Dei Verbum (Catholics and the Bible)

Catholic Exchange ^ | December 18, 2007 | Mickey Addison

[NYer]

Some Christians believe that Catholics are not encouraged to read the Bible.  In fact, the opposite is true...and why wouldn't it be, after all, the Bible is a Catholic book.  What do I mean by that?

The Catholic Church, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wrote the Bible.  The Catholic Church assembled the Canon (List) of books in the Bible, and the Catholic Church has safeguarded the Bible for 2,000 years.  The Church treasures Sacred Scripture because it is the Word of God.  The Church loves Holy Writ, so much so that she orders her prayer and worship around it.

First, let me dispel the idea that Catholics are not encouraged to read the Bible.  On the contrary, we are exhorted to spend time in God's Word often.  St Jerome, a famous Bible scholar (A.D. 342-420) and Catholic monk, wrote, "Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ."  He translated the Bible into Latin, the common tongue of the day, and his translation (Latin Vulgate) was the translation for 1,000 years.  Far from withholding the Holy Book from the people, the Catholic Church ensured that the Bible would be available to anyone who wanted it by preserving the definitive translation of it.

Listen to what the Second Vatican Council says about Sacred Scripture: "The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures just as she venerates the body of the Lord, since, especially in the sacred liturgy, she unceasingly receives and offers to the faithful the bread of life from the table both of God's word and of Christ's body. She has always maintained them, and continues to do so, together with sacred tradition, as the supreme rule of faith, since, as inspired by God and committed once and for all to writing, they impart the word of God Himself without change, and make the voice of the Holy Spirit resound in the words of the prophets and Apostles" (Dei Verbum, #21).

Ah...I hear someone murmur from the back row...what about the Council of Trent?  Didn't that council forbid Catholics to read the Bible?  No, exactly the opposite.  The Council Fathers wrote, "...the synod, following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of piety and reverence all the books both of the Old and New Testament, seeing that one God is the author of both..." (April 8, 1546).  What the Council forbade was the reading of unapproved translations of Sacred Scripture since they could not vouch for the authenticity of any version not reviewed by Biblical scholars guided by the Magesterium of the Church.  To do otherwise would have given the "seal of approval" to potentially heretical books masquerading as the Bible and in the theological and political turmoil of 16th century Europe, there were plenty of "Bibles" out there that didn't measure up.  (If you have ever taken a gander at the New World Translation, the "Bible" of Jehovah's Witnesses, you would understand how egregious doctrinal errors can be spread through a faulty translation.)

The Second Vatican Council, echoing the constant teaching of the Church, decreed the necessity for the Bible to be accessible to the faithful and ecumenical if possible: "Easy access to Sacred Scripture should be provided for all the Christian faithful...But since the word of God should be accessible at all times, the Church by her authority and with maternal concern sees to it that suitable and correct translations are made into different languages, especially from the original texts of the sacred books. And should the opportunity arise and the Church authorities approve, if these translations are produced in cooperation with the separated brethren as well, all Christians will be able to use them" (DV #22).

Today, with the myriad of translations, the surest way to know that your Bible is trustworthy is to look for the imprimatur ("let it be printed") by a bishop on the inside cover.

Jesus Christ established the Church on Pentecost, under the leadership of the Apostles and the guidance of the Spirit.  The Apostles and their followers are the ones who began to write the letters and books that would become the New Testament.  Jesus didn't flip an armload of scrolls to His followers and tell them to "figure it out for yourself, you've got the Spirit"; He gave the Apostles the authority to teach and guide in His Name.  Most of the books of the New Testament were written in the first 100 years after the Resurrection, by men who either met Christ in Person on earth, or by men who knew the Apostles.  In other words, Catholics wrote the Bible under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

How did the Church assemble Sacred Scripture into the Bible we know today?  The Council of Trent (A.D. 1546) decreed the definitive list, but the canon of Scripture they promulgated was merely formalizing the decrees of earlier synods of bishops on the same subject.  The Synod of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the three of Carthage (A.D. 393, 397, and 419), where St Augustine likely played a leading role, drew up the canon of Scripture that Trent later ratified.  Frankly, it wasn't until the 16th century that a decree from Rome on the Canon was even necessary, since almost everyone used the Latin Vulgate anyway.

To appreciate how much the Church treasures Sacred Scripture, one need only spend a day in prayer with her.  The hours of the day are marked with Lauds, Vespers, and Compline, where Psalms and Canticles are sung and passages from the Bible prayed over.  Other times of the day are marked with the Angelus or Regina Caeli, prayers that recount the joy of the Gospel's Incarnation and Resurrection narratives.  Most importantly, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass immerses us in Scripture as we participate in the Sacrifice of Christ on Calvary.  Most of the prayers and all of the four readings come from the Bible, a journey through salvation history at each celebration.

Finally, one last, and perhaps the most important, comment about the Bible.  While it is true that the Church is immersed in Scripture, it is also true that Revelation is not confined to the 72 books of the Bible.  The Bible itself records that Jesus did many other signs in the presence of (his) disciples that are not written in this book (Jn 20:30). 

Because the Bible is the Church's book, it is not intended to be read apart from the Liturgy and Sacred Tradition of the Church. 

Immerse yourself in the Bible...it's a very Catholic thing to do!

[SQUID]

Nobody ever talks about the fact that much of scripture is written in Greek. The Greeks being Eastern Orthodox probably have a good handle on what’s in the bible especially when one considers that translating Greek to Latin or any other language may have opened the door to interpretive differences.

[Kolokotronis]

"Nobody ever talks about the fact that much of scripture is written in Greek."

Actually, its sort of a constant mantra around here, even from the Latins. BTW, all of the NT was written in Greek.

[Frumanchu]

The premise of your question is false. It was Martin Luther, after all, who tore entire books out of the Bible.

When all was said and done, the Scriptures Martin Luther recognized were the same as those of the Early Church Fathers. Do you even know why Luther questioned the inclusion of a few books in the first place?

[BubbaBasher]

This was done in response to heresies that were arising at the time.

Of course this was determined by a majority vote. If you were in the minority you were a heretic. The Council of Nicea was as much about politics as it was scripture.

[Resolute Conservative]

I am, my wife reads NIV.

[Rutles4Ever]

It was this hubris that led to the Protestant reformation.

You can say that again! Luther thought he knew better than 1500 years of unified understanding and recast the canon based on his own self-aggrandized opinion.

[SQUID]

I always seen Latin as the subject. Thank you for the correction.

[Resolute Conservative]

I don’t remember jumping on any Catholic threads before, some Mormon, but that is here nor there. I will respond to assertions made about one specific “worldly church” claiming to be the “church” and trying to claim exclusivity when clearly the “church” in the true sense is the body of true believers in Christ regardless of their denomination, size, or location. The Bible says where two or more meet to worship there Jesus will be also.

I have attended many churches in my life: Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, and yes Catholic for about 2 years. I have settled back on Southern Baptist after a long absence, but do not claim that it is above any other denomination historically or spiritually, it merely reflects the style of worship and fellowship I prefer and the amount of control I am willing to relinquish to a structured man made church-political hierarchy over my spiritual journey, tithes, and doctrine. While I agree with many of the Catholic Church’s tenets ( this is what is outside of the Bible ) I did not want to subject myself to the bureaucratic whims of basically a small government on the form of the church leadership and Pope. The Bible says nothing about having to follow endless prayers, rituals, and tests to be included in the church, only that you believe in Him and secondly strive to live like Him. All the other trappings: saints, rosary, and others are man-made.

While each mainstream Christian church ( and I do not count LDS ) has its internal problems and differences no one church regardless of its age can claim to be the “church”. The seven churches mentioned in Revelation more than likely were merely organized meetings of believers who exchanged support and learned about the Word from the original apostles or their appointees like Timothy. The formal Catholic Church was founded my men ( I disagree that Peter founded it ) who added the tapestry of the ceremony as did other churches in their own way that popped up over the last 2000 years.

You have a Merry Christmas as well and may God Bless you.

[Resolute Conservative]

Basically so is mine as we worship God through Jesus and try to follow the Bible’s teachings.

[CTK YKC]

Of course the only difference between Protestant and Mormon is timing - both religions think thsey can have a bible with and without what ever they see fit at that point in time.

One came during the reformation to worship Luther and one came later to worship Joeseph Smith, but they are both heretics at heart.

[Resolute Conservative]

That is taken from the Bible where it says “where ever two or more meet in My name I shall also be”.

A moniker made by a man who more than likely never met Christ nor an original apostle.

[Resolute Conservative]

If I am a heretic by choosing not to be Catholic and allowing a man to dictate when, where, and how I worship based on his latest whim then I can come up with some descriptions of the Catholic Church for you that I will for go listing as not to insult any Catholics as you have just done many Protestants.

While I do agree that Mormonism is not Christianity you could not be more wrong about mainstream Protestant faiths like Methodism, Baptists, Presbyterian and others.

[Rutles4Ever]

Acts 11:26b "...And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch."

The term "Catholic Church" was coined in 106 AD by St. Ignatius in his epistle to the Smyrnaeans:

"Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."

Augustine continued the formalization of the term Catholic in the 4th century: "In the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me in the Church; so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep (Jn 21:15-19), down to the present episcopate.

"And so, lastly, does the very name of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house.

The term "Catholic Church" was finally formalized in 380 AD by Theodosius I, in response to the myriad heresies which had sown confusion across the evangelized world. Christianity thereby became the official religion of the Roman Empire.

[Petronski]

Do you even know why Luther questioned the inclusion of a few books in the first place?

Megalomania.

[Frumanchu]

Megalomania.

What's fun about giving some people the opportunity to show their ignorance is that they are often so quick to rise to the challenge.

Let me ask again, this time in the hopes that you'll actually present something that shows you have a clue what you're talking about.

Do you even know why Luther questioned the inclusion of a few books in the first place?

[Rutles4Ever]

and allowing a man to dictate when, where, and how I worship based on his latest whim

But if that man is "yourself" and it's your "latest whim", it's okay?

Why did Jesus assemble the Apostles if He didn't desire unity? Heck, why did He pray for unity in the Garden of Gethsemane if religion is "every man for himself"?

[Uri’el-2012]

Have you gone to Mass every Sunday for 3 years to find out?

Yes i have and that is why I doubt the statement.

But not to worry, I have been selected to know Yah'shua and serve Him.

I know Him much better now that I have read all of His Word.

shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua

[Resolute Conservative]

In my church it is a group effort through the deacons and in some cases every member of the entire body of the church has a vote on the direction of the individual church within the boundaries of the Bible and whether or not to accept guidance from an outside association such as the SBC. No one man directs the workings of our church. If our pastor starts preaching on things outside the Word and the deacons/members vote on it he can be dismissed unlike the Pope. No one person should hold that authority over congregates. If the SBC comes out with a doctrine we do not like as a church we can leave the SBC.

[Petronski]

I know what his excuse was, if that’s what you meant.

[Zionist Conspirator]

As you well know, NYer, the problem isn't that Catholics aren't encouraged from reading the Bible. They're discouraged from believing it contains absolutely no errors of any kind whatsoever and are encouraged to accept liberal Biblical "scholarship" because this supposedly shows how unreliable it is. And please don't quote that passage from Vatican II . . . that thing is interpreted more different ways than a Protestant interprets scripture!

And shame on you for saying the Catholic Church wrote the Bible. G-d wrote the Torah. The inspired prophets and sages wrote the Na"KH, and it was canonized by the 'Anshei-HaKenesset HaGedolah. Now, your church may have written the "new testament" . . . but you're welcome to that!