Huh? It's scripture from the bible, no matter if it is printed in a worship aid or not or printed on a page in the bible. What a silly thing to say.
Agree!
Monsignor or not the author is a dunderhead. So much in error in what he wrote. One example would be the whole bit about Catholics being discouraged from reading the Bible during the Reformation. Those that were literate usually had Bibles or at the very least a Book of Hours or a Psalter. What they were discouraged from doing was reading certain translations. Much like today’s Christians would be discouraged from reading a JW translation of the Bible.
I think he needs to read “Stripping of the Altars” to gain a better historic perspective of the faith life of the common people during the English Reformation.
He also errs when he writes, “Until the twentieth Century, it was only Protestants who actively embraced Scripture study.” So just what did the Church Fathers and great Theologians and Philosophers such as St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas appeal to in their writings on Christian belief and teachings? The local paper?
Catholics are still not supposed to interpret Scripture for themselves unless the plain meaning is obvious. That has always been the case. The Church has always taught that the Scripture and the Unwritten Tradition were given to the Church by the Holy Spirit. That the Church was entrusted with teaching and preaching the Word of God. Both so that the Truth could be known and for the edification of all the faithful. That is not the same thing as teaching that ordinary people should not and and must not read approved translations of the Bible and do so in light of Church teaching.