medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
As in most cases, the issue has nuances.
In the section on "The Wycliffite Versions" in The Cambridge
History of the Bible, vol. 2, Henry Hargreaves writes, "But
despite such general objections [to the use of vernacular scriptures], no
universal and absolute prohibition of the translation of the Scriptures
into the vernacular nor of the use of such translations by clergy and
laity was ever issued by any council of the Church or by any pope. ... On
the other hand, those responsible for the day-to-day administration of
the Church, particularly those responsible for the extirpation of heresy,
diocesan bishops, papal commissioners and inquisitors, all seem to have
worked on the principle that possession of vernacular Scriptures was in
itself sufficient evidence to warrant the presumption of heresy."
(pp. 391-2)
Steve Fanning
At 07:01 AM 4/11/2003 -0400, you wrote:
The implication was that the
translation itself was considered heresy - I was under the impression
that it was the interpretations of the Bible a translation could lead to
and the consequent challenges to the authority of the Church that were
the real cause of concern? Hadn't large parts of the Bible been
translated into Old English under King Alfred? I know Waldes got
into trouble - but wasn't that because of unauthorised preaching based on
the translations of the Bible he commissioned? Did attitudes
towards translating the Bible harden over the Middle
Ages?
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
