Why did the Catholic Church ban laity from reading Biblical Text?

[jschutzm]

This question was thought over.

**But why did they? Was their something in the Bible the Church feared might make people leave the Church? What was that? **

If the Bible came from the Church, if the Bible was compiled by the Church, then why would the Church not want laity to read it?

The Title is past tense, but it can easily be seen as present tense. It is past tense. I read my Bible everyday, along as my other Catholic friends.

Catholic Answers LIVE always laughs at this type of leading question. Kinda like asking someone…

“So when did you stop beating your wife?”

It assumes something that is not true.

However, some of the things that the church DID do, does make it look bad by today’s standards.

And recall what today’s standards are: Western world has VERY high literacy rates. I think the U.S. has something like 99% literacy. Books are extremely cheap, some are even FREE (free e-books and PDFs) Books can a fraction of a person’s yearly salary.
Information is all over the place, Freedom of speech is protected, etc. etc.

But we must realize that this has only recently been the case.

So we must look at the role the Church played through the lense of how things were back THEN, not now. And to some degree, see things as they saw them, not how we see them.

Secondly, the spread of Protestantism has actually given us a very good look into what happens WHEN everyone freely re-interprets scripture in their own way, without any consistency, formal training, knowledge of the original language or in some cases, even history. (I’m not saying that all Protestants are ignorant, but the idea of Protestantism leads to a lot of confusion)

So YES, the church did not promote individuals re-interpreting the bible on their own And this came out in the form of NOT promoting that people read the bible. Some Priests or Bishops may have expressed it in such absolute terms that it may appear as if the Church condemned the reading of the bible.

And again YES, the Church burned books… I wouldn’t call them ‘bibles’ because the books it burned were bad copies, corrupt translations. Back then, books were so valuable that to not burn them… would have almost definitely meant that they would be picked up ad used again, leading people astray.

And again YES, the Church chained bibles to Churches, but not so that people could not read them…but so that people would not steal them, because the cost of a hand written bible exceeded the average person’s entire yearly salary. And they couldn’t afford them to wander off.

And again YES, the Church stuck to the Latin for perhaps too long. But NOT because it didn’t want people to be able to read it, but out of fear that meaning would be lost in translation. And the more I study the bible… the more I agree with the Church. There are a lot of bibles which take liberties when they translate the bible into the local language. Meaning and Nuisance are often lost. Modern meanings of words change. I can see why the Church was concerned with translating the bible into the local dialect. But, in the end the church realized it had to be done so people could grow closer to Christ.

So, when we look back at the events with a modern understanding - I can see why some might come to this interpretation.
But the more I read history and the bible - the more I see what the Church teaches as fully supported by the bible.

 

[neophyte]

Why did the Catholic Church ban laity from reading Biblical Text?..

Never happened.

 

[neophyte]

…There was one place, I believe it was somewhere in France (working from memory here), where heretics were teaching that physical creation was evil and the spirit was good. These heretics were using the Bible to teach this heresy and were using Sacred Scripture to encourage people to commit suicide. The church rightly clamped down and the ban was lifted when the controversy subsided…

If you’re referring to Toulouse during the Albigensian heresy, you need to refresh your memory. Have you ever read the actual texts? All that happened was an order that one must ask the Bishop for permission to have private bible study, and use texts in Latin. By no rational stretch of the imagination could that be called a ban.

It’s strange that you say here that the Bishop was right in doing what he did, and yet you ask why he did it.

 

[TimothyH]

I’m sorry, I have to question the authenticity of some of your claims regarding banning of reading the bible by the church. Do you have an ACTUAL source for these claims other than “working from memory”?

And preemptively, one must understand that even if such were true, it would only affect the infinitisemally small portion of Catholics who were able to read and wealthy enough to afford the MASSIVE cost of a Bible (approximately $120,000 or more in today’s money)… Not to mention the fact that the mass itself contains LARGE amounts of scripture, so even if reading scripture were banned locally for a time, people (literate or not) would still get large amounts of exposure to scripture.

Most of the bans were of Bibles produced after the invention of the printing press when Bibles were less expensive and more freely available.

There are sources for this informatin all over the internet.

You can look up Librorum Prohibitorum. It was the index of forbidden books which existed from 1621 to 1835. Certiain translations of the Bible and specific publications of the Bible have been on it from time to time.

Pope Paul IV also had an index and on it were placed all translations of the New Testament in the vernacular. The printers were named, and all works by those print shops were forbidden.

King Henry VIII banned the Tyndale Bible in England. Yes, Anglican. I know.

To this day, the local bishop is supposed to vet books for his diocese.

**Can. 823 Responsibility. **
§1 Pastors have the duty and the right to ensure no ill effect; and to demand that writings on faith and morals be submitted for censorship; and to reprove writings which harm. §2 Pastors mean diocesan bishops, conferences and holy see.

I have heard personal accounts of people who were discouraged from reading scripture by their priests in the 1940’s and 50’s on the belief that they would not understand it. How many people read Romans and get all freaked out about all the statements about “Faith will save you” or read “Call no man father” in the Gospels and come running to CAF to ask advice about it.

-Tim-

 

[promethius]

Most of the bans were of Bibles produced after the invention of the printing press when Bibles were less expensive and more freely available.

There are sources for this informatin all over the internet.

You can look up Librorum Prohibitorum. It was the index of forbidden books which existed from 1621 to 1835. Certiain translations of the Bible and specific publications of the Bible have been on it from time to time.

Pope Paul IV also had an index and on it were placed all translations of the New Testament in the vernacular. The printers were named, and all works by those print shops were forbidden.

King Henry VIII banned the Tyndale Bible in England. Yes, Anglican. I know.

To this day, the local bishop is supposed to vet books for his diocese.
***Can. 823 Responsibility. ***
§1 Pastors have the duty and the right to ensure no ill effect; and to demand that writings on faith and morals be submitted for censorship; and to reprove writings which harm. §2 Pastors mean diocesan bishops, conferences and holy see.
I have heard personal accounts of people who were discouraged from reading scripture by their priests in the 1940’s and 50’s on the belief that they would not understand it. How many people read Romans and get all freaked out about all the statements about “Faith will save you” or read “Call no man father” in the Gospels and come running to CAF to ask advice about it.

-Tim-

You do know that the inquisitions (one of the times you say the “bans” occured) started hundreds of years before the invention of the printing press, right?

Furthermore, it is correct to say that certain VERSIONS of the bible were banned. In fact, the heretically flawed “bishops bible” translation was a “burn on sight” book because of the blasphemy it contained. Tyndale’s bible was the same, as was Wyclef’s. However, to ban reading THESE translations (terribly faulty!) is not the same as banning ALL reading of the bible under any circumstances.