I think that your description of the Missal and Catechism as being supplements to support liturgy and teaching is a good one. Moreover, it is easy to prove the accuracy of your statement.
The Roman Missal is a “book containing the prescribed prayers, chants, and instructions for the celebration of Mass in the Roman Catholic Church” (
Source: U.S.C.C.B.). But the Roman Missal cannot be used by itself; there must also be readings from Sacred Scripture. This is clearly demonstrated in the section of the missal labeled “The Liturgy of the Word.” If the Roman Missal cannot be used without Bible readings, then obviously it is not a tool for replacing or supplanting the Bible.
The
General Instruction of the Roman Missal emphasizes the importance of the Bible in the following words: “When the Sacred Scriptures are read in the Church, God himself speaks to his people, and Christ, present in his word, proclaims the Gospel. Therefore, the readings from the Word of God are to be listened to reverently by everyone, for they are an element of the greatest importance in the Liturgy” (
G.I.R.M., Ch. 2:2:29). This is hardly the language of a book that has some sort of anti-Bible agenda.
In terms of the Catechism, it is a resource for teaching and understanding various elements of the Christian Faith. St. Paul himself verifies that teachers are an important part of the Church: “And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third
teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues” (1Corinthians 12:28, RSV, emphasis added). Within the Church, we can think of the Catechism as a kind of textbook used by teachers (a.k.a, catechists) and students.
Furthermore, the Catechism’s
Index of Footnotes displays hundreds of references to Sacred Scripture. If the Catechism continuously redirects the reader to passages in the Bible, then obviously it is not a tool for replacing or supplanting the Bible.
It is also worth mentioning that certain Protestants denominations also use catechisms and missals (a.k.a., “service books”). For example, this concept is well known among Anglicans, Methodists and Lutherans. There is also
The Baptist Catechism written by John Piper in 1677 which is still used by many Baptists today. Is the person you spoke with aware of this? If so, do this person’s suspicions concerning the Roman Missal and Catholic Catechism extend to Protestant versions? If not, then you can point out the double standard.
And lastly, I will direct your attention to the
Didache, a Christian document which most scholars believe was written in the 1st Century. Among other things, it had elements of a missal (for example, see Chapters 9 & 10) and a catechism (much of the rest of it). Plus, the Church has been issuing missals and catechisms ever since, and yet the Bible is still a fundamental aspect of Catholic worship. Therefore, if the purpose of missals and catechisms is to “replace and supplant the Bible” then they are doing a very lousy job of it!
