Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MeanWestTexan

Actually, in the '50s and 60's, American Roman Catholics weren't big on the Bible. The texts we used were the Baltimore Catechism and the Sunday Missal, plus Papal Encyclicals.

It wasn't until Vatican II in '62 that the nuns had us reading the Bible, and the RC version at that (Douay), not King James.


12 posted on 10/04/2005 4:36:18 PM PDT by LibFreeOrDie (L'chaim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: LibFreeOrDie

That was my take - as someone who went to Catholic school in the 50s & 60s. My mother went in the 30s and she says the Bible was rarely taught either. It was Baltimore Catechism all the way. (Oy! Memorizing all that stuff!)


15 posted on 10/04/2005 4:38:43 PM PDT by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: LibFreeOrDie
"It wasn't until Vatican II in '62 that the nuns had us reading the Bible, and the RC version at that (Douay), not King James."

The King James????? Thank God it wasn't the King James!!!

In Catholic grade school in the mid 50's before Vatican II the nuns who taught me encouraged us kids to read the bible on our own and as a family. It was not their fault we did not do it. As I recall the nuns read the bible to us every day in religion class. We had books on bible history too. By the time I was 12 I knew a gillion bible stories.. Noah, Abraham, Jonah, Joseph's coat of many colors, woman at the well, woman taken in adulatory, water in to wine and on and on and on. True I did not read the bible but at the Catholic schools I went to, when I think back, actually it was all bible all the time. You did not have to read it yourself. It was taught to you in workbooks, story sessions and and at mass. Yet you really did not think of it as B-I-B-L-E study. It was not called Bible Study it was called Religion class.

We also had catechism books but more than half of Catechism is rooted in the bible. Then there was mass practically every day, and mass has three bible readings. I don't understand Catholics who say they were never taught the bible in Catholic schools. I was bombarded with it. Then again I always got A's in Religion. Maybe they got D's!!!! :O>

30 posted on 10/04/2005 5:02:03 PM PDT by Hound of the Baskervilles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: LibFreeOrDie
Actually, in the '50s and 60's, American Roman Catholics weren't big on the Bible.

Iteresting. I was almost sure that the Gospel and Epistle in every Mass came from the Bible, not to mention the many, many excerpts from Psalms, etc. in the body of the Mass itself. I guess that's not "big on the Bible".

141 posted on 10/04/2005 6:23:23 PM PDT by Luddite Patent Counsel (Theyre digging through all of your files, stealing back your best ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: LibFreeOrDie

The UK Times is now an expert on Catholic Teaching?


283 posted on 10/05/2005 12:42:22 PM PDT by stocksthatgoup (Polls = Proof that when the MSM want yo"ur opinion they will give it to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: LibFreeOrDie
"It wasn't until Vatican II in '62 that the nuns had us reading the Bible, and the RC version at that (Douay), not King James."

If we are discussing the Douay Version, yes, many, many mistakes. It was a product of corrupted Alexandrian-type Greek manuscripts (MSS)(corrupted by mystics in the first two centuries). Those manuscripts (some 50 copies) were brought to Constantine by Eusebius from North Africa about 350 A.D. Then Jerome used them for his Latin Vulgate, and later they were used by the Douay translation committee(s). In the 19th Century, Tischendorf found copies of the same type of MSS in a garbage bin at St. Catherine's in the Sinai, and so these are known as MSS Sinaiticus. They were recognized as corrupted, even by the scholars at St. Catherine's. The MSS that Eusebius delivered to Constantine (the same text type as those found in Sinai by Tischendorf) have been kept under lock and key in the Vatican, and are therefore called by the experts in manuscript evidence as MSS Vaticanus. MSS Vaticanus and Sinaticus are terribly inferior to the Antiochan or Byzantine type MSS from Syria. The Syrian type MSS found their way into a Latin Vulgate much superior to Jerome's as early as 160 A.D.
314 posted on 10/05/2005 9:44:33 PM PDT by Free Baptist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: LibFreeOrDie
It wasn't until Vatican II in '62 that the nuns had us reading the Bible, and the RC version at that (Douay), not King James.

Pre-Vatican II Catholics didn't read the Bible but implicitly believed it.

Post-Vatican II Catholics read the Bible but don't believe it.

345 posted on 10/06/2005 12:46:40 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo-ya`avdukh yo'vedu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: LibFreeOrDie
Actually, in the '50s and 60's, American Roman Catholics weren't big on the Bible. The texts we used were the Baltimore Catechism and the Sunday Missal

And what is in the missals? Scripture. Each day has readings from OT, NT and a Psalm. Throughout a 3 year time span, you have read almost all of the Bible by reading the passages contained in the missal.

358 posted on 10/06/2005 1:13:08 PM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson