(Read Part 1 and Part 2)
It is almost incomprehensible to us how violently the Roman Catholic Church opposed the translation of the scriptures into English. John Wyclif and his disciples called “Lolardos” [45] had circulated manuscripts of English translations of Latin by the end of the 13th century. Did Parliament pass the Comburendo Haeretic Law? Burn heretics ???? caused heresies to be punished by the burning of people alive at the stake. There were Bible translators in sight.
Then, in 1408, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Arundell, created the Oxford Constitutions declaring:
Is it dangerous, as Blessed St Jerome attests, to translate the text of Sacred Scripture from one language to another, because translation does not always easily maintain the same meaning?That is why we have decreed and ordained that no man, now, on his own authority, translate a scripture into English or another language?And that no man reads such a book? partly or in its entirety. [46]
Together, these statutes meant that the Catholic Church could burn you alive by simply reading the Bible in English. Playwright John Bale (1495-1563): As an 11-year-old boy, he saw a young man burn in Norwich For having had the Lord’s prayer in English?John Foxe recordings?[47]
Tyndale hoped to escape this conviction by obtaining official permission for translation in 1524, but found the exact opposite and had to flee London to the continent where he produced all his translations and writings over the next twelve years. time until his death near Brussels in 1536.
Tyndale witnessed a growing wave of persecution and felt the pain of seeing young men burned alive and converted as they read their translations and books. His best friend, John Frith, was arrested in London, tried by Thomas More and burned alive on 4 July 1531. at the age of 28. Richard Bayfield drove the ships that took Tyndale’s books to England. He was betrayed and imprisoned, and Thomas More wrote on December 4, 1531 that Bayfield “the monk and apostate were worthily burned in Smythfelde. “48]
Three weeks later, it was with John Tewkesbury. Se converted by reading Tyndale’s parable of the evil Mammon, who advocated justification only for faith. He was whipped into Thomas More’s garden and tightened his eyebrows with small ropes until blood came out. He was then sent to the Tower where he was tormented to be paralyzed, so he was eventually burned alive. Thomas More “was delighted that his victim is now in hell, where Tyndale?You should meet him when they meet. ” [49]
Four months later, James Bainham was also burned in April 1532. He rose during Mass at St Augustine’s Church in London and lifted a copy of Tyndale’s New Testament and begged people to die instead of denying the Word of God. signed his own death sentence. Add to that Thomas Bilney, Thomas Dusgate, John Bent, Thomas Harding, Andrew Hewet, Elizabeth Barton, and others, all burned alive by sharing William Tyndale’s views on the scriptures and the reformed faith. [50]
Why this unusual hostility against the New Testament in English, especially by Thomas More, who repeatedly defamed Tyndale in his denunciation of the reformers he burned?Some would say that the New Testament in English was rejected because it was accompanied by reformed notes that the church considered heretics. This was true for later versions, but not for the first edition of 1526. I had no notes, and that was the edition Bishop Tunstall had burned in London. [51] The church burned the Word of God, which surprised Tyndale.
There were superficial and profound reasons why the church opposed an English Bible. The superficial reasons were that the English language is rude and unworthy of the exalted language of God’s Word; and when translated, errors can occur, so it is safer not to translate; Moreover, if the Bible were in English, they would all become their own interpreters, and many would return to heresy and be condemned; and it was the tradition of the church that only priests received divine grace to understand the scriptures; and besides, there is a particular sacramental value in Latin worship, in which people cannot understand, but grace is given. These were the things that were said superficially.
However, there were deeper reasons for the church to oppose the English Bible: a doctrinal and a clergyman. The church realized that it would not be able to retain certain biblical doctrines because people would see that they are not in the Bible. The church realizes that its power and control over the people, and even the state, would be lost if certain doctrines were exposed as unbiblical, especially the priesthood, purgatory, and penance.
Tyndale’s criticism of Thomas More is primarily about how Tyndale translated five words: he translated priests into priests instead of priests; translated ekklesia as a congregation rather than a church; translated metnooas into repentance rather than penance; translated exomologeo into recognition or admit instead of confessing, and translated agape for love rather than charity.
Daniell says: “You cannot have ignored the words, in particular by cancelling the entire sacramental structure of the church that had lasted a thousand years in Europe, Asia and North Africa. Was it the Greek New Testament that made this annulment?[52] And with the doctrinal weakening of these ecclesiastical pillars of the priesthood, penance and confession, the widespread power and control of the Church would collapse. England would not be a Catholic nation. The reformed faith will flourish there in due course.
• 45 See note 12 (part 1)
46 Moynahan, God’s bestseller, 5. Xxii.
47 William Tyndale, The Obedience of A Christian Man, edited with an introduction by David Daniell (London: Penguin Books, 2000), p. 202.
48 Moynahan, The bestseller of God, 0. 260
49 Ibid. , P. 261.
The list and details are given in Daniell, Tyndale, pages 183-184.
51 Daniell, Tyndale, p. 192-193
52 Ibid. , P. 149.