Excepts from old newspapers on our Authorized English Bible
I was looking through old newspapers awhile ago from the Library of Congress' Chronicling America. I found some clippings related to the Authorized Version which I thought interesting. Pictures of the clippings themselves are at the bottom of the page.
The first was from the Jeffersonian Republican, May 1, 1853:
Our edition of the English Bible which has been the standard now for upwards of three hundred years, succeeded the Bishop's Bible.
Of this translation, Dr. Adam Clarke, one of the best linguists and most learned commentators of the 19th century, remarks: "Those who have compared most of the European translations with the original, have not scrupled to say that the English translation of the Bible, made under the direction of King James 1., is the most accurate and faithful of the whole. Nor is this its only praise; the translators have seized the very spirit and soul of the original; and expressed this almost everywhere with pathos and energy. Besides, our translators have not only made a standard translation, but they have made their translations the standard of our language; the English tongue in their day was not equal to such a work, 'but God enabled them to stand as upon Mount Sinai' to use the expression of a learned friend, 'and crane up their country's language to the dignity of the originals, so that after the lapse of 200 years, the English Bible is, with the very few exceptions, the standard of the purity and excellence of the English language. The original from which it was taken, is alone superior to the Bible, translated by the authority of King James.' (These are the words of the late Miss Freeman Shepherd, a very learned and extraordinary woman, and a rigid Papist, and the Dr. concludes by remarking): "This is an opinion in which my heart, my judgement, and my conscience coincide."
The same newspaper, on November 9, 1843, gives us this anecdote:
Dr. Franklin, in his own Life [sic], has preserved the following singular anecdote of the Bible being prohibited in England in the time of Mary, the Catholic. His family had then early embraced the reformation: "They had an English Bible, and to conceal it the more securely, they conceived the project of fastening it open with pack threads across the leaves, on the inside of the lid of a stool!' When my grandfather wished to read to his family, he reversed the lid of the stool upon his knees, and passed the leaves from one side to another, which were held down on each by the pack-thread. One of the children was stationed at the door to give notice if he saw an officer of the Spiritual Court make his appearance; in that case the lid was restored to its place, with the Bible concealed under it as before."
Next, we have an article in The Caledonian, September 28, 1860, concerning a battle over the Bible in public schools. The author, I will first say, has some misconceptions about the relationship between certain people (Tyndale, Wycliffe, James I, etc.) and the Church of Rome. It seems the Catholics objected to the usage of the English Bible in schools, calling it a "Protestant Bible." In response to this our article states:
The Bible is objected to as sectarian in its teachings. It is a "Protestant Bible." But the real objection is to the book itself, and not to the version. It is the common English Bible which has always been used. "It was written by the Father and Maker of all creatures for all His children." It is not a "Protestant Bible." Its translators, Tyndale, Wickliffe, Coverdale and Matthew, were Roman Catholics. A Roman Catholic king permitted it to be printed and circulated. A Roman Catholic bishop drafted the license to read it, until a better translation could be provided, which he hoped might not be till doomsday. Of it says Bishop Leddes, himself a Catholic, and a translator of the Scriptures, "It is of all versions the most excellent for accuracy, fidelity and the strictest letter of the text." Says Selden, "It is the best version in the world."
[...] Says a Roman Catholic, "Who will not say that the uncommon beauty and marvellous English of the Protestant Bible is one of the great strongholds of heresy in this country! It lives on the ear like the music that can never be forgotten, like the sound of church bells, which the covert hardly knows how he can forego. Its felicities often seem to be almost things, rather than words. It is a part of the national mind, the anchor of national seriousness. The memory of the dead passes with it. The potent traditions of childhood are stereotyped in its verses. The power of all the griefs and trials of a man is hidden beneath its words. It is the representative of his best moments and all that there has been about him of soft and gentle, and pure, and penitent, and good, speaks to him forever out of his English Bible. It is his sacred thing, which doubt has never dimned, and controversy never soiled. In length and breadth of the land there is no Protestant with one spark of religiousness in him, whose spiritual biography is not in his Saxon Bible."
[...] But, it may be urged, that the phrase "word of God" includes the Douay as well as the English version. As well may it include the Acorn, which Mohammedans believe to be the "word of God." There are certain rules to direct in construing particular words and phrases, among which is the following: "Words must be construed according to their popular sense, and popular sense referred to must be general and not a mere local usage." Now in what general sense is the phrase "word of God" used in this country? Is not the English Bible always understood, except when the phrase "Douay Bible" is used? [...] Was it not the translation which all discordant sects of Christianity except Catholics recognize as the "word of God?"
Last of all, an article in The New York Herald, May 8, 1848, called "the English Bible" "the light of protestantism."
Pictures of clippings are here: https://truthfreedom.wixsite.com/truth-freedom/av-newspaper-excerpts