Carl keating explains this: in Karl Keating’s Catholicism And Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians” (Ignatius Press, 1988), p. 45-46, it says:
In order to promulgate their views, the Albigensians used vernacular versions of the Bible to “substantiate” their theories. The Church had no complaint about mere translations of the Bible; vernacular versions had been appearing for centuries. But the Albigensians were twisting the Bible to support an immoral moral system [which promoted fornication and suicide]. So the bishops at Toulouse restricted the use of the Bible until the heresy was ended. They were trying to stop the heresy’s spread because it was the cause of civil unrest and considerable suffering. Their action was a local one, and when the Albigensian problem disappeared, so did the force of their order, which never affected more than southern France. This is hardly the across-the-board prohibition of the Bible
Only the Protestant version’s were forbiden
Exactly.
Unfortunately, as Daddy’s Girl’s post proved, even an intelligent and reasonable person might, in a ‘search’ on the topic, come up with truncated ‘info-bytes’ which appear to support an incorrect position. What was ‘said’ (which she quoted) was true so far as it went. . .but it only WENT a very short distance, and did not CONTINUE with the REMAINDER of what was actually said and done.
It would be like somebody reading that Henry VIII was married to Anne Boleyn. That is of course absolutely true in that Henry did undergo a ceremony of marriage with Anne.
BUT if that sentence alone is represented as being the sum total, it would be totally INCORRECT. For Henry was married before (to Catherine of Aragon), was in fact legally married to her still when he ‘married’ Anne, and he went on to send Anne to the block and to have four more wives.
So the people who parrot the “Council of such and such” and the “Bible was placed on the forbidden index” are presenting incomplete and often distorted ‘facts’ as being ‘all that was said/done’ when in fact, that was NOT so. If the people are aware of the true facts, it’s then outright lying to present the other things as ‘true’. If they aren’t aware, then at the least when made aware they should ‘check it out’.
We all have our pet beliefs, things which are a beloved and cherished item for us, which we often later find aren’t exactly as they were presented to us. . .but if we insist on keeping our “Parson Weems versions” because they appeal to us, or we learned them as youngsters, etc., then we aren’t really interested in truth, we’re more interested in FICTION.
