Why aren't there Bibles in the pews (in Catholic Churches)?

OSV ^ | August 30, 2017 | D.D. Emmons

[ealgeone]

What do you mean by "understand it on your own"? Am I entitled to my own interpretations/illuminations of the Bible?

Yes, provided it doesn't contradict what the Church has already said. I have all sorts of goofy personal "understandings" about the Bible. But they are just that. If I were one of you I'd go off and form my own church on the basis of these "understandings"....it'd be just as ridiculous and irrelevant as all the other fake churches.

If you have "goofy personal understandings" why do you even read the Scriptures?

As the RCC hasn't provided an authoritative rendering on every verse in the Bible....what do you rely upon for accuracy?

[ealgeone]

I agree....it’s not quantity so much as it is quality.

[daniel1212]

You never answered ebb’s question: at which church do you hear the entire bible? Perhaps if we take out the “you” and ask it more generally: which church proclaims/discusses the entire Bible (including books like “Numbers”)?

I was not claiming that you hear the entire Bible in any church, but was refuting any inference that this is the case in Catholicism, which I have seen asserted by Catholics, and the article may be understood as claiming ("The first reading on weekdays may be taken from the Old or the New Testament. Typically, a single book is read semi-continuously (i.e., some passages are not read) until it is finished and then a new book is started) ”which was apparently the reason boatbums said,

I wonder how many Catholics know that during Mass they are not hearing the entire Bible over those three-year cycles? Quite a bit is NEVER covered.

[Mark17]

And, if this would happen, then the Catholic would become a Protestant. ;O)

That's exactly what happened to me bro. Now, I have assurance of salvation. If others don't, that is their problem. 👍😊🇵🇭

[chesley]

So true

[Salvation]

I don’t believe the Catholic would become a Protestant by asking for the enlightenment of the Holy Spirt, God the Son and God the Father.

[al_c]

Excellent!

[ealgeone]

No, but they may become a Christian.

[Claud]

One cannot glean anything from the scriptures unless it is given to them and enlightened by the Holy Spirit.

I agree. But are we bound to accept a person's word on whether they were so "enlightened", versus being seduced into heresy by the devil? Because that's where it all falls apart.

[ealgeone]

You raise a good question. How do we know if what we're hearing is legit. We all agree on the NT books. That's the only inspired source of truth we have.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“I don’t believe the Catholic would become a Protestant by asking for the enlightenment of the Holy Spirt, God the Son and God the Father.”

I can’t say it always happens, but it graciously happened to me.

Though I must edit your statement for accuracy.

“I don’t believe the Catholic would become a CHRISTIAN by asking for the enlightenment of the Holy Spirt, God the Son and God the Father.”

I do this because I didn’t “Become a Protestant” dear salvation.

I came to Christ for salvation, was born into His Body & Bride, sealed by His Spirit, placed in the heavenlies, given eternal life and assurance of salvation, given the life of Christ, declared righteous because His righteousness was imputed to me, and was given access to the Father.

After that, what would worldly rituals, attempted self-righteousness, and a hamster wheel of guilt and works add to HIS AMAZING FREE GIFT??

Further, why would I care about Roman vs. non-Roman? I have Him.

[Claud]

If you went around your church peddling the JW "New World Translation"…you think they wouldn't put a world of hurt on you? Every translation is automatically a good and approved one, is that what you want to say?

And anyway what the heck are the Wessex Gospels....if the Catholic Church was so anti-translation?

If you actually studied the medieval period, you would realize why translation wasn't a huge priority for centuries:

a) Books cost as a much as a house
b) most of the laity was illiterate
c) people who learned to read, learned LATIN
d) there weren't even standard languages yet, there were collections of different English/Italian/French dialects. Does your church publish a Bible in Appalachian? In Brooklynese?

For centuries there were dozens of languages used in the Catholic Church. Latin, Greek, Glagolitic, Slavonic, Malayalam, Arabic, Aramaic, Coptic, Ge'ez, Mohawk, Algonquin. And now of course there are many, many more. There is ZERO objection to the vernacular in principle, if it is done right.

Even under Arundel's super-tough measures against the vernacular in 1408, even THAT legislation allowed approved translations to be read and circulated, as you yourself admitted.

[ealgeone]

Your list of excuses as to why the Bible wasn’t more available is an indictment against the RCC.

[Elsie]

Consider that Muhammad seems to have had the idea that Mary was part of the Godhead.

MAybe THAT is where JS came up with a Heavenly Mother for the Heavenly Father to create all those Spirit Babies just waiting for a human body to inhabit!

[Elsie]

I must confess.

I’ve NEVER heard 1 Kings 16:11 expounded on at MY chosen church!

[metmom]

Nice work.

However, the facts won’t make any difference to someone who doesn’t want to believe them.

[metmom]

Where is the official, Catholic aChurch approved, verse by verse commentary of the Bible interpreting it for Catholics?

And who is going to interpret the interpretation?

[metmom]

Exactly......

[MamaB]

My pastor has been teaching through the Bible for decades, verse by verse. He is retiring soon after being at my church since the late 1970’s.

[HarleyD]

But are we bound to accept a person's word on whether they were so "enlightened", versus being seduced into heresy by the devil? Because that's where it all falls apart.

I would agree. The problem with heresies is that there are "minor" heresies and BIG "major" ones. There are certain truths that all believers hold that bond us together in Christ. There are others that make us simply ineffective in understanding scripture, prayer, doctrine, etc. Some heresies are easy to spot. Many are not. Where the dividing line is, is difficult to say at times.

One can only be true to what is written in scripture after prayerful consideration and be ready to give an accounting based upon our limited understanding to grasp truth. But we would be remiss if we did not try to point out truths that we have learned just as Paul pointed out to James, Peter, etc. heretical errors they were sliding into with the Judaizers. One would hope that the giver would have a loving attitude and the receiver would have an open heart.