For this, he was excommunicated, and after death, his bones were burned by order of the pope.
Why would the pope be upset about the Bible being translated into English?
2007-01-02 15:26:36 · 13 answers · asked by tas211 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
(William Tyndale was the 2nd person to translate the Bible into English but he was burned at the stake before he could finnish it.)
2007-01-02 15:34:43 · update #1
Because it put the Truth of God ( and the reality that Jesus is the ONLY high priest you need) into the hands of regular people.
2007-01-02 15:32:28 · answer #1 · answered by watcherd 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I'm not sure whether it was John Wycliffe or William Tyndale, but what I heard on "The Forbidden Book" video (which traced the history of the Bible being translated into modern day English), is that for centuries, the Roman Catholic church banned any other language used other than Latin.
As a result, most of the common people were not allowed to recite prayers or read the Bible in their own language). During this time (the Dark Ages), the Roman Catholic church was more devoted to power rather than true Christianity. People joined out of lack of other options. So, to keep the masses under the control of the political organization, the church made it a capital offense to translate the Bible.
2007-01-02 15:32:30 · answer #2 · answered by Searcher 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Yes, he translated the Bible in 1384. The main reason the Church was upset by this, had to do with a loss of power. Until the Bible was translated into English, only priests could read and interpret it. They had all of the power. This is also one of the main reasons that mass was only performed in Latin. I had a long discussion with a Catholic priest about this. The other further loss in power was when the printing press made Bibles so readily available to all people. The church, obviously, later changed their stance. The Church does the actual interpretations of the meaning of the text.
You will hear many people say that the Church was just trying to manipulate the text of the Bible. What the fail to realize is that man has been doing that for years. For example, The King James Version Bible, was written to be anti-Catholic. The reason being is that King James, recognized the power that the Roman Catholic Church had, he became jealous and seized all of the Church's assets in Great Britain. He then made it illegal to be Catholic, and had the King James version printed with a theme against the Church.
The lesson here is that "Man corrupts all".
2007-01-02 15:34:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, your right about Wycliffe, cause Tyndale was strangled and then burned at a stake along with the bibles that he had printed.
The reason the church didn't want the bible in the common languages is cause they wanted to keep it in Latin, which only the monks knew at that time, and thus could keep most people in the dark about scripture. To translate the bible was considered heresy just like witchcraft or not believing in the trinity.
2007-01-02 15:35:21 · answer #4 · answered by jaguarboy 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Wycliffe believed that the Bible ought to be the common possession of all Christians, and needed to be made available for common use in the language of the people. National honour seemed to require this, since members of the nobility possessed the Bible in French. Portions of the Bible had been translated into English, but there was no complete translation. Wycliffe set himself to the task. While it is not possible exactly to define his part in the translation – which was based on the Vulgate – there is no doubt that it was his initiative, and that the success of the project was due to his leadership. From him comes the translation of the New Testament, which was smoother, clearer, and more readable than the rendering of the Old Testament by his friend Nicholas of Hereford. The whole was revised by Wycliffe's younger contemporary John Purvey in 1388. Thus the mass of the people came into possession of the Bible (thanks to early innovations in printing and more traditional bookmaking workshops); but the cry of his opponents may be heard: "The jewel of the clergy has become the toy of the laity."
2007-01-02 15:36:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
The people were not supposed to read the bible, only the priests. The Romans wanted the bible to be available only in Latin and only to people they controlled. Making the bible available in English (and conducting the service in English) was one of the 39 Articles which formed the Anglican church's equivalent of the Declaration of Independence's list of grievances.
And you are correct to cite Wycliffe. Tyndale's translation (called both the Geneva and the Breeches bible) was much later than Wycliffe's although his words are much better known, having been used in the King James translation.
2007-01-02 15:28:36 · answer #6 · answered by Dave P 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I guess in those days the Pope wanted the Bible in Latin and not an everyday language that the common man could understand. This was because anything that the common man was to learn about God or the Church needed to come from the Pope. This is how the Church controlled the people. If people could read the Bible themselves then they would not need to listen to the Pope!
2007-01-02 15:32:56 · answer #7 · answered by zoril 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
it was the Catholic church. Need I say more? The Catholic church in that time was VERY corrupt. Nobody argues this point. They called anyone who didn't believe what they did a "heretic" and had them burned at the stake or excommunicated.
We get a lot of church tradition from Catholicism at this time, and then people wonder why we try to go against church tradition (ie, women in leadership, homosexuality, dress codes, etc). It was founded by corrupt people, and now we have the Bible in our language and in the original languages to know what it said. We know the history and culture surrounding many passages that change the meaning. But people are stubborn and cling to what they believed. So in a lot of ways, we are no different in modern times. We still have a problem with women leadership, etc.
For most people, faith is part of who they are as people, and they feel if they are wrong on an issue of faith, then something about them personally is wrong. I used to be a poster child for this line of thought . . . now I don't care if I am wrong, and please tell me if I am so I can fix it! :)
2007-01-02 15:29:56 · answer #8 · answered by mountain_laurel1183 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The priest had no authority because everybody could pray through Jesus directly to God. So the Church kept their people in the dark by letting the priest translate the Bible because they could speak Latin and most Catholics couldn't. When the Bible was translated in English, the priest lost all of his power and became worthless like the pope.
2007-01-02 15:32:36 · answer #9 · answered by Fish <>< 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The issue wasn't the language, but the heresy that was built in to their translations.
Heresy has been responsible for the loss of innumerable souls.
The Church and the Pope have a sacred responsibility to defend against heresy.
2007-01-02 15:41:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
The Pope forbade the laymen, or regular people, to read the Bible in order to manipulate Christianity basically.
If the people never read the Bible, they would not know that the religious system was shady and corrupt and very un-Christian.
2007-01-02 15:29:08 · answer #11 · answered by . 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋