Larry Brigden on Rome’s current support for the Critical Text and the United Bible Societies:
“Whenever in the past Rome could not ‘altogether prevent the Holy Scriptures from being translated and circulated, she has made no scruple of falsifying the text’. Hence, the use of the corrupt Critical Text by the United Bible Societies is consistent with Rome’s purposes, and she will consequently lend support to such a work. On the other hand, if the Received Text were to be used, Rome would doubtless take a different view.”
 T.H. Horne and W.E. Painter, Popery, the Enemy and Falsifier of the Scripture (London, England: William Edward Painter, 1844), p. 4.
Bridgen backs up this latter statement with the fact that Rome has never published any Bible translated from the Masoretic and Received texts.
Source: Trinitarian Bible Society, Quarterly Record Issue Number: 620 – July to September 2017, 186th Annual Report for the year ending 31 December 2016, pages 41-42.
Christopher Fowler, Puritan Sermons, 5:589:
“Object. II. ‘Your translations are faulty.’ (Harding, Rhemists.)
Answer. ‘This is said a thousand times, but never proved; an untruth, joined with slander;’ so Jewel — ‘a spiteful lie;’ so Cartwright answers the Jesuits. ‘Show them,’ saith he. ‘Dr. Martin did attempt it, but was laughed at for his folly by his friend. The words may be short, but the sense is incorrupt.'”
Source: https://puritanboard.com/threads/biggest-errors-in-the-kjv.93019/, Comment 14
A discussion that illustrates some of the presuppositions at play in the Bible translation debate:
Turretin, Institutes, pp 106ff:
Turretin, Institutes, pp 108, 111:
“. . . By the original texts, we do not mean the autographs . . . We mean their apographs which are so called because they set forth to us the word of God in the very words of those who wrote under the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit.” [emphasis added] p 106
Rev. Prof. Dr. F.N. Lee:
“Now the A.D. 609-680 Qur’an frequently tries to shame the “People of the Book” – viz. especially the Judaists, but also the Christians – for not heeding the Holy Bible. In so doing, it is true that Muhammad was hereby trying to establish the superiority of the Qur’an.
But by rebuking the majority of Judaists and Christians for not being loyal to the Bible, he established the veracity of the Bible. And in conceding that some of the “People of the Book” were indeed quite loyal to it – he unwittingly thereby confirmed the accessibility and authority and understandability thereof also in his own day and age and locality.
Thereby Muhammad himself overthrows the later Islamic theory that the Holy Bible had long been corrupted and was insufficiently intelligible by the time of the beginning and the duration and the completion of the compilation of the Qur’an.”
Source: “Bible and Qur’an: The Reliability of the Original Bible and the Original Qur’an,” pages 22-23, available free online here: http://www.dr-fnlee.org/bible-and-quran-the-reliability-of-the-original-bible-and-the-original-quran/