Oh really....these catholic sources say otherwise:
The Council of Toulouse (1229) and Tarragona (1234) forbade the laity to read the vernacular translations of the Bible.
Pius IV required the bishops to refuse lay persons leave to read .."even Catholic versions of the Scripture",... unless their confessors or parish priests judged that such readings was likely to prove beneficial.’.
(Addis and Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, The Catholic Publications Society Co., N.Y., 1887, p. 82).
The following two quotations are taken from the Council of Toulouse and the Council of Trent in the thirteenth and sixteenth century respectively:
‘We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old and the New Testament; unless anyone from the motives of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin;..... but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.’
(Edward Peters. Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Council of Toulouse, 1229, Canon 14, p 195.)
‘Since it is clear from experience that if the Sacred Books are permitted everywhere and without discrimination in the vernacular, there will by reason of the boldness of men arise therefrom more harm than good, the matter is in this respect left to the judgment of the bishop or inquisitor, who may with the advice of the pastor or confessor permit the reading of the Sacred Books translated into the vernacular by Catholic authors to those who they know will derive from such reading no harm but rather an increase of faith and piety, which permission they must have in writing.
Those, however, who presume to read or possess them without such permission may not receive absolution from their sins till they have handed them over to the ordinary. Bookdealers who sell or in any other way supply Bibles written in the vernacular to anyone who has not this permission, shall lose the price of the books, which is to be applied by the bishop to pious purposes, and in keeping with the nature of the crime they shall be subject to other penalties which are left to the judgment of the same bishop. Regulars who have not the permission of their superiors may not read or purchase them.’
(Council of Trent: Rules on Prohibited Books, approved by Pope Pius IV, 1564).
oh please...do you have any idea at all of how few affordable bibles there were in the 1200's...NONE. The opposition for the people to read scripture was based on the fact that there were false versions available and the church, the only protector of the true scriptures, had no qualms whatsoever, in forbidding the reading of any scripture not approved by the church itself. That's how you protect truth, do not allow lies to exist...Good job Catholics!!!!
PiusIV ruled that local priests should first ascertain that the scriptures were true Catholic versions. That was a wise move because there were false versions available. The Catholic church has been around for a long long time, and for the most part, was the sole defender of scripture and the bible...There wasn't anyone else around to do it. Scripture and the entire bible itself did not self preserve. Yes the scripture is God inspired, yes God could have somehow preserved it without the Catholic church....He didn't, He intentionally used the early (Catholic)church to carry His word forward and they did a great job of doing so.
the quotes from any period after the protestant revolution are meaningless. The Catholic church, for over 1,500 years had been the only defender of the word of God. Now along comes Martin and the other "reformers" and they decide to challenge the truth of the church. What would you have done???? We protect the word of God, you may not read anything that contradicts the word of God...in that day and age, that's the way things were done. Now we would experience political correctness and we would scream censorship at the Catholics for not allowing multiple versions of scripture to exist ( wait a minute, that's the protestant revolution)...sorry
‘Since it is clear from experience that if the Sacred Books are permitted everywhere and without discrimination in the vernacular, there will by reason of the boldness of men arise therefrom more harm than good, the matter is in this respect left to the judgment of the bishop or inquisitor, who may with the advice of the pastor or confessor permit the reading of the Sacred Books translated into the vernacular by Catholic authors to those who they know will derive from such reading no harm but rather an increase of faith and piety, which permission they must have in writing.
For real??? Reading the Bible will harm someone?????
All they're afraid of is that whoever reads the Bible will have their eyes opened to the truth (something hearing truth can do for someone) and LEAVE the Catholic church, which tends to happen when one learns the truth.
Truth has this annoying tendency to set people free.
You are presenting only part of the story.
Certain poor translation were prohibited. You need to do just a bit more research.