Actually, it comes from two books - Wide as the Waters and another I don’t have in hand right now to give the title.
Sorry, but Tyndale was NOT tried for opposing King Henry’s marriage. Nor was he taken to England for trial.
You are not entitled to your own facts. Tyndale was not tried in a civil court in England. And at one point during his imprisonment and trial, while Anne Boleyn was still alive and influential, England sent a messenger to support Tyndale. If you would like, I can try to dig out the messenger’s name.
Why are you apologizing? I never claimed that.
Nor was he taken to England for trial.
Never said that either.
You are not entitled to your own facts.
Why would I need my own facts, since you seem bent on providing my facts for me?
From Catholic Answers:
“..And we must remember that this was not merely a translation of Scripture. His text included a prologue and notes that were so full of contempt for the Catholic Church and the clergy that no one could mistake his obvious agenda and prejudice. Did the Catholic Church condemn this version of the Bible? Of course it did.
The secular authorities condemned it as well. Anglicans are among the many today who laud Tyndale as the “father of the English Bible.” But it was their own founder, King Henry VIII, who in 1531 declared that “the translation of the Scripture corrupted by William Tyndale should be utterly expelled, rejected, and put away out of the hands of the people.”
So troublesome did Tyndale’s Bible prove to be that in 1543—after his break with Rome—Henry again decreed that “all manner of books of the Old and New Testament in English, being of the crafty, false, and untrue translation of Tyndale . . . shall be clearly and utterly abolished, extinguished, and forbidden to be kept or used in this realm.”
Ultimately, it was the secular authorities that proved to be the end for Tyndale. He was arrested and tried (and sentenced to die) in the court of the Holy Roman Emperor in 1536. His translation of the Bible was heretical because it contained heretical ideas—not because the act of translation was heretical in and of itself. In fact, the Catholic Church would produce a translation of the Bible into English a few years later (The Douay-Reims version, whose New Testament was released in 1582 and whose Old Testament was released in 1609).
When discussing the history of Biblical translations, it is very common for people to toss around names like Tyndale and Wycliff. But the full story is seldom given. This present case of a gender-inclusive edition of the Bible is a wonderful opportunity for Fundamentalists to reflect and realize that the reason they don’t approve of this new translation is the same reason that the Catholic Church did not approve of Tyndale’s or Wycliff’s. These are corrupt translations, made with an agenda, and not accurate renderings of sacred Scripture.
And here at least Fundamentalists and Catholics are in ready agreement: Don’t mess with the Word of God.”
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0212fea3.asp