“The Church, with its teaching authority mandate, had a duty to ensure that all vernacular translations were accurate and were published without the heretical margin notes that were supporting many heretical movements of the day.”
Sorry, but this simply is not true. The first translation of the NT made by Tyndale was very accurate, and had no notes. The picture I posted was a photocopy of an original.
The prohibitions were against commoners reading vernacular translations. A wealthy person could get Wycliffe’s translation approved, but the same pages in the hand of a commoner was unacceptable.
The argument the Catholic Church made was that commoners couldn’t understand the subtlety of scripture, and thus needed the priest to tell them what it meant. It was a matter of policy.
“Compounding this was the very real situation where there were no written languages for the many, many languages and dialects spoken across Europe and no one literate in them to benefit from a vernacular language had there been a suitable vernacular Bible available.”
Odd. That didn’t stop Luther or Tyndale. They made it happen because they WANTED to, and they had a HUGE market.
To find the truth we must examine positive and negative information. The purpose of Tyndale's work was not to bring the Bible to the commoners, it was to bring his doctrines to the people. There were already numerous English translations available and the number of persons able to read an English dialect was incredibly small. Those who were able to read English and not Latin were nonexistent.
When Tyndale produced his first translation in 1525 there were five major dialect divisions within England - Northern, West Midlands, East Midlands (a region which extended down to include London), Southern and Kentish - and even within these demarcations, there was a huge variety of different spellings. For example, the word church could be spelled in 30 different ways, people in 22, receive in 45, she in 60 and though in over 500 variations. The “-ing” participle (e.g. running) was said as “-and” in the north, “-end” in the East Midlands, and “-ind” in the West Midlands (e.g. runnand, runnend, runnind). The "-eth" and "-th" verb endings used in the south of the country (e.g. goeth) appear as "-es" and "-s" in the Northern and most of the north Midland area (e.g. goes), a version which was ultimately to become the standard. (above based upon information from wikipedia)
I don't expect you to always reach the right conclusions, but you have absolutely no chance of doing it when you ignore over half of the available information.
Peace be with you.