From Cardinal Merry de Val, "Forward," in the Index of Prohibited
Books, revised and published by order of His Holiness Pope Pius XI (new
ed.; [Vatican City]: Vatican Polyglot Press, 1930), pp. ix-xi:
[p. ix] What many, indeed fail to appreciate, and what, moreover
non-Catholics consider a grave abuse — as they put it
of the Roman Curia, is the action of the Church in hindering the printing
and circulation of Holy Writ in the vernacular.
Fundamentally however, this ac- [p. x] cusation is based on calumny. During
the first twelve centuries Christians were
highly familiar with the text of Holy Scripture, as is evident from the
homilies of the Fathers and the sermons of the
mediaeval preachers; nor did the ecclesiastical authorities ever intervene
to prevent this. It was only in consequence of
heretical abuses, introduced particularly by the Waldenses, the Albigenses,
the followers of Wyclif, and by Protestants
broadly speaking (who with sacrilegious mutilations of Scripture and
arbitrary interpretations vainly sought to justify
themselves in the eyes of the people; twisting the text of the Bible to
support erroneous doctrines condemned by the
whole history of the Church) that the Pontiffs and the Councils were
obliged on more than one occasion to control and
sometimes even forbid the use of the Bible in the vernacular...
This quote from his Eminence Cardinal Merry de Val, shows that Michale
Shelfer's web site, quoted above, is not being straightforward in this
presentation of texts. He avoids the obvious context of all the
disciplinary quotes he makes: namely that the vernacular translations being
condemn or prohibited were erroneous translations motivated by those who
intended to protray the meaning of scripture other than that which its
historical authors intended.
But then again that is M. Shelfer's intent on his web site: ergo..
A scholar should consider the context of his sources, primary and secondary.
Sincerely in Christ,
Br. Alexis Bugnolo