A proper Tradcath shouldn't be reading the bible at all,

[Anonymous No.21567500]

according to Catholicism it was heresy punishable by death to own a copy of the Bible in anything other than Latin, and an even greater heresy to read from it, be it in Latin or not.

William Tyndale was burned at the stake by the Dutch Catholics in Brabant for having painstakingly produced the first english language bible, of which 80% of the content was borrowed for all subsequent editions of the Bible. Tyndale ha already been forced to flee for his life from Catholics Thomas More and Cardinal Wolsey who petitioned King Henry VIII that William Tyndale should be castrated and then hanged, drawn and quartered.

As he was set upon the pyre by the Dutch his last words were that God would open his Kings eyes and reveal to Henry the truth.

The SJWs of that day, eventually crushed forevermore by Henry VIII, had it so that it was forbidden to even read from the Bible, preferring to burn the Bible rather than allow anybody to read what it contained.

Catholicism.

[Anonymous No.21567593]

>>21567500
And in answer to the rising vernacular translations from Protestant heretics the Church allowed to publish approved translations with marginal notes to explain meanings that cannot be accurately translated from Latin. Yet, you needed the approval of your bishop to own and read a translated version. With time the Church has become laxer so that even laypeople could buy one without permission, but the editions had commentary in order to interpret the passages according to Church teaching.

I agree that the Bible should be inaccessable for laymen unless one gets a special permission by his bishop. Nonetheless the faith is so weakened and the Novus Ordo not Catholic that man needs resources for his private home to keep and maintain the faith as was handed down. Mass alone, especially Novus Ordo, is not gonna cut it. What is important to have reverence and respect when reading and interpreting the Bible, that you must not go against dogmas promulgated by the Church.

I have become Catholic because of reading a lot, including the Bible, and nobody else would have taught me anything if it would not have been for my willingness to research and being fully open and honest to wherever my journey takes me.

[Anonymous No.21567627]

>>21567500
Catholicism (trad or not) is largely a spic and nigger-worshipping secular "religion" devoid of any spiritual or metaphysical import.

[Anonymous No.21567646]

>Latin
Not the original language. You should learn Greek and Aramaic.

[Anonymous No.21567680]

>>21567593
>I have become Catholic because of reading a lot, including the Bible,
>I agree that the Bible should be inaccessable for laymen
That's an inherent contradiction though. Your very 'good sense' to pursue and study in the first place would find you branded as a heretic by Catholicism, for example.

>What is important to have reverence and respect when reading and interpreting the Bible, that you must not go against dogmas promulgated by the Church.
It's more than that though, you're supposed to take someone elses word that what they're claiming is correct is actually correct, as you'll be punished with torture and death if you don't. Whether the religion itself is legitimate or not one cannot deny the extreme megalomania of this (i.e. the Catholic) position.

Also,
>I have become Catholic because of reading ... the Bible
The bible written by Tyndale, who was burned at the stake by Catholics for making the translation that led you to Catholicism.

Q.
>I agree that the Bible should be inaccessable for laymen
Why?

>to interpret the passages according to Church teaching.
>What is important to have reverence and respect when reading and interpreting the Bible, that you must not go against dogmas promulgated by the Church.
This is one of the arguments that Tyndale and More had; you won't deny then, as More would admit of himself, that it's not actually God or anything else you're thinking of but merely the human institution of the Papacy and its aggrandizement or importance before anything else.

[Anonymous No.21567760]

>>21567500
A good example against laypeople owning Bibles is how often normies misinterpret scripture. Normal people misinterpreting scripture has done so much damage in the past 30 years it's unreal. People unironically quote bible verses "proving" Jesus had a homosexual relationship with John, or that he was black because a verse referred to his feet as "bronze" or that violence is never acceptable because "thou shalt not kill", etc. Most people are so easily misguided that there is NO benefit to them being able to read, in fact, it only gives them the excuse to think they know what they're doing.

[Anonymous No.21567772]

>>21567760
And OP, the purpose of this post is to make your point accessible to zoomer brains.

[࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇ !KNDY/Ar.iI No.21567774]

«TRADCATHS» ARE TO CATHOLICS WHAT «BEATNIKS» WERE TO THE «BEATS», WHAT ANIMALISTS ARE TO VEGANISTS, WHAT «BROPORWAVE» IS TO VAPORWAVE.

[Anonymous No.21567858]

>>21567760
>he was black

>>21567760
>>21567772
Sure, but that's due to poor literacy than anything else. More in this case it's the various flaws with Papal Primacy contradicting all four steps in img. of this post: >>21567593 which was being considered at the time. The church at that time was a supra-governmental bureaucracy rife with corruption, this is what people were moved by.

I mean, to put it simply, it's a sign of conscious guilt of being quite seriously wrong if a person forbids you to study something or threatens to kill you if you read about XYZ. If they were 'correct' then they could make a case as to why which would convince other people, and the notion of censorship wouldn't occur to them.

[Anonymous No.21567901]

>>21567500
>according to Catholicism it was heresy punishable by death to own a copy of the Bible in anything other than Latin, and an even greater heresy to read from it, be it in Latin or not.
This is BS. There were English bibles since Saxon times. The rejection of the Tyndale bible was because the publishers just blatantly changed shit for their own political bias.

[Anonymous No.21567910]

>>21567774
Shut up you fucking pedophile

[Anonymous No.21567977]

>>21567901
>This is BS. There were English bibles since Saxon times.
you'll have to offer some proof for this.


If that was true anyway there had been four centuries or thereabouts since the Normans invaded and replaced the Saxons (in their language and their church jobs) with Frenchmen and Normans who didn't care about the Saxon language.

You inadvertently raise a good point though, when exactly did that ban that created Tyndale and Luther begin to be enforced? Obviously the church created this problem by having banned any translations in the first place and if what you say is true or not anyway obviously the first Greek and Roman converts to Christianity didn't think it was 'proper' that they shouldn't read anything about that religion.

[Anonymous No.21567990]

how do I trust any Bible translation
How do I bring myself to read anything but the ancient greek

[Anonymous No.21567999]

>>21567500
>according to Catholicism it was heresy punishable by death to own a copy of the Bible in anything other than Latin, and an even greater heresy to read from it, be it in Latin or not.
Show me the papal encyclical stating this, or the council making this decision.

[Anonymous No.21568030]

>>21567977
>you'll have to offer some proof for this.
This isn’t secret alt history, this is like, wikipedia level stuff
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_English
>Very few complete translations existed during that time. Most of the books of the Bible existed separately and were read as individual texts. Translations of the Bible often included the writer's own commentary on passages in addition to the literal translation.[3]
>Aldhelm, Bishop of Sherborne and Abbot of Malmesbury (639–709), is thought to have written an Old English translation of the Psalms.

>Bede (c. 672–735) produced a translation of the Gospel of John into Old English, which he is said to have prepared shortly before his death. This translation is lost; we know of its existence from Cuthbert of Jarrow's account of Bede's death.[4]
>In the 10th century an Old English translation of the Gospels was made in the Lindisfarne Gospels: a word-for-word gloss inserted between the lines of the Latin text by Aldred, Provost of Chester-le-Street.[5] This is the oldest extant translation of the Gospels into the English language.[5]
>The Wessex Gospels (also known as the West-Saxon Gospels) are a full translation of the four gospels into a West Saxon dialect of Old English. Produced in approximately 990, they are the first translation of all four gospels into English without the Latin text.[3]
>In the 11th century, Abbot Ælfric translated much of the Old Testament into Old English. The Old English Hexateuch is an illuminated manuscript of the first six books of the Old Testament (the Hexateuch).
So they were rare, but existed

[Anonymous No.21568078]

>>21567910
He's right

[Anonymous No.21568197]

>>21567858
Poor literacy? College academics push anti-biblical facts. It just has to do with the fact that a peon with an npc brain isn't going to be able to interpret the bible. Ever.

[Anonymous No.21568489]

>>21568030
That is interesting, I guess it only became a heresy post-schism.

but,
>>21567999
I don't know, that's why I asked: >>21567977

It could have been a post-schism thing, since there was nothing really obviously wrong with the imperial church prior to the schism itself, i.e. prior to the popes self-declaration of being jesus's only contact on earth.

[I V R I • N E M O !!GgBWHLRiayD No.21568503]

>"Tradcath".


Zoomers pervert everything that they touch; they are too idiotic to corrupt anything great/magnificent though.

[Anonymous No.21568504]

>>21568197
>It just has to do with the fact that a peon with an npc brain isn't going to be able to interpret the bible.
Alright, but again - like the guy earlier - you're in contradiction over this, obviously you've read the bible and according to your ideas now, that makes you a heretic.

Tyndale had more faith in you, paradoxically, even though you, directly due to Tyndales translations of the bible for your benefit, declare Tyndale to be a heretic for converting you to Christianity lol

[Anonymous No.21568519]

>>21568504
I would likely have been born into a catholic church and been in no need of conversion.

[Anonymous No.21568553]

>>21567500
This is a reminder to /lit/ that the unsaved false prophets from the catholic/orthodox/protestant churches that preach works based salvations or other false gospels are cursed by God and these cursed fake Christians cannot be saved from hellfire.

Pic related.

Watch this short gospel video if you want to be sure of going to heaven. It's very easy to get to heaven because salvation is by faith only. God does not need your human works to save you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf3uF0juIVI

[Anonymous No.21569644]

>>21567977
In the early years, there was no Inquisition burning people and books, so translations to Latin, Gothic and Anglo-Saxon among others occurred. However, other than Latin in the west they were very rare. By the time leading up to the Investiture Controversy, especially around the 11th century, the megalomaniacal faction of papists had begun to form. They had new ideas about keeping access of the Bible limited to very few, and when a new translation was made into Occitan by the Waldensians in southern France, they initiated the campaign against the so-called "Albigenses" which involved toppling the local ruler and starting an Inquisition against local churches in the area who had resisted their rule ever since the Petrobrusian uprisings which were in response to the Investiture controversy and the conclusion of the diet of Worms, which took away the authority of the Emperor in these places, giving it to Rome instead. So, the Waldensian Occitan translation became the first one on the burning pile. Later, they tried with less success to burn Wycliffe's translation into Middle English that he made in England. By the time of Luther, Tyndale and Olivetan, they were already in a well-established pattern for destroying "unapproved" translations, although they failed again because this time the translations were printed using mechanical printing techniques.

Here are sources showing the rationale they used to justify their practices and the dates when they were enacted.

>"We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old and the New Testament; unless anyone from the motives of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.f" (Edward Peters. Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Council of Toulouse, 1229, Canon 14, p 195.)

This decision was made at the conclusion of the Albigensian crusade in Toulouse in 1229, at the same time that the Inquisition was started in southern France (and soon expanded outward). This idea was later basically re-affirmed in the counter-reformation at Trent in the year 1564 with the updated "rules on prohibited books."

[Anonymous No.21569668]

>>21567760
This unfortunately appears to be an accurate assessment

[Anonymous No.21569677]

>>21567500
Not true. See
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_in_the_Middle_Ages#:~:text=The%20Bible%20was%20translated%20into,%2C%20in%20Western%20Europe%2C%20Latin.

[Anonymous No.21569759]

>>21567910
lol