs question has been answered in that the church clearly did not burn anyone for having a vernacular Bible and (if you’d take the time to do the homework) you’d know full well that the church had many vernacular translations of non-Latin languages long before Luther and his buddies came along.

As I said…the issue was never about translation…just the anti-Catholic notes in the editions.

 

[Michael_Francis]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)