Replies

“During the late middle ages, the Roman Catholic Church had imprisoned God’s Word in the Latin language, a language the common people of Europe did not speak. The Reformers unlocked the Scriptures by translating them. And once the people had the Word of God, the Reformation became inevitable.”

Here’s another whopper. Who writes this stuff anyway? So, every Catholic walked around preaching in Latin? No catholic saint, and there were many, preached to the people in their native language?

“Imprisoned God’s Word in the Latin language.” I suppose dishonesty doesn’t really matter when your attacking Rome.

“Imprisoned God’s Word in the Latin language.” I suppose dishonesty doesn’t really matter when your attacking Rome.”

Now that’s rich since very few common folks of the time read Latin. Oh yeah Latin was mostly for the rich folks such as rich money donors. Then you have the loss of translation accuracy when you go from Greek to Latin to Native language. It’s bad enough going from Greek to Native language, but add a third language for no reason and it gets all jacked up. Oh I love how you put catholic saint preaching in their native language, but how dare they be able to read the Scripture for themselves. Your denomination doesn’t teach IAW Scripture anyways, so what does it matter. It’s all about the catechism and tradition right? Funny how the COT made some salvation changing tradition changes, but you still claim that it came from the Apostles. Read your own history and you will realize that you have been boondoggled.

“Imprisoned God’s Word in the Latin language.” I suppose dishonesty doesn’t really matter when your attacking Rome.

Proof they did not ??

“Imprisoned God’s Word in the Latin language.” I suppose dishonesty doesn’t really matter when your attacking Rome.

Well, those of the Church of Rome, just prior to the Protestant Reformation, did very much oppose having Scriptures translated directly into common languages (most particularly if not done only by their own prior approval) although for a time there was exception made for Breviaries and Psalters in common language, and near to the onset of the Reformation --- one could possibly possess translation of Scripture (once those came to be more widely available, chiefly due to pressure from outside the RCC itself) provided one had yet again another layer of prior written approval to do so, though that too over the years began to be relaxed.

From there instead, it was fairly commonly stressed that direct reading of the Scripture, if not under the care and guidance of an RCC priest, either as a student hoping to enter the priesthood, or a private individual with the desire, and time enough on their hands to read Scripture for themselves, would do more harm than good, in effect keeping the prisoner (the Scripture) close to the prison walls, even if not entirely caged within them.

That "prisoner" received relatively few Roman Catholic 'lay' visitors, as it were (in comparison to so-called Protestants) for quite some time, unless it was just a quick visit to take a peek at such a dangerous thing as the Word of God.

That has now changed, (most markedly in the last hundred years or so) and private possession of Scripture (in their own language) is more or less encouraged, and "bible societies" are not criticized and even vehemently opposed from within the higher echelons of the RCC, as those had generally been for a few hundred years... from the dawn of the Reformation.

A bit of history as for Rome's opposition towards having Scripture translated into common languages, and also having spoken portions of liturgy presented in anything other than Latin;

Wycliffe's body was dug up and burnt, his ashes being cast into the river Swift. One of Wycliffe's articles of faith was to have the Scriptures translated into common vernacular, and the Liturgy conducted in the same language also, even though he was also opposed by those of the RCC for his stance against the existence of the office of "papacy" itself.

Jan Hus, followed a month or so after by Jerome of Prague, were burnt at the stake...while still alive when the fires were lit. Hus had been influenced by Wycliffe (that was the major charge against Hus). A central feature of Hus's own stance was that liturgy be conducted in native language, as a matter of principle.

When we go back even more hundreds of years previous, back as far as Peter Waldo (12th century) it appears as if at first, there was no big fuss made of Waldo and 'the Poor Men of Lyons' having Scripture in common language. After having wiped out (literally murdered) most of the Albigensian, and Cathars (those two to not be confused or mistaken for one another as for doctrine), followed later by the Lollards --- the reaction from within RCC ranks was to more strenously oppose common persons having access to the Scriptures in their own common vernacular.

No catholic saint, and there were many, preached to the people in their native language?

That is not what anyone said. Notice the difference between "being preached to" and being able to read directly from Scripture, in one's own native language.

Did you not just conflate the two?

That sort of loose-as-a-goose logic is so often the recourse of Rome's defenders, it would fully convert many acres of duck ponds into swampy marsh.

In the fictional Lord of the Rings, within the ring of mountains surrounding the land of the Mordor, were large areas of dead marsh, you know?

Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them

In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.