Reformation and the printing press

[Ani_Ibi]

and I was not arguing that making bibles available to the masses was the turning point of the reformation. I was simply stating that the ability to disseminate information, whether in words or pictures, is generally harmful to dictorial or central authorities.

Are you suggesting that the Catholic Church was dictatorial? Surely not in view of the actions of the Reformers themselves who forced widespread conversion to their new religion at gunpoint.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Did the invention of the printing press help Jewish people disseminate Scripture, or were the Jewish people unable to access printers due to prejudice?

Prejudice? Tell us about prejudice, lak.

 

[Valke2]

Did the invention of the printing press help Jewish people disseminate Scripture, or were the Jewish people unable to access printers due to prejudice?

Good question. I believe that, in general, Jews were able to take advantage of the printing press for our scriptures. I did a little research and found out that the first printing press run in a muslim country was owned by jews, in the 1480s. So I have to assume that Jews were able to print their own texts as well.

You might find this link interesting. It gives a brief description as to how the printing press effected European Jews and Judaism.

 

[lak611]

You might find this link interesting. It gives a brief description as to how the printing press effected European Jews and Judaism.

Where’s the link?

 

[lak611]

Prejudice? Tell us about prejudice, lak.

I’m not denying that there was a lot of prejudice against Catholics; however, Jewish people did experience it too from both Protestants and Catholics. By the time of the Reformation, Jews were no longer persecuting Christians, but Christians still discriminated against Jews. There were many occupations that Jews were not even allowed to do, so that was why I asked. I see from Valke2’s post that printer was not an occupation that Jewish people were unable to do, even if they had to do this in a Muslim country.

 

[Valke2]

Are you suggesting that the Catholic Church was dictatorial? Surely not in view of the actions of the Reformers themselves who forced widespread conversion to their new religion at gunpoint.

I’m saying it is a relgion that has a central authority that makes final rulings/decisions. Who would suggest otherwise? You think the Pope was the president of a democracy??

 

[Valke2]

Where’s the link?

ooops. associatedcontent.com/article/120761/influence_of_printing_press_on_ashkenazic.html

 

[Ani_Ibi]

I’m saying it is a relgion that has a central authority that makes final rulings/decisions. Who would suggest otherwise? You think the Pope was the president of a democracy??

You are evading my question. What is the relevance of the Pope’s authority to the topic of this thread? No point in alluding to the Pope’s authority unless you are willing to state that there was or was not a problem with how the Pope used that authority. So what is your point?

 

[lak611]

ooops. associatedcontent.com/article/120761/influence_of_printing_press_on_ashkenazic.html

Thanks for the link. That was an interesting article.

 

[runandsew]

To point to one thing that led to the Protestant reformation is too simplistic.
There were many things that led up to the reformation, the reformation was not just one heresy that the church could have dealt with the way that it had with all the other heresies through out the ages. It was more a change of the world view, a change in the moral atmosphere, rather than just one error of teaching; also it did not set up a separate religion like Islam did.

Of the many forces that led up to the reformation, Ken Hensley in his audio CD “John Calvin: Inside The Protestant Mind” mentions 6 of these:

1. Growth in literacy

• Explosion in the ability to read, many books available.

1. Multiplication of theological ideas in that world at that time

• the universities had many schools of thought, and Martin Luther might have misunderstood one of these errors to be what the Catholic Church taught.

1. The rise of Renascence Italian humanism

• wanting to get back to the classics, and back to the bible and church fathers, away from the scholastic theology taught in that day, it was confusing and irrelevant to many. (Who cares how many angles can dance on the head of a needle)

1. Rise in personal religion (individual religion)

• making the faith personal, the church needed reforming, and it should begin with you.

1. The rise anti-clericalism

• The church had grown very corrupt, and was in dire need of reforming.

1. The rise of nationalism

• Nations did not want to be ruled from Italy.

 

[valient_Lucy]

As a protestant, I can say that I’m happy God sent us the printing press. On the other hand, I also lament that fact that people see the Word differently because of it. Well meaning Evangelicals see the bible the same way the see a self help book in the religion section of Barnes & Noble. It is a simple fact the form something takes effects the way it’s understood. The bible is no different.

I totally agree with your concern about the Bible being viewed as a self help book. I cringe whenever I see books describing the Bible’s guide to dieting or losing weight.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

looking at history often leads ppl into the catholic church

…and grace often leads them from it. Grace may lead a man either way; in more than one direction & more than once in a lifetime, indeed.

History is something the Jews had in spades - I don’t recall Jesus being impressed by that.

To blame all evils on the Reformation is very silly. As for the printing press, it’s ambiguous, because it could be used to print Catholic material as readily as Protestant; the technology had no religious bias. What was printed where & in whose interest is a matter of geography, not religion: a Catholic state which has many presses busy is going to produce more than a Protestant state with only one or two - & contrariwise. A Catholic state which has presses with lower print runs than it Protestant equivalent, will produce less. The whole question is far too complicated for a productive discussion, IMHO - unless there are OPs with a very detailed knowledge of printing during the Reformation

 

[Valke2]

You are evading my question. What is the relevance of the Pope’s authority to the topic of this thread? No point in alluding to the Pope’s authority unless you are willing to state that there was or was not a problem with how the Pope used that authority. So what is your point?

my point is obvious from my post. I’ll repeat. Whenever you have better communication and dissemination of information, any central authority or power is going to lose some or all of its power.

Whatever one may think of any pope or the Church, the fact is the Church is authoritarian. And therefore an increase in the ability to communicate through mass media is going to erode at the Church’s power.

The relevance to the Pope’s authority to this thread is obvious if you agree that the Reformation resulted in, among other things, a lessening of the Church’s power and authority in Europe.

 

[Mary3]

And therefore an increase in the ability to communicate through mass media is going to erode at the Church’s power.

I’m confused about your use of the term ‘power’, and if you’re really implying ‘influence’? If mass media communications erode the Church’s power / influence, something has gone wrong. In today’s era of mass electronic communication, where the Church’s teachings are more available than ever before, the Catholic Church now has over 1 billion members. I recently heard that 150,000 new Catholics just joined the Church in the US this past Easter.

The printing press worked both for and against the Church during the Reformation. It worked against the Church wherever anti-Catholic polemics were distributed, and where truncated versions of the Scriptures were promulgated for each individual’s private interpretation according to principles invented by the reformers (faith without works, etc.).

The printing press was an instrument in helping the Church when employed by people like St. Frances de Sales. St. Francis had tracts printed explaining the Catholic faith, and he distributed them in areas where anti-Catholic teachings had flourished and drawn many out of the Church. With his tracts, he brought back many back to the faith.

 

[kell0618]

This is a current topic of discussion on an anti-Catholic forum as we speak. Check this information out about the development of printing devices:

 The Story:
In the mid-15th century Johannes Gutenberg invented a mechanical way of      making books. This was the first example of mass book production. Before the      invention of printing, multiple copies of a manuscript had to be made by      hand, a laborious task that could take many years. Later books were produced      by and for the Church using the process of wood engraving. This required the      craftsman to cut away the background, leaving the area to be printed raised.      This process applied to both text and illustrations and was extremely      time-consuming. When a page was complete, often comprising a number of      blocks joined together, it would be inked and a sheet of paper was then      pressed over it for an imprint. The susceptibility of wood to the elements      gave such blocks a limited lifespan .

    In the Far East, movable type and printing presses were known but did      not replace printing from individually carved wooden blocks, from movable      clay type, processes much more efficient than hand copying. The use of      movable type in printing was invented in 1041 AD by Bi Sheng in China. Since      there are thousands of Chinese characters, the benefit of the technique is      not as obvious as in European languages.

    In China, there were no texts similar to the Bible which could guarantee      a printer return on the high capital investment of a printing press, and so      the primary form of printing was wood block printing which was more suited      for short runs of texts for which the return was uncertain

    It is not clear whether Gutenberg knew of these existing techniques or      invented them independently, though the former is considered unlikely      because of the substantial differences in technique.Europeans use      xylography (art of engraving on wood, block printing) to produce books and      used by European textile makers to print patterns on fabric.

and further down:

His initial efforts enabled him in 1440 to mass-produce indulgences – printed slips of paper sold by the Catholic Church to remit temporal punishments in purgatory for sins committed in this life, for those wealthy enough to afford indulgences. Although Laurence Koster (Coster) of Haarlem, Netherlands also laid claim to the invention, scholars have generally accepted Gutenberg as the father of modern printing.Gutenberg left Strasburg, presumably about 1444. He seems to have perfected at enormous expense his invention shortly afterwards, as is shown by the oldest specimens of printing that have come down to us, the “Poem of the Last Judgment”, and the “Calendar for 1448”). …Legal documents indicate that Gutenberg probably began printing the Bible around 1450.…The earliest dated specimens of printing by Gutenberg are papal indulgences (notes given to Christians by the Pope, pardoning their sins) issued in Mainz in 1454. In 1455, Gutenberg demonstrated the power of the printing press by selling copies of a two-volume Bible for a price that was the equivalent of approximately three years’ wages for an average clerk, but it was significantly cheaper than a handwritten Bible that could take a single monk 20 years to transcribe.

More

The part I found most interesting that the beloved printing press that the anti-Catholics cleave strongly to with great reformative pride was first used to print indulgences for the Pope!

Peace be with you,

Kelly

 

[lak611]

I’m confused about your use of the term ‘power’, and if you’re really implying ‘influence’? If mass media communications erode the Church’s power / influence, something has gone wrong. In today’s era of mass electronic communication, where the Church’s teachings are more available than ever before, the Catholic Church now has over 1 billion members. I recently heard that 150,000 new Catholics just joined the Church in the US this past Easter.

In all honesty, I do not think we can use numbers to justify influence. In the USA, only about 30% of all Catholics go to Mass every Sunday, and in some nations, the numbers are lower. Mass attendance has dropped off dramatically in the past 50 years. Many of the people amongst the 1 billion are Catholic in name only.

The printing press worked both for and against the Church during the Reformation. It worked against the Church wherever anti-Catholic polemics were distributed, and where truncated versions of the Scriptures were promulgated for each individual’s private interpretation according to principles invented by the reformers (faith without works, etc.).

The printing press was an instrument in helping the Church when employed by people like St. Frances de Sales. St. Francis had tracts printed explaining the Catholic faith, and he distributed them in areas where anti-Catholic teachings had flourished and drawn many out of the Church. With his tracts, he brought back many back to the faith.

This part is true. Any form of media can serve to hinder or aid any cause, including religion.

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

I’m confused about your use of the term ‘power’, and if you’re really implying ‘influence’? If mass media communications erode the Church’s power / influence, something has gone wrong.
The printing press worked both for and against the Church during the Reformation.

The Church is an organisation made up with humans and so subject to normal laws of economics and politics.

Technology changes power relations in strange ways. For instance the 18th century landowners who introduced water and steam machinery thought they were merely increasing productivity. In fact industrial workers can strike whilst agricultural workers, unless they want to starve, cannot. That had massive effects on the political structure of industiralised economies.

It was the same story with printing, and and same thing will happen again with the Internet. Computers will usher in a wholly new society and a wholly new Church, but it is too early to be certain about how and why. The fact that I am writing this in my bedroom is telling.

 

[chosen_people]

Concerning Jews, Jewish universal male literacy began in the Ist Century and is unconnected with the printing press:

“…in 64 C.E., when the Palestinian sage Joshua ben Gamla issued an ordinance mandating universal schooling for all males starting at about age six. The ordinance was not only issued; it was implemented. Within about a century, the Jews, uniquely among the peoples of the world, had effectively established universal male literacy and numeracy.”

"From its very outset, apparently going back to the time of Moses, Judaism was intertwined with intellectual complexity. Jews were commanded by God to heed the law, which meant they had to learn the law. The law was so extensive and complicated that this process of learning and reviewing was never complete. Moreover, Jewish males were not free to pretend that they had learned the law, for fathers were commanded to teach the law to their children. It became obvious to all when fathers failed in their duty. No other religion made so many intellectual demands upon the whole body of its believers. Long before Joshua ben Gamla and the destruction of the Second Temple, the requirements for being a good Jew had provided incentives for the less intelligent to fall away.

Assessing the events of the 1st century C.E. thus poses a chicken-and-egg problem. By way of an analogy, consider written Chinese with its thousands of unique characters. On cognitive tests, today’s Chinese do especially well on visuo-spatial skills. It is possible, I suppose, that their high visuo-spatial skills have been fostered by having to learn written Chinese; but I find it much more plausible that only people who already possessed high visuo-spatial skills would ever devise such a ferociously difficult written language. Similarly, I suppose it is possible that the Jews’ high verbal skills were fostered, through secondary and tertiary effects, by the requirement that they be able to read and understand complicated texts after the 1st century C.E.; but I find it much more plausible that only people who already possessed high verbal skills would dream of installing such a demanding requirement".

source: commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.html?id=10855&page=all

 

[Vigis]

I love how Protestants think that they were the first ones to print the Bible massively on the printing press. This is not true though. The Catholic Church had many Bibles printed on the printing press. Besides that their was a Bible in each church (chained of course because they were worth more than a million pounds of gold back then) for anyone who could read to read them. So the idea that the Protestants brought the Word of God to the people bears no weight, and is like throwing a paper ball at us Catholics.

God speed.

Vigis

 

[Randy_Carson]

I was talking with a protestant and she brought this to my attention. How would you address it?

“Isn’t it interesting that the Protestant reformation followed very closely after the invention of the printing press- when scripture was in the hands of the “people” and they could compare church doctrine with scripture?”

To the contrary, once people began to attempt to interpret scripture for themselves, then the divisions began in earnest.

Why, even Martin Luther acknowledged:

“This one will not hear of Baptism, and that one denies the sacrament [Real Presence], another puts a world between this and the last day: some teach that Christ is not God, some say this, some say that: there are as many sects and creeds as there are heads. No yokel is so rude but when he has dreams and fancies, he thinks himself inspired by the Holy Ghost and must be a prophet.” (De Wette III, 61. quoted in O’Hare, THE FACTS ABOUT LUTHER, 208.)

“Noblemen, townsmen, peasants, all classes understand the Evangelium better than I or St. Paul; they are now wise and think themselves more learned than all the ministers.” (Walch XIV, 1360. quoted in O’Hare, Ibid, 209.)

There is certainly nothing wrong with people reading the Bible; however, they must be willing to submit their interpretation of the scriptures to the Church which teaches the doctrines of the faith infallibly.

Hope this helps. :tiphat: