Replies

Mr Rogers, you've been cornered quite handily by Vladimir, and you should at least have the good sense to admit it and stop trying to fight a losing battle on this. Vladimir mentioned that he is a trained historian (an expert on the very era you are making pronouncements about, no less) and, as you yourself admit, you have no expertise in this area. If Vladimir were to attempt to lecture you on the technicalities of electronic warfare (something he has no training in), you would be quiet within your rights to shut him down as a mere poseur if he attempted to bamboozle people with a mish-mash of technical-sounding quotes and jargon. Since you have the necessary training in electronics warfare, you would quickly be able to spot his imposture. This is precisely what he did to you. That much is clear. And that's why your coming back at Vladimir with another blast of pseudo-historical argumentation accomplishes nothing of value to your cause. You said, "I don't have days to read all source material. If Wiki is in error, correct it [and] me." As I see it, he already did.

Sir, I’ve been neither cornered nor beaten. The problem with Vladimir is he cares more for his church than his history.

The Catholic Church fought to keep scripture out of the hands of the laity. That isn’t something an honest person can debate. From the 1300s with Wycliffe until the late 1500s, the Catholic Church had 200 years in which to produce an English translation and put it in the hands of the people.

It did not. It called those who tried heretics, and whined that their translations were not good enough. Tyndale’s translation was attacked by More as being filled with errors - yet roughly 90% of the KJV New Testament comes from Tyndale, and More emphatically did NOT produce a competing New Testament - or even try. And the DRV, IF one believes Wikipedia, relied on the Tyndale-influenced (90+ %) KJV when rewritten to be more readable.

The Catholic Church COULD HAVE translated the scriptures into German, and distributed them, rather than let Luther’s translation corner the market - yet it did not. How long did it take Luther, by himself, to produce a New Testament? Roughly a year.

It is hair-splitting to say that Tyndale and others were not risking their lives in translating and publishing the Bible because the Catholic Church opposed their efforts.

If the problem had been errors in translation, then the Catholic Church certainly had the resources to correct the problems. If it was the cost of distribution prior to a printing press, then A) the Catholic Church had the resources, and B) the Catholic Church still failed to act AFTER the printing presses were churning out books by the hundred thousand. If it was literacy, then the Catholic Church not only failed to address that issue, but neglected another solution - distribute copies of the Bible to each church congregation, and teach at least one person to read it.

The widespread distribution of scripture is what gave the Reformation its strength. Wycliffe couldn’t do it, for there were not enough copies - nor could there be, while the Lollards were hunted down and given a choice of repent or die.

If Vladimir wants to discuss which books an ecclesiastical writer wrote or didn’t write (as per the link I provided), he can debate himself. The fact remains - the Catholic Church opposed distributing scripture, it refused to make and publish a translation, and it tried to kill those who did.

And when scripture was received by the masses, it proved dangerous to both Catholic Popes and Kings. It was with good cause that King James sided with the High Church Anglicans, saying, “No Bishop, No King!”

My point to you was that we should celebrate the Reformation - remember the start of this thread you posted - because until the Reformation, the laity couldn’t access scripture. After it, as Tyndale boasted, there were plowboys who knew more about what the scriptures said than did any of the Medieval Popes!