"The Hidden Exodus" - Do Catholic Churches Need More Bible?

[JohnnyReb]

I agree that some homilies r too short. I once heard an interesting comment made by a Catholic Priest and eminent scholar that thought that both Protestants and Catholics after the reformation came out somewhat short-handed because of their suspiciousness of each other with Catholics emphasizing the Liturgy of the Eucharist and Protestants the Liturgy of the Word. This persisted down through the centuries to our present day. I dont know how accurate that is but I found it interesting.

In Christ,
JMS

I have heard this too but not sure where it came from. Of course both sides tried to paint the other as sinister in their intentions, (ie the Catholics Lord over the sacraments as their way of trying to draw people back to church or the Protestants emphasize the word because its all they have and don’t care about the sacraments-both are false IMO)

 

[Dave_Noonan]

Stats, please. Don’t make statements which you cannot back up. Scripture, and the Liturgy that includes much of it, is a serious area of study in EVERY Catholic seminary.

Also, the deacon/priest/bishop who gives the homily is INSTRUCTED to base it on the readings for that Sunday or, for that matter, Mass EVERY DAY. That some priests, etc., do not do this is similar to the MANY non-Catholic sermons I have heard where ONE VERSE is referenced. At least we get multiple readings, plus the Psalms.

Bible study is available in every Catholic parish. Does everyone go? No. But then you have those “protestant” churches with “perfect” attendence. Baloney.

I’ve actually taught in a Catholic seminary, so I do know of what I speak–the situation is appalling. I’d challenge you to page through the M.Div requirements of ANY Catholic seminary on the web–the average is 4 to 6 classes on the Bible being required (of which two are typically courses at the introductory level), through which one only really scratches the surface. Requirements for study in original languages–which most Protestant seminaries at least attempt–is typically not required at a Catholic seminary, and sometimes not even offered, nor is the study of Latin required. Training for deacons is still less.

Most Protestants follow the Revised Common Lectionary, so the vast majority of the time, they are hearing the same readings that you are.

 

[Contarini]

Hi there,
Another poster from last month mentioned this article, which I read and found very interesting. Apologies if this is not the best forum to discuss… I’m new and learning the ropes a bit.

Here’s a link to the article:
ncronline.org/news/hidden-exodus-catholics-becoming-protestants

The article attempts to look at data regarding departures from the RCC towards either evangelical churches or mainline Protestant churches (i.e. Episcopal/Lutheran/Methodist,etc).

It seems the underlying theme of departures is directly relevant NOT to social beliefs of the RCC, but a lack of Biblical focus and a lack of an engaging worship service:

As a non-Catholic, I can agree with this sentiment, but I’d like to hear the opinions of you folks on this topic.

Would it HELP the Roman Catholic Church to increase time spent on scripture interpretation at mass?

Do you AGREE with the article’s author that the Church needs to emphasize SCRIPTURE even above the Catechism?

Thanks all!

One flaw in the article is that it seems to assume that if ex-Catholics leave the Church over substantive doctrinal issues, the relevant issues are going to be related to Catholic social teaching. The article assumes that theology is largely trivial, and it’s not clear if this is really what the study has shown–nor is it clear whether Fr. Reese’s bias is built into the study itself or whether he’s simply reading it into the results of the study.

He doesn’t even consider the possibility that many folks leave the Catholic Church because they come to object to certain doctrines which they see as un-Scriptural–Mary, Purgatory, etc. He’s so removed from the world of conservative Protestantism and the ex-Catholics who become Protestants that he can’t conceive of this possibility.

A follow-up question is whether the problem is solely in Catholic catechesis or also in cultural assumptions about what following Scripture looks like. People in modern American society (and this has been true since the Revolution) have a very pragmatic, bottom-line, common-sense approach to religious truth. Catholicism, with its appeal to mystery and tradition and ritual, goes against the grain of the American religious ethos. (To me that’s a large part of its appeal–I hate the American religious ethos, but that’s me. . . . ) Certainly Catholics could do much better explaining and defending the Faith, but there’s going to be a certain amount of attrition given the general religious assumptions of the culture. American Catholicism was able to keep this attrition lower in the past by taking a very hostile, circle-the-wagons approach to the broader culture. I don’t think that was entirely healthy by any means. There are risks to a more open approach, but I think they’re surely risks worth running.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

I’ve actually taught in a Catholic seminary, so I do know of what I speak–the situation is appalling. I’d challenge you to page through the M.Div requirements of ANY Catholic seminary on the web–the average is 4 to 6 classes on the Bible being required (of which two are typically courses at the introductory level), through which one only really scratches the surface. Requirements for study in original languages–which most Protestant seminaries at least attempt–is typically not required at a Catholic seminary, and sometimes not even offered, nor is the study of Latin required. Training for deacons is still less.

Most Protestants follow the Revised Common Lectionary, so the vast majority of the time, they are hearing the same readings that you are.

Dave, mainline Protestant denominations follow the RCL, and by no means all congregations even in those denominations do so. (The mainline denomination I know best, other than my own Episcopal Church, is the United Methodist Church, and I’m not sure that a majority of UM congregations follow the RCL. I’m pretty sure that the number that use all the readings is vanishingly small. Most Methodist congregations, in my experience, use one Scripture reading, sometimes from the RCL–usually the Gospel–and sometimes just picked by the pastor.) The majority of American Protestants today do not belong to one of those denominations.

I’m not going to argue with you on the sad state of Catholic seminaries, though. . . . I have no personal experience, but the abysmal quality of most Catholic preaching bears out what you are saying.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

As a new Catholic (Evangelical for 18 years prior) who entered the Church this past Easter Vigil, I couldn’t disagree more. The Catholic Mass including the liturgy of the Word (very biblical) and Eucharist I find much more engaging so to speak than a typical Protestant service, the history behind the mass is also remarkalbe and every part of it has Biblical roots both from the OT and NT.

Indeed. Those of us who come to liturgical Christianity from a free-church Protestant background can see this. But unfortunately, many Catholics don’t pick up on this just from attending Mass. (The same is true in the Episcopal Church.)

Edwin

 

[Revert_43]

Hi there,
Another poster from last month mentioned this article, which I read and found very interesting. Apologies if this is not the best forum to discuss… I’m new and learning the ropes a bit.

Here’s a link to the article:
ncronline.org/news/hidden-exodus-catholics-becoming-protestants

The article attempts to look at data regarding departures from the RCC towards either evangelical churches or mainline Protestant churches (i.e. Episcopal/Lutheran/Methodist,etc).

It seems the underlying theme of departures is directly relevant NOT to social beliefs of the RCC, but a lack of Biblical focus and a lack of an engaging worship service:

As a non-Catholic, I can agree with this sentiment, but I’d like to hear the opinions of you folks on this topic.

Would it HELP the Roman Catholic Church to increase time spent on scripture interpretation at mass?

Do you AGREE with the article’s author that the Church needs to emphasize SCRIPTURE even above the Catechism?

Thanks all!

As a member of the hidden exodus that returned home…

I disagree. I was raised Catholic, left the church and attended an CM&A Church and reverted back to the Catholic Church. I was, and am still, friendly with some of the pastoral staff at that Church is as follows so I’m not am embittered ex-Protestant that joined the Catholic church.

The assumption that Protestants know the Bible better than Catholics is not entirely true. While I was away from the Catholic Church I studied the Bible constantly, in fact, studying the Bible was what brought me back to the Catholic Church. I studied my way back. But to my original point, most of the people I attended small groups with didn’t study the Bible either, most people listened to the pastor during his sermons and just blindly accepted what he said. When folks got tired of hearing him they went Church shopping. Most people in that church knew a few scripture verses very well because those are the few that the Pastor preached about and those people spoke about those verses authoratively.

To the point about the CCC, focusing on the CCC keeps us Catholic as one. The main reason I returned home was that the Catholic Church could answer questions no Christian denominational church or even non-denominational church could.

People leave the Catholic Church because either they disagree with the teachings or don’t understand the teachings. Other churches roll out the red carpet for new people because that’s what they do, they sheep steal. I’d assert that most people bounce around from Protestant Church to Protestant church and their aren’t as many “new converts” as one might think.

I’m a high tech professional and the CM&A church I attended was run like a small start-up company. That Church has better organization, better marketing and better presentation than a typical Catholic Church. Each week the service a different show, and it was the Church staff that called it a show, those are not my words. Once the novelty wore off I returned home.

 

[Dave_Noonan]

Dave, mainline Protestant denominations follow the RCL…

Edwin

You can read the list of denominations that do here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Common_Lectionary. I also know of other denominations where following the RCL is a fairly common practice, but are not listed in the article–for example, various Mennonite groups. Granted, uniformity cannot be guaranteed and the practice is indeed optional on a practical level. And while free-church denominations like Southern Baptists are prominent in the U.S., recall that’s not the situation in the rest of the world.

But despite the numbers or Protestants that do or don’t follow a lectionary, broad-brushing Protestant preaching as based on “one verse” and contrasting that with the amount of Scripture at a Catholic Mass isn’t a fair picture.

 

[hn160]

My view on this subject is the pertains not only to Catholics but to Protestants. I was a ELCA Lutheran, my then church lost members to Evangelicals because the laity were not taught by the pastor. My Wife and I went to Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. Our church has pastors that were well taught in seminary, they both know Greek, Hebrew, and Latin. They both teach adult Bible Class and on Sunday, teach Adult Class, They teach once a month, a theology class for those interested and every other Saturday, a Tischreden Class (Table Talk) on the Lutheran Confessions. The Missouri Synod believes that the lay people should be well informed. This certainly not the view of the ELCA.

 

[Bluegoat]

I thought that the article was ultimately unclear about why people left. I am sure many who do leave for Protestant groups do so because they think the Catholic is not Biblical enough in some way - but I don’t think they are really correct in that belief. But that misunderstanding itself may point to the problem and possible solutions. Somehow some people don’t get how Catholicism is Biblical in focus.

As far as the catechism, I have spoken to ex-Catholics who felt that it was referred to more often than the Bible, and that it was more authoritative, and that it really bothered the,m And I have also met quite a few practicing Catholics, often quite devout, that did actually think that it was authoritative in a way that was not really correct. So it may be that a better understanding of what it is, and how to use it, would be helpful to many.

And along those lines, many Catholics don’t have a clear idea about how the teaching of the Magisterium, or the saints, or the ecumenical councils, relates to scripture, or the catechism, and to history. So perhaps a clearer understanding of these things would be helpful to people.

 

[cooterhein]

It seems the underlying theme of departures is directly relevant NOT to social beliefs of the RCC, but a lack of Biblical focus and a lack of an engaging worship service

First off, I wasn’t aware that this exodus was hidden; I was well aware of the fact that Catholicism has the worst net conversion ratio of any major religious group in America. And that on a global scale, it’s the only one of the six mega-blocks that has negative net conversion numbers.

Second, I’ve looked at a few of the studies on why people leave Catholciism, and no single reason or group of reasons ever stuck out to me. Even when you’re looking at a pretty long and detailed list of option, the “Other” category tends to be in the top two or three vote-getters. And while it might be encouraging to know that certain worrisome events or factors aren’t individually responsible for as much damage as one might fear, it kind of adds up to something a little more discouraging- there is no single thing that you can focus on in order to fix the problem. It’s got to be several things at once.

Would it HELP the Roman Catholic Church to increase time spent on scripture interpretation at mass?

Yes, in the long run. Provided that Church leaders can succeed in demonstrating that various aspects of Church teaching, properly explained, actually do harmonize with Scripture. That can be a tough sell, though. In the short term, I think that could lead to a certain degree of trading quantity for quality. In the long term, though, quality does lead to more effective ministry and cultural/community impact.

Do you AGREE with the article’s author that the Church needs to emphasize SCRIPTURE even above the Catechism?

Most definitely. They should emphasize Scripture as the highest authority and everything else as, at best, second in authority to that.

Realistically, though, it would be nice if Catholics started treating Scripture like a self-interpreting document. They already do that with the Catechism, but they currently don’t do it with Scripture. That’s definitely not right.

 

[Calgar]

And, those drawn to the more evangelical churches are often more interested in the “show” than anything else. They will say whatever they are taught to say.

Got any proof to go with that?

I understand you might have had a bad experience, but your dislike (hate?) and vitriol don’t do you, your church, or God any service.

 

[Hesychios]

The homilies I get the most out of at Mass are the ones where the Priest or Deacon explains the scripture readings, their historical significance, any pertinent linguistic nuance, their relationship to the teaching of the Magesterium, and how we can use that in our lives as Christians.

I used to read the books by Father Carroll Stuhmuller (I believe he was a Passionist) every day, in connection with the church calendar.

Before Mass (if possible) I would read the work for that day, and meditate upon it. I must say it was greatly beneficial.

I recommend the whole series to anyone, I wonder if anyone else here is familiar with this?

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41MC0WB2T2L.BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/416N7MGBY9L.BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01.jpg

 

[_L]

As a Catholic I agree with the premise of this thread that Catholics need to read their Bibles more. It is perfectly understandable how the different sects of protestants are more Bible oriented due to the fact that they feel that the Bible alone is reliable for the basis of their faith. Considering Catholic and Orthodox have never based the faith solely on the sacred scriptures but also on sacred tradition, too often and erroneously so, the scriptures are not given the prominence they deserve in the Catholic Church. I think you will find that among the truly devout Catholics you will see that many know the scriptures quite well and are constantly in the foreground of their continuing spiritual formation. Sadly however, most people who bear the name Catholic do so by default due to cultural and sentimental reasons rather than the substantial reasons as far as faith goes, in that they really are not on fire for God and just go through the motions or not even that. The stereotype that Catholics do not read the Bible can be greatly attributed to these folks in my opinion. With that said, Catholics have a lot more scripture integrated into the faith than most non Catholics realize, I challenge you to sit through a mass and count all of the biblical references made and I assure you the number is greater than the typical 4 scripture readings read/sung at mass. But it saddens me sometimes when at a certain mass, a great reading is read, and when the priest goes to give the homily he may scarcely mention the scripture reading but go off speaking in generality about some experience he had or what not. Truly this portion can be improved upon. And in addition to this I think fellow Catholics need to really to read their Bibles at home as well in order to love and know the scriptures like the back of their own hand.

“Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ.” - St. Jerome

 

[C_the_K]

As a Catholic I agree with the premise of this thread that Catholics need to read their Bibles more.

“Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ.” - St. Jerome

I don’t know about other churches but in our church we are provided missals in the pews with the Sunday readings. All anyone has to do is pickup the missal and they can read the bible passages for Sunday. This is usually an Old Testament reading a Psalm a New Testament reading and a Gospel reading. We consider the Gospel so sacred we stand to show respect for the words of Jesus. What I’m trying to say is, the Church gives the people the opportunity to read the bible the problem is the people aren’t taking advantage of the opportunity.

How many non-catholics actually pickup the bible and read it on a regular basis? Isn’t it more important to put the teaching of the bible into practice than just pick it up and read it?

 

[hn160]

I don’t know about other churches but in our church we are provided missals in the pews with the Sunday readings. All anyone has to do is pickup the missal and they can read the bible passages for Sunday. This is usually an Old Testament reading a Psalm a New Testament reading and a Gospel reading. We consider the Gospel so sacred we stand to show respect for the words of Jesus. What I’m trying to say is, the Church gives the people the opportunity to read the bible the problem is the people aren’t taking advantage of the opportunity.

How many non-catholics actually pickup the bible and read it on a regular basis? Isn’t it more important to put the teaching of the bible into practice than just pick it up and read it?

You are correct.

 

[_L]

I don’t know about other churches but in our church we are provided missals in the pews with the Sunday readings. All anyone has to do is pickup the missal and they can read the bible passages for Sunday. This is usually an Old Testament reading a Psalm a New Testament reading and a Gospel reading.

As a fellow Latin Rite Catholic the same thing goes on in my Church, but the problem is either people aren’t picking it up and reading, or their scripture reading is confined to 4 passages a week. Imagine if we only prayed during mass on sundays? In my opinion reading the scriptures should be done daily like prayer.

We consider the Gospel so sacred we stand to show respect for the words of Jesus. What I’m trying to say is, the Church gives the people the opportunity to read the bible the problem is the people aren’t taking advantage of the opportunity.

Exactly what I was trying to say

How many non-catholics actually pickup the bible and read it on a regular basis? Isn’t it more important to put the teaching of the bible into practice than just pick it up and read it?

It is indeed better to practice than just to read, but how can you practice something you are not familiar with? I am just trying to advocate a deeper spiritual life for fellow Catholics by reading the scriptures more often.

 

[cooterhein]

Here’s a fun question. Are Catholics typically familiar with what the Bible says about reading the Bible? Or do you depend entirely on priestly/Magisterial/otherwise earthly authority in order to know how much you should care about reading it?

Are you allowed to read what the Bible says about what you should do with it and put that into action? Or would it be more appropriate for you to read an approved Church document (ie., the Catechism or an encyclical), use your own fallible private interpretation of that document, and take action based on that?

At this point, does the Bible even count as an approved Church document, in the sense that you’re cleared to read it and then do what it says?

 

[Revert_43]

Here’s a fun question. Are Catholics typically familiar with what the Bible says about reading the Bible? Or do you depend entirely on priestly/Magisterial/otherwise earthly authority in order to know how much you should care about reading it?

Are you allowed to read what the Bible says about what you should do with it and put that into action? Or would it be more appropriate for you to read an approved Church document (ie., the Catechism or an encyclical), use your own fallible private interpretation of that document, and take action based on that?

At this point, does the Bible even count as an approved Church document, in the sense that you’re cleared to read it and then do what it says?

I know exactly what the church says about the Bible. I read the daily mass readings and use a Catholic study bible to understand them in the context of the magisterium. And from my experience for a few years in a Protestant church that’s more time with the Bible than most of the Protestants I previously worshipped with, in fact, most of the Protestants in my small groups kept calling me an “over achiever” and made smarmy comments.

The CCC is why there aren’t 20,000 Roman Catholic denominations (even though there are many Catholic groups that are trying to achieve that). The CCC is where Catholics can find the answers to those questions that cause non-Catholics churches to split. The CCC is where Catholics can turn to actually enforce what is said in Matthew 18.

 

[TrueLight]

I know exactly what the church says about the Bible. I read the daily mass readings and use a Catholic study bible to understand them in the context of the magisterium. And from my experience for a few years in a Protestant church that’s more time with the Bible than most of the Protestants I previously worshipped with, in fact, most of the Protestants in my small groups kept calling me an “over achiever” and made smarmy comments.

The CCC is why there aren’t 20,000 Roman Catholic denominations (even though there are many Catholic groups that are trying to achieve that). The CCC is where Catholics can find the answers to those questions that cause non-Catholics churches to split. The CCC is where Catholics can turn to actually enforce what is said in Matthew 18.

As a pre-Catholic , who was Protestant all my life, this is the way I see it.

Catholics are exposed to much more scripture IF they read all the daily readings. Now here is the problem.

The quick reading of the Epistles and Gospel and then a bland homily which doesn’t go deeply into the scriptures is not enough.

If Catholics were encouraged to go home and re-read the readings with a study bible and read the cross-references as well as compare them to the CCC, it would be great.

I don’t think enough emphasis is placed on setting time aside to read the Bible on one’s own.

The other day I heard someone ask on Catholic Answers if it was okay for his child to read the Bible on his own and if as Catholics we are supposed to read anything aside from the readings provided by the church. Therein lies the problem.

A lot of Protestants don’t know their Bible either. However, I do see a difference in emphasis on the admonition that people should read their Bibles at home.

As a Protestant, I remember being asked, “Do you spend time reading the Word?”. That is an important question.

 

[Revert_43]

As a pre-Catholic , who was Protestant all my life, this is the way I see it.

Catholics are exposed to much more scripture IF they read all the daily readings. Now here is the problem.

The quick reading of the Epistles and Gospel and then a bland homily which doesn’t go deeply into the scriptures is not enough.

Hi and Welcome True Light!!! I seem to run into your posts a lot over in the trad catholics forum!

• All Catholics are exposed to the Bible in the mass
• The focus of most Protestants is to read your Bible regularly and understand it

Those two points DO NOT mean that all Catholics do not know the Bible and Protestant read their Bibles and know it better. People either will or won’t read their Bibles, Catholic or Protestant. Let’s drop the stereotypes…

Protestants go to Sunday services to be taught the Bible by their pastor. Catholics are expected to learn on their own and go to Sunday mass to worship God. That’s a big difference and an important point when comparing the Mass to Sunday worship and a Protestant church.

I returned the the Catholic Church because of the Catholic understanding of the Bible, The Bible needs to be read a whole, Old Testament and New Testament. The New Testament fulfills the Old Testament, the Old Testament is revealed in the New Testament. While I attended a Protestant Church I always heard that the Bible needs to be read in the context that is written, which is true, but the context is much larger than the book that is being read. It needs to be read in the context of the entire scriptures, that’s also where the CCC comes in.