[RegulatorCountry]

So why then did the Catholic Church reject and forbid the use of protestant “bibles” such as the one published by John Wycliff?  It was not because they were in English or another vernacular. It was not because they were being made available to the laity. It was because they were corrupt versions of the Bible. They were bad translations. And were often being used to spread false doctrine. It’s that simple.

This is a very disturbing paragraph. I know the history and am aware of what happened to the Oxford educated John Wycliffe, a Doctor of Divinity at Oxford in fact, at the hands of Catholic authorities, and why.

It's a particularly ugly episode that kicked off an ugly era, that cannot be so easily breezed past, no matter how disconcerting it may be for those inclined to rationalize. Exhuming his remains, burning them and dumping them in the Thames? Why didn't they go all out and put his corpse on trial, as was done with Pope Formosus? The mind boggles, it's all just too bizarre.

Another point that goes begging with this, is just how Wycliffe's Bible was:

- Corrupt
- A bad translation
- False doctrine.

Would anyone care to elaborate? My apologies for being so blunt, but this author is quite the bomb thrower, with little to back up his inflammatory claims.

[Mr Rogers]

Tyndale’s translation was excellent. He worked the New Testament himself, and roughly 90% of the KJV NT is found in Tyndale’s.

The Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible was revised in 1750, and the text used by Catholics now - the Challoner revision - was largely taken from the KJV, with Catholic doctrine inserted.