Did the Catholic Church Supress Knowledge of the Bible?

[AmbroseSJ]

This is a long established Protestant argument.

But it was specious even when it first emerged in the 16th cent.

What REALLY bothered Protestants is that the Church would forbid reading of Scriptures unless approved by the local Bishop. (This only relates to the late middle ages leading up to the Reformation, AND only in some European countries.) Many countries elsewhere had long had the Bible in the vernacular, and read it reverently.

What people both then, and especially now fail to grasp is:

1. The vernacular language in the late Middle ages was very fluid. For example, Northern English people could bare understand Southern English people. Because the Printing Press had not been invented, language was almost entirely “by ear.” People were NOT accustomed to seeing their vernacular in print. Spelling, pronunciation and even grammar were all local custom. Things like Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales went a long way in establishing English as a language of the educated. This was precisely during the rise of nationalism, and Wycliffe’s Bible.
2. Most people could not read their own language much less Latin, even during the Reformation! So a vernacular Bible was only symbolic of the freedom from oppression imagined in the heads of Protestants.
3. By the time the Printing Press made the vernacular Bible accessible to ordinary folk, Catholics in many countries were already printing Catholic bibles. England was perhaps later than most because of her deadly penal laws against Catholics.
4. Catholics should realize that Catholicism is Global, not just European. What European Protestants accuse the Universal Church of, is mostly ridiculous and untrue.

 

[Bonnie]

Well, it is actually material that comes from the Church or material that comes from a particular clergy/theologian/lay person? You see what I mean.

But then - who do you trust? I had thought - back in my more innocent days - that an imprimatur meant that everything in that book was correct. Turns out that wasn’t so. Now they don’t bother with the imprimatur.

I don’t know Latin, and even the translations of Church documents are difficult to understand. I’m not good at following the logic in a sentence that goes on for more than a page.

I’m fairly intelligent, fairly well educated, and I have problems understanding the documents of the Church. There is no way that those with less education are going to understand them, or even read them. I had a relative with little education - he could barely read his native Spanish, let alone English. He believed that he was going to heaven when he died because he had been baptised in the Catholic Church. Never went to Mass, married outside the Church, but none of that mattered - he had been baptised.

Whether that was his own idea or someone had told him that, I don’t know. But when the Church had the chance, when he was still attending Mass, no one corrected that idea.

 

[Della]

But then - who do you trust? I had thought - back in my more innocent days - that an imprimatur meant that everything in that book was correct. Turns out that wasn’t so. Now they don’t bother with the imprimatur.

The imprimatur is still granted, but far fewer authors are seeking them.

I don’t know Latin, and even the translations of Church documents are difficult to understand. I’m not good at following the logic in a sentence that goes on for more than a page.

I certainly don’t know Latin, and I really don’t bother reading Church documents unless I need a reference. Such documents are written for fellow bishops and theologians, not the average person. It is up to our bishops to read them and instruct us, if necessary and as he sees fit. Lay Catholics aren’t expected to read everything and digest everything. It’s only necessary to understand those precepts and teachings that pertain to everyday Christian development, and they are easily accessible to anyone who wants to know them.

I’m fairly intelligent, fairly well educated, and I have problems understanding the documents of the Church. There is no way that those with less education are going to understand them, or even read them. I had a relative with little education - he could barely read his native Spanish, let alone English. He believed that he was going to heaven when he died because he had been baptised in the Catholic Church. Never went to Mass, married outside the Church, but none of that mattered - he had been baptised.

It seems that was your relative’s excuse for not following Church teachings, not what he was taught. Many people do that sort of thing–they’ll say that no one said anything to them when they weren’t even there to hear it. Homilies aren’t directed at individuals but for the whole congregation, and they are based on the Mass readings for the day not usually on what one is supposed to do/not do as practicing Catholics, although they may deal with that.

Whether that was his own idea or someone had told him that, I don’t know. But when the Church had the chance, when he was still attending Mass, no one corrected that idea.

No pastor is a mind reader. If your relative had bothered to ask he’d certainly have been told. Again, we are to take our own spiritual well-being into our own hands. Just like going to a doctor, if we don’t tell him all our symptoms and/or hide things from him how is he supposed to treat us? We need to take responsibility for wanting to know and finding out through the many resources available to us.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

But when the Church had the chance, when he was still attending Mass, no one corrected that idea.

The Church is the city on a hill. Even fools can see where she is.

Church teachings are all public and non-hidden doctrines. The Church has tens of thousands of emissaries (clergy) scattered throughout the world ready to answer questions.

NO ONE will escape judgement because they are too foolish or stupid.

Isaiah says of the future Church: “And a path and a way shall be there, and it shall be called the holy way: the unclean shall not pass over it, and this shall be unto you a straight way, so that fools shall not err therein.” Isaiah 35:8

 

[Maddie26]

It may have been a “misunderstanding” the same way limbo was a “misunderstanding.” It was taught as real by religious educators, but the theologians in their ivory towers never noticed…]
How many more “misunderstandings” are going to be revealed?

As you imply, there is often a big difference between what the Church teaches and what Catholics teach. In a Church as large as the Catholic Church the “theologians in their ivory towers” first need to realise that a warped idea has taken hold, then, in charity correct it. Also in the last few hundred years, if an idea is not blatantly heretical, the Church often tries to get the people to sort it out for themselves rather than coming down hard on any whiff of difference.

As for misunderstandings in the modern Church I wouldn’t know where to stop. God is not a woman. Mary Magdalene was not Jesus’ wife, nor an apostle except in an honourary sense. Baptism is not invalidated if not accompanied by a subsequent baptism in the Spirit. God does not forgive all sins if the sinner does not repent. Not all religions are equal.

All these I have personally heard priests or RCIA teachers profess as the teaching of the Church. I wait earnestly for the day the Church speaks. Until then I’m glad we don’t worship in a police state.

 

[Todd977]

No, this doesn’t make sense at all.

I understand where you are coming from as my journey into Christianity and the Catholic Church also began when I picked up a Bible and started reading it without any kind of preparation. Thankfully, in my case, it was a Catholic Bible with orthodox footnotes. Nevertheless, simply because some of the ignorant, like you and I, were happily able to avoid twisting the Scriptures to destruction, does not mean that the danger of the ignorant twisting Scripture to their destruction is not real and serious.

The New Testament books were written by Christians to Christians, to people who had already been initiated into the mysteries of the Christian faith, to people who had already been taught “the first principles of God’s word … the elementary doctrines of Christ.” (Hebrews 5:12; 6:1) Without that “foundation” (Hebrews 6:1), it is much more likely that the ignorant will twist the Scriptures to their destruction. So, it still makes sense, at least to me, that, in the interest of preventing the ignorant from twisting the Scriptures to their destruction, the Church take reasonable precautions, such as insisting that a lay person get their pastor’s permission before reading the Bible on his own or insisting that Bibles contain orthodox introductions and footnotes that explain the more difficult passages.

 

[EveningSkye111]

Well, when I was in school back in the 50s, It was even printed in the bulletin and preached from the pulpit that we were NOT to read the Bible. We were scared to even consider such a crime. I do remember when we did get our first Bible. It wasn’t until the late 60s. I remember well Archbishop Dearden (later Cardinal) that the ban was off and it was okay to buy, own and read.

 

[Della]

Well, when I was in school back in the 50s, It was even printed in the bulletin and preached from the pulpit that we were NOT to read the Bible. We were scared to even consider such a crime. I do remember when we did get our first Bible. It wasn’t until the late 60s. I remember well Archbishop Dearden (later Cardinal) that the ban was off and it was okay to buy, own and read.

It was that residual fear from left over from the reformation that reading the Bible by ordinary people would lead them astray. Thankfully that idea has pretty much died out. Read all you want to–there are ample resources for proper Bible reading these days.

 

[EveningSkye111]

Hi Della,

I read my Bible as often as I can! It’s a best seller!

 

[Della]

Hi Della,

I read my Bible as often as I can! It’s a best seller!

Yes, it’s a good read, isn’t it?

 

[steve_b]

Hi,

I have heard this claimed before. Is it just a protestant talking point? *Did the Catholic church attempt to keep people from reading the bible in their own language? *

Any links or articles on this matter would be greatly appreciated!

Today the illiteracy rate in the world is ~17% of adults unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/education-building-blocks/literacy/resources/statistics/

What do you think that percentage was 500 years ago? 1500 yrs ago?

Would it matter WHAT language a book was written in when so many couldn’t read?

RE: Protestants

500 years ago, the man considered the father of Protestantism, Martin Luther, who also invented sola scriptura, already had 17 versions of the bible to read in his native German language, before he ever wrote a single word of his own bible.

Prior to the invention of the printing press, a bible was hugely expensive and difficult to produce. A bible had to be 100% hand written. Not an easy or cheap task given the times. Nor was it quickly done. Making each bible a very valuable item.

Historically,

• the Church came before the NT was written.
• The writers of the NT were already in the Church they were writing to and for,
• meaning they were already in ἐκκλησία,καθ’,ὅλης ,τῆς ] the kata holos church… Acts 9:31, The Catholic Church
• Which means the Catholic Church wrote the NT and canonized it plus canonized the OT books (73 total) in 382 at the council of Rome, by Pope Damasus I
• #34

 

[JohnR77]

As you imply, there is often a big difference between what the Church teaches and what Catholics teach… All these I have personally heard priests or RCIA teachers profess as the teaching of the Church. I wait earnestly for the day the Church speaks…

Your wait is over. She has !

That is why the Church has always given us approved Catechisms through the ages.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/epub/index.cfm

The Baltimore Catechism
catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/

Sources Of Catholic Dogma
Catechism of Saint Pius X

• The Catechism of the Council of Trent
  catecheticsonline.com/Catechetics1.php

.

 

[JohnR77]

Well, when I was in school back in the 50s, It was even printed in the bulletin and preached from the pulpit that we were NOT to read the Bible. We were scared to even consider such a crime. I do remember when we did get our first Bible. It wasn’t until the late 60s. I remember well Archbishop Dearden (later Cardinal) that the ban was off and it was okay to buy, own and read.

Let us assume that you correctly understood what you were told and that there was no difference between your impression of what was said, and what was truly said. This assumption is not true in most cases, but let’s assume you have an exceptional case. You were lied to and taught contrary to what the official Church teaching was actually saying even at that time. You have come to right place, as you will come to see (below) that you must distinguish between what you were incorrectly taught as opposed to what the true teaching of Church actually teaches. Catholic heretics who misrepresent Church teaching have always caused problems. And always will.

Of course, now perhaps not in your case, but definitely in others we see :

**There is a case after Vatican II where a priest was very disappointed that some members left the Church and Jesus in the Eucharist to join a Protestant led Bible study fellowship. It seems as though some of these ex-Catholics had fallen into a type of clericalism where they had expected their priest to be somewhat god-like and be capable of knowing and remembering every answer to every polemical and “biblical” argument against the Church. Since the priest could not answer their argument against the Church they used that encounter as a justification for leaving the Church. Out of frustration and the desire to preserve their unity with Jesus in the Eucharist the priest mistakenly told them to not bother reading the Bible. While understandable, this is contrary to the overall expressed wishes of the Popes. **

NOTE: There are some older Catholics (mostly in America, born before Vatican II) who claim that they were not allowed to read the Bible when they were kids.

This was not true, but they thought it was true based on a misunderstanding.

The Church always taught that the Bible must be read and interpreted within the context of the Church… …. Its was the lay person mis-understanding the priest.

So again, you will here this from time to time. I most recently heard it from someone who teaches CCD and a member of the Adult Faith Formation team. She didn’t’ believe me when I tried to explain that it was a misunderstanding, because for her, I’m just some 38 year kid who wasn’t alive back then. For her, she wasn’t allow that’s all there is to it.

But this was NEVER the official teaching of the Church.

God bless

Yes. You are so correct. Please prove to this lady who teaches falsely her Adult Faith Formation members that she is wrong. She is hurting others with her false testimony. Please consider using the visible, irrefutable evidence mentioned below.

Ive heard people say that they were discouraged from reading the bible as well. However, you say they misunderstood. That’s a lot of people who misunderstood? I am wondering how you know that it was a misunderstanding if so many people claimed it? I would like to have an answer next time I hear this because they won’t believe me unless I can show them.

Yes. I agree. You must show them. Words alone are not enough to overcome their ignorance. We need to show that these false teachers who falsely claimed that the Catholic Church did not allow the laity to read the Bible before Vatican II were misrepresenting true Catholic teaching. please distinguish between what some false teachers in the Church said and official Catholic teaching ]

It was actually very easy to do this, even back then. **All a person had to do was to actually pick up a Catholic Bible before Vatican II and read the opening pages.**These Catholic Bible publishers were not complete idiots, right ? They wanted to stay in business and pay their bills, right ? So, they wanted to sell what they printed, right ? So, they printed in the opening pages the proof that Catholics WERE supposed to be reading the Bible. All the Catholic Bibles from this time period that I have seen clearly printed the indulgences granted by the current Pope, practically begging Catholics to read the Bible and offering special graces when they did so. On this web page below you can see pictures of a Bible printed in AD 1884 and another printed in AD 1957. These were clearly Catholic Bibles for the home, printing what the Pope said, to clarify with absolute certainty what the Church actually taught. Catholics, Please read your Bible.

defendingthebride.com/bb/vatican.html

Also read what the Popes said at

defendingthebride.com/bb/index.html#pope
%between%

I have so much more to say on this thread, but I am out of time.
Until later, please read
defendingthebride.com/bible.html

.

 

[Maddie26]

Your wait is over. She has !

That is why the Church has always given us approved Catechisms through the ages.

.

Doesn’t stop 'em, though, does it? For many people their own interpretation of doctrine is more important than what the Church teaches, which is odd, since the priests and RCIA teachers I’m thinking of aren’t Protestants. The Church keeps trying, but she is gentle.

I was second-hand book shopping with my mother (born in 1930s) when I found a little Bible. She said, “I had one just like that when I was a girl.” We were not a well to do, scholarly or religious family, so it can’t have been that rare to own or read a Bible pre V2 in Australia.

 

[AngelBerp]

This info may be helpful:

justforcatholics.org/a198.htm

.

justforcatholics.org is a site that is filled with misconceptions, misunderstandings, and misinterpretations about the Catholic church. Tons of them. Easy to spot and easy to debunk.

It is not a reliable source of information about the Catholic Church or her teachings.

 

[Duane1966]

Well, when I was in school back in the 50s, It was even printed in the bulletin and preached from the pulpit that we were NOT to read the Bible. We were scared to even consider such a crime. I do remember when we did get our first Bible. It wasn’t until the late 60s. I remember well Archbishop Dearden (later Cardinal) that the ban was off and it was okay to buy, own and read.

Then your parish and Archbishop were going against the teaching of many popes, the Magisterium, the US Council of Catholic Bishops, just to name a few. I am posting just a small tidbit of official documents to show what the Church actually taught about the laity reading the Holy Scriptures.

Pope Pius VII* (1742 –1823)*in a rescript, April 18, 1820, addressed to the English Bishops, *he expressed his wish“to encourage their people to read the Holy Scriptures; for nothing can be more useful, more consoling, and more animating, inasmuch as they serve to confirm the faith, support the hope, and influence the charity of the true Christian.”Catholic Bishops in AD 1826“

Q. Do not Catholic Bishops and Popes discourage the reading of the Scriptures?***
A. No; the Catholic clergy are bound to read the Scripture for nearly an hour every day; the Catholic Bishops of Great Britain publicly declared, in 1826, **that the circulation of *authentic copies **of Scripture was never discouraged by the Church”(A Doctrinal Catechism published in AD 1846)

Third Council of Baltimore** (7 December AD 1884)*“It can hardly be necessary for us to remind you, beloved brethren, that the most highly valued treasure of every family library, and the most frequently and lovingly made use of, should be the Holy Scriptures…** We hope that no family can be found amongst us without a correct version of the Holy Scriptures.**”**The Holy Bible, Holy Trinity Edition (Chicago: Catholic Press,1951) p.xxi.

See Pictures of1884 Catholic Biblein America with endorsements from all the Bishops in USA in the opening pages encouraged the laity to read it.

Pope Leo XIII*(1878-1903 AD)Providentissimus Deus: Encyclical Of Pope Leo XIII On The Study Of Holy Scripture“ …* advancing the glory of God and contributing to the salvation of souls, have for a long time cherished the desire to give an impulse to the noble science of Holy Scripture, and to impart to Scripture study a direction suitable to the needs of the present day. The solicitude of the apostolic office naturally urges and even compels us, not only to desire that this grand source of Catholic revelation should be made safely and abundantly accessible to the flock of Jesus Christ, but also not to suffer any attempt to defile or corrupt it”“… (Psalm 119:2)[Providentissimus Deusat the Vatican Website. ( Nov. 18, 1893)]Note:“Holy Ghost”* is an older English translation from the Latin for “Holy Spirit”* which is* “Spiritūs Sancti.”*

Pope Leo XIII*(1898 AD)*“An indulgence of 300 days for reading the Holy Gospels is granted to all the Faithful who read these Holy Scriptures for at least a quarter of an hour, with reverence due to the Divine Word and as spiritual reading…. A Plenary indulgence under the usual conditions is granted once a month for the daily reading.*”*Pope Leo XIII. December, 1898,Preces et Pia Opera, 045.(Enchiridion Indulgentiarium,694).

Pope St. Pius X*(1903-1914 AD)“Nothing would please us more than to see our beloved children form the habit of reading the Gospels - not merely from time to time, but every day.”

On Holy ScripturePope Benedict XV** (1914-1922 AD)**“*Our one desire for all the Church’s children is that, being saturated with the Bible, they may arrive at the all surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ.”15 September AD 1920
He repeated St. Jerome’s statement:“Ignorance of Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.”
*
Pope Pius XII 1943 AD“Our predecessors, when the opportunity occurred, recommended the study or preaching or in fine the pious reading and meditation of the sacred Scriptures.“… This author of salvation, Christ, will men more fully know, more ardently love and more faithfully imitate in proportion as they are more assiduously urged to know and meditate the Sacred Letters, especially the New Testament …”[Divino Afflante Spiritu]He also granted indulgences (a blessing of God’s grace) to those who read Scripture. (1 Cor. 4:1.)

I would add that I went to Catholic schools in the 70’s and 80’s, and we were encouraged to read the bible.

My mom went to school in the 30’s and 40’s, and she was encouraged to read the bible by her parish priest and diocesan bishop.

My grandmother and grandfather went to school in the early 1900’s, and they were encouraged to read the bible by their priests and bishops. And they recall their parents saying they were encouraged to read the bible by their priests and bishops.

I would add that all of this took place in MICHIGAN.

 

[Alex_H]

Thank you, all, for the responses! I take my relationship with God seriously and I am currently in the process of converting to Catholicism. I just want to make sure I understand all that I can before I make such a big commitment.

 

[JohnR77]

Thank you, all, for the responses! I take my relationship with God seriously and I am currently in the process of converting to Catholicism. I just want to make sure I understand all that I can before I make such a big commitment.

Dear Alex,

It is a gift from God to be able to convert. It is a matter of faith in God. It is on going. I need to convert each day to follow Him. Please pray for me. And I will pray for you.

It is not so much a strength within yourself, or what you are doing exclusively, but more so what God does through you and within you.

Please see

defendingthebride.com/ch/why.html

God’s Peace,
John

 

[JimG]

justforcatholics.org is a site that is filled with misconceptions, misunderstandings, and misinterpretations about the Catholic church. Tons of them. Easy to spot and easy to debunk.

It is not a reliable source of information about the Catholic Church or her teachings.

It is an evangelical site which attempts to draw Catholics out of the Catholic Church.

 

[guanophore]

It is absolutely a Protestant talking point. Protestants claim this was an attempt to hide scriptures from the people. It was one of many attempts to discredit the Church and the Pope.

First, we must note that Latin was a language used in the vast Roman Empire.

Some of the scriptures were translated to Latin. The mass was also said in Latin.

Saint Jerome translated scriptures into Latin around 400 AD. He used Greek manuscripts, Hebrew manuscripts, and Old Latin manuscripts.

There were many heretical movements and uninspired letters circulating in early Church history.

The clergy used Latin as their language, in part, to protect the Church and scripture.

This was at least 1,200 years before the Protestant Reformation.

They were not speaking English or German in the Middle East where the Church originated.

So, a Protestant cannot understand the use of Latin. Essentially, a Protestant will start with Christ, go to Luther, and pay little attention to the 1,500 years in between.

When one rejects the Church and its tradition, one misses out on the origins of Christianity.

It is also difficult for moderns to imagine life without the printing press. The Gutenberg Bible was certainly the first mass produced printed work. Until that was invented all Bibles were produced in Catholic monasteries painstakingly penned by monks at candelinght. Each one might take a year.

They were chained to the podium of the Church because they were too expensive to replace. Only nobles and the very rich could afford to commission one for their home.