Rheims Glossary of the Bible Teaches us Lessons For Today
Review of Stanley R. Maveety’s article "The Glossary in the Rheims New Testament of 1582," in the Journal of English and Germanic Philology, Vol. 61 (1962): 562-577.
Reviewed by Kerry A. Shirts
Director of Research (FAIR)
This paper is one of the most interesting in print for a number of reasons. When I was doing research on a paper I wrote on Dante and his version of a cold hell (interesting in itself!), I ran across this and read it with amazement. Here’s why.
We LDS have often been lambasted for believing the Bible, unfortunately I might add from our view, has been changed, corrupted, and even doctrines changed. This has been more than shown by many Bible scholars and textual critics, of which I certainly will review in time. For now this paper deserves more attention.
The issue was how Protestants translated the Bible as opposed to how Catholics did so, each wanting the Bible to reflect their own doctrines and rituals and emphasis for their own theological significance to their respective religious preferences.
Tyndale deliberately translated the Bible to reflect his prejudices of his day and his religion. Sir Thomas More argued that Tyndale "was guilty of intentionally mistranslating the Bible for the sake of Lutheran doctrine." (p. 566). Tyndale’s translations, according the Maveety, were one thing that eventually led to his death at the stake! (p. 567). In other words, folks knew the Bible had been changed.
Tyndale’s view that the church had been corrupted by temporal power and excessive corruption, was consistent with his view of being saved by justification in faith alone. Here is where the interpretations of we are saved by grace alone have their root, in Tyndale’s views and translation of the Bible in 1525. "More’s objection in general was that Tyndale, in the way he translated these certain words, intentionally obscured Biblical references to traditions of the Orthodox Church." (p. 567). Their differing views, which led to their handling of the biblical text is illustrative for us today. "To Sir Thomas More, Tyndale’s translation was a distortion or a departure of the truth; to Tyndale it was the correction of a distortion and a return to the truth." (p. 568).
The Protestants would translate the word idol to "image." The Catholics were offended because they accepted sacred images in their relgion, and did not view it as idolatry. (p. 571). Many others issues were fought over including the ideas of eunuchs and allegory and its use, and misuse, in the Bible.
The battles went back and forth over doctrinal issues and tradition Orthodox traditions and their meanings which were not specifically spelled out in the Bible. Again and again, Protestants translated the Bible using different words which certainly effected the doctrinal meanings in not a few instances. The point I would like to bring out, is that man has tampered with the Bible ever since it was written. It is not perfectly preserved, nor have men been prevented from tampering with it through translation. This is precisely the understanding Mormonism has of the Bible also, even though we heartily accept it as a magnificent book of scripture for our benefit and use.