Was Bible Possession banned by the Catholic Church

[The Learner]

Good printing history there my friend. You will perhaps before long shed you designation as, Learner, so as to take on a new one, Teacher.

 

[Hobie]

Arianism is a heresy named for Arius, a priest and false teacher in the early fourth century AD in Alexandria, Egypt. One of the earliest and probably the most important item of debate among early Christians was the subject of Christ’s deity. Was Jesus truly God in the flesh, or was Jesus a created being? Was Jesus God or not? Arius denied the deity of the Son of God, holding that Jesus was created by God as the first act of creation and that the nature of Christ was anomoios (“unlike”) that of God the Father. Arianism, then, is the view that Jesus is a finite created being with some divine attributes, but He is not eternal and not divine in and of Himself.

What is Arianism? | GotQuestions.org

What is Arianism? Is Jesus the highest and first created being?

www.gotquestions.org

Arius and Nicea – Fuller Seminary

www.fuller.edu

Yes, but not quite seeing your point.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

My niece is Catholic and doesn't possess or read a bible.

Why would she?

It be a member of the catholics and remain in good standing one must agree to not think for themselves and instead bow down in submission to the cat with the collar on.

During my years as active Catholic [ended in 1961],

Glad you got delivered!

 

[Hobie]

Here is another study on this..."Roman Catholic Repression of the Bible: The Roman Catholic church’s repression of the Bible in vernacular languages has been documented since the Middle Ages, with a few highlights being Pope John X in 920 banning the use of the Old Church Slavonic translation, the Second Council of Tarragona in 1234 banning ownership of a Bible in any Romance language, and Archbishop Richard Arundel’s 1409 prohibition of translating the Bible into English. Severe restrictions on the ownership of vernacular Bibles were laid out in Pope Pius IV’s Tridentine Index, being relaxed somewhat in 1896 by Pope Leo XII. The various bans and restrictions on vernacular Bibles focused on concerns that the laity, left to their own devices and apart from the direction of the clergy, would wrongly interpret the Scriptures. The aforementioned bans against English translations were accompanied by an opposition to John Wycliffe’s belief in the “priesthood of all believers,” a doctrine suggested by 1 Peter 2:9 in which followers of Christ are called “a royal priesthood” and thus, according to Wycliffe, not needing the mediation of priests to interpret the Bible. The ban on English Bible translations was also accompanied by the concern that the laity would read passages such as Ephesians 2:8-9—“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not of your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast”—according to Wycliff’s proto-Reformational hermeneutic and thus come into conflict with official Church teachings regarding matters of salvation."...

 

[The Learner]

View attachment 39746

Start at

• #42

 

[Hobie]

Start at

• #42

I know Arianism, but what was your focus or relevance to the issue, can you clue me. It must be the cold, I got my heaviest winter jackets and still freezing, and I'm in Florida..

 

[The Learner]

Yes, but not quite seeing your point.

In some churches it may have been taught. One of the emphors, favored Arianism for a time.

 

[The Learner]

oh I made it to here, go figure

 

[Hobie]

Now as to why they didnt want Bibles in the hands of the people, its quiet simple, they were corrupting the truth. Putting in paganism and the old gods they worshiped, but first they had to get their corrupted doctrines by the truth given by the Bile. Here is a major one they pushed through of the old gods/goddesses..

'To assist the Roman Catholic Church with their quest to deify Mary as the Queen of Heaven, it was deemed necessary, over the course of time, to assign to her the attribute of a sinless and perfect life, which meant there was a need to accredit her with, what they have termed, an immacualte conception; that is, a completely sinless nature from the very womb of her own mother.

This could have led to several complications, of course, because, how far back do you go? If Jesus’ mother was sinless, under the Roman Catholic doctrine of original sin, how could she have been born in the sin of her own mother? Would there have been a need to also attribute sinlessness and immaculacy to Mary’s mother, and so on.

So, to illustrate the Roman Catholic desire to elevate Mary as venerated as the Queen of Heaven, which is the name of a blasphemous goddess, I present from the very Vatican site, AD CAELI REGINAM, which begins with the following astonishing statement:

From the earliest ages of the catholic church a Christian people, whether in time of triumph or more especially in time of crisis, has addressed prayers of petition and hymns of praise and veneration to the Queen of Heaven. And never has that hope wavered which they placed in the Mother of the Divine King, Jesus Christ; nor has that faith ever failed by which we are taught that Mary, the Virgin Mother of God, reigns with a mother’s solicitude over the entire world, just as she is crowned in heavenly blessedness with the glory of a Queen.

Is Roman Catholic Doctrine Biblical? The Immaculate Conception

Now this is a very interesting doctrine. The Immaculate Conception of Mary. To assist the Roman Catholic Church with their quest to deify Mary as the Queen of Heaven, it was deemed necessary, over …

signposts02.wordpress.com

 

[The Learner]

Now as to why they didnt want Bibles in the hands of the people, its quiet simple, they were corrupting the truth. Putting in paganism and the old gods they worshiped, but first they had to get their corrupted doctrines by the truth given by the Bile. Here is a major one they pushed through of the old gods/goddesses..

'To assist the Roman Catholic Church with their quest to deify Mary as the Queen of Heaven, it was deemed necessary, over the course of time, to assign to her the attribute of a sinless and perfect life, which meant there was a need to accredit her with, what they have termed, an immacualte conception; that is, a completely sinless nature from the very womb of her own mother.

This could have led to several complications, of course, because, how far back do you go? If Jesus’ mother was sinless, under the Roman Catholic doctrine of original sin, how could she have been born in the sin of her own mother? Would there have been a need to also attribute sinlessness and immaculacy to Mary’s mother, and so on.

So, to illustrate the Roman Catholic desire to elevate Mary as venerated as the Queen of Heaven, which is the name of a blasphemous goddess, I present from the very Vatican site, AD CAELI REGINAM, which begins with the following astonishing statement:

From the earliest ages of the catholic church a Christian people, whether in time of triumph or more especially in time of crisis, has addressed prayers of petition and hymns of praise and veneration to the Queen of Heaven. And never has that hope wavered which they placed in the Mother of the Divine King, Jesus Christ; nor has that faith ever failed by which we are taught that Mary, the Virgin Mother of God, reigns with a mother’s solicitude over the entire world, just as she is crowned in heavenly blessedness with the glory of a Queen.

Is Roman Catholic Doctrine Biblical? The Immaculate Conception

Now this is a very interesting doctrine. The Immaculate Conception of Mary. To assist the Roman Catholic Church with their quest to deify Mary as the Queen of Heaven, it was deemed necessary, over …

signposts02.wordpress.com

when the bible was first printed, there was limited number of copies and were too expensive.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

when the bible was first printed, there was limited number of copies and were too expensive.

That's why they invested the copy machine... so they could make copies and pass bibles out to everyone... and they upset the catholics too!

 

[Hobie]

when the bible was first printed, there was limited number of copies and were too expensive.

Yes, that must be the reason they were burned and kept away from the people, I dont think so....

 

[BreadOfLife]

Everyone needs one, or they can tell you anything and lead you to the wrong path..

Gee – it’s done Protestants and quasi-Christian sects a lot of good.
They ALL got Bibles and the ALL interpreted them differently and invented ALL sorts of different and even competing doctrines.

For 1500 years people didn’t have Biles. Did they ALL go to Hell?
What about the people in the first 300 years who didn’t even HAVE a Bible to reference??

The problem isn’t about owning a Bible.
It’s about believing the TRUTH . . .

Rom. 10:17
So faith comes from HEARING, and hearing through the word of Christ.

 

[BreadOfLife]

My niece is Catholic and doesn't possess or read a bible.

Then, she's a poor excuse for a Catholic.
The Catholic Church gave the Bible to the world and she should know that.

 

[BreadOfLife]

@Hobie - time for a History Lesson . . .

The “ban” on owning or making copies of the Bible came about because of ABUSES.

Before the invention of the printing press in the 15th century – Bibles were handwritten. It took MANY years to complete a SINGLE copy, so they were not only time-consuming – but very expensive to produce. Usually, only the wealthy could afford to pay to have one reproduced.

This led to many errors and spurious versions being create and passed around. They contained not only grammatical errors but outright heresies.

At the Council of Toulouse in the 13th century, the Church decided to prohibit the copying or owning of these unauthorized versions. Had it NOT been for the Church placing this prohibition, who knows HOW many more heresies would have been invented.

As for the Church “keeping the Bible away from the common people”, as is often LIED about – the “common” people were largely ILLITERATE anyway and would have NO USE for a Bible. It is estimated that as many as Eighty-Five percent (85%) of the public was functionally illiterate – a fact that changed very little until the 19th century.

 

[Hobie]

@Hobie - time for a History Lesson . . .

The “ban” on owning or making copies of the Bible came about because of ABUSES.

Before the invention of the printing press in the 15th century – Bibles were handwritten. It took MANY years to complete a SINGLE copy, so they were not only time-consuming – but very expensive to produce. Usually, only the wealthy could afford to pay to have one reproduced.

This led to many errors and spurious versions being create and passed around. They contained not only grammatical errors but outright heresies.

At the Council of Toulouse in the 13th century, the Church decided to prohibit the copying or owning of these unauthorized versions. Had it NOT been for the Church placing this prohibition, who knows HOW many more heresies would have been invented.

As for the Church “keeping the Bible away from the common people”, as is often LIED about – the “common” people were largely ILLITERATE anyway and would have NO USE for a Bible. It is estimated that as many as Eighty-Five percent (85%) of the public was functionally illiterate – a fact that changed very little until the 19th century.

Yes, lets go into history, it was all because of a misunderstanding.......

"History of the Inquisition of the Catholic Church​

The Inquisition can trace its origin to 1184 when Pope Lucius III commanded the various bishops of the Catholic Church to begin to search for heresies in their jurisdictions. A judicial inquiry was called an inquisition, hence the origin of the name. For the first few decades, these heretical inquisitions were piecemeal due to the power that bishops had in conducting them; bishops sometimes failed to carry them out at all. This changed in 1227 when Pope Gregory IX began to appoint judges whose specific responsibility was to carry out inquisitions into heresy. These were the first Inquisitors.
By the mid-1200s, Inquisitors developed a common set of procedures documented in handbooks. In 1252, Pope Innocent IV explicitly permitted Inquisitors to implement the punishment of torture upon those who did not change their heretical ways or compel confessions. By the 1300s, persecution and torture of so-called heretics were occurring across Europe, though it is impossible to know for sure how large the Inquisition was. Therefore, the Inquisition should not be considered an event but rather an institution that carried out its business over many decades."

"To respond to the above-mentioned questions, this Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, after having asked the Holy Father, announces that the Index remains morally binding, in light of the demands of natural law, in so far as it admonishes the conscience of Christians to be on guard for those writings that can endanger faith and morals. But, at the same time, it no longer has the force of ecclesiastical law with the attached censure.

— “Notification regarding the abolition of the Index of books,” June 14, 1966

The Index Librorum Prohibitorum was a list of books banned for lay Roman Catholic readership. Officially — though the Church was never fully explicit in its means of prosecution of such rules — any individual who dared read any books included on this list risked excommunication and, thus, spiritual damnation. As mentioned above, the Index was definitively compiled Church-wide starting around 1600 and semi-regularly published in Latin (and, later, in translation) by the Vatican starting in 1632.

The process of deciding which books were to be included was regulated in accordance with various canons (religious laws) regulating the Church’s official policies on printed literature. Before they were consolidated into one master serial publication, various subsets of the Church such as the Universities of Paris and Louvain and the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions had independently published their own indices of forbidden books throughout the sixteenth century. Finally, after almost 400 years, as a result of the reforms promulgated by the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), the Index and its official mechanisms were officially decommissioned in 1966." The Catholic Index of Forbidden Books: A Brief History

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yes, lets go into history, it was all because of a misunderstanding.......

"History of the Inquisition of the Catholic Church​

The Inquisition can trace its origin to 1184 when Pope Lucius III commanded the various bishops of the Catholic Church to begin to search for heresies in their jurisdictions. A judicial inquiry was called an inquisition, hence the origin of the name. For the first few decades, these heretical inquisitions were piecemeal due to the power that bishops had in conducting them; bishops sometimes failed to carry them out at all. This changed in 1227 when Pope Gregory IX began to appoint judges whose specific responsibility was to carry out inquisitions into heresy. These were the first Inquisitors.
By the mid-1200s, Inquisitors developed a common set of procedures documented in handbooks. In 1252, Pope Innocent IV explicitly permitted Inquisitors to implement the punishment of torture upon those who did not change their heretical ways or compel confessions. By the 1300s, persecution and torture of so-called heretics were occurring across Europe, though it is impossible to know for sure how large the Inquisition was. Therefore, the Inquisition should not be considered an event but rather an institution that carried out its business over many decades."

"To respond to the above-mentioned questions, this Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, after having asked the Holy Father, announces that the Index remains morally binding, in light of the demands of natural law, in so far as it admonishes the conscience of Christians to be on guard for those writings that can endanger faith and morals. But, at the same time, it no longer has the force of ecclesiastical law with the attached censure.

— “Notification regarding the abolition of the Index of books,” June 14, 1966

The Index Librorum Prohibitorum was a list of books banned for lay Roman Catholic readership. Officially — though the Church was never fully explicit in its means of prosecution of such rules — any individual who dared read any books included on this list risked excommunication and, thus, spiritual damnation. As mentioned above, the Index was definitively compiled Church-wide starting around 1600 and semi-regularly published in Latin (and, later, in translation) by the Vatican starting in 1632.

The process of deciding which books were to be included was regulated in accordance with various canons (religious laws) regulating the Church’s official policies on printed literature. Before they were consolidated into one master serial publication, various subsets of the Church such as the Universities of Paris and Louvain and the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions had independently published their own indices of forbidden books throughout the sixteenth century. Finally, after almost 400 years, as a result of the reforms promulgated by the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), the Index and its official mechanisms were officially decommissioned in 1966." The Catholic Index of Forbidden Books: A Brief History

No “misunderstanding”.

First of all – the Index of Prohibited Books was a disciplinary measure - NOT a doctrinal statement. It was intended to keep inappropriate or otherwise heretical texts from being read or shared among Catholics.

In any case - this has absolutely NOTHING to do with keeping the Bible out of the hands of the “common people”. Ony spurious and unauthorized versions of the Bible, which contained errors and heresies were prohibited.

Thanks for not addressing a SINGLE point I made . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Why would she?

It be a member of the catholics and remain in good standing one must agree to not think for themselves and instead bow down in submission to the cat with the collar on.

Coming from a guy who blindly follows the doctrines of men.

And showing respect for the clergy is Biblical . . .

1 Thess. 5:12
We ask you, brothers, to respect those who are laboring among you and who are OVER YOU in the Lord and who admonish you,

1 Tim. 5:17
Let the elders that RULE WELL be counted worthy of DOUBLE HONOUR, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

Do your homework . . .

 

[The Learner]

Coming from a guy who blindly follows the doctrines of men.

And showing respect for the clergy is Biblical . . .

1 Thess. 5:12
We ask you, brothers, to respect those who are laboring among you and who are OVER YOU in the Lord and who admonish you,

1 Tim. 5:17
Let the elders that RULE WELL be counted worthy of DOUBLE HONOUR, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

Do your homework . . .

Romans 4:12
and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

1 Corinthians 4:15
For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Romans 4:12
and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

Did you see in the New Covenant where... Christians are circumcised of heart?

There's no requirement for circumcision now like they did it under the old covenant, just like there's no requirement for Saturday sabbath now like they did it under the old covenant