Replies

You wrote:

“Translating the Bible w/o permisssion was a crime. It was heresy.”

False. No action is heresy other than to hold to an erroneous doctrinal belief after being formally corrected by proper religious authority. That, and that alone, is heresy. No act of translation is heresy nor can it be heresy. An act of translation might be an example of someone spreading heresy if what is translated is heretical, but the act of translating itself cannot be heresy. In other words, drinking a class of water because you’re thirsting cannot be heresy. Changing a flat tire because it is flat cannot be heresy. Putting on a suit for a job interview cannot be heresy. Translating a document, even a sacred one, into the vernacular, cannot be heresy in itself. It just can’t be and it never once.

“Pope Martin V ordered his Bibles, books, writings, and bones burned for the crime of heresy.”

Yes, because he believed and spread heresies such as dominion and false theories about the Eucharist. When you read through some of the works of
J. Loserth (especially what he edited) you will have a better idea of what Wycliffe believed and taught.

Most likely, just like every other Protestant I have ever encountered who claimed he knew something about Wycliffe, you have probably never read anything Wycliffe ever wrote. Is that right? Which of the following books have you read?:

De actibus animae, De civili dominio, De ecclesia, De ente in communi and De ente primo in communi, De ente praedicamentali, De eucharistia, De materia et forma, De officio regis, De potestate papae, De scientia Dei, Purgans errores circa veritates in communi, Purgans errores circa universalia in communi, De intelleccione Dei, and De volucione Dei, Summa insolubilium, Tractatus de logica, Tractatus de universalibus, De Trinitate, Tractatus de universalibus, De veritate Sacrae Scripturae,
Trialogus.

Ever even heard of any of them? Any at all?