DeoOmnisGloria.com

"Are Catholics Allowed To Read The Bible": An Article by Francis J. Ripley

I stumbled upon this article recently and I felt that it adequately addresses this common misunderstanding held by many Protestants. It also sheds some light on just how active the Catholic Church has been in making Sacred Scripture available to all. For the full text of this series follow this link: Catholics and the BibleEnjoy!

It is the wish of the Church that her children should know the Bible.

In the Past. Pre-reformation literature is satu¬rated with Bible quotations. Much that is left to us consists either of books of the Bible or breviaries which are almost wholly made up of Scripture. The sermon literature of the Middle Ages was a mosaic of Scripture texts. Preachers used the Bible much more than is customary today in any pulpit. Half an hour’s perusal of the sermons of a Bernard or a Bonaventure shows us that the preachers almost thought in Scripture texts. For those who could not read, the Church moreover, provided a knowledge of the Bible by means of mystery plays, illustrated editions of parts or the whole of it the paintings, sculptures, and stained glass windows of her churches: the statuary of one great cathedral is known as the Bible of Amiens. Of the Bible in pictures, the Synod of Arras (1025) said: "The illiterate contemplated in the lineaments of painting what they, having never learnt to read could not discern in writing."

To the man of the Middle Ages the Bible was a living reality.

In the Present. Priests are obliged to read Scripture in their Office, or daily prayers, for about an hour and a half every day.

The laity are more than encouraged, they are urged to read the Bible. By Pius VI (1778), bv Pius VII (1820), they were earnestly exhorted to read it, by Leo XIII a special blessing was given to all who would read the Gospels for at least a quarter of an hour daily. Benedict XV (himself the founder of the Society of St. Jerome for distributing the Gospels in Italian, which sells great numbers every year sent, by the Cardinal Secretary of State, the following message to the Catholic Truth Society:

"It was with no little gladness of heart that the Holy Father learned of the work of the Society and of its diligence in spreading far and wide copies of the Holy Gospels, as well as of the other books of the Holy Scriptures, and in multiplying them so as to reach all men of good will. Most lovingly therefore his Holiness blesses all who have put their hand to this very excellent work; and he earnestly exhorts them to persevere with ardor in so holy an enterprise."

The Catholic Truth Society has, in fact, sold nearly 500,000 copies of various books of the Scriptures, especially of the Gospels, and the sale still continues. These must have been bought by Catholics, for Protestants have their own version, and their circulation affords in itself a sufficient answer to the Protestant tradition.

The best proof of the Church’s care to provide her children all over the world with the Bible is given by the confession of non-Catholic missionaries and others. "The best translations of foreign Bibles issued by our Bible Societies" (said one of them, Dr. Wolff), "are reprints from those made by the Propaganda of Rome." A short list may be given of some striking instances in which the British and Foreign Bible Society made use of translations which they found had been made by Catholics many years before their Society came into existence. These facts are chiefly testified to by non-Catholic writers:

The Armenian Testament, bought by the British and Foreign Bible Society, 1818, from the Armeno-Catholic College, Venice.

The Amharic Version (chief Abyssian dialect) prepared at Cairo by the French.

The Arabic, printed at Rome, 1671.

The Ethiopic N. T., translated by the Jesuits.

The Tartar, published nearly 500 years before Protestant Missions began.

The Chinese Catholic version, two centuries prior to any other.

The Cingalese, at least equally early, found by a Protestant Missionary.

The Persian, published at Kaffa, 1341.

The Russian, printed at Alcala, 1515;Venice, 1518.

The authorities for these facts are given in Marshall’s Christian Missions, vol.1. The same thing occurred in the cases of the Coptic, Tamil, Annamite, Malayalim and many other Oriental versions. Moreover, when the British and Foreign Bible Society penetrated to Poland, they found four editions of the whole Bible and two of the New Testament issued by the Catholics (Herbert Marsh, D.D., Enquiry relative to the B. & F. B. S., p. 67)

What has caused the general impression that the Church does not wish her children to read the Bible ?

Her claim to guide and teach them in the reading and interpretation of it: Danger is incurred in many ways by putting the Bible, without guidance, into the hands of children or the unlearned. No one would maintain that the Old Testament in its entirety is suitable for the young even to read; again, some explanation is absolutely necessary for many parts of both Old and New Testaments).

Her refusal to allow her children to use false and incomplete translations. At one time Bible translations were falsified in the interest of certain heresies Tyndale, for example, always substituted the word "congregation" for " Church"; and "ordinance" for "tradition," because of the Catholic connotation attached to these words. He also translated "Little children, keep yourselves from images," instead of using the more accurate rendering "idols." Again the authorized Anglican version translated I Cor. 11:2; e.g., "and drink this cup," so that the Catholic custom of Communion under one kind should seem to be condemned by it. The Revised Version has corrected this, and the text now stands "or drink this cup."

The harm done by bad translations and by want of an interpreter may be specially seen if we examine the efforts of various Bible Societies and non-Catholic missionaries in the last century. In China, India, and elsewhere, they either altered the Catholic versions or wrote new ones in various dialects before they had acquired real knowledge of the language into which they were translating; these they scattered broadcast, without explanation. Educated natives declared that in many cases the translations were so bad as to make absolute nonsense, and in other cases were even blasphemous: they derived from them nothing but contempt for Christianity. Moreover, the way in which these sacred books were distributed shocked all, especially the Mahommedans, who declared nothing would induce them to give the Koran to anyone unless they were certain it would be treated respectfully. These Bibles were often used as wrappings for drugs and other merchandise, wallpapers, or covers for cartridges (See Marshall’s Christian Missions, vol. 1., chap. 1).

It may perhaps, be allowed that at some periods and in some countries this caution of the Church has been carried to excess; but in the long run the realization of the existence of difficulties and of the need of an interpreter has preserved the Bible for Catholics when others are losing it. (For fuller treatment of this point, see Part I).

In Christ,
Joe

Posted by Joe at November 12, 2005 8:37 AM | TrackBack