Actually, I say this humbly and meekly. The King James version of the Bible has never been supplanted by any other for the beauty and sweep of its poetry. But it is acceptable only to Protestant denominations, and "forbidden" to Roman Catholics. There are major differences as to which scriptures are considered 'canonical' and therefore legitimate between these two branches of Christendom.

I am not sure if the author of the article emphasized this point. The goal for Christians ever since breaking with the church in Rome had been to bring the Bible to the masses, and therefore translations were the obvious thing to do. In fact the first translation of the Latin Bible into German is still considered one of the precipitating causes of the Protestant Reformation. The 'word' could then be brought directly to the common person -- who no longer needed to depend on translation and interpretation by a very small number of clerics who could read Latin. The Catholic Church was essentially forced in response to translate the Latin Bible into a modern language or be left behind in the dust.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/29898-definitive-translation-guru-granth-sahib-ji.html

In reaction to the King James Bible the Roman Church devised its own Rheims Douay Bible which was originally written in French, and then translated into other languages.

Both the King James and the Rheims Douay were ultimately to lose their unique importance as their language became less like the spoken language of the 20th Century, and newer bibles took their place that are not nearly as poetic, but are felt to be more relevant to the average person in the modern world.

The Rheims Douay bible is not even read any longer as part of the Roman liturgy. There are around 30 major English language bibles in use by the Roman Church (only one branch of Christianity). The one most in use in the US is The New American Bible. For Protestant denominations the number is equally staggering, though the King James retains its eminence.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=29898

No translation was ever without controversy. The keepers of the keys to the meaning of the words let free their grasp only after considerable prodding and struggle. Language is political even when it is not religious.