Penalty for reading non-latin translation of scripture?

[AlNg]

“[This council] forbids the reading, teaching, expounding and citing of the said books or of any one of them in particular, unless it is for the purpose of refuting them. It forbids each and every Catholic henceforth, under pain of anathema…to teach, approve or hold the said books, or to refer to them in any way, unless this is done, as has been said, for the purpose of refuting them.

Is a Catholic anathematised if he holds a book written by Wycliffe?

 

[midori]

I don’t think it means it in the sense of “picking up”— but more in the sense of “having in your possession.”

If you remember, a Wycliffe Bible in the 14th/early 15th c sold for four marks and forty pence, which equals two pounds, sixteen shillings and eightpence. (There are 20 shillings per pound.)

A pound sterling, in that time period, would purchase:
One carthorse
Two cows
Rent a craftsman’s townhouse for one year
Hire a servant for six months
Support a peasant’s lifestyle for six months

So, for something with that cost, you could almost:
Buy three carthorses
Buy six cows
Three years’ rent
Pay a servant’s wages for one-and-a-half years.

So, it’s not something that most people would just happen to pick up— you’d have to really want to invest in it.

You can buy a Jersey cow for about $2500. A bred red angus cow retails for about $3000. So buying six cows is about $15,000-$18,000. That number range also coordinates with a minimum wage job and rental rates in rural towns.

 

[dmar198]

Is a Catholic anathematised if he holds a book written by Wycliffe?

No, because that law is no longer in force. The 1983 Code of Canon Law abolished all previous disciplinary laws, including disciplinary laws set by the Council of Constance, if any were still in force (which I doubt, as the Code of Canon Law was completely overhauled at least once before 1983).

If you had asked me this question back then, I would have said, “Yes, unless it is for the purpose of refuting it.” And I second what midori says about the definition of “hold.” I do not know how you mean it, but I think the Council meant that term in a sense similar to “own.”

 

[CelticWarlord]

One incident they may have been referencing was the burning of William Tyndale in 1536 who was executed for translating the bible into the English of his day. But it was not the church that ordered and carried out the deed, it was a collusion of secular governments throughout Europe who hounded and chased him down, finally putting him to death in Belgium.

Tyndale’s contributions to language are almost unparalleled, though the man was largely forgotten until the 20th century. A more complete story of him can be found here; Melvyn Bragg on William Tyndale: his genius matched that of Shakespeare

 

[ProVobis]

The Italians have a phrase for this: Translator, traitor.

(Which I just did.)