We have now arrived at the reign of James I of England and the events that led to the commissioning of the translation of a Bible “Appointed to be Read in Churches” or, as we know it, the King James or the Authorised Version. We will also see that while this work was steadily progressing, plots were hatched by the Catholics, the most notorious of which was the Gunpowder Plot, aimed to replace James with a Catholic Monarch and bring England again into the Roman Catholic fold. However God Himself was also working through these events for He had determined that England would never again be part of Catholic Europe, and as England spread its Empire, and therefore its language, the Word of God would go out into all the world.
The closest blood relation to the Tudors who had reigned over England since 1485 was James VI of Scotland, who was of the house of Stuart. He was the great-grandson of Henry VIII’s sister Margaret. She had been married to James IV of Scotland and their son became James V. James V married and had a daughter, Mary, who became Mary Queen of Scots. She in turn had a son also named James and in turn he became James VI of Scotland. On the death of Elizabeth in England in 1603 he was invited to ascend the throne of England as James I. His being both King of Scotland and of England led to the term ‘The United Kingdom’, which we are familiar with.
James I of the United Kingdom
Mary, the mother of James, was a staunch Catholic but through various intrigues she was forced to abdicate in favour of her son James and flee from Scotland, seeking protection from Elizabeth I. However her intrigues with the Catholics, both in England and abroad, aiming to obtain the English throne finally led to her undoing and so Elizabeth reluctantly had her executed in 1587.
James, though having a Catholic mother, had been brought up in the Presbyterian environment that prevailed in Scotland as a result of the Reformation and in particular the work of John Knox. James has been described as the most learned man who ever occupied the British throne, being fluent in Latin, French and English at the age of 10.
As James made his way south from Scotland to London there was a swell of Puritan feeling that now a King would ascend the throne who would follow the Presbyterian ways and not those existing ways of the Church of England with its Archbishops, Bishops and Priests with all the formal
regalia and ritual that went with that system. James realised that resolving this problem would be a major issue to be addressed on taking up the throne.
The Hampton Court meeting of 1604
James was a strong believer in ‘the Divine Right’ of kings to rule, or the belief that God had appointed kings to their position. He had written articles on this theme while in Scotland and he certainly would not be changing this idea now. Early in 1604, less than a year after ascending the throne, James decided it was time to address the religious issue. A conference was convened at Hampton Court at which both parties of the Church of England, the Bishops group and the Puritan leaders, were called. In James’ words, “the learned and grave men of both sides” were called to the conference. These men, though from opposing points of view on the way forward for the Church in England, were certainly among the most capable and intellectually brilliant men to put their position before the King. The end result was that James favoured the continuation of the Church of England with its bishops, rather than the Presbyterian system in which each congregation was overseen by the elders, or presbytery of that community. James put his finger on the nub of the issue when he strongly stated to Reynolds, who was upholding the Puritan view regarding the presbytery, “No bishops – no king!” He realised that a king subject to a presbytery was always in danger of being removed. To have a king subject to the independent authority of elders of church communities was a revolution waiting to happen. He decided on the Church system as it stood, with the King as head of the Church and the one who appointed the Archbishop. The discussion at Hampton on which way the Church would be run was now concluded but one final decision was made based upon a suggestion of Reynolds, the spokesman for the Puritan party. He said that the petitioning ministers he represented would like “one only translation of ye byble to be authenticall and read in ye churche”. The Bible used by the Puritans was the Geneva Bible, which was anathema to James as the marginal notes (and there were many) were Calvinistic and Presbyterian in outlook. James saw the possibility of replacing the Geneva Bible and agreed to one uniform translation being made but with this caveat, that no marginal notes should be added. James explained what he desired in the preparing of this Bible.
“His Highnesse wished, that some e s pe c i a l l pa i n s should be taken in that behalf for one vniforme translation … and this to be done by the best learned of both the Vniversities, after them to be reuiewed by the Bishops, and the chiefe learned of the Church; from them to be presented to the Priuy Councell; and lastly to bee ratified by his Royall authority; to be read in the whole Church, and no other.”
The King gave specific rules on certain points to be followed in the translation. Rule 3 stated: “The ould ecclesiasticall words to be kept viz. as the Word Churche not to be translated Congregation etc.” James was ensuring that the Church of England was to follow the structure of the Roman Catholic Church with archbishops and bishops with James replacing the Pope as head of the Church in England. Tyndale had translated the word “ecclesia” as “congregation” throughout the New Testament as he felt it gave a better sense to the word. “Ecclesia” really mans a “called out” group of people. By using the term “church” James believed he was minimising the possibility of the Presbyterian ideas of church governance being taken up in England.
Those familiar with The Ecclesial Guide will recall that Clause 1 reads in part: “There is no exact equivalent in English for this term Ecclesia. It means an assembly of the called. ‘Church’ (by which it is translated) has not this meaning, and has become objectionable through association with un-apostolic ideas and institutions. Consequently, the original term has to be employed.” In the days of Robert Roberts there was possibly a sharper abhorrence of the Roman Catholic system by brethren and sisters than there is today, as they were constantly opposing its blasphemous teachings in lectures and literature. Thus the term “the ecclesia” became the way brethren spoke of our meetings, which has proven to be a wise custom. Let us not slide into apathy but maintain a vigilant opposition to Rome and her teaching, carefully instructing our younger members to maintain this stand, so they see clearly how God views this wicked system that is soon to be judged.
Rule 6 stated that there were to be no marginal notes apart from explaining a Hebrew or Greek word. Our margin in the kjv will show these.
As 1604 moved along, the work of organising the translating groups or companies was finalised and the work began in earnest. The work of translation was divided into six companies with eight translators and a director, making the total team involved at the beginning 54. Each company worked on different sections of the Bible, and when finished they came together for final editing. It is not our aim to follow this work through as there are many books that have been written on this process of translation that can be referred to for fuller information.
The Gunpowder Plot of 1605
One thing James did on coming to the throne was to ease the fines Roman Catholics were to pay for non-attendance of the Parish Church. This period of toleration led to a flood of priests from Europe, which in turn resulted in reimposing the fines. Even before the Gunpowder Plot, two plots were discovered which militant Jesuits were accused of hatching as they continued their Counter Reformation activities.
The Gunpowder Plot was a simple plan. The conspirators were to blow up the House of Lords at the opening of the session when the King and the members of both Houses of Parliament were assembled. They would capture James’ son Charles, proclaim him king and then inform the Roman Catholics of the success of the plot. A room was rented on the ground floor and two tons of gunpowder placed there in barrels. As history records, after a message was sent telling of the plot, the culprit caught was Guy Fawkes. The other conspirators were subsequently rounded up; some died resisting capture and the rest were executed. As a matter of interest, a test has since been carried out exploding the equivalent of two tons of gunpowder to see if it actually would have succeeded in demolishing the House of Lords. The result showed that not only would it have done exactly that, but it would have caused a fire ball to sweep through part of London, destroying it also. We may not realise that Fireworks Night came into being through Parliament passing the Observance of the 5th November Act of 1605, which made services and sermons to commemorate the event an annual feature of English life as a reminder of the Roman Catholics’ evil plot. It became customary to burn effigies of Guy Fawkes and let off fireworks that night as the church bells were rung. It remained in force until 1859, but as humanism with its seegood- in-all-people took possession of men’s minds, the inquisition and its horrors, the Smithfield Fires of Queen Mary, and the Gunpowder Plot, all faded into insignificance and were forgotten. But God will not forget the brutality of that system. He will judge the great whore, which corrupted the earth with her fornication, and He will avenge the blood of his servants at her hand (Rev 19:2).
The Douay–Rheims Bible translation of 1610
The Counter Reformation may not have been able to remove James from the throne but it continued its struggle against the Reformation in England. What was deemed necessary was an English Catholic Bible where the text and notes would uphold Catholic tradition in the face of the Protestant Reformation. The New Testament portion was published in Reims, France, in 1582, and the Old Testament portion was published by the University of Douai. In 1610 the two sections were printed and sent to England for use by Catholics. Let us realise that parallel with the events of the Reformation there was always the careful scheming of the Roman Catholic Church and the Counter Reformation to try to win back defectors and if that was not possible to destroy those who deserted the Church for the Reformation.
The Authorised Version appears in 1611
The translators continued their exacting task, endeavouring to give the clearest meaning of the original language as they worked from the Hebrew and Greek and examined the previous translations. In the spring of 1611, after the final editing, the completed manuscripts were sent to the printers where the exacting work of typesetting was undertaken. Then after proofreading they were printed and bound and the first edition of the King James Bible became a reality.
It has been calculated that Tyndale’s translation work had the greatest input to the finished English version, with about 84% of the sections Tyndale had translated being used. Just pause for a moment to think what this indicates. Fifty-four of the most eminent linguistic scholars in England exercised their learning in examining the original texts and concluded that much of Tyndale’s work could not be improved upon – Tyndale was vindicated as an outstanding and accurate translator who could convey the meaning and flow of the original in the language of the plough boy, the language of English speaking people. The King James Version was not immediately accepted as there were those who were familiar with the Geneva and other versions and preferred to stay with them. But within two decades the King James Version became the Bible of England, and soon after of Scotland also.
The King James Version won the day as The Word of God in the English speaking world for 300 years. There are some simple reasons why this was so.
- It was read in churches to all who attended, and in those early days it was obligatory to attend church on Sunday. Thus the people became familiar with the actual words of God in their own language.
- It was translated by renowned linguists who could give the clear textual emphasis and flow of the language.
- The flowing rhythmic style they used made the text easy to commit to memory.
- It did not contain the notes that had been in the Geneva Bible. Therefore readers were required to think through what was written themselves, rather than accept others’ interpretations. People were made to study the Bible – not use a Study Bible prepared by others.
- As it did not contain notes, all ‘Christians’, Catholics excepted, accepted it whether Church of England, Puritan or Nonconformist. It became the Bible used in discussion between these groups.
- It was not long before most homes had a copy and it became the standard reading for families in the evening and then the topic of discussion. There were not the invasive electronic gadgets bringing the world into the home to distract in those days.
- And finally, it is a translation completed by a group of men who genuinely were endeavouring to remain faithful to the inspired Word of God and give its meaning clearly to English readers.
The question that one may ask is, “Why is it called ‘The Authorised Version’ as well as ‘The King James Version’?” The title page of the King James Version (many printings still have the wording of the title page in them), states that it is “Appointed to be read in Churches”. It was the King who stated regarding the translation to be made that when the final manuscript was completed it was “to bee ratified by his Royall authority, to be read in the whole Church, and no other”. Although the word ‘Authorised’ was not used, it was understood that because it had the royal sanction to be printed and then read in Churches it was ‘authorised’ by King James.
Some concluding thoughts
Through these six articles we have followed events over 230 years from the time of Wycliffe and his first translation of the Bible into English to the time of King James and the King James Version of the Bible.
We have tried to impress upon readers the struggle that raged between the Roman Catholic Church and the Reformation. If there had never been an English Version of the Bible, the Reformation would have faltered and failed in England. We are 400 years removed from those days of struggle for conscience sake that were made by men of character and resolution. These were men who saw the Roman Catholic Harlot for what she really was – an abomination to God, because she blasphemed His Name and was “drunken with the blood of the saints”, who in the eyes of God were “the salt of the earth”. They also saw that its teachings did not convey the truth of His Word. Though many of those who struggled against Rome did not come to a full awareness of truth, they clearly saw the identification marks given by Scripture of the “Mother of Harlots”. This startling conclusion compelled them to cut themselves off from the Mother Church, but though separating from her, they were unaware that they took many of her false doctrines with them. They became her “daughters”,
as defined in Revelation. Others did continue to seek the Truth of God’s Word and often were caused to flee, not only from the persecution of Rome but now also from the oppression of her “daughters”. Is it a timely question to ask – “Where really does the Christadelphian community stand in relation to Rome and her daughters?” Do we, as a community, have a very clear perception of the corruption that this system has wrought against the simple truths of the Word of God and the way they should be lived?
If you have an Authorised Version, have you noticed if “The Epistle Dedicatory” is still printed in the front of your version? In the more recent printings it is not there. Obviously in translations in modern English it will not appear at all. Those translators knew that they would be ridiculed by the Papacy for their efforts in translation, and so wrote: “… we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God’s holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness.” But they were willing to accept this slander, knowing that by translating God’s Word into the mother tongue of the English they were opening the eyes of those who wished to know the Truth. How sad it is today that though over 100 million Bibles are printed each year, few want to read and study it carefully. The Bible, to many, has become a voiceless image on a shelf in their homes, not unlike a lifeless statue of Mary in homes of the apostasy. The Bible was translated to lead men from such superstitious ignorance. As a community let us never slip into the deception that owning a Bible of itself makes us sons and daughters of the living God. Jesus said, “the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” Let us read and meditate upon the Word of God that it may produce that new life in us which is a reflection of that seen in the “Word made flesh”, even our beloved Lord.
As we take up our Bibles each day may we remember that it came about because honest and conscientious men saw that people were enshrouded in superstitious ignorance from which they were unable to extricate themselves. They therefore risked their lives to translate the Word of God so that we can now read it in the safety of our homes, without fear of religious persecution. It was the work of these men that under the overshadowing hand of our God brought about such a defining change. Let us continually be thankful for this blessing and be a community, as we have been in the past, known for our dedication and understanding of the whole counsel of God.
As we have surveyed the history behind the King James Bible we have seen that the role of King James was but one piece in the whole drama of bringing the Word of God to us in our mother tongue, and of separating the United Kingdom at that time from Europe and the shackles of Roman Catholicism. Let us be thankful for this great mercy as it has given us the privilege of reading and speaking together about the Word of our God, and being able to preach it openly to others without fear of being burnt at the stake.
And a final thought for us all – have we thanked God for the blessing of His life-giving Word and done our readings today?