Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: txzman
My point should've been narrowed on the subject of the RCC not allowing English translations of the Bible in a time where most of the general populace did not understand Latin.

As Sir Thomas More notes in his Dialogue Concerning Heresies, pre-Tyndale translations of the Bible were certainly permitted. Considering literacy levels of the time, such translations were largely redundant, since the literate classes could already understand Latin. Most of the general populace couldn't understand written English.

61 posted on 03/31/2003 1:24:36 PM PST by Dumb_Ox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: Dumb_Ox
Most of the general populace couldn't understand written English.

Right, but most of them couldn't afford books, anyway. Books weren't really accessible except to the rich (or those prepared to make financial sacrifices for them) until the relatively cheap process of making paper from wood pulp was developed in, I think, the eighteenth century.

64 posted on 07/23/2003 6:44:10 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson