Lectionary Statistics - How much of the Bible is included in the Lectionary for Mass? (Popquiz!)

catholic-resources.org ^ | Updated on January 2, 2009 | Felix Just, S.J., Ph.D.

[GonzoII]

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC LECTIONARY WEBSITE
by Felix Just, S.J., Ph.D.

---

Lectionary Statistics

How much of the Bible is included in the Lectionary for Mass?
Not as much as you might think, yet far more than was included in the Roman Missal before the Second Vatican Council!

The bishops assembled at Vatican II declared, "The treasures of the Bible are to be opened up more lavishly so that a richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God's word. In this way the more significant part of the Sacred Scriptures will be read to the people over a fixed number of years" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, #51). As the following tables show, the current Lectionary for Mass does indeed offer a "richer fare" of biblical readings during the Eucharistic liturgy than was available before Vatican II. However, since many parts of the Bible (esp. the Old Testament) are still not included in the Lectionary, one must go beyond the readings used at Mass to cover the entire Bible.

The following tables compare the current edition of the Lectionary for Mass (1981 Latin, 1998/2002 USA editions)
with the pre-Vatican II Missale Romanum (substantially unchanged between 1570 and 1969, with a few modifications in 1951)
and the complete New American Bible (see the bottom of this page for a key to the column headings).

Readings from the Old Testament:

Before Vatican II, each Catholic Mass included only two biblical readings, which were normally referred to as "The Epistle" (since the first reading was almost always taken from one of the New Testament letters) and "The Gospel." Readings from the Old Testament were never used on Sundays, but only at the Easter Vigil, the Vigil of Pentecost, the feast of Epiphany and its octave, during Holy Week, and on some weekdays (esp. Ember days, weekdays of Lent, the feasts of some saints, and some votive Masses).

Since Vatican II, Masses on Sundays and major feast days include three biblical readings, the first of which is usually taken from the Old Testament (except during the Easter Season, when the first reading is from the Acts of the Apostles). The OT reading is normally very brief and thematically related to the Gospel reading of the day, so there is no detectable order or semi-continuous pattern from one Sunday to the next. Weekday Masses usually have only two readings, the first of which is taken from either the OT or the NT, according to a two-year weekday cycle.

OT	Name of Book	NAB		Pre-Vatican II Missal: Vigils & Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Major Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Weekdays
		# Chap.	# Vv. Total	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used
1	Genesis	50	1533	100**	6.5 %	138	9.0 %	428	27.9 %
2	Exodus	40	1213	28	2.3 %	112	9.2 %	208	17.1 %
3	Leviticus	27	859	0	0 %	9	1.0 %	42	4.9 %
4	Numbers	36	1289	0	0 %	11	0.9 %	81	6.3 %
5	Deuteronomy	34	959	9	0.9 %	52	5.4 %	106	11.1 %
6	Joshua	24	658	0	0 %	9	1.4 %	42	6.4 %
7	Judges	21	618	0	0 %	0	0 %	51	8.3 %
8	Ruth	4	85	0	0 %	0	0 %	21	24.7 %
9	1 Samuel	31	810	0	0 %	31	3.8 %	148	18.3 %
10	2 Samuel	24	695	0	0 %	19	2.7 %	110	15.8 %
11	1 Kings	22	817	0	0 %	37	4.5 %	166	20.3 %
12	2 Kings	25	719	0	0 %	14	1.9 %	100	13.9 %
13	1 Chronicles	29	943	0	0 %	0	0 %	0	0 %
14	2 Chronicles	36	821	0	0 %	8	1.0 %	17	2.1 %
15	Ezra	10	280	0	0 %	0	0 %	21	7.5 %
16	Nehemiah	13	405	0	0 %	8	2.0 %	19	4.7 %
17	Tobit	14	245	0	0 %	0	0 %	71	29.0 %
18	Judith	16	340	0	0 %	0	0 %	0	0 %
19	Esther	16	272	0	0 %	0	0 %	7	2.6 %
20	1 Maccabees	16	922	0	0 %	0	0 %	54	5.9 %
21	2 Maccabees	15	556	0	0 %	8	1.4 %	35	6.3 %
22*	Job	42	1068	0	0 %	11	1.0 %	87	8.1 %
24*	Proverbs	31	915	0	0 %	24	2.6 %	47	5.1 %
25	Ecclesiastes	12	222	0	0 %	4	1.8 %	34	15.3 %
26	Song of Solomon	8	117	0	0 %	0	0 %	7	6.0 %
27	Wisdom of Solomon	19	436	0	0 %	42	9.6 %	102	23.4 %
28	Sirach/Ecclesiasticus	51	1372	0	0 %	48	3.5 %	208	15.2 %
29	Isaiah	66	1291	24**	1.9 %	166	12.9 %	322	24.9 %
30	Jeremiah	52	1364	0	0 %	38	2.8 %	162	11.9 %
31	Lamentations	5	154	0	0 %	0	0 %	8	5.2 %
32	Baruch	6	213	30**	14.1 %	27	12.7 %	44	20.7 %
33	Ezekiel	48	1273	14**	1.1 %	48	3.8 %	180	14.1 %
34	Daniel	14	530	24**	4.5 %	5	0.9 %	178	33.6 %
35	Hosea	14	197	16	8.1 %	11	5.6 %	38	19.3 %
36	Joel	4	73	0	0 %	5	6.8 %	27	37.0 %
37	Amos	9	146	0	0 %	13	8.9 %	51	34.9 %
38	Obadiah	1	21	0	0 %	0	0 %	0	0 %
39	Jonah	4	48	10**	20.8 %	6	12.5 %	39	81.3 %
40	Micah	7	105	0	0 %	4	3.8 %	24	22.9 %
41	Nahum	3	47	0	0 %	0	0 %	8	17.0 %
42	Habakkuk	3	56	0	0 %	5	8.9 %	12	21.4 %
43	Zephaniah	3	53	0	0 %	8	15.1 %	13	24.5 %
44	Haggai	2	38	0	0 %	0	0 %	18	47.4 %
45	Zechariah	14	211	0	0 %	5	2.4 %	24	11.4 %
46	Malachi	3	55	0	0 %	6	10.9 %	18	32.7 %

* Note 1: The above table does not include the Psalms, since they are used so often in various ways during the Mass.
** Note 2: The 1951 revision of the Roman Missal reduced the number of OT readings at the Easter Vigil from twelve to four,
and omitted all six OT readings from the Pentecost Vigil, thereby further reducing the total amount of the OT read before Vatican II;
remaining were only 33 verses of Genesis, 28 of Exodus, 9 of Deuteronomy, 12 of Isaiah and 16 of Hosea. For details, see the Roman Missal page.

OT Summary:

OT Section	NAB		Pre-Vatican II Missal: Vigils & Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Major Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Weekdays
	# Chap.	# Vv. Total	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used
Torah/Law	187	5853	137	2.3 %	322	5.5 %	865	14.8 %
Historical Books	316	9186	0	0 %	134	1.5 %	862	9.4 %
Wisdom Books (w/o Psalms)	163	4130	0	0 %	129	3.1 %	485	11.7 %
Four Major Prophets	191	4825	92	1.9 %	284	5.9 %	894	18.5 %
Twelve Minor Prophets	67	1050	26	2.5 %	63	6.0 %	272	25.9 %
OT Total (w/o Psalms)	924	25044	255	1.0 %	932	3.7 %	3378	13.5 %

Note 3: The 1951 revision of the pre-Vatican II Roman Missal (see note 2 above) reduced the total to only
98 verses or 0.39% of the Old Testament (aside from the Psalms) read at Vigils and major feast days.

Readings from the New Testament:

Before Vatican II, the same readings were used each year for the various Masses in the Roman Missal. The first reading was usually from one of Paul's Letters or the Catholic Epistles. The Gospel readings were most often taken from Matthew or John, less frequently from Luke, and only rarely from Mark.

Since Vatican II, much more of the New Testament is included in the Lectionary for Mass. The Acts of the Apostles is used as the first reading on the Sundays and weekdays during the Easter season. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are read semi-continuously on the Sundays of Ordinary Time on a three-year cycle, while passages from the Gospel of John are used mostly during the seasons of Lent and Easter and on several major feast days. Excerpts from all other NT books and letters are used as the second reading at Masses on Sundays and major feasts according to a three-year cycle, and/or weekday Masses on a two-year cycle. (Click on any of the previous underlined links for more details.)

NT	Name of Book	NAB		Pre-Vatican II Missal: Sundays & Major Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Major Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Weekdays
		# Chap.	# Vv. Total	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used
1	Matthew	28	1071	373	34.8 %	594	55.5 %	916	85.5 %
2	Mark	16	678	30	3.4 %	414	61.1 %	653	96.3 %
3	Luke	24	1151	188	16.3 %	650	56.5 %	1011	87.8 %
4	John	21	879	256	30.0 %	526	59.8 %	813	92.5 %
5	Acts	28	1007	35	3.5 %	165	16.4 %	492	48.9 %
6	Romans	16	433	69	15.9 %	117	27.0 %	228	52.7 %
7	1 Corinthians	16	437	75	17.2 %	162	37.1 %	244	55.8 %
8	2 Corinthians	13	256	40	15.6 %	48	18.8 %	123	48.0 %
9	Galatians	6	149	45	30.2 %	47	31.5 %	90	60.4 %
10	Ephesians	6	155	57	36.8 %	96	61.9 %	141	91.0 %
11	Philippians	4	104	25	24.0 %	47	45.2 %	73	70.2 %
12	Colossians	4	95	16	16.8 %	35	36.8 %	62	65.3 %
13	1 Thessalonians	5	89	16	18.0 %	39	43.8 %	69	77.5 %
14	2 Thessalonians	3	47	0	0.0 %	17	36.2 %	28	59.6 %
15	1 Timothy	6	113	0	0.0 %	20	17.7 %	51	45.1 %
16	2 Timothy	4	83	0	0.0 %	25	30.1 %	39	47.0 %
17	Titus	3	46	9	19.6 %	8	17.4 %	28	60.9 %
18	Philemon	1	25	0	0.0 %	8	32.0 %	19	76.0 %
19	Hebrews	13	303	17	5.6 %	84	27.7 %	188	62.0 %
20	James	5	108	11	10.2 %	31	28.7 %	99	91.7 %
21	1 Peter	5	105	33	31.4 %	36	34.3 %	57	54.3 %
22	2 Peter	3	61	0	0.0 %	7	11.5 %	15	24.6 %
23	1 John	5	105	13	12.4 %	33	31.4 %	95	100.0 %
24	2 John	1	13	0	0.0 %	0	0.0 %	6	46.2 %
25	3 John	1	15	0	0.0 %	0	0.0 %	4	26.7 %
26	Jude	1	25	0	0.0 %	0	0.0 %	6	24.0 %
27	Revelation	22	404	0	0.0 %	38	9.4 %	129	31.9 %

NT Summary:

NT Section	NAB		Pre-Vatican II Missal: Sundays & Major Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Major Feasts		Current Lectionary: Sundays & Weekdays
	# Chap.	# Vv. Total	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used	Vv. Used	% Used
Gospels (4)	89	3779	848	22.4 %	2184	57.8 %	3393	89.8 %
Acts	28	1007	35	3.5 %	165	16.4 %	492	48.9 %
Pauline Letters (7)	61	1493	270	18.1 %	468	31.3 %	846	56.7 %
Deutero-Paulines (6)	26	539	82	15.2 %	201	37.3 %	349	64.7 %
Hebrews	13	303	17	5.6 %	84	27.6 %	188	62.0 %
Catholic Epistles (7)	21	432	57	13.2 %	107	24.7 %	292	67.6 %
Book of Revelation	22	404	0	0 %	38	9.4 %	129	31.9 %
NT w/o Gospels	171	4178	461	11.0 %	1063	25.4 %	2296	54.9 %
NT Grand Total	260	7957	1309	16.5 %	3247	40.8 %	5689	71.5 %

Key to the Column Headings:

• NAB = New American Bible, used as the basis for chapter and verse numbers in the USA editions of the current Lectionary for Mass
  • # Chap. = total number of chapters in each biblical book (or section of the Bible), in the New American Bible translation
  • # Vv. Total = total number of verses in each biblical book (or section of the Bible), in the New American Bible translation
• Pre-Vatican II Missal = the Missale Romanum of Pope Pius V, nearly identical from 1570 to 1969, with a few changes introduced in 1951.
  • Vigils & Major Feasts = In the pre-Vatican II Missal, OT readings were only used at the Easter Vigil, Pentecost Vigil, Epiphany & its octave, and during Holy Week, but never on any Sundays.
• Current Lectionary = the Ordo Lectionum Missae (2nd Latin edition, 1981), equivalent to the Lectionary for Mass (2nd USA edition, 1998/2002)
  • Sundays & Major Feasts = readings contained in the first half of the Missale Romanum, or Vol. 1 of the current Lectionary for Mass, including all Sundays and Solemnities of the Lord, and a few other major Feasts (those which can replace an ordinary Sunday Mass).
  • Sundays & Weekdays = readings prescribed for all Sundays and weekdays during the various liturgical seasons (but not including the Propers or Commons of the Saints, Votive Masses, Ritual Masses, or Masses for Various Needs and Occasions).
• Vv. Used = number of verses from each biblical book or section used in the Roman Missal or the Lectionary for Mass, respectively.
• % Used = percentage of verses from each biblical book or section used in the Roman Missal or the Lectionary for Mass, respectively.

Main Lectionary Page	1998/2002 USA Edition	1992 Canadian Edition
Links to Other Websites	1970 USA Edition	Roman Missal (Pre-Vatican II)

---

Return to the HOME PAGE of Felix Just, S.J.
This page was last updated on January 2, 2009.
web version copyright © 1999--2006

[Gamecock]

***And I guarantee that whatever Scripture Catholics hear is more than the congregants of most Baptist or similar churches hear at church.***

Oh?

Based on?

[Alex Murphy]

I am using the table. It says that Catholics who attend on Sundays and Holy Days hear 40.8% of the New Testament and 3.7% of the Old Testament.

Correct. However, you're doing the math wrong, if you're simply adding the two percentages together to get your "nearly 50%" number. The OT isn't the same size as the NT. The percentage of the OT not read drags the "overall" statistic way down.

Using the table, find the actual verse counts read under each Testament (i.e. for weekly reading, that's 3247 for the NT and 932 for the OT). Add the verse counts together (a total of 4179 verses). Now look at the total verses for each Testament (7957 for the NT, and 25044 for the OT) and add those together (33001 verses total). Divide 4179 by 33001 and you get 12.7%.

I am not saying throw the other parts of the Bible out. I’m saying that the numbers would obviously change if we computed them without the chapters/books in the Old Testament about Jewish lineage, battles, and intricate Jewish ritual.

That's not what you said. You advocated throwing them out of the statistics because you claim no one reads them. If you're not reading them, and you're not hearing them because they're never read at Mass, then practically speaking Catholics are throwing them out. Every "read through the Bible" guide that I've ever seen in Protestant/Evangelical churches includes them. FWIW I've read all of Leviticus and Numbers several times myself.

My point is that a nominal Catholic, who does nothing but attend Mass weekly, is hearing almost half of the New Testament.

True, and IMO that's an admirable number, but that's not what you posted before. You posted (and I quote) "a Catholic who does nothing to practice his faith except attend weekly Mass (and the few Holy Days) will hear almost half the Bible", not "almost half of the New Testament."

We read along in the missals. We study what was said in the homily at Mass. We are encouraged to read the Bible on our own. And, if we attend daily Mass and do nothing else, we hear two thirds.

Incorrect. Using the correct math, you're hearing less than half of that - 27.5 percent.

I stand by my statement that the old saw “Catholics don’t read the Bible” is untrue and anyone who has told you that is pushing their own, questionable agenda.

Ouch. This is probably going to hurt.

Get Cracking, Catholics![article at the National Catholic Register]
A formative, family-friendly factoid from a recent study or survey in the news.
November 19-25, 2006 Issue
Posted 11/16/06 at 8:00 AM

According to a study released in September by Baylor University’s Institute for Studies of Religion, evangelical Protestants are a whopping eight times more likely than Catholics to read the Bible on a weekly basis. Of course, the survey only looked at private Bible reading; it did not take into account the Scripture passages Catholics take in at every Mass. Still, we tip our hats to our separated brothers and sisters in Christ for their zeal for the Word of God.

Related threads:
Synod: Christianity not a 'Religion of the Book' [article from National Catholic Reporter]
Yesterday saw...a forceful plea from a key papal advisor [Bishop Salvatore Fisichella, the rector of the Lateran University and President of the Pontifical Academy for Life] to reject the idea of Christianity as a “Religion of the Book.”

Synod to Focus on Proper Use of Scripture [article from Catholic World News]
The Church should combat widespread "Biblical illiteracy" among the Catholic faithful, Archbishop Eterovic said

A Literate Church: The state of Catholic Bible study today [article from America: The National Catholic Weekly]
...while fewer believers know much about the Bible, one-third of Americans continue to believe that it is literally true, something organizers of the Synod on the Word of God called a dangerous form of fundamentalism that is “winning more and more adherents…even among Catholics.” Such literalism, the synod’s preparatory document said, “demands an unshakable adherence to rigid doctrinal points of view and imposes, as the only source of teaching for Christian life and salvation, a reading of the Bible which rejects all questioning and any kind of critical research”....
....The flip side of this embarrassment is the presumption among many Catholics that they “get” the Bible at Mass, along with everything else they need for their spiritual lives. The postconciliar revolution in liturgy greatly expanded the readings, with a three-year cycle in the vernacular that for the first time included Old Testament passages. Given that exposure, many think they do not need anything else. As Mr. McMahon put it, “The majority still say you go to Mass, you get your ticket punched, and that’s it for the week.”

[HarleyD]

HD-It wouldn't make any difference if a Catholic read the Bible once a month, they are not allowed to draw any conclusion except the conclusion the Church tells them.

Them-False, not to mention silly. What they aren't allowed to do is draw conclusions that contradict the teachings of the church.

OK, then let's go with:

It wouldn't make any difference if a Catholic read the Bible once a month, they are not allowed to draw any conclusion except the conclusion the Church tells them that contradict Church teaching as told to them by the Church.

Is that better? You're free to think what you will as long as you agree with my conclusions. Sounds like this administration.

[FourtySeven]

Quite useful thanks for posting this too.

[Mr Rogers]

Wiki had a good summary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Jewish_Bible_canon

[Gamecock]

**Sounds like this administration.**

Kind of explains why there are so many Catholic-Dems.

[Mr Rogers]

Speaking for Baptists: we generally do NOT read significant portions of scripture during the service. The SBC Sunday School curriculum covers the entire Bible, although no one is required to use it.

Every Baptist church I’ve ever been in - including the KJV-only one that I walked out of mid-sermon - encouraged reading the Bible. Most encourage reading it daily...I couldn’t count the sermons I’ve heard supporting that, possibly because so few do. For myself, I currently do NOT read the entire Bible on a regular basis, although I have a number of times. I may start up again...and there are one and two year Bibles available for easy use - one example:

http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?item_no=06392&item_code=WW&netp_id=307579&event=ESRCN&view=covers

We do NOT exclude the Old Testament, although I’m sure many (as I suspect Catholics do as well) concentrate more on the histories and Isaiah than, say, Leviticus! And yes, I skip the genealogies as well...

Before moving to a Systematic Theology text, the last books our Sunday School class looked at were Isaiah, Micah, Galatians and James (took about 6 months).

[HarleyD]

LOL!!!

Hey, that does bring up the point of Catholics who disagree with Church teaching on abortion or other things. One has to wonder what teachings of the Church they are to agree with? I guess it all gets sorted out in purgatory. ;O)

[Judith Anne]

Thanks for your thoughtful response. In my experience, the portions of the Bible which were read in protestant churches pertained to the sermon, in many cases a parable of Christ, or a reading from the Pauline Epistles.

I read the entire Bible initially out of curiosity. Even the first five books, for the laws—fascinating, especially getting mold out of houses, that sort of thing. I just found it interesting.

Then, the history, the prophets, and the stunningly beautiful Psalms; Wisdom, Song of Solomon—the OT is an amazing collection of wonderful books.

The Gospels converted me. The Acts, and the letters of the apostles were great. Revelations is still incomprehensible, in large part, as far as I am concerned, although I’ve read it several times.

A short, sincere prayer before reading, that the Lord will speak to me is indispensable. And it doesn’t matter how much I read it, or how often, there is still the unexpressible mystery of The Word of the Lord. So I can’t say I understand it, just that it does take root in my soul.

[marshmallow]

Is that better? You're free to think what you will as long as you agree with my conclusions. Sounds like this administration.

Unless you belong to a Church which holds no dogma, then you're in the same boat. It won't be a Catholic boat of course but it will be a boat of sorts. Or would your Church have no problem if your personal reading of the Bible led you to conclude that the Resurrection of Jesus was not a historical event but simply a story?

Unfortunately, the pluralistic American political model is not a valid model for the understanding of revealed truth. The great American tradition of custom-made churches is the result.

As always, everything comes back to the question of authority and how one views the Church. "There is one God, one faith, one baptism"(Ephesians). Now if one views the Church as the guardian of that "one faith" one positively wants to know what the Church has to say about Scripture. On the other hand, if the Catholic Church is an ogre which is trying to mislead us, then naturally, its views on Scripture are considered oppressive and something to be avoided.

Of course every Church, no matter how dogmatically challenged, has some core beliefs about Scripture which it wants to put abroad and convey to its members(except perhaps the Unitarians and some liberal Protestant churches). If it doesn't then it has no raison d'etre. So you end up back at square one.

Remind me again what is so great about trying to use one's own weak intellect to find truth in Scripture when it has been handed down to us by a faithful mother in the Church?

And the worst is, it doesn't work!!!! Look around you at the motley gaggle of "churches" all claiming scriptural "truth" as their bedrock. Yeah, right!

[Alex Murphy]

Unless you belong to a Church which holds no dogma, then you're in the same boat. It won't be a Catholic boat of course but it will be a boat of sorts. Or would your Church have no problem if your personal reading of the Bible led you to conclude that the Resurrection of Jesus was not a historical event but simply a story?

Related threads:
A Literate Church: The state of Catholic Bible study today [article from America: The National Catholic Weekly]

...while fewer believers know much about the Bible, one-third of Americans continue to believe that it is literally true, something organizers of the Synod on the Word of God called a dangerous form of fundamentalism that is “winning more and more adherents…even among Catholics.” Such literalism, the synod’s preparatory document said, “demands an unshakable adherence to rigid doctrinal points of view and imposes, as the only source of teaching for Christian life and salvation, a reading of the Bible which rejects all questioning and any kind of critical research”....

Should We Take the Bible Literally or Figuratively? [article from Catholic Exchange]

Some may write off the whole Bible as being merely symbolic or allegorical, while others take every word as the kind of literal truth you get when you say something like, "The fire is hot." Symbolically, that same fire represents the power, warmth, and enthusiastic fervor poured into Christians by the Holy Spirit. You can approach the flame literally or figuratively, but either way, the fire is "true"....Unlike modern libraries that separate fiction from nonfiction and both genres from poetry, a single book of the Bible may contain an eclectic mix of Godly commands, historical events, poetic lines, and allegorical tales. Between genres, thin lines may overlap, but don't let them trip you up.

[D-fendr]

It’s sola scriptura again. For Calvin for sure. And I think his verse-by-verse would be a rarity today. Certainly I never saw this in years of Baptist preaching.

“Going to Church on Sunday” is two different things for Protestants and Catholics. For Protestants, the major time part is the sermon, which is akin to a lecture in my experience. Usually there was a Bible passage or two that was referred to, sometimes the sermon was akin to a Bible study in toto.

The major part of Mass is not the homily. To turn the Mass into a lecture and Bible Study would be to severely miss why we are “Going to Church on Sunday.”

So a comparison of how much scripture is read is a false comparison, as well as one for which we do not even have both quantified to compare.

[marshmallow]

Related documents:

The Catechism of the Catholic Church

THE HOLY SPIRIT, INTERPRETER OF SCRIPTURE

109 In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words.75

110 In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression."76

111 But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. "Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written."77

The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.78

112 1. Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture". Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.79

The phrase "heart of Christ" can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.80

113 2. Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church". According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81).

114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith.82 By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God's plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.

1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ's victory and also of Christian Baptism.84

2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written "for our instruction".85

3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, "leading"). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86

[Gamecock]

***Unless you belong to a Church which holds no dogma, then you’re in the same boat. It won’t be a Catholic boat of course but it will be a boat of sorts.***

Catholics may be in the same boat, but they seem to be rowing in different directions.

[Gamecock]

Catholics may be in the same boat, but they seem to be rowing in different directions.

Exhibit A.

What Happened to the Catholic Vote?

Interview With Fidelis President Brian Burch
By Karna Swanson

CHICAGO, Illinois, NOV. 6, 2008 (Zenit.org).- More than half of U.S. Catholics voted Tuesday for a presidential candidate at odds with the Church's stance on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage, despite the urging of more than 50 heads of dioceses to support pro-life candidates.

Source: ZENIT, The World Seen From Rome

[marshmallow]

Catholics may be in the same boat, but they seem to be rowing in different directions.

You're right.......the Protestant virus has infected the Church!...... :-)

[papertyger]

You are correct. The magesterium is a great model of what heresy looks like.

But multiple thousand denominations look orthodox?

It's easy to forget what manner of man you are when you walk away from the mirror.

[GonzoII]

I’m glad we have a lot of Scripture at Mass but any way you look at it, it’s that Meal that’s at the center of it and the main reason we go.

[GonzoII]

You’re welcome.

[GonzoII]

"Bump to post 80 and a correct understanding of the article. RCs have nothing to be proud of here."

71.5% of the New Testament for a daily Mass attendant isn't too shabby.

Let's see some Protestant stats for Sunday worship...