[metmom]

“So who has read Haggai lately? Answer: those of us who read “the Office of Readings.””

Which mass has that been read in lately? After all, that IS what the issue is about, not whether any individual reads the entire Bible themselves personally.

The claim was made that the Bible is read in it’s entirety at each mass each day.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2578704/posts?page=10818#10818

That is simply NOT humanly possible.

[Mad Dawg]

I don't think anybody claimed that the entire Bible was read daily at Mass. I read the post to which you linked. I think it was ambiguously written, but someone who was looking for what was intended rather than a bone of contention, would be able to dope out what the post claimed.

But whatever anyone else claimed, I was referring to the Office of Readings.

The fact is that if one goes to Mass Daily one gets a very large portion of the Bible in two years. But not all of it. One gets more if one prays the Office of readings, but still not all.

It is a shame when people would rather find something to fight about than something on which they could agree. In any event, despite the falsehoods you may read here, Bible reading is encouraged in the Catholic Church, as I have shown above.

[Cronos]

Actually, if you do read my post, you would read:

Yes, you have to read the New Testament — which is what is done each day in Church at mass.
All clear so far? We read from the New Testament each day in mass -- if you are an ex-Catholic, you would know this

And, unlike some of your groupings, we read the NT, OT in their entirety
We read The Bible in it's entirety, not excerpts

— we read the Gospels, the Epistles, Revelation, we read psalms, the Pentateuch etc. all in mass
If you are an ex-Catholic and / or have ever attended Sunday mass, you will hear the singing of psalms, the readings from the Old Testament, the New Testament (Epistles, Revelation etc) and the Gospel. we read all of these during mass -- from the entire Bible, not excerpts, not focusing just on the epistles, but showing how the OT points to the Gospels and the Epistles point BACK to the Gospels, since the Gospels are the CRUX of the NT

—> we, Christ’s Church, the One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church ARE the New Testament Church. This is evidenced in the reading of Acts, in the writings of First Century Christians (Didache, +Ireneus etc).
This is plainly obvious to anyone reading Early Christian text that the practises of the Early Christians, from the mass with the Eucharist to the apostolic succession etc. is the basis of Church tradition -- not only of the Catholic churches but also of our Oriental and Assyrian brethern who have been separated from us for centuries, a lot of the time by distance and hostile nations.

And, of course, you put your own YOPIOS on my text, which was a false one "bible read in it's entirety at mass each day" to think that we read the entire Bible instead of my text which clearly points out we read from the various books of the Bible (OT, Epistles, Gospels) in their entirety rather than in excerpts. Just like the errors you make in scripture, these all derive from reading and misinterpretation.

[Natural Law]

"The claim was made that the Bible is read in it’s entirety at each mass each day."

What a blatant distortion and misrepresentation of what cronos actually posted. Cronos said we read the entire Bible in the mass, not the entire Bible in a single mass.

[OLD REGGIE]

The claim was made that the Bible is read in it’s entirety at each mass each day.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2578704/posts?page=10818#10818

That is simply NOT humanly possible.

Now now Mom, be reasonable. The actual claim did not say "each Mass". The claim did say "in its entirety".

Based on that I asked for proof and specified a very generous 10 year time span.

I actually got one brilliant reply asking how much was read in a Unitarian service. Come to think of it, that wasn't brilliant, it was a stupid misdirection. Sigh!