CathNews - a Service of Church Resources

Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. Catholics forgetting Bible: Survey
   These statistics show that bible-reading is greatest amonst the more fundamentalist Christians. However an ounce of understanding is worth a ton of reading. For me reading Biblical criticism (in the broadest sense of the word) can be more valuable than reading the Bible itself.

   Posted By: Geoff Bethell

2. I wish to clarify information about NCLS survey results related to Bible reading. There hase been NO CHANGE in the overall levels of frequent Bible reading (ie more than weekly) in the past 15 years.
   
   Around a third (35%) of church attenders read the Bible daily or at least a few times each week. This frequency of Bible reading varies greatly between denominations, from a high of 72% among Pentecostal attenders to just 12% of Catholic attenders. These denominational variations reflect traditional differences between Catholic and Protestant approaches to the place of personal Bible reading in the life of the believer.
   
   While the proportion of attenders who read the Bible at least a few times per week has not changed much in the past 15 years, the proportion of Protestant attenders who read the Bible every day has decreased since 1991. These decreases have mostly occurred among Baptist and Pentecostal attenders.
   

   Posted By: Dr Ruth Powell, NCLS Research

3. The Catholic church has only itself to blame. For the first part of 20th century, Catholics were not allowed to read the bible. Vat II said otherwise but the priests didn't do much about it. Sermons were often on "Mothercraft - name for sick sex" , or hell, fire and brimstone. We were rarely given any explanation of the gospels. Most Catholics still take everything in the Bible literally and because of lack of teaching from the church, people find it very difficult to change their way of thinking. We have never been given a love of the Bible in the same way that many nuns gave us a love of reading.
   Why don't the Bishops do something about this rather than add the stupid changes to the Mass - the pope is certainly out of touch with life in the world as also are the cardinals and others in their ivory palaces in rome. They never take responsibility for the wrongs they do; rather, they blame the lay people. Wake up!

   Posted By: Gemma

4. Prayerfully reading the Bible is very important, but let's not kid ourselves that it's the ONLY measure of our faith. Protestants tend to read the Bible a lot because they've got virtually nothing else. What about a survey asking churchgoers of all faiths how often they, say, receive Holy Communion? Or pray? Or give to or work for the poor and needy? Or any number of other essential parts of Christian life.

   Posted By: Ronk

5. In some ways, this survey is comparing apples and oranges. Protestant and Catholic traditions are different.
   
   The survey seems to presume along with Protestants that the Bible is the sole source of revelation and guidance, making it central to the Faith. In this case, of course you'd study the Bible as much as one does.
   Catholics on the other hand are taught that the Eucharist is the Source and Summit of the Faith. We have relied upon Eucharistic worship, the Scripture readings at Mass, and Tradition for instruction.
   
   Those Scripture study programs that I have attended, have been taught less from a devotional approach and more from a modern approach (Bultmann, etc.), and not especially helpful or faith building.

   Posted By: Joseph

6. One must remember that at every Mass there are at least two readings from the Bible and that over the course of the cycle of the Lectionary Catholics are actually covering a very comprehensive section of sacred scripture. Many "Bible-based" protestant churches fail to acknowledge this fact.

   Posted By: Luke Reid

7. Gemma, you seem to be totally on another planet. What you describe has not the slightest resemblance to the Catholic Church which I know, and which my parents and my grandparents knew before Vatican II. I'm not going to bother refuting individually everything you said, because every single sentence in your comment is the exact opposite of the truth. God knows what you're trying to prove with this arrant nonsense.

   Posted By: Ronk

8. How about a survey of who goes to Mass/Church daily...or more than 2-3 a week? That is a Catholic practice, .... Bible reading replaces daily worship for Protestants.

   Posted By: Jean

9. Reading the bible does very little good if you only believe what you want to believe. Read chapter 6 from the Gospel of John. "Unless you eat may flesh and drink my blood you have no life(ie eternal life) in you"ILM

   Posted By: ILM

10. "For the first part of 20th century, Catholics were not allowed to read the bible."
    ===============================
    
    (1) History - Why didn't people in the middle ages read the Bible?
    
    This section was researched by Art Sippo, Fr. Terry Donahue and Mark Bonocore
    The Bible was on scrolls and parchments during the early centuries of Christianity. No one had a "Bible". Even into the Middle Ages, each Bible was written by hand. Most people were, at best, only functionally literate. That is partially why they used stained glass windows and art to tell the Bible story. The printing press was not invented until 1436 by Johann Gutenberg. So prior to 1436, the idea of everybody having a Bible was out of the question, even if they could read. Yeah, I know it's hard to imagine a world without photocopiers, printing presses, email, and web sites - but hey look at the bright side - no SPAM!
    
    After the invention of the press, prior to Luther's Bible being published in German, there had been over 20 versions of the whole Bible translated into the various German dialects (High and Low) by Catholics. Similarly, there were several vernacular versions of the Bible published in other languages both before and after the Reformation. The Church did condemn certain vernacular translations because of what it felt were bad translations and anti-Catholic notes. (vernacular means native to a region or country)
    
    The Catholic Douay-Rheims version of the whole Bible in English was translated from the Latin Vulgate. It was completed in 1610, one year before the King James Version was published. The New Testament had been published in 1582 and was one of the sources used by the KJV translators. The Old Testament was completed in 1610.
    
    The Latin Vulgate was always available to anyone who wanted to read it without restriction. Some Evangelicals have said that it would only have been usable by people who read Latin. But in the 16th Century there were no public schools and literacy was not that common, especially among the peasants. Those people who could read had been well educated and could read Latin.
    
    I got an email that said:
    
    The Church still had its readings and services in the dead language of Latin ...The Church fought to keep the Bible in Latin even though it could not be understood by most people of the time.
    
    Mark Bonocore responds:
    
    Latin was far from a dead language. It was the language of theology and science (the language of all educated peoples throughout Europe and beyond) well into the 17th and 18th Centuries. For example, when Isaac Newton published his works on physics, he published them in Latin so that all of Europe could read them. The same was true of all other scientific and scholarly advances.
    
    The reason that the Protestant reformers used vernacular languages was because a) most educated people did not take the reformers seriously and b) they used the masses to get power for their movement. The pamphlets published by Luther and Calvin were filled with all manner of crude and dirty language (lots of references to "shitting," "pissing," and "farting"), and this was done to capture the imagination of the common man and to create popular uprising against the social establishment.
    
    The Bible could very much be understood by people with the intelligence and ability to understand its theological content -- most of whom spoke Latin. Most common people of the time, however, could understand neither the language nor the content ...and most common people are still clueless about the content of the Bible today ...which is why Protestants supply "ministers" to interpret it for them.
    
    We should also remember that the Jews had always kept their Bible in the Hebrew until the 19th Century. The Greek versions of the Jewish Bible made in ancient times had been co-opted by the Christians so the Jews basically abandoned them. Any Jew who wanted the read the Bible was expected to make the effort to learn Hebrew.
    
    Some Evangelicals have accused the Catholics of burning people for reading the Bible. Mark Bonocore responds:
    
    We must be careful not to project modern, American sensibilities (in regard to freedom and justice) into the context of medieval history. In the Middle Ages and before 1776, there was simply no such thing as separation of Church and State ---not in Catholic countries OR in Protestant countries. If we "burned people for reading the Bible," then the Protestants burned people for praying in Latin or hearing the Catholic Mass (something they unquestionably did in England, Geneva, and Scandinavia, etc.). At this time in history, heresy was also a secular crime; and the powers of a particular country treated it as such ... Despite the "spin" that some Evangelicals put on the Catholic position, the Catholic Church was never opposed people reading the Bible. What it opposed was people reading interpretations the Bible apart from the teaching authority of the Church, which would lead to the kinds of problems we have today with 30,000 denominations interpreting Scripture differently. The Bible itself warns against this. (2 Peter 1:20). With the invention of printing, there was a communications explosion, and one suddenly saw lots of people making very poor and heretical translations of the Bible and popularizing them throughout Christendom...The Church tried to stop this.
    
    The common people of the middle ages had no intellectual defense with which they could make a reasonable judgment about the Truth. They were almost as vulnerable to the heresies that were sweeping through their communities as a person standing in front of a gun today. Except a lot more than their lives was at stake, their eternal lives were in jeopardy. Today, if someone went out into the street and started shooting people, we wouldn't say, "let him go ahead and do it, people can protect themselves...its there own fault if they are shot to death." The Church was very worried that people who were influenced by these heresies were going to spend eternity in hell. No one was punished for simply believing a heresy. The crime was teaching it, and leading others astray. The Church felt it was their job to protect the souls of the innocent. In hindsight, we see that we would have done better by not using force.
    
    Some Evangelicals accuse the Catholic Church of "Chaining Bibles". The Church DID chain Bibles in the Middle Ages; and for the same reason that the Telephone Company chains its directories to the booth -- to prevent people from STEALING them.
    
    We must remember that each Bible had to be copied by hand and that it took the lifetime of a monk to do this. According to standards today, each one of these Bibles would probably be worth $20,000. Records have been compiled which show that there were 5,000 chained books in 11 Protestant and 2 Catholic libraries. The Reformers, likewise, chained their Bibles in their churches for at least 300 years. Therefore, Catholics were not alone in chaining Bibles.
    
    
    
    (2) Bible reading earlier this Century
    
    I did not grow up Catholic but I've interviewed dozens of older Catholics, and ex Catholics, including those who now go to Evangelical Churches, to try to gain an understanding of the charge that Catholics weren't allowed to read their Bibles in the 1930's - 1970's.
    
    It is true that earlier in this century, in some Catholic circles, people were not encouraged to read their Bibles. This discouragement was a mistake. The Church does not claim that these types of mistakes have not been made. Catholics believe that although the teaching of the Church is "infallible" on matters of doctrine, the Church is not "indefectable." Sometimes God chooses people who fall. He has done that since the beginning of the Church. (i.e., Judas)
    
    It was never forbidden to read the Bible. But some priests were worried that congregations would come up with dozens of conflicting interpretations of Scripture. These priests knew of over 300 Protestant denominations who had distinct beliefs about the interpretation of Scripture. Many of these interpretations conflicted with each other yet every one of them claimed divine inspiration. As a whole, neither Catholics or Evangelicals are into relativism (which says there are many truths). So we have to conclude that the vast majority of conflicting Evangelical biblical interpretations are incorrect since only one can be true. (Perhaps this is a powerful argument against Sola Scriptura - Bible alone.) Some priests saw this divisional process in Protestant circles and felt it was a danger.
    
    Eleanor, an elderly lady in our Church, explained to me that Catholics went to Catholic school. That was in the day when they really were religious based schools. They had religion class for 40 minutes every morning which taught the basics of the faith, including many articles based on Scripture and Latin. (those who think Jesus is about "Relation" not "Religion" may want to go here) The Evangelical counterpart to this was once a week of Sunday School. Eleanor loved the nuns who were her teachers. Eleanor's mother went to Church every morning at 6 am. Even though the Mass was in Latin, the Bible readings were in English. As mentioned above, there were four readings at every Mass. Most families had a family Bible although it is true they favoured hearing the Bible reading during Mass where there would be a homily explaining the readings. Joan, a lady in our church said this:
    
    ...in grade 6 or 7 all the students in our class were given the New Testament and encouraged to read it every day. The teacher (a nun) started us with the Acts of the Apostles and I remember becoming soooo excited...and I still get that way! ...I do remember being told by my grade one teacher...to listen well to the Bible readings at Mass on Sunday because that was Jesus talking to us...My grandmother used to quote Scripture to her neighbors...She heard it at church or from the priests and remembered it...and used it!
    
    
    
    (3) What's it like today? Do Catholics read the Bible?
    
    Today, Catholics who are faithful to the teaching of the Church are totally into the Word. The level of education is higher than it has ever been and people are better able to comprehend its meaning. The New American Bible has a preface from the Vatican that regular private Scripture study is a blessing (an indulgence is received) to all Catholics who crack open the Word. I love digging into the Word with my Evangelical friends. And hey, my Bible was not copied out by hand. Thank God for the printing press.
    
    

    Posted By: Ida

11. Catholics who attend Mass every Sunday read / listen to 3 Biblical Scrptures..... That alone would change this survey. Apparently the author has a disconnect between reading the Bible while in Church and reading the Bible at home..... why should that matter?
    
    It's also not accurate to poll practising Protestants along with non-practising Catholics, which is a common error especially in Political polls.

    Posted By: Mark

12. All the Catholics, 100%, who attend church either hear or read scripture when the scripture readers and the priest read before his sermon. I'll bet you have never thought of that, have you? Yes, 100%.

    Posted By: Philip Saenz

13. Geoff Bethell makes an excellent point. Pentecostals may read the Bible a lot, but these same people have very little conception of what the Bible really means. They interpret it for themselves (well, really their pastors interpret it for them) outside of the context of historical Christianity, and come up with the most bizarre heresies. Catholic may not read the Bible as much (which is bad) but at least they're not rolling around on the ground babbling gibberish and calling it a miracle.

    Posted By: JOhann

14. I spent 12 years in Catholic school and we NOT ONCE were taught from the BIBLE. To Catholics that is a coffee table book that is there to look like the good little Catholic when someone comes to your house. We studied the saints, the mass, christian living in school but NEVER the BIBLe. The church has only itself to blame if they think Catholics are falling away. I joined a baptist church bible study and learned more there in 6 weeks than in the 12 years in Catholic school.

    Posted By: victoria davis

15. Hi
    
    I believe, the schools should recite the Pledge of Allegiance every morning when school starts. One nation Under God etc. It's important that that statement begins our school day. I also believe that religious education should be offered in every school by the religious authorities. It must not be mandatory, but rather offered weekly, say for one period (45 minutes I suggest) and no-one is forced to attend these classes, they can opt out for a study hall. I believe many would attend the bible studies, if they were offered.
    
    Sincerely, Joseph Wagner

    Posted By: Joseph J. Wagner

16. From Dr Powell's clarifying comment, it seems a more factual headline would be
    "Protestants forgetting Bible; More Catholics remembering it."

    Posted By: Ronk

17. On the spur of the moment I recently purchased a Catholic Study Edition Bible on sale at Saint Paul's bookstore in Brisbane. I didn't own a bible and it was cheap. Since then I have read it religiously(pardon the pun). The explanatory notes and reading guides have opened a whole new experience for me and bought me closer to my Faith. I feel like I am on a journey to my true identity. God works in mysterious ways....

    Posted By: lex

18. As a Catholic, I do believe whether or not one reads Sacred Scripture has a lot to do with one's upbringing, one's local bishop, and most especially, one's own pastor. Too little emphasis is placed on reading from the Bible. In certain circles (homeschoolers, active church members), however, reading from Sacred Scriptures is commonplace.
    
    And please, refrain from the absurd "the Church didn't let people read the Bible" nonsense. Study the Faith and learn the truth. Stop distorting Church history and the documents of Vatican II. These silly retorts and commonplace distortions are getting old.

    Posted By: Amy

19. There may not be as many Catholics reading the Bible directly, however, those who attend daily Mass or even weekly Mass hear the Scripture readings and teachings on them at every Mass.

    Posted By: Anita

20. The Scripture readings at Mass, cover, over three years, a huge chunk of the Old Testament and virtually the whole of the New Testament. In addition many of the other parts of the Mass are direct quotes from the Bible. Compare this with the typical Protestant service (and ironically this is ESPECIALLY common in Baptist and other sects which claim most vociferously to be "Bible-based") where you might get one brief scripture reading (often it is only ever one of only half a dozen or so of the minister's favourite texts which he endlessly repeats), 45 minutes of the minister preaching his personal opinions, a few hymns, and that's the entire service!
    
    Joseph Wagner, you don't seem to have realised that this is an Australian site. Our schoolchildren don't, thank God, have to recite a Pledge of Allegiance.
    
    Victoria Davis, frankly I don't believe you. Your allegation is typical of those who have defected from the True Church to seek an easy simplistic "church" which purportedly guarantees they are "saved".
    Please name the Catholic school where you supposedly were never taught from the Bible. Some of our Catholic schools are indeed pretty slack at teaching the faith but none of them are THAT bad. If you didn't learn the Bible in Catholic school it's because you weren't listening.
    Though if they really did literally teach you well the Saints, the Mass and Christian living, you wouldn't need to learn the Bible. After all, the early Catholics managed to do a fine job of educating their youngsters in the faith for all the years when the Catholic Church had not yet written the New Testament and invented the Bible.
    
    And although every Catholic I know has at least one Bible in their house (there are a dozen in my house, plus several New Testaments etc), I have never ever seen it on display on a coffee table for show in a Catholic's house, as I have in some protestants' houses.

    Posted By: Ronk

21. And of course the Divine Office, which the Church has for centuries required as COMPULSORY daily prayerful reading for all priests and nearly all brothers and nuns (and is increasingly read by Catholic laity) consists mostly of further huge chunks of the Bible.
    
    And the Catholic Church is as far as I know the ONLY church which gives indulgences of remission of the temporal punishment due for sins, to those who prayerfully read the Bible.

    Posted By: Ronk

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. Mercies helped me roll Howard: McKew

   Mercy taught Bennelong MP Maxine McKew has credited the education she received at Brisbane's All Hallows School with enabling her to defeat former Prime Minister John Howard in last year's Federal elections.

2. Heavy metal funerals proliferate

   Perth Auxiliary Bishop Don Sproxton says he is not concerned about a shift from traditional funeral services after funeral directors revealed that football theme songs and heavy metal songs are now among those most requested at WA funerals.

3. Medicare abortion funding bill to go before Federal Parliament

   A Queensland bioethicist has called on Catholics to write to senators in support of a bill to end Medicare funding for second and third trimester abortions.

4. Church dismissed complaints over Bathurst priest

   Sydney Archdiocese investigated recent complaints against Fr Peter Dwyer, who has been charged over alleged events at St Stanislaus College, Bathurst in the 1970s.

5. Fleming inquiry begins

   A prominent South Australian barrister, Mr Michael Abbott QC, is preparing to examine witnesses for an investigation into allegations against Fr John Fleming following a briefing from the Adelaide Archdiocese.