Could a lowborn during the middle ages read the bible?

Upvote:1

According to data compiled from multiple sources and available here, general literacy in Italy was less than 20% at the close of the Middle Ages, so I think that the answer to your title question is no, a "lowborn" would likely not have been able to read the Bible on their own.

Another answer addressed the topic of "translation of page to art." I recall this theme being prominent in a tour I received of the Cathedral of Chartres as a youth. Each statue and image in the Cathedral served the purpose of teaching some particular lesson.

One of the reasons, I think, that icons are so central to the theology of the Eastern Church is that they teach dogmatic lessons in a form other than the written word. While the anachronisms and distortions that are seen in an Orthodox icon may seem somewhat arbitrary, every feature of an icon is put there for some express dogmatic purpose.

I think that it is also important to consider that the means by which Scripture most readily reached believers during the Middle Ages and earlier was probably not private study or study with the parish priest (or "pastor"), but rather through the annual reading cycle of Epistle and Gospel during the Liturgy (or Mass) and accompanying sermons. In many cases these sermons have themselves been recorded in writing and have served as secondary witnesses to the New Testament manuscripts (e.g. the homilies of John Chrysostom for Matthew, John, Acts, Pauline Epistles; Cyril of Alexandria for Luke).

Upvote:5

Rev John O'Brien wrote in The Faith of Millions* that in the Middle Ages (1000s to renaissance) the Bible was chained in various churches so it would be accessible to the greatest number of people.

He also says that St. Jerome, the Latin translator of the Vulgate (people's) Bible wrote words of encouragement that all should love and honor the Bible.

Luther apparently had the invalid assertion that the Bible was just sitting around collecting dust before he came around and lots of people still think there were no vernacular translations before him, but in reality, O'Brien wrote, there were more than 20 in German alone. (Maybe not Luther's German, but various high and low forms).

But in the Middle Ages the translation was more abstract and in Italy, you've got the best examples of the translation from page to art. The art was still being refined, but it's still intelligible, what exists, the Gospels were hanging up on the walls and being internalized.

St. Mark's Basilica is a prime example of such work in the 1200s.

Dominican preachers would be well acquainted with the Bible and even if you were unlucky enough to have a priest in your village who didn't think much of your lowbornness, there's a chance, at least, that an itinerant preacher would come to your aid and help you to learn your Bible.

The middle ages were truly a much more pleasant time to be a Catholic, and hopefully following Pope Francis' advice we can all shut out our techno-wizardry, learn from the sages of the past and go back there.

* see "The Chruch: Interpreter of the Bible" under subheads Bible in the Middle Ages; Luther, First Translator and Chained Bibles"

More post

Search Posts

Related post