The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : NYT Coons Profile: What YDS Values?

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

NYT Coons Profile: What YDS Values?

By Jeffrey Lord on 10.12.10 @ 11:59AM

The New York Times profiles Chris Coons this morning. The Delaware Democrat who is the opponent of Christine O’Donnell is looked at in typical Times fashion. The paper brings up O’Donnell’s high school date with the witch guy. There was a reference to O’Donnell and masturbation. Then there was this:

She: awash in disputes about what her educational credentials are and whether she has exaggerated them. He: a double major in political science and chemistry at Amherst College with graduate degrees from both the law and divinity schools at Yale University.

You just have to admire the paper’s ability to get away with this kind of thing unchallenged for decades. O’Donnell, you see, is “awash in disputes about what her educational credentials are.” Coons? Nary a mention of his controversial “Yale Divinity School values” pledge. Not a word of YDS and witchcraft, Queer worship, socialism or liberation theology. Nope. Nada.

The paper mentions his travels to Africa. But not a word — not one — about his dalliance with liberation theology. Nor is there a solitary mention that 12 of Coons endorsements come from groups who signed up to march alongside the Communist Party and Hezbollah supporters the other weekend.

This is what liberal media bias looks like. The conservative is impugned… the liberal cast as a secular saint. Any problems in liberal land? Naaaaaaaaaah. Good ole’ Chris Coons. That Bearded Marxist stuff…what a great joke. And did you know his opponent, awash in disputes, is a witch?

This line of attack no longer flies in a day and age where the New Media thrives. It gets answered.

A closer examination of Chris Coons or any other liberal candidate? Not to be found in the paper once heralded as “the paper of record.” Its credibility has long since washed away.

You might even say the New York Times has cast a spell on itself that even Dumbledore couldn’t break.

View all comments (93) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 10.12.10 @ 12:20PM

Mr. Lord,

God bless every one of you guys beating the drums of freedom.
My little contribution is a cautionary tale.
www.texassaidno.com a rip roaring fictional story to raise your neck hairs. Please forgive us in advance. We are short of bandwidth getting orders out and downloaded.

bostinks2| 10.12.10 @ 12:38PM

i doubt O'Donnald is losing the fight against the obama puppet/pet socialist democratic socialist party buring itself in a manner of a parasite. Why is obama stumping for coons. sounds like coons is in trouble despite MSM reporting or lack thereof.

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 1:05PM

"He: a double major in political science and chemistry at Amherst College with graduate degrees from both the law and divinity schools at Yale University."

Yes indeed we all know that some of the best and brightest geniuses of high moral character and outstanding valor are produced by Law & "divinity" schools.

Warped teaching produces warped thinking. Christine O'Donnell didn't go to divinty school, but she's a Biblical Christian. The Bible is the correct standard to learn from, and her mind is as sharp as a razor. She's a right thinking Christian woman and therefore the perfect candidate for political office.

THIS is why she is so hated. Same with Sarah Palin. Bible believing Christians are rejects to the World, and especially Religious "institutions."

But God and His people always win anyway, His will is done.

And Jeffery's point about how the conservative is impugned, but the Left is cast as a secular saint~ much like the vile anti-semitic Catholics who post here against the Bible believing Christians. They know who they are. Heh.

DRed| 10.12.10 @ 1:55PM

Isn't Ms. O'Donnell a Catholic?

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 2:08PM

Don't know and doesn't matter, she's Bible based and her thinking is right. And she's pro-Israel, which makes her even more of a target if she is a Catholic, with the anti-semites among them.

Concerning the present political situation, she said:

"I think it's a little like the Chosen People of Israel in the Hebrew scriptures who cycle through periods of blessing and suffering and then return to the Divine principles in their darker days. It's almost as if we're in a season of Constitutional repentance."

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 6:25PM

Catholics are free to think antway they so choose about Israel You Anti-Catholic Piece of White Trash .
We Tea Party Rebels have financed & supported Christine from the gitgo & We sure as hell don't need your Anti-Catholic ass hanging around Our Campaign .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.

We Remember In November .

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 6:32PM

"Catholics are free to think antway they so choose about Israel You Anti-Catholic Piece of White Trash ."

God disagrees with the Neo-Nazi skin head. As it is written:

"For thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet and rejoiced with all the malice within you against the land of Israel, therefore, behold, I have stretched out My Hand against you, and will hand you over as spoil to the nations; and I will cut you off from the peoples and will make you perish out of the countries; I will destroy you. Then you will know that I am the LORD." Ez. 25:6 & 7.

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 6:45PM

Apocalyptic Crank Lady Is Slandering Liar .

We Tea Party Rebels ain't puttin' up with either your Anti-Catholic Crap Or Your Israel Firster Crap . Our Mission Statement And Core Values never discuss Israel . It is Not Our Priority As Tea Party Rebels .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

We Can See November From Christine's House .

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 7:05PM

You're a fool of your own making.

I lie not.

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 7:29PM

You're A Slandering Lying Bitch Apocalyptic Crank Lady Margie .

We ain't takin' Your Psychotic Crap .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

We See November From Christin's House .

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 7:40PM

The Bible is the Truth that I stand on. Your lot is in Hell with the rest of the liars and haters of God and Christians, and Jews.

Unless you repent of course.

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 8:19PM

Repent My Ass You Hypocritical Crank .

Now tell all The Practicing Jews And Muslims where You think they go when they die .

You're an Equal Opportunity Bigot .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

Rise Up !

texaspatriot| 10.12.10 @ 2:18PM

Sooooo.....I guess you are insinuating that being a Catholic is not being a Christian ?

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 2:41PM

Nope. Not following the Bible is not being a Christian.

Ryan| 10.12.10 @ 3:57PM

Who follows the Bible perfectly?

Also, what if she believes in the Trinity?

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 4:13PM

1. Didn't say anyone does. Genuine Christians want to, though.

2. People believe a lot of false doctrines that aren't in the Bible. Have you ever done a word search yourself on this subject? It does NOT exist. Would you as a Bible believing Christian if you had the opportunity to show her this, do so? I would.

Doctrine can be wrong, but not all people realize it.

Ryan| 10.13.10 @ 8:17AM

Saying that it isn't true if the word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible is simplistic. There are several instances where all Three Persons of the Godhead appear (such as Jesus' Baptism), and other instances where certain circumstances don't make sense outside of a Trinitarian understanding (how could Jesus be God AND pray to God at the same time?)

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 4:24PM

A word search in the Bible, that is. James Strong did this and that's why we have the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance where every single word in the Bible is numbered as to the Hebrew or the Greek origin that the Bible was written in.

Heh, why do you think the Catholics prevented all but the Priests from being allowed to have the Bible translated into the common language? They burned William Tyndale at the stake for doing this. (Translating it into English in the 16th century). They wanted it kept in Latin because no one could read it but the Priests.

It is because of the false doctrines they wanted to hide and they wanted to keep their power of their people. Much like today the church remains a Leviathan and an empire unto itself.

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 6:32PM

Apocalyptic Crank Lady Margie Is an Anti-Catholic Slandering Liar .

Tyndale's translation was banned by the authorities, and Tyndale himself was burned at the stake in 1536, at the instigation of agents of Henry VIII and the Anglican Church."

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalate .

We Remember In November

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 7:03PM

No, you lie. From the Foxe's Book of Martyrs (much more trustworthy than a despicable anti-semite and hater both of God and Bible believing Christians), it was the Bishops and prelates of the church just like Pontius Pilate did with Christ, sought to silence him by death, and they were the ones who CONVINCED the King to do it.

"So great were then the froward devices of the English clergy (who should have been the guides of light unto the people), to drive the people from the knowledge of the Scripture, which neither they would translate themselves, nor yet abide it to be translated of others; to the intent (as Tyndale saith) that the world being kept still in darkness, they might sit in the consciences of the people through vain superstition and false doctrine, to satisfy their ambition, and insatiable covetousness, and to exalt their own honor above king and emperor.
The bishops and prelates never rested before they had brought the king to their consent; by reason whereof, a proclamation in all haste was devised and set forth under public authority, that the Testament of Tyndale's translation was inhibited-which was about A.D. 1537. And not content herewith, they proceeded further, how to entangle him in their nets, and to bereave him of his life; which how they brought to pass, now it remaineth to be declared."

Nice try. And anyhow the Anglican church broke with the Catholic church only so that King could divorce his wives. Other than that there's no difference.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/tyndale1.html

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 7:25PM

Wrong Slandering Liar Anti-Catholic Zealot Crank Lady Margie .

Do Your Freakin' Homework .
The Church Od England separated from The Catholic Church in 1534 , You Insufferable Horse's Ass .Tyndale was betrayed by a friend, Philips, the agent either of Henry or of English ecclesiastics, or possibly of both. Tyndale was arrested and imprisoned in the castle of Vilvoorden for over 500 days of horrible conditions. He was tried for heresy and treason in a ridiculously unfair trial, and convicted. Tyndale was then strangled and burnt at the stake in the prison yard, Oct. 6, 1536. His last words were, "Lord, open the king of England's eyes." This prayer was answered three years later, in the publication of King Henry VIII’s
1539 English “Great Bible”.

The tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

We Can See November From Christine's House .

victor| 10.12.10 @ 8:31PM

*T*i*m*m*y*:
"Do Your Freakin' Homework ."

Do yours, comma boy.

"The Church Od England separated from The Catholic Church in 1534 ,"

The Church of England was for a thousand years under the Papal Authority in Rome.
And though Henry VIII had separated England from the Pope, he never permitted the renunciation of Catholic doctrine.
It was not until the reign of his son Edward VI that Protestantism was established with such reforms as priests being allowed to marry and the imposition of the mass into English.
Though the church changed authority in 1530 the clergy was still basically Catholic.
They were the ones who pushed Henry VIII into persecuting William Tyndale.

The fact remains that the Catholic church never wanted the Bible to be in the hands of its people and the result of that "belief" was the death of Tyndale. There were many, many more persecuted and martyred along these same lines.

For the history of these facts, read the book of historical accounts, Martyrs Mirror or Foxe's Book of Martyrs.

All the lying on your part is to no avail and you can't rewrite it to suit your own leanings or prejudices.

You hate the Truth and those who speak it exactly as the men who killed Tyndale. You are in good company. You treat my wife and anyone who dares oppose your filthy mouth the same way.

You won't be able to escape God's Judgment.

The Catholic church persecuted not only Bible believing Christians, but Jews, Protestants and those who would not submit to Papal authority.

They are a cult. And one of if not the largest one in the world.

"During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people. It was illegal to translate the Bible into the common languages, even though most people could not read the official Catholic Bible because it was in Latin, a language known only to the highly educated.
Consider some of the laws Rome made against Bible translation. These began to be made in the 13th century and were in effect through the 19th."

Read its history here:

http://www.wayoflife.org/files.....b3-79.html

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 9:20PM

You Slandering Liar Victor-Margie Fraud.

Tell that Crap to The Anglican Church and King Henry The XIII You disgusting Anti-Catholic Bigot .

"Tyndale was a theologian and scholar who translated the Bible into an early form of Modern English. He was the first person to take advantage of Gutenberg’s movable-type press for the purpose of printing the scriptures in the English language. Besides translating the Bible, Tyndale also held and published views which were considered heretical, first by the Catholic Church, and later by the Church of England which was established by Henry VIII. His Bible translation also included notes and commentary promoting these views. Tyndale's translation was banned by the authorities, and Tyndale himself was burned at the stake in 1536, at the instigation of agents of Henry VIII and the Anglican Church."

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 9:24PM

Now Victor Margie ,Tell all The Practicing Jews And Muslims where you say they go when they die .

You're up Ya Freakin' Bigoted Hypocrite .

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 10:15PM

Same place you go. To appear before the Judgment seat of Christ. Are you ready?

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 11:13PM

Screw You Ya Bigoted Hypocrite .

Ya Don't Got The Guts To Tell The Jews And Muslims Where Ya Think They Go When They Die .

You're A Serial Bigot .

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 11:53PM

God says this, and it applies to every human being, and Christians believe what He says:

"Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicode'mus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him." Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Nicode'mus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?" Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born anew.' The wind blows where it wills, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know whence it comes or whither it goes; so it is with every one who is born of the Spirit." Nicode'mus said to him, "How can this be?" Jesus answered him, "Are you a teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand this? Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen; but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into Heaven but he who descended from Heaven, the Son of man. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life." For God so loved the world that He gave his only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the Name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than Light, because their deeds were evil. For every one who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does what is true comes to the Light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God." Jn. 3:1-21.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:00AM

Who The Hell Do Ya Think You're Foolin' Bigot Broad.

God knows that you are a Freakin' Hypocrite Bastardizing His Words To Carry out your Own Twisted Zealot Agenda .

Ya Think You Can Scam God ,Ya Maniac ?
Ya Can't .

He's Got Your Number , and So Do We Multi-Bigot Pig .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:42AM

The Anti-Catholic Bigot Margie Is Also Anti-Semite Bigot & Anti-Muslim Bigot , as well .

This Joisey Girl Bigot Got A Big Ax To Grind Against Others' Religions .

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 9:33PM

"It was not that King Henry VIII had a change of conscience regarding publishing the Bible in English. His motives were more sinister… but the Lord sometimes uses the evil intentions of men to bring about His glory. King Henry VIII had in fact, requested that the Pope permit him to divorce his wife and marry his mistress. The Pope refused. King Henry responded by marrying his mistress anyway, (later having two of his many wives executed), and thumbing his nose at the Pope by renouncing Roman Catholicism, taking England out from under Rome’s religious control, and declaring himself as the reigning head of State to also be the new head of the Church. This new branch of the Christian Church, neither Roman Catholic nor truly Protestant, became known as the Anglican Church or the Church of England. King Henry acted essentially as its “Pope”. His first act was to further defy the wishes of Rome by funding the printing of the scriptures in English… the first legal English Bible… just for spite."

victor| 10.12.10 @ 10:12PM

It is NOT hypocritical to speak the truth. It is Christian and it is what God wants me to do.

Your vile name calling and Neo-Nazi skin head views have been clear to everyone who reads your posts. You can continue YOUR slanderous lies by continuing to do what you are doing, and taking other screen names to personally attack my wife but by now just about everyone knows it's you. But especially God knows. We stand by what we say in spite of your attacks.

From your previous post:

"views which were considered heretical, first by the Catholic Church"~

Heretical? You consider the Truth to be heretical? The Catholic Church did not support any English translation of Scripture. That is your idea of Heresy?
Many highly-placed Clergy were suspicious of Tyndale's beliefs and were uncomfortable with the idea of the Bible in the common language of English.
In other words, the Church did not want just anyone to read God's Word without benefit of a priest to properly present the Gospel.

"and later by the Church of England"~

In 1530, he wrote "The Practyse of Prelates", opposing Henry VIII's divorce on the grounds that it was unscriptural.
In other words, he was persecuted for pointing out that Henry's divorce was wrong and not Biblically correct.

The Catholic Church has a long and infamous history of suppressing the Truth and those who proclaim it.

Beginning in 1215 Pope Innocent III issued a law “that they shall be seized for trial and penalties, WHO ENGAGE IN THE TRANSLATION OF THE SACRED VOLUMES" and that those found guilty by Innocent III “declared that as by the old law, the beast touching the holy mount was to be stoned to death, so simple and uneducated men were not to touch the Bible or venture to preach its doctrines”

Stoned to DEATH for reading and translating the Bible??
You support that Timmy?? Defend that Timmy!!

The Death Penalty for Reading the Bible??

All the way up to the 19th century:
In Quebec, as late as 1826, MANY PEOPLE HAD NEVER HEARD OF THE NEW TESTAMENT"

In the 20th century when: Between December 1907 and February 1908 a diligent search was made to determine how many Bibles were available in Catholic Ireland.
"Not a portion of the Bible was available in bookshops in Athlone, Balbriggan, Drogheda, Mullingar, Wexford, and Clonmel. A shop assistant at Mullingar said, “I never saw a Catholic Bible.”

Timmy of course, defends the indefensible and so, you can read it on this page:

http://www.wayoflife.org/files.....b3-79.html

There are more examples from other periods of history.

I will be back!

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 11:16PM

You're A Slimey Serial Hypocrite , Who doesn't have the guts to tell Jews & Muslims where you think they go when they die , because then you'd be toast around American Spectator . Ya Fat Pig .

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 9:58PM

"Patrick Collinson notes that the accentuation of Tyndale's anti-Catholic inspiration is "typical of Foxe's intensified antipapal animus in the year of the publication of the bull of excommunication of Queen Elizabeth"

victor| 10.12.10 @ 10:14PM

You better believe it. The Satanic Papacy put to death anyone who wanted to or tried to translate or read the Bible on their own.

It figures you'd defend that! You're just as vile!

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 11:28PM

American Spectator see that you Anti-Catholic Zealot Crank Lady Margie are just a gutless Multi-Bigot from New Joisey , who doesn't have the honesty to lay your bigoted thoughts about practicing Jews & Muslims out here , because you'd be ripped apart , but think ya can slander the Catholic Church with your crap in the face of the Facts .

Tyndale himself was burned at the stake in 1536, at the instigation of agents of Henry VIII and the Anglican Church .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:45AM

Well now Victor-Margie , We see You're An Anti-Jew Bigot & An Anti- Muslim Bigot to boot .

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 11:33PM

There Ain't No Victor ,There's Just Psychotic Margie the Multi-Bigot .

Ryan| 10.13.10 @ 8:19AM

You're going overboard there a bit, Timmy, and making Margie look better by comparison. You don't convince me to your point of view.

danny| 10.12.10 @ 2:47PM

texaspatriot, no, she didn't say that at all. read very carefully what she did say. you go margie. glad to hear from you again. where you been?

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 2:57PM

Thanks danny! Moved to the country recently. Busy raking leaves and pulling up weeds. Now I know why people pay people to do it. My poor muscles were screeching in pain.. but I will get used to it. Great exercise and lots of sunshine, love it.

God bless.

danny| 10.12.10 @ 4:35PM

margie, we've been the country for the past 12 years. got approx. 110 oak trees in my front yard, so i know a thing or two about raking leaves. hang in there, it's worth it.
God bless you too, welcome back.

CHRIS| 10.12.10 @ 8:58PM

if a lefty democrat wanted to create a caricature of a crazy, anti-catholic, bigoted person who quotes the Bible to justify any absurd position, he would be "Margie." This would be done to embarass true Christians and paint them as stupid, ignorant,bigoted, and foolish because if "Margie" is representative of these "Christians," then the lefty-liberals have achieved their purpose. And when "Margie" endorses Palin, O'Donnell, and others they are tartnished because it appears a nut like "Margie" endorses them.
I do not believe "Margie" is a conservative or a Christian. She/he/they are professional bloggers out to discredit true conservatives and true Christians.
Best advice: ignore her. Maybe they will go back to the daily kos, or similar blogs. Do not reply to them. They are here only to disturb and disrupt.

Warrior | 10.12.10 @ 10:16PM

You are mistaken. While I do not agree with much of what she posts, she has every right to quote the bible and she is a conservative. I would rather listen to her "evangelical" position than the liberals secular one. You sound like the troll here.

Margie| 10.12.10 @ 10:28PM

Thank you, Warrior. :^)

Tim*| 10.12.10 @ 11:31PM

Screw You Anti-Catholic Pig Margie .

You Freakin' Psychotic Freakazoid .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:06AM

In 397 AD, the Catholic Church gave a definitive decision as to which writings and books should be admitted into the Bible and which should be rejected, and every book which is in the Protestant New Testament today, was put there by Pope Siricus and the Catholic Bishops in the year 397 AD If Christ had intended that men should learn Christianity from the New Testament, what about the hundreds who lived before the first Bible was given to the world by the Catholic Church? Luther's Protestant Bible came out 1520 and before his Bible the Catholic Bible had been translated into Spanish, Italian, Danish, French, Norwegian, Polish, Bohemian, Hungarian and English, there was exactly 104 editions in Latin; 38 editions in German language, 25 editions in Italian language, 18 in French. In all 626 editions of the Bible with 198 in the language of the laity, had been edited before the fist Protestant Bible was sent forth into the world.

Ryan| 10.13.10 @ 8:22AM

There can be a decent argument that Christ intends our salvation through the Gospel, and that is how even pre-NT folks are saved - that the grace that comes from the Cross can reach both backward and forward in time.

chris| 10.13.10 @ 12:37PM

dear warrior,
assuming you are not "margie,"
it is not evangelical to call the catholic church "satanic." that is sick. she does not have a "right" to put on the spectator blog the bigotry and racist comments. would you support her if he posts the "N" word, or the "W" word, like jerry brown, or similar words? she/he/it/they are harming the conservative and evangelical cause.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:00AM

JOHN WYCLIFFE (1324-1384), the father of the English Bible, is an example of how Rome treated the Bible in these days.

Wycliffe, the vicar of St. Mary’s Church at Lutterworth, completed the English New Testament in 1380 and the Old Testament in 1382. He rejected many of Rome’s heresies, including the doctrine that the people should not have the Bible in their own language. Here is one of the powerful statements that he made to the Catholic authorities: “You say it is heresy to speak of the Holy Scriptures in English. You call me a heretic because I have translated the Bible into the common tongue of the people. Do you know whom you blaspheme? Did not the Holy Ghost give the Word of God at first in the mother-tongue of the nations to whom it was addressed? Why do you speak against the Holy Ghost? You say that the Church of God is in danger from this book. How can that be? Is it not from the Bible only that we learn that God has set up such a society as a Church on the earth? Is it not the Bible that gives all her authority to the Church? Is it not from the Bible that we learn who is the Builder and Sovereign of the Church, what are the laws by which she is to be governed, and the rights and privileges of her members? Without the Bible, what charter has the Church to show for all these? It is you who place the Church in jeopardy by hiding the Divine warrant, the missive royal of her King, for the authority she wields and the faith she enjoins” (David Fountain, John Wycliffe, pp. 45-47).

Rome persecuted Wycliffe bitterly and attempted unsuccessfully to have him imprisoned. Pope Gregory XI issued five bulls against Wycliffe, but he was protected by the Queen of England and others.

Wycliffe died on December 31, 1384, and forty-three years later, in 1428, the Roman Catholic Church dug up Wycliffe’s bones and burned them.

Rome also persecuted Wycliffe’s followers, the Lollards, imprisoning them and putting many of them to death. The Lollards’ Tower in London was so named because it is one of the places where they were imprisoned and tortured. It was illegal to own a copy of the Wycliffe Bible, and most of the priceless handwritten Scriptures were burned.

WILLIAM TYNDALE (1484-1536), the first to translate the English Bible from Greek and Hebrew, is another example of Rome’s persecutions.

As a young man Tyndale had a burden to translate the Bible into English directly from the Hebrew and Greek so that his people could have the Word of God from the purest fountains. When he expressed this plan to Catholic authorities in England, then under Roman Catholic rule, he learned that it would not be possible to do this work in his own country.

While employed at Little Sodbury Manor after graduation from Oxford, Tyndale preached in that part of western England and debated the truth with Catholic priests. One evening a priest exclaimed, “We are better without God’s laws than the pope’s.” Hearing that, Tyndale replied: “If God spare my life, ere many years I will cause a boy that driveth a plough shall know more of the Scriptures than thou doest.”

Tyndale traveled to Europe to pursue this objective, where he had to move from place to place and hide his work from the ecclesiastical authorities.

After completing the New Testament and a portion of the Old, Tyndale was arrested in May 1535. He was imprisoned for 16 months in the castle at Vilvorde, Belgium.

On October 6, 1536, Tyndale was strangled and then burned at the stake. His ashes were thrown into the river that flowed alongside the castle.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:46AM

You're Still An Anti-Catholic Slandering Liar.
Now Go Back To Your Catholic Parents And Take Your Lapsed Catholic Background An Your Ax To Grind And Lay This Crap On Them New Joisey Bigot Broad .

Tyndale was betrayed by a friend, Philips, the agent either of Henry or of English ecclesiastics, or possibly of both.
Tyndale himself was burned at the stake in 1536, at the instigation of agents of Henry VIII and the Anglican Church .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:07AM

What books are not found in Protestant Bible?

They are Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch and the two Books of Machabees, together with fragments of Esther (x.4; xvi, 24), and Daniel (iii, 24-90; xii., xiv). These books were contained in the Alexandrian list or Canon of Books which was used by Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria, Asia Minor, Greece and Italy.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:05AM

THE GERMAN BIBLE WAS PERSECUTED

The PRE-LUTHER GERMAN BIBLES were persecuted in the 15th century. The first complete printed Bible in German was published by Johann Mentelin (John Mentel) at Strassburg in 1466 (Olaf Norlie, The Translated Bible, 1934, p. 73). Mainz was the most active publication center in Germany at that time, and in 1485, the archbishop there issued AN EDICT PRESCRIBING CENSORSHIP FOR ALL TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE. The edict forbade the Scriptures to be given to simple and unlearned men and to women. Following is an excerpt: “We have observed books containing the office of the mass and also containing divine things and lofty matters of our religion and translated from Latin into the German language, not without damage to religion [meaning the Catholic religion!], circulating among the hands of the vulgar [common people] … for who will give to the ignorant and unlettered persons, and to the female sex at that, into whose hands the manuscripts of sacred learning should fall, the ability to find the true sense? No sane person would deny that the texts of the Holy Gospels and of the Epistles of Paul require many additions and explanations from other writings.”

THE LUTHER BIBLE, which first appeared in 1522, was also fiercely persecuted.

D’Aubigne, in his History of the Reformation, describes how Rome replied to this milestone in Germany history: “Ignorant priests shuddered at the thought that every citizen, nay every peasant, would now be able to dispute with them on the precepts of our Lord. The King of England denounced the work to the Elector Frederick and to Duke George of Saxony. But as early as the month of November THE DUKE HAD ORDERED HIS SUBJECTS TO DEPOSIT EVERY COPY OF LUTHER’S NEW TESTAMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE MAGISTRATES. BAVARIA, BRANDENBURG, AUSTRIA, AND ALL THE STATES DEVOTED TO ROME, PUBLISHED SIMILAR DECREES. IN SOME PLACES THEY MADE SACRILEGIOUS BONFIRES OF THESE SACRED BOOKS IN THE PUBLIC PLACES” (D’Aubigne, III, p. 77).

Persecutions were poured out by the Catholic authorities upon those who read the works of Luther. An example of those who were tormented for distributing the German Luther New Testament was a bookseller named John in Buda, Hungary. He had circulated the German Scriptures throughout that country. “He was bound to a stake; his persecutors then piled his books around him, enclosing him as if in a tower, and then set fire to them. John manifested unshaken courage, exclaiming from the midst of the flames, that he was delighted to suffer in the cause of the Lord” (D’Aubigne, III, p. 152).

In 1520 a strict search for Lutheran Bibles and books was instigated in Venice, and those found were destroyed (M'Crie, Reformation in Italy, p. 28).

The ANABAPTIST LUTHERAN BIBLES were persecuted.

The German Bible produced by Anabaptists appeared in 1529, five years before the entire Luther Bible. It was called THE WORMS BIBLE, after the name of the city in which it was published. The translation was done by two Anabaptists, Ludwig Hetzer and Hans Denck, “accomplished scholars, thoroughly versed in Hebrew and Greek, as well as in Latin. Denck studied and received the degree of Master at the University of Basel, under and with Erasmus, Hetzer was an alumnus of Basel, and also of the University of Paris” (John Porter, The World’s Debt to the Baptists, 1914, p. 138). “At the time of its publication the approval of the Denck-Hetzer edition was unlimited and universal. Within three years thirteen separate editions appeared at Strasburg, Augsburg, Hagenau, and other places. ... In a word, in all Germany the book of the despised Anabaptists was bought, read, and treasured” (Ludwig Keller, Hans Denck, Ein Apostel der Wiedertaufer, p. 211; cited by Porter, p. 139).

This German Bible and its translators suffered the fate we have seen so many times already. “Denck, suffering with tuberculosis, under the decree of banishment and outlawry, died in hiding, in Basel, in 1529, a little before the Bible came from the press. Hetzer was arrested, condemned as a heretic, and beheaded the same year at Constance. … EVERY POSSIBLE EFFORT WAS MADE TO SUPPRESS THIS ‘HERETIC BIBLE;’ PRINTING OFFICES, PLACES WHERE THE BOOK WAS FOR SALE, PRIVATE HOUSES AND INDIVIDUALS WERE SEARCHED, AND ALL COPIES FOUND WERE DESTROYED. Only three copies that are accessible to scholars are now known to be in existence, one is in the library in the University of Bonn, one in a library in Stuttgart, and one in the New York Public Library” (Porter, p. 139).

THE SPANISH BIBLE WAS PERSECUTED

In the fifteenth century a Roman Catholic priest named BONIFACIO FERRER translated the whole Scriptures into the Valencian or Catalonian dialect of Spain. He died in 1417, but his translation was printed in Valencia in 1478. In spite of the fact that it was produced by a Catholic, “it had scarcely made its appearance when it was suppressed by the Inquisition, who ordered the whole impression to be devoured by the flames. So strictly was this order carried into execution, that scarcely a single copy appears to have escaped” (M’Crie, History of the Progress and Suppression of the Reformation in Spain, 1829, pp. 191, 92). In 1645 four leaves of this translation were discovered in a monastery.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:21AM

All Your Tap Dancing Ans Shuck & Jivin' And Irrelevant Crap Can't Wipe Away Your Slandering Lies , Multiple Bigot Broad .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:10AM

Why did Luther reject 7 books from the Bible?

Because they did not suit his new doctrines. He had arrived at the principle of private judgment - of picking and choosing religious doctrines; and whenever any book, such as the book of Machabees, taught a doctrine contrary to his taste he rejected it overboard and overboard that book went because it says: 2 Mach. xii 46, "it is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sins." He not only cast out certain books, but he mutilated some that were left. For example, not pleased with St. Paul's doctrine, "we are justified by faith," Luther added the word "ALONE" to make the sentence read: "We are justified by faith alone." His explanation of this insertion is found in his own words, "I know very well that the word 'alone' is not in the Latin and Greek texts; but Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. " St. Paul writes under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Luther creates a Lutheran Bible under his own audacity. He shows little respect for the Bible when he calls the Epistle of St. James "an Epistle of straw with no character of the Gospel in it." He spoke disparagingly about the Epistle of St. Jude, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the beautiful Apocalypse of St. John.

The Lord's Prayer or the Our Father is in the Bible, but Catholic prayer differs from the Protestant. Protestants use a conclusion which was not in the original Greek copies of the New Testament, namely, "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever. Amen." Catholics say the Lord's Prayer properly. Before the last book in the New Testament was written the Catholic Church celebrated her golden jubilee; 11 of the Apostles had died.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:11AM

THE SPANISH BIBLE WAS PERSECUTED

In 1543 the FRANCISCO DE ENZINAS Spanish New Testament was published with the title “The New Testament, that is, the New Covenant of our Only Redeemer and Saviour Jesus Christ, translated from the Greek to the Castillian [Spanish] language.” Enzinas presented a copy of his New Testament to Charles V, Emperor of the Roman Empire (1519-1558), during the emperor’s visit to Brussels, who gave it to his Catholic confessor, Pedro de Soto. “After various delays, Enzinas, having waited on the confessor, was upbraided by him as an enemy to religion, who had tarnished the honor of his native country; and refusing to acknowledge a fault, was seized by the officers of justice and thrown into prison” (M'Crie, History of the Reformation in Spain, pp. 194-95). Francisco’s father and uncles visited him in prison and reproached him for dishonoring his family. After fifteen months’ confinement he miraculously escaped prison in Brussels and fled to Antwerp, then on to England, where, in 1548, he was given the chair of Greek at Cambridge. He returned to the continent in 1550 and died of the plague at Strasbourg in 1553. Most of his New Testaments were burned and all of his manuscripts were destroyed by the Inquisition.

Another man who was raised up by God to provide the Spanish world with a vernacular Bible was JUAN PEREZ DE PINEDA (c. 1490-1567). In Seville, Spain, as the head of the College of Doctrine, he began to study the Bible and rejected Roman Catholic doctrine. When persecution began against the believers in that area, Perez and some of his friends were able to flee from Spain. Perez settled in Geneva and was the first to form a Spanish church in that city (M’Crie, p. 363). Afterwards he moved to France. His translation of the New Testament into Spanish, relying heavily on the Enzinas version, was published in 1556 in Geneva.

Another of the men who fled Spain's inquisition terrors was CASSIODORO DE REINA (1520-1594). As a monk in the San Isidro del Campo monastery in Seville he joined the Protestant revival and rejected Catholic doctrine. Arrested and sentenced to death, Reina was able to escape from prison and flee to London, where he preached to a Spanish congregation (Lupton, A History of the Geneva Bible, I, p. 40). Later he journeyed to Geneva and associated with the Protestant Spanish church there, pastored by the aforementioned Juan Perez de Pineda. In 1567 Reina completed a Spanish New Testament that “is hailed to this day as the greatest literary triumph in Spanish history.” Reina settled in Basle, and the entire Bible appeared in 1569.

Reina’s work was taken over by CIPRIANO DE VALERA (1532-1602?).

Like Enzinas and Reina, Valera had fled the inquisition in Spain. In 1565 Valera joined Oxford University and became well known for his linguistic expertise, “having mastered at least ten languages.” He revised and corrected Reina’s work and published the New Testament in London in 1596, and, the entire Bible in 1602 in Amsterdam.

All of these Spanish Bibles “were accompanied with vindications of the practice of translating the scriptures into vernacular languages, and the right of the people to read them” (M’Crie, p. 202).

What a contrast this was with the attitude of the Roman Catholic Church. As late as 1747, the inquisitor general in Spain fretted that “some men carried their audacity to the execrable extreme of asking permission to read the sacred scriptures in the vulgar tongue, not afraid of finding in them the most deadly poison” (M’Crie, p. 202, f3).

Pope Julius III addressed a bull to the inquisitors in 1550 in which he warned them of the Spanish Bibles which were being smuggled into the country (M’Crie, History of the Reformation in Spain, p. 203). The inquisitors were given instructions “to seize all the copies, and proceed with the utmost rigour against those who should retain them, without excepting members of universities, colleges or monasteries. ... At the same time the strictest precautions were adopted to prevent the importation of such books by placing officers at all the sea-ports and land-passes, with authority to search every package, and the person of every traveller that should enter the kingdom” (M’Crie, p. 204).

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:23AM

You Can't Hide From Your Slandering Lies About The Catholic Church And Tyndale , Multiple Bigot Broad .
Tyndale was betrayed by a friend, Philips, the agent either of Henry or of English ecclesiastics, or possibly of both.
Tyndale himself was burned at the stake in 1536, at the instigation of agents of Henry VIII and the Anglican Church .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:17AM

In order to more fully appreciate the Catholic Church's understanding of the Bible, one must first grasp the Church's view of Divine Revelation as a whole. The Catholic Church teaches that during the Old Testament God revealed Himself in increasing measure to His people. This revelation of Himself culminated in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. The Church teaches that in Christ God revealed the fullness of Himself and "we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."

The Catholic Church also maintains that Jesus appointed the twelve apostles to preach the Gospel throughout the world in order that God's revelation might be proclaimed to humanity. They then ordained bishops and priests (presbyters) to succeed them in their ministry, who were called to "guard the truth that had been entrusted to them by the Holy Spirit." Thus, Catholics view divine revelation as being originally transmitted primarily by oral means (Sacred Tradition).

The Holy Spirit also guided some of the apostles and the early Christians to write down the stories of Jesus and certain letters of instruction and revelation. The early Church came to recognize these writings as divinely inspired. The Catholic Church has continuously taught, therefore, that God's revelation is also transmitted to us through written means (Sacred Scripture). Distinct from Protestantism, however, the Bible is not considered to be the exhaustive, comprehensive teaching of the Christian Faith. Rather, Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture together are considered the integral source of divine revelation, as explained in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out of the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing and move towards the same goal. Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own 'always, to the close of the age.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 3:10AM

"Distinct from Protestantism, however, the Bible is not considered to be the exhaustive, comprehensive teaching of the Christian Faith. Rather, Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture together are considered the integral source of divine revelation, as explained in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church"

What sacred tradition? Their own made up tradition!
This is false teaching. The Catechism of the Catholic church is not Biblical. Why do you think they put people to death for trying to translate it from its original languages?

It is for this very reason. They were making up their own false doctrines and getting away with it and they are still getting away with it today. And the hatred for those of us who speak truthfully is still the same as it ever was.

This is mumbo jumbo pulled from a Catholic website.

The Bible has everything you need to know about following Christ and Jesus Himself warned that if you are of God you will hear His words, If you are not, you will follow false doctrines.

"He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." Jn. 8:47

His words are where? In the Bible!

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:00AM

Asked & Answered Ya Anti-Catholic Bigot .

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 11:58AM

There is no such thing as Popes in the Bible. It is Satanic. There is no authority of any such thing in the Bible.

The Catholic Religion is Satanic and it makes up their own rules and they are NOT Biblical.

The book of Revelation warns the wicked churches to repent but the Holy Roman Empire does not.

And you do not.

Your sick spirit and those are of perverted ilk are in Hell already.
Unless you repent and receive the Lord Jesus Christ.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:12AM

THE FRENCH BIBLE WAS PERSECUTED

JACQUES LEFEVRE (1455-1536), a professor at the University of Paris, published a French New Testament in 1523 and the complete French Bible in 1528. For his labor of love for the French people, the elderly Lefevre was hated and persecuted by the Romanist authorities.

One thing that galled them was Lafevre’s principle that all Christians should read the Scriptures. One of these angry authorities exclaimed: “Does he not dare to recommend all the faithful to read the Scriptures? Does he not tell therein that whoever loves not Christ’s Word is not a Christian; and that the Word of God is sufficient to lead to eternal life?” (D’Aubigne, III, p. 385).

The Sorbonne, the theological faculty of the University of Paris, condemned Lefevre as a heretic and he was forced to flee to Strasbourg in 1525. In 1531, Lefevre took refuge in southern France and remained there till his death…” (Durant, The Story of Civilization, VI, p. 502).

The Sorbonne declared war on printing and printers. In 1534, twenty men and one woman were burnt alive. One of those was a printer whose sole crime was printing some of Luther’s writings, while another was a bookseller who had sold the same.

An edict was issued in 1546 by the Roman Catholic authorities against Lefevre and his work, in which the following statement is found: “It is neither expedient nor useful for the Christian public that any translation of the Bible should be permitted to be printed; but that they ought to be suppressed as injurious.” It was also ordered that any person possessing a copy of it should deliver it up within eight days (John Beardslee, The Bible among the Nations, 1899, pp. 211, 12).

Many French believers were burned for distributing the Bible. Foxe’s unabridged Martyrology is a massive set of books. I own a copy of the 8th edition, which was printed in 1641. It is 3 volumes folio, 3227 pages, the three volumes together almost one foot in width, and each page 9 X 13.5 inches. Roughly 150 of these large pages are dedicated to an enumeration of just some of the French martyrs. Following are a few examples:

In 1925 a Gospel preacher named Schuch was burned in the town of Nancy in France. When he was arrested and tried, he had his Bible with him, and holding the same as he stood before his accusers, he preached to them out of the Scriptures and “meekly yet forcibly confessed Christ crucified.” His words so incised his tormentors that “transported with rage, they rushed upon him with violent cries, TORE AWAY THE BIBLE FROM WHICH HE WAS READING THIS MENACING LANGUAGE, and like mad dogs, unable to bite his doctrine, THEY BURNT IT in their convent.” The man was immediately condemned to be burned alive, and the sentence was quickly carried out. “On the 19th of August 1525 the whole city of Nancy was in motion. The bells were tolling for the death of a heretic. The mournful procession set out. When the martyr reached the place of execution, HIS BOOKS WERE BURNT BEFORE HIS FACE; he was then called upon to retract; but he refused, saying, “It is thou, O God, who hast called me, and thou wilt give me strength unto the end.” Having mounted the pile, he continued to recite the psalm until the smoke and the flames stifled his voice” (D’Aubigne, History of the Reformation, III, pp. 468, 69).

In 1546 Peter Chapot was burned to death for bringing French Bibles into France and for selling them. Because of his bold testimony at the place of persecution, a decree was made that “all which were to be burned, unless they recanted at the fire, should have their tongues cut off. Which law diligently afterward was observed” (Foxe, unabridged, 1641, II, p. 133).

Stephen Polliot was also arrested in 1546 with a bag of Scriptures and Gospel books he was distributing. His tongue was cut out and he was burned, “his satchel of books hanging about his neck” (Foxe, unabridged, II, p. 134).

Nicholas Nayle, a shoemaker, was arrested in Paris and burned in 1553 for bringing parcels of books to distribute among the believers.

In 1554 Dionysius Vayre, who had smuggled many books into France, was arrested in Normandy and sentenced to be “burned alive, and thrice lifted up, and let down again into the fire” (Foxe, unabridged, II, p. 145).

Waldensian bookseller Bartholmew Hector was arrested in 1556. When the Inquisition judge said, “You have been caught in the act of selling books that contain heresy; what say you?” Hector replied, “If the Bible is heresy to you, it is truth to me.” After languishing in prison for several months, Hector was burned at the stake.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:29AM

Ya Lied About Tyndale And The Catholic Church .
Tyndale was betrayed by a friend, Philips, the agent either of Henry or of English ecclesiastics, or possibly of both.
Tyndale himself was burned at the stake in 1536, at the instigation of agents of Henry VIII and the Anglican Church .

Ya keep exposing to The American Spectator Readers Your Insane Anti-Catholic Agenda .

Just Because You're A Lapsed New Joisey Catholic with an obvious Ax to Grind Against The Catholic Church Doesn't Give ya The right To Slander And Lie About The Church , In An Attempted Effort To Tear It Down .

You're A Piece Of Trash .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:19AM

However, a third point remains to be explained regarding the Catholic view of divine revelation. Namely, that Jesus Christ appointed the Church to teach His revelation to all peoples and all places. Catholics understand that the Church has a mystical Body similar to the Protestant understanding of a "spiritual Church." Nevertheless, they also believe Jesus instituted a hierarchical, visibly-organized Church, to be led by Peter and the apostles and their successors. In order to ensure that revelation was preserved intact until the close of the age, He promised that the Holy Spirit would protect and guide the Church. Of course, by this Catholics do not understand that every individual believer or even teacher will be protected from error. Rather, the Church maintains that its official teachings and pronouncements (made by the pope or a church council approved by the pope) will be protected from error. Hence, Catholics look upon the Council of Jerusalem recorded in fifteenth chapter of Acts as a primitive example of the Church's authority to teach and guard the truth received from Christ by the apostles.

The development of the canon of Scripture illustrates the Catholic view of the authority of the Church. During the early centuries of the Church there was wide disagreement over which books formed the canon. For instance, many considered several books not found in the New Testament today to be part of Sacred Scripture, such as Clement's Letter to the Corinthians or The Shepherd of Hermas. On the other hand, some questioned or rejected the canonicity of books ultimately included, such as Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, and Revelation. However, this issue was ultimately settled through church councils, and papal pronouncements.

Thus, for the faithful Catholic, the reason one ultimately accepts that the books found in the canon are inspired is because he trusts the Holy Spirit to guide and protect the Church's official teachings in matters of faith and morals. Whether the issue is the canon of Scripture or the proper understanding of a biblical passage, orthodox Catholics view the Church's ability to teach authoritatively as God's gift to humanity to protect His revelation for all times and peoples. The Church maintains that God instituted the three pillars of Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium (the Church's teaching authority) to uphold His revelation to humankind. "In accord with God's most wise design," they are "so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others. . . " Any consideration of the Catholic Church's relationship to the Bible must be preceded by this foundation of the Catholic view of Divine Revelation.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 2:15AM

This is unbiblical and false, and taken from a Catholic website. None of it is in the Bible.

And because of the sacrifice of all the murdered Martyrs we know this. If it weren't for them the Satanic murderous Papacy would have won out to this very day and the only thing we'd have right now is their perverted version of the Bible, to which they have added books that were never inspired by God.

The Bible WARNS about adding or taking away from His words:

"I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of Life and in the Holy City, which are described in this book. He who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen." Rev. 22:18-21.

And the Biblical definition of a saint is ANYONE who believes and follows Christ. not what the Catholic Religion says they are.

Again" Read your Bible to know the Truth of God!

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:03AM

The Catholic Martyrs of England are men and women who died for the Roman Catholic faith in the years between 1535 and 1680. Certain of them have officially been recognized as martyrs by the Catholic Church.

Catholics in England and Wales were executed under treason laws. Legislation of the 16th century made treasonable refusing to assent to the royal supremacy over the Church that had been asserted by Henry VIII, or being (or harbouring) a Catholic priest. The standard penalty for all those convicted of treason at the time was execution by being hanged, drawn and quartered.

Groups with official recognition by the Catholic Church include:

* The Forty Martyrs of England and Wales (including Saint Edmund Campion and Saint Margaret Clitherow)
* The Eighty-five martyrs of England and Wales, beatified on 22 November 1987
* The 18 Carthusian Martyrs

Others known as martyrs include the laymen Thomas More, James Duckett and Thomas Sherwood.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:12AM

THE DUTCH BIBLE WAS PERSECUTED

In 1270 JACOB VAN MAERLANDT completed the four Gospels in Dutch. “This effort aroused the wrath of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Utrecht, who thought it was disrespectful to the Scriptures thus to bring them within the reach of the common people, and Van Maerlandt nearly lost his life as a reward for his labor” (John Beardslee, The Bible among the Nations, p. 175).

In 1526 the first entire Bible in Dutch was published by JACOB VAN LIESVELDT in Antwerp, and 20 years later Liesveldt was beheaded in Antwerp “for his printing labours” (Lupton, A History of the Geneva Bible, I, p. 35).

THE ITALIAN BIBLE WAS PERSECUTED

ANTONIO BRUCIOLI published an Italian New Testament at Venice in 1530 and an entire Bible two years later. Brucioli also produced a commentary on the whole Bible, which was published in seven volumes. “His translations of the Bible were put into the first class of forbidden books, and all his works, on whatever subject, ‘published or to be published,’ together with all books which came from his press, even after his death, were strictly prohibited. ... violent measures were afterwards employed for its suppression” (M'Crie, Reformation in Italy, 1856, pp. 56, 57).

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:23AM

II. CATHOLIC BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION THROUGHOUT HISTORY
A. The Early Church

That the early Christians held the Bible in high esteem can be easily detected from studying early Christian commentaries, sermons, liturgies, and art. They agreed on the inspiration of the Scriptures (though there was disagreement over which books were canonical) and viewed the Bible as a "single work of a single Author." 13 Among the great Scripture scholars of the early Church were Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, and Pope Gregory the Great in the West, while Athanisius, John Chrysostom and the Cappadocian Fathers (Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa) were among the best-known in the East.

While some of the Fathers, e.g., Melito of Sardis, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, suggested principles for the interpretation of the Scriptures, rules remained generally flexible during this early stage. Allegorical interpretations of the sacred texts were accepted so long as the allegory pointed to the Christian Faith and were not at variance with Apostolic Tradition. The well-known maxim of Vincent of Lerins was very much the rule of the day: quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus (what [has been taught] everywhere, always, and by all).

The literal, historical truth of the Scriptures was usually assumed by the Fathers. However, some were an exception to this such as some belonging to the School of Alexandria. Origen, for instance, taught that the events of the Old Testament were not necessarily historically accurate, but served as stories to communicate spiritual truths. In contrast, the School of Antioch such as John Chrysostom strongly rejected this approach, and maintained the historical reality of the Scriptures.

As the centuries passed, the natural familiarity with the languages of Scripture (Greek and Hebrew) and the early oral traditions diminished. Thus, the need for a more formal set of principles for hermeneutics and exegesis arose. Gradually, the continued development of the art and science of Biblical study led to the great Catholic tradition of the four senses of Scripture.

The first of the four senses is the literal sense, which, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, is the sense upon which all of the senses rest. The literal sense is simply the literal and direct meaning of the words, although this could include metaphor (e.g., the Sons of Thunder would still be the literal sense even though it is metaphorical).

The other three senses, the allegorical, anagogical, and moral, together form the spiritual sense. The allegorical sense focuses on the symbolic meaning produced by the words. The many instances of foreshadowing in the Old Covenant of the New are examples of this sense. The anagogical focuses on how the words relate to what Catholics call the "four last things;" namely, death, judgment, heaven, and hell. Lastly, the moral sense teaches the effect of the words on how we live. The teaching of the four senses was summed up in a well-known medieval couplet:

Littera geta docet, quid credas allegoria,
moralis quid agas, quo tendas anagogica.

In essence, this can be loosely translated to say: "the letter teaches us what happened; what you are to believe is called allegory; what you are to do is called the moral sense; the anagogical sense has to do with the final end of your life."

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 2:33AM

"As the centuries passed, the natural familiarity with the languages of Scripture (Greek and Hebrew) and the early oral traditions diminished. Thus, the need for a more formal set of principles for hermeneutics and exegesis arose. Gradually, the continued development of the art and science of Biblical study led to the great Catholic tradition of the four senses of Scripture."

~And this was wrong. They (Catholics) took it upon themselves to re write the Bible into Latin rather than to teach Hebrew or Greek which was the original language. They did this in order to add their own books as they saw fit (see God's warning about doing this in Rev. 22:18) and in order to teach things that were unbiblical. All kinds of sick twisted teachings having nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

And the rest is history. They put people to death for the "crime" of reading or translating from the original Greek and Hebrew. Power hungry Satanic murderous Popes who ordered the suppression of these translated Bibles. Christians who longed for God's words, put to death! Disgusting and despicable.

Know your church history. Learn what the Bible says. Pick one up and read it yourself. God arranged His words to be had by ALL both great and small. The haughty Catholics still regard us Bible believing Christians as the enemy as you can see here. It is the same Demonic spirit you see emanating from Tim* and Patriot and some others. Some, not all.

If this was still the 15th century I am sure they would burn me alive for saying what I am saying they have such vile hatred and so despise the Truth.

"He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." Jn. 8:47.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:07AM

List of Catholic clerics executed in England 1530 - 1680
1530 - 1560

* Thomas Abel, priest, 1540
* John Allen, priest, 1538
* George Ashby (Asleby), monk, 1537

* Ralph Barnes, monk, 1537
* Elizabeth Barton, Benedictine nun, 1534
* John Beche, Abbot, Chester, 1539
* Thomas Belchiam, Franciscan friar, 1538
* Arthur Bell, Franciscan friar, 1543
* Richard Bere, Carthusian monk, 1537
* Robert Bird, priest, 1540
* William Bird, priest, 1540
* Laurence Blonham, monk, 1537
* Edward Bocking, Benedictine, 1537
* Edmund Brindholme, priest, 1544
* Anthony Brookby, Franciscan, 1538
* Thomas Brownel, Brigittine brother
* Edward Burden, priest, 1538
* William Burraby, priest, 1537

* James Cockerell, Prior of Gisborough Priory, 1537
* William Coe, monk, 1537
* Lawrence Cook, Carmelite. Prior of Doncaster Friary, 1540[1]
* Richard Coppinger, Benedictine, 1558
* Thomas Cort, Franciscan, 1537[2]
* Martin Coudres, Augustinian monk, 1544
* William Cowper, monk, 1537
* George Croft, priest, 1538

* John Davy, Carthusian, 1537
* John Dering, Benedictine, 1537

* John Eastgate, monk, 1537
* Richard Eastgate, monk, 1537
* Thomas Empson, Benedictine, 1540
* William Exmew, Carthusian monk, 1535
* John Eynon, Benedictine monk, 1539

* Hugh Faringdon, Abbot of Reading, 1539
* Richard Featherstone, Archdeacon, 1540
* John Fisher, Saint, Bishop, 1535
* John Forrest, Franciscan friar, 1538
* John Francis, monk, 1537

* German Gardiner, 1548
* Henry Gold, priest, 1537
* William Greenwood, Carthusian brother, 1537
* William Gylham, monk, 1537

* John Haile (or Hale), priest, 1535
* Richard Harrison, Abbot of Jervaulx, 1537
* William Haydock, monk, 1537
* Nicholas Heath, Prior of Lenton, 1537
* John Henmarsh, priest, 1537
* Robert Hobbes, Abbot of Woburn, 1537
* John Houghton, Saint, Carthusian prior, 1535

* John Ireland, priest, 1544

* Roger James, Benedictine, 1539
* Henry Jenkinson, monk, 1537

* Thomas Kendal, priest, 1537

* John Larke, priest, 1543
* Richard Laynton, monk, 1537
* Robert Leeche, layman, 1537
* Hugh Londale, monk, 1537

* Matthew Mackerel, Premonstratensian abbot, titular bishop of Chalcedon, 1537
* James Mallet, priest, 1537
* Richard Masters, priest, 1537
* Humphrey Middlemore, Carthusian monk, 1535

* Sebastian Newdigate, Carthusian monk, 1535

* John Paslew, Abbot of Whatley, 1537
* Paul of Saint William, Augustinian monk, 1544
* William Peterson, priest, 1540
* John Pickering, Benedictine, prior of York, 1537
* John Pickering, priest, 1537
* Walter Pierson, Carthusian, 1537
* Edward Powell, priest, 1540

* Thomas Redforth, priest, 1537
* Hugh Rich, Franciscan friar, 1534
* William Richardson, priest, 1540
* Richard Risby, Franciscan friar, 1534
* John Rochester, Carthusian monk, 1537
* John Rugg, monk, Reading, 1539

* Adam Sedbar, Abbot of Jervaulx, 1537
* Robert Singleton, priest, 1544
* Thomas Slythurst, priest, 1560
* John Stone, Saint, friar, 1538
* William Swale, monk, 1537

* John Tenant, monk, 1537
* John Thorne, monk, Glastonbury, 1539
* William Thyrsk, Cistercian, 1537
* William Trafford, Abbot of Sawley, 1537
* John Travers, monk, 1539

* Richard Wade, monk, 1537
* Friar Waire, Franciscan, 1539
* James Walworth, Carthusian monk, 1537
* Augustine Webster, Saint, Carthusian monk, 1535

* Sister Isabel Whitehead, Benedictine nun
* Richard Whiting, Abbot of Glastonbury, 1539

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:18AM

These Are Just A Portion Of Catholic Martyrs of the English Reformation .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:24AM

Anti-Catholic Bigot Margie Doesn't Wanna Bring Up The Catholic Martyrs Of The English Reformation .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:15AM

Your Anti-Catholic Slandering Lying Is Still Anti-Catholic Slandering Lying Multi-Bigot Broad .
You Can Attempt To Run From It , But Ya Can't Hide From It .

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:19AM

During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people. It was illegal to translate the Bible into the common languages, even though most people could not read the official Catholic Bible because it was in Latin, a language known only to the highly educated.

Consider some of the laws Rome made against Bible translation. These began to be made in the 13th century and were in effect through the 19th.

(1) In the year 1215 Pope Innocent III issued a law commanding “that they shall be seized for trial and penalties, WHO ENGAGE IN THE TRANSLATION OF THE SACRED VOLUMES, or who hold secret conventicles, or who assume the office of preaching without the authority of their superiors; against whom process shall be commenced, without any permission of appeal” (J.P. Callender, Illustrations of Popery, 1838, p. 387). Innocent “declared that as by the old law, the beast touching the holy mount was to be stoned to death, so simple and uneducated men were not to touch the Bible or venture to preach its doctrines” (Schaff, History of the Christian Church, VI, p. 723).

(2) The Council of Toulouse (1229) FORBADE THE LAITY TO POSSESS OR READ THE VERNACULAR TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE (Allix, Ecclesiastical History, II, p. 213). This council ordered that the bishops should appoint in each parish “one priest and two or three laics, who should engage upon oath to make a rigorous search after all heretics and their abettors, and for this purpose should visit every house from the garret to the cellar, together with all subterraneous places where they might conceal themselves” (Thomas M’Crie, History of the Reformation in Spain, 1856, p. 82). They also searched for the illegal Bibles.

(3) The Council of Tarragona (1234) “ORDERED ALL VERNACULAR VERSIONS TO BE BROUGHT TO THE BISHOP TO BE BURNED” (Paris Simms, Bible from the Beginning, p. 1929, 162).

(4) In 1483 the infamous Inquisitor General Thomas Torquemada began his reign of terror as head of the Spanish Inquisition; King Ferdinand and his queen “PROHIBITED ALL, UNDER THE SEVEREST PAINS, FROM TRANSLATING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE INTO THE VULGAR TONGUES, OR FROM USING IT WHEN TRANSLATED BY OTHERS” (M’Crie, p. 192). For more than three centuries the Bible in the common tongue was a forbidden book in Spain and multitudes of copies perished in the flames, together with those who cherished them.

(5) In England, too, laws were passed by the Catholic authorities against vernacular Bibles. The Constitutions of Thomas Arundel, issued in 1408 by the Archbishop of Canterbury, made this brash demand: “WE THEREFORE DECREE AND ORDAIN THAT NO MAN SHALL, HEREAFTER, BY HIS OWN AUTHORITY, TRANSLATE ANY TEXT OF THE SCRIPTURE INTO ENGLISH, OR ANY OTHER TONGUE, by way of a book, libel, or treatise, now lately set forth in the time of John Wyckliff, or since, or hereafter to be set forth, in part of in whole, privily or apertly, upon pain of greater excommunication, until the said translation be allowed by the ordinary of the place, or, if the case so require, by the council provincial” (John Eadie, The English Bible, vol. 1, 1876, p. 89). Consider Arundel’s estimation of the man who gave the English speaking people their first Bible: “This pestilential and most wretched John Wycliffe of damnable memory, a child of the old devil, and himself a child or pupil of Anti-Christ, who while he lived, walking in the vanity of his mind … crowned his wickedness by translating the Scriptures into the mother tongue” (Fountain, John Wycliffe, p. 45).

(6) Pope Leo X (1513-1521), who railed against Luther’s efforts to follow the biblical precept of faith alone and Scripture alone, called the fifth Lateran Council (1513-1517), which charged that no books should be printed except those approved by the Roman Catholic Church. “THEREFORE FOREVER THEREAFTER NO ONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PRINT ANY BOOK OR WRITING WITHOUT A PREVIOUS EXAMINATION, TO BE TESTIFIED BY MANUAL SUBSCRIPTION, BY THE PAPAL VICAR AND MASTER OF THE SACRED PALACE IN ROME, and in other cities and dioceses by the Inquisition, and the bishop or an expert appointed by him. FOR NEGLECT OF THIS THE PUNISHMENT WAS EXCOMMUNICATION, THE LOSS OF THE EDITION, WHICH WAS TO BE BURNED, a fine of 100 ducats to the fabric of St. Peters, and suspension from business for a year” (Henry Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages).

(7) These restrictions were repeated by the Council of Trent in 1546, which placed translations of the Bible, such as the German, Spanish, and English, on its list of prohibited books and forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Catholic bishop or inquisitor.

Following is a quote from Trent: “…IT SHALL NOT BE LAWFUL FOR ANYONE TO PRINT OR TO HAVE PRINTED ANY BOOKS WHATSOEVER DEALING WITH SACRED DOCTRINAL MATTERS WITHOUT THE NAME OF THE AUTHOR, OR IN THE FUTURE TO SELL THEM, OR EVEN TO HAVE THEM IN POSSESSION, UNLESS THEY HAVE FIRST BEEN EXAMINED AND APPROVED BY THE ORDINARY, UNDER PENALTY OF ANATHEMA AND FINE prescribed by the last Council of the Lateran” (Fourth session, April 8, 1546, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Translated by H.J. Schroeder, pp. 17-19).

These rules were affixed to the Index of Prohibited Books and were constantly reaffirmed by popes in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. These prohibitions, in fact, have never been rescinded. It is true that the Council of Trent did not absolutely forbid the reading of the Scriptures under all circumstances. It allowed a few exceptions. The priests were allowed to read the Latin Bible. Bishops and inquisitors were allowed to grant license for certain faithful Catholics to read the Scriptures in Latin as long as these Scriptures were accompanied by Catholic notes and if it was believed that these would not be “harmed” by such reading. In practice, though, the proclamations of Trent forbade the reading of the Holy Scriptures to at least nine-tenths of the people. Rome’s claim to possess authority to determine who can and cannot translate, publish, and read the Bible is one of the most blasphemous claims ever made under this sun.

The attitude of 16th century Catholic authorities toward the Bible was evident from a speech Richard Du Mans delivered at Trent, in which he said “that the Scriptures had become useless, since the schoolmen had established the truth of all doctrines; and though they were formerly read in the church, for the instruction of the people, and still read in the service, yet they ought not to be made a study, because the Lutherans only gained those who read them” (William M’Gavin, The Protestant, 1846, p. 144). It is true that the Bible leads men away from Roman Catholicism, but this is only because Roman Catholicism is not founded upon the Word of God!

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:33AM

You're An Obviously Crazed Driven Anti-Catholic Bigot with an Obvious Past . However The Facts Are Still The Facts , No Matter How Much Ya Attempt To Smear The Catholic Church .

Aaaand There Ain't No Victor , Just You Bigot Broad .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:25AM

B. The Middle Ages

The study of the Scriptures thrived throughout the middle ages, an era in which theology and Biblical studies were considered the "pinnacle of learning" and the "queen of the sciences." During the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church preserved and transmitted the Scriptures. It is said that two monks working full-time required four years to transcribe the entire Bible. Hence, it was due to their incredible value and their desirability as an object to steal that Bibles were sometimes chained down in churches and libraries (as were other books of high value), and not because of a Church conspiracy to keep the Bible from the masses, as some would assert. To the contrary, the Church did all in its power to transmit the written word during the Middle Ages as it also helped to preserve Western learning and culture.

This era extolled the search for truth wherever it was to be found. It is not surprising, therefore, that in this era universities, libraries, and the arts and sciences flourished. Biblical studies and interest in the original languages expanded in this time. For instance, the Council of Vienna (1311) prescribed that chairs for the study of oriental languages be erected in universities.

Perhaps the most well-known movement of the Middle Ages in Biblical studies was the School of Scholasticism. The great scholars of this age, among whom were Bernard of Clairvaux, Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, and Bonaventure, sought to synthesize reason and faith. This school of thought studied philosophy and the Natural Law in light of the word of God. For example, Aquinas explained the Christian faith in light of the teachings of Aristotle in an attempt to demonstrate that Christianity is a reasonable, logical, and truthful faith. It might be worth noting, however, that the Church was careful to maintain that in spite of the value of reason and philosophy, grace was needed to attain faith, hope, and charity. That is, one could reason his way to the truth using natural means, but only through supernatural grace could one believe and be saved.

Theologians of the Middle Ages relied heavily on the commentaries of the Fathers and were cool toward new and innovative interpretations. Scholars such as the English historian and theologian Bede, Peter Lombard, and Thomas Aquinas produced works that collected the writings and opinions of the Fathers. Another scholar of the time illustrated the times when he wrote, "It is better not to be taken up with supposedly new ideas, but to be filled from the fountain of the ancients." 15

Scriptural study also relied heavily on the allegorical sense of Scripture. Indeed, in the eyes of many today, some of these interpretations might seem "imaginative," if not absurd. Mark Holtz explains:

We are told by Hugh of St. Victor (c. 1090- 1141) that the length of Noah's Ark, 300 cubits, is a sign of the Cross, since the number 300 is represented in Greek by the letter tau (T), which has the shape of a cross. Rupert of Deutz (c. 1075-1129) tells us that Proverbs 19:12, "A king's wrath is like the growling of a lion," speaks of Christ in his crucifixion, since then the King of kings roared at the Devil. 16

Certainly, at least some of the interpretations proposed during the Middle Ages might be discarded today as an over-zealous use of the spiritual sense. However, it also reflects the deep conviction held by theologians of the age in the inspiration of Scripture. In contrast to liberal modern exegetes, they were able to see God as the ultimate author of Scripture. Consequently, even the most mundane verses were often seen as having spiritual significance and being open to allegorical interpretations.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:21AM

Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and went even further by forbidding licenses to be granted for the reading of the Bible under any conditions (Richard Littledale, Plain Reasons Against Joining the Church of Rome, 1924, p. 91).

(8) The restrictions against ownership of the vernacular Scriptures were repeated by the popes until the end of the 19th century:

Benedict XIV (1740-1758) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and issued an injunction “that no versions whatever should be suffered to be read but those which should be approved of by the Holy See, accompanied by notes derived from the writings of the Holy Fathers, or other learned and Catholic authors” (D.B. Ray, The Papal Controversy, p. 479).

It was during the reign of Pope Pius VII (1800-1823) that the modern Bible society movement began. The British and Foreign Bible Society was formed in March 1804, the purpose being “to encourage a wider circulation of the Holy Scriptures without note or comment.” Other societies were soon created for the same exalted purpose. Germany (1804); Ireland (1806); Canada (1807); Edinburgh (1809); Hungary (1811); Finland, Glasgow, Zurich, Prussia (1812); Russia (1813); Denmark and Sweden (1814); Netherlands, Iceland (1815); America, Norway, and Waldensian (1816); Australia, Malta, Paris (1817); etc. One of the societies began distributing a Polish Bible in Poland. The Pope, instead of praising the Lord that the eternal Word of God was being placed into the hands of the multitudes of spiritually needy people, showed his displeasure by issuing a bull against Bible Societies on June 29, 1816. The Pope expressed himself as “shocked” by the circulation of the Scriptures in the Polish tongue. He characterized this practice as a “most crafty device, by which the very foundations of religion are undermined,” “a pestilence,” which he must “remedy and abolish,” “a defilement of the faith, eminently dangerous to souls.” Pope Pius VII also rebuked Archbishop Buhusz of Mohiley in Russia because of his endorsement of a newly formed Bible society (Kenneth Latourette, The Nineteenth Century in Europe, p. 448). The papal brief, dated September 3, 1816, declared that “if the Sacred Scriptures were allowed in the vulgar tongue everywhere without discrimination, more detriment than benefit would arise” (Jacobus, Roman Catholic and Protestant Versions Compared, p. 236).

Pope Leo XII (1823-29) issued a bull to the Bishops in Ireland, May 3, 1824, in which he affirmed the Council of Trent and condemned Bible distribution. “It is no secret to you, venerable brethren, that a certain Society, vulgarly called The Bible Society, is audaciously spreading itself through the whole world. After despising the traditions of the holy Fathers, and in opposition to the well-known Decree of the Council of Trent, this Society has collected all its forces, and directs every means to one object,--the translation, or rather the perversion, of the Bible into the vernacular languages of all nations. ... IF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES BE EVERYWHERE INDISCRIMINATELY PUBLISHED, MORE EVIL THAN ADVANTAGE WILL ARISE THENCE, on account of the rashness of men” (Bull of Leo XII, May 3, 1824; cited from Charles Elliott, Delineation of Roman Catholicism, 1851, p. 21). This Pope re-published the Index of Prohibited Books on March 26, 1825, and mandated that the decrees of the Council of Trent be enforced against distribution of Scriptures (R.P. Blakeney, Popery in Its Social Aspect, p. 137).

Pope Gregory XVI (1831-46) ratified the decrees of his predecessors, forbidding the free distribution of Scripture. In his encyclical of May 8, 1844, this Pope stated: “Moreover, we confirm and renew the decrees recited above, DELIVERED IN FORMER TIMES BY APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, AGAINST THE PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, READING, AND POSSESSION OF BOOKS OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES TRANSLATED INTO THE VULGAR TONGUE” (James Wylie, The Papacy, 1867, p. 182). This encyclical was delivered against Bible societies in general, and mentioned in particular the Christian Alliance, which was formed in 1843 in New York for the purpose of distributing Scriptures.

Pope Pius IX (1846-78) in November 1846 issued an encyclical letter in which he denounced all opponents of Roman Catholicism, among which he included “those insidious Bible Societies.” He said the Bible societies were “renewing the crafts of the ancient heretics” by distributing to “all kinds of men, even the least instructed, gratuitously and at immense expense, copies in vast numbers of the books of the Sacred Scriptures translated against the holiest rules of the Church into various vulgar tongues...” What a horrible crime! Distributing the Scriptures freely to all people! It was Pius IX who had himself and his fellow popes declared “infallible” at the Vatican I Council in 1870.

Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) published an “Apostolic Constitution” in 1897 which stated: “All versions of the vernacular, even by Catholics, are altogether prohibited, unless approved by the Holy See, or published under the vigilant care of the Bishops, with annotations taken from the Fathers of the Church and learned Catholic writers” (Melancthon Jacobus, Roman Catholic and Protestant Bibles, p. 237).

Where the Roman Catholic Church held power the Bible was always scarce. Consider a few examples: When the government of New Orleans was taken over in 1803, “it was not till after a long search for a Bible to administer the oath of office that a Latin Vulgate was at last procured from a priest” (William Canton, The Bible and the Anglo-Saxon People, I, p. 245). In Quebec, as late as 1826, MANY PEOPLE HAD NEVER HEARD OF THE NEW TESTAMENT (Canton, II, 61). The situation was the same in South America, where “for about three centuries, were almost entirely without the Bible.” It was 1831 before the first Bible was printed in Spanish America, and even then the copies were exorbitantly expensive (Canton, II, 347). Thus, even when Catholic authorities finally printed some Bibles, they were priced far beyond the reach of most people. Between December 1907 and February 1908 a diligent search was made to determine how many Bibles were available in Catholic Ireland. Not a portion of the Bible was available in bookshops in Athlone, Balbriggan, Drogheda, Mullingar, Wexford, and Clonmel. A shop assistant at Mullingar said, “I never saw a Catholic Bible.” When asked about the New Testament, a sales person at the The Catholic Truth Society replied, “We don’t keep it.” Those who did the extensive survey concluded “that IN NINE TENTHS OF THE CITIES, TOWNS, AND VILLAGES OR IRELAND A ROMAN CATHOLIC COULD NOT PROCURE A COPY OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BIBLE OR NEW TESTAMENT” (Alexander Robertson, The Papal Conquest, 1909, pp. 166-167).

These facts uncover only the tip of iceberg in regard to Rome’s attitude toward the Bible in former times. Our book “Rome and the Bible: The History of the Bible through the Centuries and Rome’s Persecution against It” documents this more extensively. It is available from Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 61368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org.

THE WALDENSES (also called Vaudois or Albigenses) are an example of what occurred during this period. They lived in the mountains of Italy and France and eventually spread throughout Europe; they refused to join the Catholic Church or recognize the Pope. They received the Bible as the sole source for faith and practice and had their own translations, which they diligently reproduced in hand-written copies. Rome persecuted the Waldenses throughout the Dark Ages up until the 18th century.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:37AM

We're Gonna Stay On Top Of Your Slandering Bigoted Anti=Catholic Lies Bigot Broad .

American Spectator readers Are Seeing How Driven Ya Are To Smear Up The Catholic Church ,Cause You're A Lapsed Catholic With An Obvious And Crazed Ax To Grind . Take It Up With Your Catholic Mommy & Daddy New Joisey Broad .

We Catholics Ain't Takin' Your Crap .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:29AM

A. Old-English and Middle-English

Today many still believe that the Catholic Church endeavored to keep the Bible from the people. This demonstrates the Church's dismal performance in public relations over the past 500 years, for nothing could be farther from the truth.

Indeed, it was at the request of Pope Damasus in the late 4th century that St. Jerome undertook the creation of the Latin Vulgate. The eminent scholarship of St. Jerome produced this translation as an accurate standard and rendered all previous Latin translations obsolete. This text would serve as the authoritative Scripture for the Western Church for the next fifteen-hundred years. The Council of Trent reiterated its authority and endorsed its use "in disputations, in lectures and in preaching."

In order to understand the Vulgate's value, one must first grasp that throughout the Middle Ages and even until quite recently, Latin was not the dead language it is today. In Western Europe throughout the Middle Ages, anyone who was literate read and wrote in Latin. Education was conducted entirely in Latin. It was the language of all men of learning and culture. Thus, for the literate people of England, the Vulgate served as the primary Bible during the Middle Ages.

However, this is not to admit the charge that the Bible was kept in Latin during the Middle Ages. In the seventh century poetic renderings of portions of the Bible were done by a monk named Caedmon. During the following century the well-known Venerable Bede undertook a translation into the vernacular. Many other partial translations were done during the next couple centuries, including one of the Psalms attributed to King Alfred the Great.

In 1066 the Normans conquered England, and Middle English and French replaced Old English (Saxon). From this time we have various manuscripts such as the paraphrase of Orm (ca. 1150) and the Salus Animæ (ca. 1250). The existence of translations during this period is affirmed by the original preface to the King James Bible and Sir Thomas More, who wrote: "The whole Bible long before Wycliff's day was by virtuous and well-learned men translated into the English tongue, and by good and godly people with devotion and soberness well and reverently read."

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:43AM

B. 14th Century to the Reformation

During the late 14th century, the language of the English people began to change drastically, approaching what we would recognize today as the English language. During this period there were several translations done of parts of the Bible before Wyclif's, including the Psalters attributed to William Shoreham and Richard Rolle, among others. During the 1380s the translation of the Vulgate into the vernacular attributed to John Wyclif was composed in separate editions. The Synod of Oxford, convened in 1408, condemned translations unapproved by the Church. This was done because the Church viewed Wyclif's translation as erroneous (such as translations by the Jehovah's Witnesses might be viewed today).

Throughout the entirety of the Middle Ages, it was the monks who painstakingly preserved the Scriptures. Clergy were often required to know by heart the entire psalter. Liturgies, homilies, music, and commentaries of this age also abundantly suffice to demonstrate the clergy's grasp of the Bible.

Regarding the laity, the words recorded in the form of literature, legal documents, correspondence, etc., provide ample evidence that the lay people were exceedingly familiar with Scripture. Though the common people of that time were largely illiterate, the Bible was conveyed to them through means other than reading, such as instruction in school, church sermons, drama, and art. Churches themselves were "visual Bibles," in which the many statues and stained-glass windows served to communicate the stories and teachings of the Bible.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:28AM

The Catholic church is the biggest cult on the face of this Earth.
Know your church history. Find out what the Bible says, you're "allowed" to read it now.

Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by Him. ~John 14:6.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 12:42AM

You're The Biggest Anti-Catholic Hate Machine on American Spectator And We Catholics Ain't Takin' Your Crap .

You're Spittin' In Jesus' Face With Your Insane Bigotry .

Now take Your Own Lapsed Catholic Ax To Grind And Go Take It Up With Your Catholic Mommy And Daddy New Joisey Bigot Broad .

Patriot| 10.13.10 @ 1:27AM

The Catholic Church is not a cult, Margie--but you most surely are a bigoted and very nasty piece of work. Crazed zealots like you give real Christians a bad name. You are an ugly human being.

I have noticed that you've cleaned up your foul mouth, though. lol

She's not worth your distress, Tim*, she's not worth dirt.

God knows your heart, Tim*, and God knows the many millions of generous and loving Catholics around the world who remain true to His Word.

Peace, Tim*.

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 1:58AM

I cannot be considered a "lapsed Catholic" since I was under the age of 12 and my parents made me go to Catechism, et al. When I became old enough to realize and learn the Bible I found that it did not agree with the doctrines of Catholicism and that the gospel of Jesus Christ was not that of theirs.

So Tim8's rabid lying is just that, lying.

Of course I hate perverse teachings and I also hate and abhor liars and false teachers. I revere the Jesus of the Bible and would encourage anyone to make certain they read what it says and stick to it.

"He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." Jn. 8:47.

The words of God are in the Bible and if you reject them, you reject Him, and like Tim* truly do spit in Jesus' face, and then you will be spitting in the faces of those who honor Him by honoring His words.
“And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord” 2 Chronicles 19:2.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 2:08AM

You're A Hate Machine And Ya Front A Hypocritical Fraud Christian Posture To Workout Your Hang Ups And Nasty Ass Disposition On Other People .

We Catholics Ain't Takin' Your Crap .

Now Go Pull This Crap On Your Catholic Parents New Joisey Bitch .

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 2:35AM

Yeah we can see who that hate machine is.

Patriot| 10.13.10 @ 4:58AM

"And now there remain faith, hope and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity."

We need more love and less judgment.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 5:41AM

You're A Hate Provokin' Bitch .You're Gettin' Back What You Started & What You Provoke .
What Comes Around , Goes Around Now .

Aaand , I'm Gonna Keep Stickin' Your Last Worditis Obsession Up Your Fat New Joisey Broad Ass.
Got It Burp , The Wonder Bigot .

Ya Wanna War With Catholics Ya Anti-Catholic Piece Of Joisey White Trash Ya Got It Now .

Come & Get It Pig .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 1:32AM

Gotcha Patriot .

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 5:51AM

C. The Reformation and the Douay-Rheims

After the advent of the printing press in the 15th century, the first printed Bible in the vernacular in England was that of William Tyndale. In defiance of his bishop he left England and settled in Worms, Germany, where he met Luther. His translation was completed abroad and smuggled into England in large numbers. The translation included anti-Catholic footnotes and was considered erroneous by the bishops of England. The calm and fair-minded St. Thomas More wrote of Tyndale's translation that to "find errors in Tyndale's book [was] like studying to find water in the sea." 20 Not surprisingly, the translation was condemned and copies were burned.

Over the course of the 16th century, a host of other English Bibles emerged. These included the Coverdale Bible and the Geneva Bible, which, as the name suggests, was written in Geneva by Protestants who followed John Calvin and Theodore Beza. Also completed was the Bishops Bible, which was done under Queen Elizabeth by the Church of England to counteract the Calvinist influence in the Geneva Bible.

Catholics fled to the European continent under Queen Elizabeth's reign. A group of Catholic translators began working on the New Testament in Rheims, France. The completed text was presented in 1582. The Old Testament was then translated at the English College in Douay, France and completed in 1609. According to the translators, the translation was undertaken "with the object of healthfully counteracting the corruptions whereby the heretics have so long lamentably deluded almost the whole of our countrymen." The translation was based upon the Latin Vulgate and compared with the original Greek. To answer why they had utilized the Vulgate as the basis instead of the original languages, they responded that the Vulgate "is not [only] better then [all] other Latin translations, but [than] the [Greek] text [itself], in those places where they disagree . . . the same Latin [has been far] better conserved from corruptions." 21

During the mid 18th century, Bishop Challoner significantly revised the Douay-Rheims to eliminate obscure words and render the text more readable. The influence of the Latin in the Douay-Rheims is evident in the translation. The Douay-Rheims also influenced the translators of the King James Version. One example was the adoption of "charity" to translate the Greek word agape (a transliteration of the Latin caritas), which was used twenty-eight times in the KJV.

Tim*| 10.13.10 @ 6:12AM

List of Catholic Martyrs of the English Reformation
1561 - 1600

* John Ackridge, priest, 1585
* Thomas Ackridge, Franciscan, 1583
* John Adams, priest, 1586
* Thomas Alfield, priest, 1585
* John Almond, Cistercian, 1585
* John Amias, priest, 1589
* Robert Anderton, priest, 1586
* William Andleby, priest, 1597

* William Baldwin (Bawden), priest, 1588
* Christopher Bales, priest, 1590
* Thomas Bedal, priest, 1590
* George Beesley, priest, 1591
* William Blackburne, priest, 1586
* John Bodey, priest, 1583
* John Boste, Saint, priest, 1594
* Richard Bowes, priest, 1590
* Alexander Briant, Jesuit priest, 1581
* James Brushford, priest, 1593
* Christopher Buxton, priest, died Canterbury, 1588

* Edmund Campion, Jesuit priest, 1581
* James Claxton (Clarkson), priest, 1588
* James Clayton, priest, 1588
* Henry Cole, priest, 1580
* Laurence Collier, Franciscan, 1590
* John Collins, priest, 1584
* Henry Comberford, priest, 1584
* John Cornelius, Jesuit priest, 1594
* Thomas Cotesmore, priest, 1584
* Thomas Cottam, Jesuit priest, 1582
* Richard Creagh, archbishop of Armagh, 1585
* Ralph Crockett, priest, 1588
* Alexander Crowe, priest, 1587
* Thomas Crowther, priest, 1585

* Robert Dalby, priest, York, 1589
* William Davies, priest, 1594
* William Dean, priest, 1588
* Richard (Robert) Dibdale, priest, 1586
* Francis Dicconson, priest, 1590
* Roger Dicconson, priest, 1591
* George Douglas, priest, 1587
* Anthony Draycott, priest, 1570
* Edmund Duke, priest, 1590

* Edward Edwardes (alias Campion), priest, 1588

* John Feckenham, Benedictine, abbot of Westminster, 1585
* Thomas Felton, Franciscan, 1588
* James Fenn, priest, 1584
* John Finch, 1584
* John Finglow, priest, 1586
* William Freeman, priest, 1595

* Thomas Gabyt, Cistercian, 1575
* Nicholas Garlick, priest, 1588
* Miles Gerard, priest, 1590
* Nicholas Grene, priest, 1571
* - Gretus, priest
* John Griffith (alias Jones), Saint, Franciscan friar, 1598
* William Gunter, priest, 1588

* William Hambledon, priest, 1585
* John Hambley, priest, 1587
* Everard Hanse, priest, 1581
* Nicholas Harpsfield, priest, 1575
* William Harrington, priest, 1594
* John Harrison, priest, 1586
* William Harrison, priest, 1594
* William Hart, priest, 1583
* William Hartley, priest, 1588
* Thomas Harwood, priest, 1586
* Richard Hatton, priest, 1584
* George Haydock, priest, 1584
* Thomas Hemerford, priest, 1584
* John Hewitt, priest, 1588
* Richard Hill, priest, 1590
* John Hogg, priest, 1590
* Thomas Holford, priest, 1588
* Richard Holliday, priest, 1590
* Robert Holmes, priest, 1584
* Richard Horner, priest, 1598

* Francis Ingleby, priest, 1586
* John Ingram, priest, 1594

* Edward James, priest, 1588
* Edmund Jennings (Genings), Saint, priest, 1591
* John Jetter, priest, 1585
* Lawrence Johnson, priest, 1582
* Robert Johnson, priest, 1582
* Edward Jones, priest, 1590

* Luke Kirby, Saint, priest, 1582

* Joseph Lambton, priest, 1593
* Richard Leigh, priest, 1588
* James Lomax, priest, 1584
* John Lowe, priest, 1586
* Robert Ludlam, priest, 1588

* William Marsden, priest, 1586
* Roger Martin, priest, 1592
* Cuthbert Mayne, Saint, priest, 1577
* Thomas Metham, Jesuit, 1592
* Anthony Middleton, priest, 1590
* Robert Morton, priest, 1588
* Thomas Mudde, Cistercian, 1583
* John Munden, priest, 1584

* John Nelson, priest, 1577
* George Nichols, priest, 1589
* John Nutter, priest, 1584
* Robert Nutter, priest, 1600

* Edward Oldcorne, Jesuit priest, 1561
* Edward Osbaldeston, priest, 1594

* Antony Page, priest, 1593
* Thomas Palasor, priest, 1600
* William Patenson, priest, 1592
* John Payne, Saint, priest, 1582
* Thomas Pilchard, priest, 1587
* Polydore Plasden, priest, 1591
* Thomas Plumtree, priest, 1570
* Edward Pole, priest, 1585
* Thomas Pormort, priest, 1592

* Alexander Rawlins, priest, 1595
* Christopher Robinson, priest, Carlisle, 1598
* John Robinson, priest, 1588
* John Roche, priest, 1588
* Stephen Rowsham, priest, 1587

* John Sandys, priest, 1586
* Montford Scott, priest, 1591
* Thomas Sedgwick, priest, 1573
* Richard Sergeant, priest, 1586
* Martin Sherson, priest, 1587
* John Shert, priest, 1582
* Peter Snow, priest, 1598
* Robert Southwell, priest, 1595
* William Spenser, priest, 1589
* Thomas Sprott, priest, 1600
* James Stonnes, priest, 1585
* John Story, Chancellor to Bishop Bonner, 1571
* Edward Stransham, priest, 1586
* Robert Sutton, priest, 1587
* Edmund Sykes, priest, 1587
* Robert Sympson (or Richard Sympson), priest, 1588

* Gabriel Thimelby, priest, 1587
* Richard Thirkeld, priest, 1583
* James Thompson, priest, York, 1582
* John Thompson, Jesuit
* William Thomson, priest, 1586
* Hugh Taylor, priest, York, 1585
* Robert Thorpe, priest, 1591
* Edward Thwing, priest, 1600

* Lawrence Vaux, priest, 1585

* Roger Wakeman, priest, 1584
* Sir Edward Waldegrave, 1561
* Henry Walpole, Saint, priest, 1595
* Edward Waterson, priest, 1593
* William Way (alias May or Flower), priest, 1588
* Swithin Wells, priest, 1591
* Richard Weston, Jesuit
* Christopher Wharton, priest, 1600
* Eustace White, priest, 1591
* Robert Wilcox, priest, 1588
* Richard Williams, priest, 1592
* Thomas Wood, priest, 1588
* John Woodcock, Franciscan, 1646
* Nicholas Woodfen, priest, 1586

* Richard Yaxley, priest, 1589

Margie| 10.13.10 @ 12:02PM

Exactly. They broke away from the perverted and murderous Pope & Catholic church. THAT IS WHY THEY WERE MARTYRED!

The English Reformation was the series of events in 16th-century England by which the Church of England first broke away from the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church.

Now get your facts right, rabid snake.

Patriot| 10.14.10 @ 5:23PM

I pity you, Margie. You are sick with hatred for others who don't march in lock step with you.

You are not Christ-like in word or manner, you merely use Him as weapon against those who disagree with you. Where is Christ's compassion in your heart, Margie?

As a Roman Catholic I am called to witness Christ by showing my love for all of His creation--that is what my Catholic faith requires of me.

It's obvious that love and compassion play no part in your "Christianity." You are a liar and a fool.

The Spectacle Blog

Elbert Guillory: ‘Why I Am a Republican’

Patrick Ryan | 10:13AM

The One Party State

F.H. Buckley | 9:47AM

Cummings Accused of Subverting IRS Investigation

Jeffrey Lord | 6:20AM

Let Pitchers Throw Complete Games

Aaron Goldstein | 12:10AM

Thoughts on New U.S.-Taliban Peace Talks

Aaron Goldstein | 6.18.13

Thank You, Bobby Jindal

Matt Purple | 6.18.13

Buzzfeed Faces $3.6 Million Lawsuit for Copyright Infringement

Kaylin Bugos | 6.18.13

Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder

Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13

Latest Headlines

Green Flags, Yellow Flags, and Black Flags

John Tabin|49 comments

Barack’s Brave New World Blarney

George Neumayr|42 comments

There’s Something About Cambridge

Daniel J. Flynn|26 comments

Obama’s Unaffordable Act

Peter Ferrara|59 comments

Celebrating Our Lady of Paris

Joseph A. Harriss|9 comments

Charter Schooling? Why Not Charter Housing?

Wayne Woodman|16 comments

Cash for Organs?

Eric Boehm|19 comments

Back in the Fray

Kyle Peterson|102 comments

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?