vladimir988, this is all very impressive. And you are quite right that I haven’t read any of the four books you cite. On the other hand, I haven’t made any of the arguments to which you have taken such great offense so as to make great show of your erudition.
A few questions for you with your great learning:
1) What percentage of the population could actually read or hear Latin (and here I mean more than just the words comprising the historic liturgy in the Latin mass) with any degree of comprehension?
2) How many of the pre-Luther Bibles were in some form of German - and there were many dialects of German before the time of Luther, some almost unintelligible to speakers of different dialects?
3) Regarding those Bibles available in some form of German, how many were actually widely available to those people who, by virtue of the dialect of the translation, could read them with any facility? Here percentages and numbers would be quite helpful, would they not?
4) How many of these pre-Luther Bibles, either whole, NT only, Gospels only, or just lectionaries, whether “handschriftliche” or “gedruckte”, were translated from something other than the Vulgate, i.e. directly from the OT Hebrew/Aramaic and the NT Greek? In other words, how many were something more than just translations of a translation?
Finally, I recognize that the relative scarcity of comprehensible Bibles in the era before Luther is a complex question, one not rightly or properly answered by jingoistic nostrums from any interest group. However, you must admit that the need for, and desirability of, a Bible comprehensible to the ordinary person and translated directly from the original languages was very great. Luther responded to that very real need. And the effect of his efforts (together with his co-workers) hugely altered the German language and the ability of Germans to communicate with each other, and these things are just secondary benefits to the chief benefit: access to the Word of God afforded to ordinary people.
Answers to such questions as these would enable us to actually evaluate the meaning and effect of those decrees of Trent already posted by Alamo-Girl. Do you want to help such an effort or just trot out book titles?
You wrote:
“A few questions for you with your great learning:
1) What percentage of the population could actually read or hear Latin (and here I mean more than just the words comprising the historic liturgy in the Latin mass) with any degree of comprehension?”
Unknown.
“2) How many of the pre-Luther Bibles were in some form of German - and there were many dialects of German before the time of Luther, some almost unintelligible to speakers of different dialects?”
First, even today German dialects are unintelligible to speakers of different dialects. Upper Bavarians cannot understand the dialects of Cologne or Vienna for instance. I have seen this first hand. Second, there were numerous translations of the Bible in German before Luther. There were at least 14 editions which were printed BEFORE LUTHER. That in no way included the hundreds of translations (i.e. different editions) made by hand.
“3) Regarding those Bibles available in some form of German, how many were actually widely available to those people who, by virtue of the dialect of the translation, could read them with any facility?”
Many. More are discovered or detected in other writings all the time.
“Here percentages and numbers would be quite helpful, would they not?”
Such a thing is impossible because there is no baseline for percentages.
“4) How many of these pre-Luther Bibles, either whole, NT only, Gospels only, or just lectionaries, whether “handschriftliche” or “gedruckte”, were translated from something other than the Vulgate, i.e. directly from the OT Hebrew/Aramaic and the NT Greek?”
None. No one wanted a translation other than that of Vulgate. Since the Vulgate was THE Bible of the Western world that is the Bible people wanted to know at the time.
“In other words, how many were something more than just translations of a translation?”
Technically all modern Bibles are probably translations of translations or translations of multi-generational copies. There is evidence for instance that Matthew was written in Hebrew or Aramaic. We have no autographs, however. If true, this would mean we only have Greek translations of Matthew.
“Finally, I recognize that the relative scarcity of comprehensible Bibles in the era before Luther is a complex question, one not rightly or properly answered by jingoistic nostrums from any interest group. However, you must admit that the need for, and desirability of, a Bible comprehensible to the ordinary person and translated directly from the original languages was very great.”
Yes and no. First, all the translations were comprehensible to ordinary people or else they would not have been made, copied, printed and sold. Second, I do not believe it is necessary for a Bible to be based on the original languages in itself since there is reason to believe that has not been the case for 1500 or more years. Again, if Matthew was written in Hebrew or Aramaic, where does that leave us in terms of translations based on the original languages? Plenty of people went to heaven without being able to read let alone ever reading any Bible let alone one in the original languages or translated from the original languages. The Bible is a great gift. It is not what saves us, however.
“Luther responded to that very real need. And the effect of his efforts (together with his co-workers) hugely altered the German language and the ability of Germans to communicate with each other, and these things are just secondary benefits to the chief benefit: access to the Word of God afforded to ordinary people.”
Actually Luther did not respond to a need. Luther deliberately distorted scripture to agree with his theology. His Bible was propaganda. He dropped books from the canon (in both Old and New Testaments), altered verses to agree with his ideology. There is no doubt that his Bible - which became a maninstay of the German state churches - helped shaped the dialect which was forced on German education and government by decree in the 19th century. That movement is now causing dialects to be pushed to extinction.
“Answers to such questions as these would enable us to actually evaluate the meaning and effect of those decrees of Trent already posted by Alamo-Girl.”
No. There is no relationship there.
“Do you want to help such an effort or just trot out book titles?”
I have posted more effective information than probably anyone in this thread. I already exposed the fact that one Protestant poster was posting a bogus, made up, anti-Catholic quote, for instance. Your questions are effectively a waste or time in this thread for they have nothing to do with Trent.