What does the Bible mean to Catholics?

[Lightbee]

At my RCIA class last night we were having a discussion about “the Bible and the Church”. For me, the Bible has always been very important as it is God’s word in written form. It has also been the means by which I have been led to the Catholic church.

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

I don’t know if that’s just the few people from last night, or if that is a normal Catholic stance. I would be very grateful to hear of the experiences of other Catholics - particularly “cradle Catholics” - to get a better understanding of the place of the Bible in the Catholic church.

 

[RBK]

At my RCIA class last night we were having a discussion about “the Bible and the Church”. For me, the Bible has always been very important as it is God’s word in written form. It has also been the means by which I have been led to the Catholic church.

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

I don’t know if that’s just the few people from last night, or if that is a normal Catholic stance. I would be very grateful to hear of the experiences of other Catholics - particularly “cradle Catholics” - to get a better understanding of the place of the Bible in the Catholic church.

I can only share with you my experience, that when I went through RCIA a few years ago, Scripture study was a very important part of the program. Our parish offers Bible studies throughout the year and there are many people who grew up during the pre-Vatican II times who attend.

Last year we began using this book for the small group portion of RCIA. We study Old Testament typology for the first 45 minutes before moving on to the topical lecture.

amazon.com/Catholicism-Scripture-Salvation-History-Student/dp/0977609901

 

[Mumbles140]

I think the important thing to remember regarding the Catholic Church and the Bible is that, as it states in the Bible, the Church herself has the authority to maintain Tradition and all of the teachings of the faith in the Magisterium. Whereas other Christians believe the Bible is IT for religious teaching, understanding, and guidance, the true Christians know that Christ founded His Church upon the apostles, and gave them the authority.

I have heard Protestants accuse Catholics (namely, me) that the Church hierarchy doesn’t want lay people to read the Bible, but I have never heard that from another Catholic. It is important to remember, though, that the laity shouldn’t try to interpret teachings or beliefs from the Bible because we have not been properly trained to do so. However, I have always been encouraged to read the Bible as a way to strengthen faith and become more knowledgeable about the backbone of Church teachings.

Hope I was able to assist, but feel free to ask more questions and I’ll do my best to answer!

 

[puzzleannie]

At
I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

I don’t know if that’s just the few people from last night, or if that is a normal Catholic stance. I would be very grateful to hear of the experiences of other Catholics - particularly “cradle Catholics” - to get a better understanding of the place of the Bible in the Catholic church.

I must have grown up in a parallel universe to Catholics who feel way. I and my sibs and my parents and in-laws, who now range in age from 50 to 90 (the ones still alive) grew up in Catholic schools, had parents who regularly read the bible themselves and to us in the home, enshrined the bible in the home, and had regular bible study throughout our school years, and have, those of us who are still Catholic at least, a regular if not daily habit of reading and praying with scripture. So I can’t answer for anyone else.

the definitive teaching on the place of Sacred Scripture in the Catholic Church is Dei Verbum which you can access on the vatican website.

 

[fhansen]

At my RCIA class last night we were having a discussion about “the Bible and the Church”. For me, the Bible has always been very important as it is God’s word in written form. It has also been the means by which I have been led to the Catholic church.

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

I don’t know if that’s just the few people from last night, or if that is a normal Catholic stance. I would be very grateful to hear of the experiences of other Catholics - particularly “cradle Catholics” - to get a better understanding of the place of the Bible in the Catholic church.

Individual Bible study has been promoted more in the CC in the last 100 years or so -even prior to VatII -than previous to that time. But the CCs gospel does not come directly from Scripture, as it does with Protestants, because the Church’s own history-her Tradition-has carried, explained, and proclaimed the word continuously since the beginning of Christianity. Her people wrote the NT, the faith is her life.

As with you, the bible was very instrumental in my coming to believe. But it also led me down some wrong paths and this is one of the main reasons we have so many different Protestant denominations.

So while the bible is being opened more often by various Catholic groups-it’s quite central in our RCIA-and while it will always be venerated by the Church and read at every Mass-it will always have a somewhat different role in Catholicism than in Protestantism.

 

[PAboy57]

The Bible is most important to all Catholics and we are encouraged to read scripture on a regular basis. We receive special graces and indulgences for reading the Bible so that makes it extremely important. Please continue to read the word of God as often as you can.

Take care.

 

[daughterofeve]

I sponsored a candidate last year and she is a Bible “quoter”. The issue with the Church and the Bible is that we are taught not to “willy-nilly” throw quotes around. She said she was taught how to interpret the Bible and has been for x amount of years, etc.

She has been given everything the Church teaches on this subject and I have made it quite clear that this is not “my” opinion, I hold no opinion different than that of the Church. She has out right told me that “You do not know God!”. She insists upon bringing the subject up again and again even though she has the last word and now the first and only words again and again.

The Bible is most important to all Catholics and we are encouraged to read scripture on a regular basis. We receive special graces and indulgences for reading the Bible so that makes it extremely important. Please continue to read the word of God as often as you can.

Take care.

Making this quite clear to her. I had to finally tell her that she will not convince me that she knows more than the institution that constructed the Bible. She than acted like I had committed some kind of sacrilege.

 

[JRKH]

At my RCIA class last night we were having a discussion about “the Bible and the Church”. For me, the Bible has always been very important as it is God’s word in written form. It has also been the means by which I have been led to the Catholic church.

Praise be to God in His most Holy Spirit. And Welcome Home…

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

It is true that that in the Pre-Vatican II Church there was not so much emphasis on individual bible study. Now that is not the same thing as what you say above about not having interest in the Bible. As you are aware the Bible is read every Sunday at Mass and this was just as true in the Pre-Vat Church as it is today.
Finally I would say that the old notion of distrusting those who read and studied the independantly stemmed fro teh reformation and the desire to make sure that catholics learning the bible lessons did so within the context of Holy Mother Church.

These things have changed since Vat II and Catholics are now encouraged to read and learn the bible, but again it needs to be within the teachings of Holy Mother Church.

I don’t know if that’s just the few people from last night, or if that is a normal Catholic stance. I would be very grateful to hear of the experiences of other Catholics - particularly “cradle Catholics” - to get a better understanding of the place of the Bible in the Catholic church.

In our house we did not read the bible. We went to mass and listened to the bible being read and the homily given. I did start trying to read the Bible a couple of times as a Child but never got too far.
Later as an adult, and not attending Church, I began reading the Gospels. I built much of my theology from that and later when I returned to The Church I found there was little I needed to change in my thinking (there were some errors that crept in though).
Long story Short, the Bible is certainly a thoroughly catholic book.

Peace
James

 

[puzzleannie]

one area that fosters misunderstanding on this topic esp. in the RCIA setting is the different meanings some Catholics and some Protestants attach to the words “bible study”. In the Catholic tradition praying with scripture is the much stronger emphasis, and the academic study of word meanings, cultural background in which the books were written etc. is often left to the academics. If I say I am doing a bible study it is more likely to be a mainly devotional exercise, either in a small group or on my own, with the goal of meditation and prayer and hopefully is a gateway to contemplation.

Whereas quite often a non-Catholic Christian in my group who says she is doing a bible study with her former congregation means they are attending a series of talks or lectures on a book or topic led by a pastor or with a resource that goes more deeply into the more academic factors, may or may not try to relate the biblical events to daily life in the 21st century, and probably ends with prayer, but more perfunctory. the participant may be encouraged to pray and meditate on the passage more on their own, but the purpose is primarily useful knowledge, or to prove or enlarge upon a point of doctrine.

I am of course generalizing but before condemning or short-changing what another person is saying about their approach to bible reading and study it is best to find common ground for the discussion.

 

[JRKH]

** I sponsored a candidate last year and she is a Bible “quoter”.** The issue with the Church and the Bible is that we are taught not to “willy-nilly” throw quotes around. She said she was taught how to interpret the Bible and has been for x amount of years, etc.

She has been given everything the Church teaches on this subject and I have made it quite clear that this is not “my” opinion, I hold no opinion different than that of the Church. She has out right told me that “You do not know God!”. She insists upon bringing the subject up again and again even though she has the last word and now the first and only words again and again.

Making this quite clear to her. I had to finally tell her that she will not convince me that she knows more than the institution that constructed the Bible. She than acted like I had committed some kind of sacrilege.

Did this “candidate” actually come into The Church??

Peace
James

 

[StevenFrancis]

At my RCIA class last night we were having a discussion about “the Bible and the Church”. For me, the Bible has always been very important as it is God’s word in written form. It has also been the means by which I have been led to the Catholic church.

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

I don’t know if that’s just the few people from last night, or if that is a normal Catholic stance. I would be very grateful to hear of the experiences of other Catholics - particularly “cradle Catholics” - to get a better understanding of the place of the Bible in the Catholic church.

Hi Lightbee:

I don’t know you, and can’t verify the varacity of what you’re saying here. I will take you at your word, though it is a sad commentary on your parish. I’d have a little word with your Bishop, in fact, because you are getting incorrect cathecesis, and this is of deep importance.

This is, as politely as I may say it, a load of hogwash. The Holy scriptures were translated by SAINT Jerome, and compiled by the Holy Catholic Church over the years, and canonized in councils. Now granted, I am a convert, and can not personally attest to catechesis prior to V2, however I’ve read many a papal encyclical from before then, and each was literally dripping in scripture. The Holy Mass itself is a prayer, nearly word for word from scripture. We read virtually the whole bible every three years in Mass as a PART of the divine liturgy. I spend 90% of my reading time deep in scripture, or reading Catholic exegesis thereof. Most of my Catholic friends, who were almost entirely brought up in the Church, and many prior to 62, including my RCIA sponsor when I came in, read scripture and are more familiar with it than I am.

I’m sorry. There seems so much of this kind of dirt going around about the Church all the time, that I get a little touchy sometimes. Yes, there are a few protestant groups who may spend a little more time having bible study meetings and groups, but you what? They don’t have a magesterium, and they talk and and talk, and spin their wheels, applying THEIR OWN OPINIONS, and taking away their own meanings from the scriptures. They don’t have any guide, except other probably misguided ministers who aren’t even Catholic, and so don’t provide the Church accepted meanings to the very scriptures that we believing Catholics treasure like the pearl.

Your average Catholic understands that when Jesus says that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Quite a dangerous phrase to be hanging around out there to the uncathecized protestant bible reader who does not have the guidance of magesterium and keep him from seeing this as ugly or frightening like all but the 12 did, and ran away.

We know what is meant when Jesus tells Simon that you are rock, and upon this rock, I shall build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not withstand it. Since so many Christians don’t count themselves in the one Holy catholic and apostolic Church, I’m guessing there are some crossed wires there also without magesterium. WIthout shepherds, without a consecrated priesthood, without a bible held tightly and free from error, and misinterpretation.

Please talk to your priest, and then your Bishop if not satisfied, but I promise you this Church is all into the bible in every way. I just wish more people understood that the bible is a book about a church, and that the church isn’t supposed be about a book. The divinely inspired scriptures were given us to help us understand the history and the stories of our people, and prophecy about how it all comes together. It is a document of some of the teachings of our high priest by folks who knew him, and travelled with him. It came after the church. It wasn’t canonized until over 100 years after the Church was going strong. And most importantly, it was canonzed BY the Church, and was exclusively for the body of Christ, the church universal to use until the invasion of the reformers after over a thousand years.

You should be able to come to Christ, and live the gospels without even being ABLE to read, or even knowing of the bible. Early Christians just had people talking to them and preaching to them, or they observed the gospels going on around them. It was passed by word of mouth for a LONG time before the NT scriptures started making the rounds to the masses. They believed because the Holy Spirit called them. Most of our Christian beliefs made it into the bible, and that’s nice, but there were others that didn’t and they are every bit as valid as those which did. Love the bible, but remember that it is a product of God. Not God itself. The Word of God itself was Jesus Christ. If you start thinking it’s the book, then you end up with Islam.

Peace,

Steven

 

[richardacombs]

I was baptized Catholic as an infant long before Vatican 2.

I attended Catholic schools, so received–what most people would consider–a Catholic education. To the best of my knowledge, my parents and the schools I attended at two different parishes were all in the main stream of Catholicism.

The Bible was very important. It was considered inerrant and infallible, though interpretation was limited by Catholic Tradition. My parents always had a Douay Rheims version of the Bible in the house and encouraged their children to read it. At the two different Catholic schools I attended, Bible study was mandatory.

The lay teachers, nuns, and priests at these schools were not theologians or Biblical scholars, but they did pass along the generally accepted Scriptural interpretation of the Catholic Church.

Then after high schooI I left the Catholic Church for many years.

Several life-changing events occurred in my middle to late thirties. My professed self-reliance went down the toilet, but I didn’t come back to the Catholic Church. Instead, I became an evangelical Protestant. I studied the Bible. I read commentaries, Biblical scholars, theologians (Christian and non-Christian). I dabbled with Buddhism, but returned to Christianity.

All this searching led back to the Catholic Church. Its foundation, the basics, even after Vatican 2, had not changed.

More life-changing events pushed me further into Catholicism. I studied the Bible; read Catholic and non-Catholic commentaries; pored over the works of the Church Fathers and the Doctors; struggled through the Summa. Catholics not interested in Scripture? The whole Faith is based on Scripture and the Tradition handed down through centuries.

Most Protestants, and I speak from experience, have no real knowledge of the teachings of the Catholic Church. Their knowledge is based on hearsay, novels, movies, and television–the bulk of it pure fiction. Most Protestants proclaim sola scriptura with religious fervor, but overlook that many basic Christian doctrines have been extrapolated from the Scriptures, including the very basic tenet of the Trinity, Which is never actually mentioned in the Bible.

As a matter of fact, no Bible writer actually puts forth anything like sola scriptura. Different Bible writers do affirm that Scripture is the Word of God (I don’t believe that I need to provide Scriptural references, but will.) More importantly, some do mention holding fast to oral traditions like St Paul in 1 Cor 11:2 and 2 Thess 2:15; 3:6, but that the tradition cannot counter Scripture, as Jesus pointed out in Matt 15:3.

The point is that these myriad Protestant denominations flounder through the Scriptures, yet have tens of thousands of irreconcilable interpretations. One thinks gay bishops are fine; another believes that gays bring down hellfire and damnation; one believes handling snakes is a divine gift; another looks at snake handling as a side show. Divorce and remarriage are OK with most in spite of what Jesus said. How can all that be sola scriptura?

Catholics vary in their beliefs as well, but most are willing to cede to the dogmatic and doctrinal supremacy of the magisterium: they’re willing to agree to the basics. Of course, not all professed Catholics even agree to that, but they still call themselves Catholic and even if it’s once a year or longer, they go to Mass. And the Church welcomes them.

 

[Apollos]

It has also been the means by which I have been led to the Catholic church.

Me too! Protestants occasionally tell me that if I would only read the Bible, then I would see that the Catholic Church teaches all sorts of false doctrines. I’m almost embarrassed to tell them that they actually kind of have it backwards!

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

First of all, that’s understandable. My own experience of RCIA - as a visitor, not as a convert or sponsor - is that it’s a waste of time for anyone who really want to learn anything substantial. Most of what goes on in those sessions is “sharing” your “feelings” about things. I hate to say this, but this is what I witnessed in my own parish. Also there seems to be an urban myth that Vatican II was a sort of watershed for everything that confirms whatever you wish to be true of the Church today. Looks like your RCIA leaders think that the Dark Ages of the Church came to an end on December 8, 1965, the day the council closed.

The best answer I can think of to the statement “those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible” is simply to deny it: “No, no, no.” Because that statement is so off that it would take an entire book to explain how it’s off. It’s like saying the God of the Old Testament was mean, and the God of the New Testament was nice.

But let me give you a creative example that blows that statement our of the water. My parish is one of those parishes that does everything in Latin according to the old style. Mass, confessions, weddings, everything. Even the men’s and women’s bathrooms are marked “Viri” and “Feminae”. (Just kidding about the bathrooms.) We’re not one of those weird ultraconservative breakaway parishes that thinks the pope isn’t the real pope or anything; we are totally on the up and up and our bishop has said mass here at least a couple of times in the last several years (in Latin). So in other words, we do it the way it used to be done before Vatican II. I am in the choir, and practically all of the music is set for every Sunday of the year in a special book of Gregorian Chant that the Church had been using for centuries before Vatican II. If you look at the chants, you will see that 99% of them are actual texts from the Bible. For example, last Sunday the six chants were verbatim quotations of Psalms 27, 28, 31, 51, and 90. And that’s just the music.

So when people who probably weren’t even born in 1965 spout off about how the Bible was supposedly ignored and discouraged are just being ignorant. Sorry to word it so sharply, but it’s such a silly misconception that doesn’t even deserve to be spoken of gently. And now, in the age of the internet, it is not just ignorant but also irresponsible. Anyone can look it up and see that it is not so.

Second of all, if Catholics mistrusted people who are into the Bible, it was for good reason. Protestants are extremely pro-Bible, and it only stands to reason that someone into the Bible would be suspected of siding with Protestants. In fact, Pope Gregory XVI in 1844 put out a statement condemning Protestant Bible societies. But NOT because they were distributing Bibles! On the contrary, the Catholic Church is very pro-Bible. Other popes have promoted scripture study long before the 1960s such as Leo XIII in 1893, Benedict XV in 1920, and Pius XII in 1943, just to name the major statements.

Hope I didn’t over-answer!

 

[daughterofeve]

Did this “candidate” actually come into The Church??

Peace
James

Yes.

A little elaboration…I was asked to sponsor her by the RCIA director, after I had specifically told the director I would assist in anyway but not as a sponsor.

I brought these issues to the attention of the director as well as the Pastor. I was instructed that I am not attesting to her faith or acceptance, just that she has received the necessary instruction. There are plenty more issues on this subject, but do not wish to step on or change the issue of the OP. If I have done so already I DO APOLOGIZE!

What a Priest very long ago taught me is those that go around throwing out quotes are either displaying the fact that they have the ability to memorize therefore are meant to thrill and impress, and or, are preaching. Neither of which many in the Church respond to, primarily because it is not an effective way of teaching. He also made it quite clear that the devil was there at its inception and can quote it upside down and backwards.

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

We do not distrust those that read it regularly and study it intently…we distrust those that boast about it.

 

[mackbrislawn]

At my RCIA class last night we were having a discussion about “the Bible and the Church”. For me, the Bible has always been very important as it is God’s word in written form. It has also been the means by which I have been led to the Catholic church.

I got the impression from the others talking (we have only 2 RCIA people, and last night 3 leaders, so we’re somewhat outnumbered) that those in the Catholic Church, particularly those in the church before Vatican II, do not have much interest in the Bible and distrust those who do read it regularly and study it intently.

I don’t know if that’s just the few people from last night, or if that is a normal Catholic stance. I would be very grateful to hear of the experiences of other Catholics - particularly “cradle Catholics” - to get a better understanding of the place of the Bible in the Catholic church.

The way I think of it is that the Bible is a product of the Church, not the Church a product of the Bible.

Scripture was produced by the people of God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for the people of God. The Church (God’s people, the congregation) comes first, then comes Scripture from and for the Church.

But that doesn’t seem to be the way Protestants think. They have it the other way around. For them, it appears that the Bible exists first, and then anyone can read the Bible and from that reading, derive a church.

For a Catholic, Scripture is a tool given to the pre-existing Church for worship and evangelization.

 

[Lightbee]

We do not distrust those that read it regularly and study it intently…we distrust those that boast about it.

I think you may have hit on the issue I have been trying to understand since last night.

What one person may take as boasting, may only be as a result of another person having more knowledge in that area and under questioning imparting that knowledge.

I feel that is what happened in my RCIA class. I (personally - not directed to the group) was being asked a number of questions about what Protestant churches thought about the bible and what I thought and what experience I had had with the bible etc. I answered all the questions honestly and gave opinions where asked for - which I certainly put in the context that they were only my own opinions, not speaking on behalf of anyone. I also, for context, mentioned that my degree at university had been studying biblical history, Latin and Greek.

Now I don’t pretend for a minute that I know all the answers, but I certainly have had a fair bit of knowledge which I wouldn’t have thought was wrong to bring to the table. I’m more than happy to have someone show me the Church’s interpretation of passage, particularly if they differ from what I’ve previously known. But how can we have that conversation without talking about the bible and quoting scripture?

But maybe I’m wrong…

Is the correct Catholic way to act in this circumstance just to shut up and pretend you’re totally ignorant so that you don’t mistakenly get taken for boasting?

 

[Apollos]

I (personally - not directed to the group) was being asked a number of questions about what Protestant churches thought about the bible and what I thought and what experience I had had with the bible etc.

I am astonished at the sheer *lack of content *of these sessions. I can never again endorse RCIA for anyone.

Is RCIA in fact mandatory, or is there some way to get around it?

Is the correct Catholic way to act in this circumstance just to shut up and pretend you’re totally ignorant so that you don’t mistakenly get taken for boasting?

Looks like keeping your mouth shut is the *expedient *thing to do, if you know what I mean.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I think you may have hit on the issue I have been trying to understand since last night.

What one person may take as boasting, may only be as a result of another person having more knowledge in that area and under questioning imparting that knowledge.

I feel that is what happened in my RCIA class. I (personally - not directed to the group) was being asked a number of questions about what Protestant churches thought about the bible and what I thought and what experience I had had with the bible etc. I answered all the questions honestly and gave opinions where asked for - which I certainly put in the context that they were only my own opinions, not speaking on behalf of anyone. I also, for context, mentioned that my degree at university had been studying biblical history, Latin and Greek.

Now I don’t pretend for a minute that I know all the answers, but I certainly have had a fair bit of knowledge which I wouldn’t have thought was wrong to bring to the table. I’m more than happy to have someone show me the Church’s interpretation of passage, particularly if they differ from what I’ve previously known. But how can we have that conversation without talking about the bible and quoting scripture?

But maybe I’m wrong…

Is the correct Catholic way to act in this circumstance just to shut up and pretend you’re totally ignorant so that you don’t mistakenly get taken for boasting?

Lightbee:

Last Question First - You have a Degree in Biblical Studies which includes minors in Greek & Latin. There’s no way you can honestly hide that sort of knowledge. It’s a Gift of the Spirit that you developed by taking classes. “Shutting up and feigning ignorance” in that circumstance would be a form of false humility. I think you’re far better off following the advice of St. James the Apostle -
Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.
James 1:19-20 ESV
There are times when your knowledge might prove useful - Esp when it comes to describing things from a Biblical WorldView… You could always say what you think, and then add, “…But, Then, I could be wrong.” It’s an admission that, even with all your schooling, you’re not infallible and could still be wrong, and it’s something I’ve heard from a couple of people who were really quite brilliant - It’s also something I wish a lot of theologians would learn to say, so I think you would prove that you were ahead of them in one way, at least…

I read a volume of the Latin Desert Fathers recently - These were people who turned their backs on the world during the 4th - 6th Centuries, during the time Christianity was Legalized and then made the “State-Church” of the Empire and then the Western Roman Empire fell…

They knew, prayed and quoted the Sacred Scriptures. Many of them copied books of the Bible (some from memory) which they ten sold to support themselves and their small communities… But these men not only lived with the Scriptures in their heads and their hearts, they knew that they meant - They knew how to interpret and apply them. and, Often, these men were “Ignorant shepherds” and goat herders!

I’m in the middle of a book on the writings and life of St. Thomas More. Here is another man who lived with and knew the Scriptures, and who could quote entire paragraphs and pages of the Bible from memory. Some of St. Thomas More’s correspondence with Erasmus (and with others) shows that he was concerned that the Laity have access to a Vernacular Translation of the Sacred Scriptures. I tend to think St. Thomas More would have preferred the final edition of the Douay-Rheims to the first Edition - At least for the “Non-Latin Speaking” Laity - drbo.org/

Please don’t hesitate to ask if you have any more questions. God bless you as you prepare to enter the Church.

Good MANE,
Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

 

[Lightbee]

I am astonished at the sheer *lack of content *of these sessions. I can never again endorse RCIA for anyone.

Is RCIA in fact mandatory, or is there some way to get around it?

Looks like keeping your mouth shut is the *expedient *thing to do, if you know what I mean.

I think this parish is very inexperienced with RCIA. They certainly had no candidates (is that the right word?) last year. And this year its just me and one other girl. It might depend even which country you’re in - I know our priest mentioned that churches in the USA (I’m in Australia) are much better at pulling all the RCIA stuff together.

I guess what I’m saying is not to throw out the whole thing based on one person’s bad experience.

I suppose one of the really hard things for me is that the book we’ve been using (not necessarily very strictly) is starting at the absolute beginning for those who have no experience with God or religion and are really starting from scratch. I think that’s quite relevant for some people. But for me I find that really hard to take as I’m quite certain of my faith in God and have only come to Catholicism after studying and questioning and becoming very certain of that faith.

What I really want to know about now is the rituals and practices and traditions (little “t”) that the Catholic Church holds as I feel I need some human instruction for that - I can’t just get it from books.

But that is getting wildly off topic! And as the OP I should at the very least respect the original topic!!!

 

[Lightbee]

Lightbee:

Last Question First - You have a Degree in Biblical Studies which includes minors in Greek & Latin. There’s no way you can honestly hide that sort of knowledge. It’s a Gift of the Spirit that you developed by taking classes. “Shutting up and feigning ignorance” in that circumstance would be a form of false humility. I think you’re far better off following the advice of St. James the Apostle -
Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.
James 1:19-20 ESV
There are times when your knowledge might prove useful - Esp when it comes to describing things from a Biblical WorldView… You could always say what you think, and then add, “…But, Then, I could be wrong.” It’s an admission that, even with all your schooling, you’re not infallible and could still be wrong, and it’s something I’ve heard from a couple of people who were really quite brilliant - It’s also something I wish a lot of theologians would learn to say, so I think you would prove that you were ahead of them in one way, at least…

I read a volume of the Latin Desert Fathers recently - These were people who turned their backs on the world during the 4th - 6th Centuries, during the time Christianity was Legalized and then made the “State-Church” of the Empire and then the Western Roman Empire fell…

They knew, prayed and quoted the Sacred Scriptures. Many of them copied books of the Bible (some from memory) which they ten sold to support themselves and their small communities… But these men not only lived with the Scriptures in their heads and their hearts, they knew that they meant - They knew how to interpret and apply them. and, Often, these men were “Ignorant shepherds” and goat herders!

I’m in the middle of a book on the writings and life of St. Thomas More. Here is another man who lived with and knew the Scriptures, and who could quote entire paragraphs and pages of the Bible from memory. Some of St. Thomas More’s correspondence with Erasmus (and with others) shows that he was concerned that the Laity have access to a Vernacular Translation of the Sacred Scriptures. I tend to think St. Thomas More would have preferred the final edition of the Douay-Rheims to the first Edition - At least for the “Non-Latin Speaking” Laity - drbo.org/

Please don’t hesitate to ask if you have any more questions. God bless you as you prepare to enter the Church.

Good MANE,
Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

Thank you so much Michael. I’ve been feeling really down on myself the last couple of days and what you’ve written has really been a blessing to me.