Bibleless Catholics

[CamraghiCartus]

The bible should be studied with a solid pre-1960 Catholic commentary on hand.  I use the book that used to be standard in seminaries, edited by Orchard et. al.  It is long out of print but turns up in the used book market.

Sure, guidance of a priest is preferable--assuming the priest is sound and orthodox.  This is a big problem, as it also obviously is with many lay chatecists and with de facto sola scriptura--just cracking the book without any guidance whatsoever.  Unfortunately the standard bible in virtually all Catholic parishes in the USA is the New American Bible, riddled with problems including many heterodox footnotes.

I know that there may be good post-1960 commentaries, but I only have one life to live and simply have no time to sort through all that. 

I use the Douay Rheims which while stilted antiquated English is canonically approved & doctrinally sound.

Stephen F transmits more or less accurately I think standard warning in pre-Vatican 2 USA, which was culturally riddled with aggressive Protestant bible interpreters aimed at and against Catholics.  And certainly "bible study" without the mind of the Church right at hand is thoroughly Protestant.  To summarize, at minimum you need:  (1) sound translation; (2) sound Catholic commentary.  Unfortunately (3) "go see Father" is now, as they say on the Emerald Isle, rather "dodgey."  But it is still possible -- take the Gipper's advice: "Trust but verify."

[marelise]

The Bible, reading it and letting the text and the Holy Spirit say exactly what they wanted to was the thing that led me back to the Church (I never officially left, but my heart was far from God).  I do not think the Scriptures are hard to understand (some portions of them were written to individuals), at least not for any reason owing to them in and of themselves.  They are hard to understand because of our fallen and wrongly oriented natures when we are willing to fall silent before them and do whatever he tells us to do (to paraphrase Our Lady in the Gospel of John) their meaning can be clear to us.  When we are in a State of Grace, the very same God that wrote the Old and New Testaments lives in our spirits and strives to "make the meaning plain."

Psalm 119:105
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

The Bible is nothing to be afraid of.  It is not a Protestant book. 

[ancientpapacy]

I grew up before the VII wreck and I waI still think Bible study is essentially Protestant.  

That's what the Protestants think. The Church says otherwise in the person of her popes and saints: "Ignorance of the scriptures is ignorance of Christ."

While 'freethinking' Protestant-style bible study should be discouraged, Scripture should be studied under the guidance of the Fathers of the Church as many here have noted.

[ResiduumRevertetur]

I had questions on this, too. I, personally, only see sola scriptura as protestant, not bible reading, even without guidance. One only gets drawn into heresies when the protestants are pointing out where "Catholics are wrong, here, here, and here," and then the Good Book is snapped shut. The bible is completely Catholic, and if you have a proper foundation in the catechism, you should only be enriched, not confounded.

I heard a man, shaking his head over the pre-Vatican II days, saying, "They (whoever they are) didn't even want us to read the bible." Then in my DR I find there are indulgences attached to scripture reading. Then in read in Sullivan's Externals of the Catholic Church (1918) that scripture reading, alone, was a no-no. What's a girl to think?

edited for clarity

[ancientpapacy]

Then in read in Sullivan's Externals of the Catholic Church (1918) that scripture reading, alone, was a no-no. What's a girl to think?

edited for clarity

Actually there were rules that Catholic Bibles were supposed to have at least some notes or commentary from the Fathers, so one wasn't supposed to be reading the Bible "alone"; this doesn't mean that bible study wasn't recommended, but that it needed to be done under the guidance of the Fathers and magisterium. Apparently, there was a sort of "unofficial" attitude, represented by the OP's experience, that scripture study was either dangerous or not worth encouraging, but nothing could be farther from the truth.

[mattc]

The Haydock commentary online might be helpful:

http://haydock1859.tripod.com/

[StrictCatholicGirl]

The Bible is a Catholic Book. The Church gave it to us. Reclaim it. Read it with "Catholic eyes" which means getting a good translation with good commentary and footnotes by the Church Fathers. The Bible was made for the Church, not the Church for the Bible. The Protestants always got that backwards.

- Lisa

[Valz]

The Bible is a Catholic Book. The Church gave it to us. Reclaim it. Read it with "Catholic eyes" which means getting a good translation with good commentary and footnotes by the Church Fathers. The Bible was made for the Church, not the Church for the Bible. The Protestants always got that backwards.

- Lisa

Indeed. I always find, that when discussion about the Scriptures with protestants, the ones that always end up ignoring or explaining away verses are themselves. Catholics should not fear the Scriptures but embrace and proclaim them for they are the book of their faith.


Valz

[diotima]

guidance of the clergy? Sigh... make sure you have the RIGHT clergy, though.

My sister is married to an ex-priest, who left the priesthood, because he couldn´t cope with celibacy, and now is a protestant (lutheran) pastor, because he still felt the calling to be clergy... THAT kind of clergy?