[BlueDragon]

Iscool --- Ping to #162 this thread.

You earlier post #60, from the same source (those meddlesome Jesuits, hehheh...) listed part III.

In post # 157 I brought the next, part IV where the quote can honestly be found, if not exactly word-for-word sourced.

As to the slight differences in wording, I can only guess it may be due to differing translations from what I assume was originally written up in Italian, and possibly French, at the same time.

Now our lovable little buddy vladi, posted in response to your #60 which contained part III;

That’s not the quote Iscool, but I give you credit for trying to save your buddy from the embarrassment of being caught out. The quote in question is apparently a bogus one. It is not in the text. None of the keywords appera in the text in that combination. Only anti-Catholic books and websites cite the quote. Anti-Catholics are known liars so this should not be a surprise.

Looking at part IV, what do we see, but the 'quote' apparently in question is not 'bogus' in the least?

from part IV;

Those, however, who presume to read or possess them without such permission may not receive absolution from their sins till they have handed them over to the ordinary.

Iscool, was there any other quote you were trying to assist someone here on this thread with, other than what Persevero brought, and is above?

[vladimir998]

By the way...

1) Did you notice “that book” in the original false quote?
2) Did you notice all the context - which says “the matter is in this respect left to the judgment of the bishop or inquisitor, who may with the advice of the pastor or confessor permit the reading of the Sacred Books translated into the vernacular by Catholic authors to those who they know will derive from such reading no harm but rather an increase of faith and piety, which permission they must have in writing”? Thus, scriptures were never banned by Trent. Thus, “that book” was never banned.