Why No "pew Bibles?"

[Bruce S]

[quote]This is where I really don't understand Protestant logic.

You say you don't need the Church to understand the Bible, but then turn around and say that you rely on the commentary. So, in essence, you're replacing the Church with whoever authored the commentary. I don't really see that as an improvement, and common sensically speaking, I see that as unwise.

Your logic does seem contradictory Bruce.

God bless.
[/quote]

Commentaries are GREAT, I use a lot of them, including Catholic ones. But, in the end, they are ALL just commentaries.

Yours included.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Pew Bibles, as you call them, are not provided.

We have our readings divided between days in a systematic order, so we use a book called a Missal or a Missalette in Mass and we use Bibles for our own prayers.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote]Commentaries are GREAT, I use a lot of them, including Catholic ones. But, in the end, they are ALL just commentaries.

Yours included.[/quote]

So you just see them as opinions?

That doesn't make sense to me, because it seems to open up all the Bible to individual interpretation, which in turn doesn't make sense because it allows dissent over what the Bible means. The Bible cannot divide people. There must be one intended meaning of the Bible and so there must be one proper interpretation. It seems to me that this must come from the only consistent Biblical commentary in existence: the Catholic one.

[willguy]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Apr 6 2004, 09:22 AM']
I don't MOCK them, I think they are really just to snippety to be of real value, they have some nice stuff in them like prayers etc, and they ARE needed for the formal group responses that the Catholic Church uses, that most Evangelical church's do not have.

Pew Bibles are there for the TAKING too, at my church, often the pastor say's if you don't HAVE a Bible, please just take the one in front of you home, gratis.

It is something that all our denominations use as THE foundational source, so the foundational source needs to be there to USE, in totality, without editing, which the missilettes do all the time to MAKE a point, and HIDE others that are inconvient. [/quote]
If you want a Bible, talk to the priest, odds are he'll get you one.

Also, I notice that you really didn't answer my question. Why have like 200 pew Bibles if they're only there so a few people that need one can take one? Do you really use them in Church for any use that a Missallete could not accomplish?

As for hiding things, I resent that, because it is much easier in a Protestant church for the pastor to hide something. Think about it, Catholics cover the Bible every 3 years of Sundays. That means, whether you like it or not, you'll here everything (with, I believe, a few exceptions such as geneologies and some passages like Numbers ch 7). Meanwhile, a protestant preacher is free to talk about whatever he/she wants. So, if they want to avoid a verse like, oh,. James 2:14-26, they can.

[willguy]

[quote]I don't MOCK them[/quote] Calling something equivalant to a Chick comic is mocking it in my book, if not worse.

[PassionistF]

As others have shared, the Mass is very rich in Holy Scripture. Not only by what is proclaimed in the Liturgy of the Word, but also in the Hymns and of course, in the prayers of the faithful and the responses that the faithful share.

I have witnessed non-Catholic "services" that shows everyone with their study bibles out and high-lighters in hand as if they were cramming for an examination.

And before anyone jumps on the bandwagon with a catch-phrase about how there will be a test. I would concur that the test that we all face will not be about how much we memorized from Scripture, but rather how much we put that Scripture into action by the way we loved God and loved our brothers and sisters here on Earth (James 1:22-25).

As a former Protestant, I am well aware of how memorization leads to a certain tendency for some (not all) to engage in a bombardment of questions and challenges not unlike the stiff-necked Scribes of Jesus' time. Heck, after my conversion, I had an unsuspecting Methodist, turned Messianic Jew, turned Baptist try to "pepper" me with the typical "you guys worship Mary, you are all going to Hell", nonsense. Weeks later, the guy sat sobbing in a chair asking me (a Catholic) to pray for him to our Lord as he contemplated his return to the Catholic Church (So much for his argument against intercessory prayers!)

Back on track ....

The Church, by way of the Liturgical calendar, reads, prays and meditates on three Scripture readings each and every weekday (not to mention the faithful who, in addition read the Office of the hours, Vespers and Lauds or who engage in Scripture study or self-paced meditation on Scripture).

And on the Sabbath and certain Solemnities, the Mass contains four readings as well as the rest of the morning and evening prayers that I mentioned above. Church doesn't end with a "service", for Catholics ..... service (to others) begins at the dismissal of the Mass (you'll probably read this again).

But again, I go back to the difference between memorization, high-lighting, finding text in Scripture to attack other people with as the stiff-necked Scribes did, and simply "living" the Scriptures as best one can.

I have followed many of the discussions here from both sides and I read how many of us are beating each other over the head with Scripture passages, comparing "our guy vs. your guy" and simply being down-right non-Christian at times.

Does it matter whether or not a pew has a Bible or a Missal in it? What if the person sitting there [u][b]cannot read?[/b][/u] Do illiterate people not count here? [u][b]What about the blind?[/b][/u] Are they outside the boundaries of what "Church" is to you?

When does the "studying", "highlighting" and "showing off of memorization skills" end and the "living of the Gospel" begin? To Catholics, it begins at the end of Mass (Go forth to love and serve the Lord), not by sitting in a pew for three hours being pounded over the head with the same personalized diatribes as the pastor shows off what he (or she) knows or has memorized.

No, the central focal point, the summit of the Mass is Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God. The source and summit of life itself.

Scripture can be shared orally as it was in the most early days of the Church. I re-state that more Scripture is offered and read during the Mass than some people want to recognize. For me, this is much more meaningful because of two simple facts:

1. I am no longer at the mercy of a pastor who has a personal penchant for only certain Scripture passages (half-fed flocks).

2. I am comforted that my Lord's prayer (John 17: 20-21) for unity in His Church is being answered at least in the Catholic Church. Because I know, that if on any given day, I am on vacation and attend a Catholic Parish outside my home town, I will be offering Mass in unity with all Catholics and I won't run the risk of having to sit through an overlapped sermon. You won't get that continuity in the (now well over) 1700 different Protestant denominations. And if I got the current number wrong, please forgive me .... I now only keep tabs on one Church.

In a three year cycle, if a person attends only Sunday Mass, he or she will have read or heard the entire Bible.

I would rather stand before God at my particular Judgement and be able to tell Him that I failed to memorize His Word but that I did try to live by it. Than to stand in His presence and try to out-wit or "lawyer up" on God Almighty.

The time to "lawyer up" is over. Let's live it and stop judging one another by what we think the other person doesn't know. Doing this places ourselves on the Judge's throne, a place reserved for Jesus Christ.

I post this with love for my separated brothers and sisters and I wish all here the same Peace of our Lord.

[theculturewarrior]

Beautiful post, Passionist.

[-I---Love]

PassionistF

thank you for reminding me and knocking sense into me as I'm reading all this...

living the Gospel surely is of utmost importance+

[Paladin D]

PassionistF, that is why I try and not worry about memorizing all the arguments on certain scriptural passages. If I wanted to, I can debate. But it's not my thing, my destiny is to serve God and witness to others, not to squable against others.

[PassionistF]

[quote name='Paladin D' date='Apr 7 2004, 01:16 AM'] PassionistF, that is why I try and not worry about memorizing all the arguments on certain scriptural passages. If I wanted to, I can debate. But it's not my thing, my destiny is to serve God and witness to others, not to squable against others. [/quote]
Couldn't have said it better myself. One could however, be prepared without memorization, to defend their faith as I am sure you are.

And of course, to do all things with love is also paramount.

What you wrote and what I had hoped to get across myself was typified by St. Francis of Assisi when he said: [i]"Always preach the gospel. When necessary, use words."[/i]

His peace to all.

[Aloysius]

Bruce, i ask you again, if God hides this message from the wise, why must one study the cultural context of each line, why must one read commentary after commentary to try to go back in time to that place so that they might understand the intentions of those words? is that not becoming one of the earthly wise?

but us Catholics have a much simpler way of knowing what the scriptures intended to say: what today's Apostles consent that it means, what the Rock proclaims and what councils solemnly declare. thus we do not need thousands of commentaries, for all we have to do is ask someone else who has learned Catholic teaching. We learn from each other, from the past and the present, the sciptures and traditions, and we know where to place our trust. we do not rely on our own intellect to know where to place our trust, that would be chasing truth with our mind the way people the scripture talks about wisdom being hidden from did, we trust in the Church for matters of faith and morals and have no need to bicker over such things, no need to read and read and read to find what it's supposed to mean.

Pax et Amorque Christi

~*on the Phorum, words are necessary*~

[M.SIGGA]

um...

I go to a Catholic Church and we have Bibles and Missals available, but I'm not arguing that it is [b]absolutely[/b] necessary because I agree the Mass isn't meant to be a Bible study, but a PRAYER - plus I don't think anyone mentioned that most of the Mass is actually Scripture (all the prayers/ liturgy of the Eucharist, etc.) and much more than in a Low Church Protestant service...

Anyway, I really like it because if anything it helps me learn the Scriptures with the little commentaries at the bottom and it also helps me to see the coorelations of the Scriptures with other Scripture verses, and I don't agree with the low church protestant method, but I respect it - and all of this can be done before and after Mass too...

so... Sometimes I bring my Bible to Mass and we have some; that's all.

[Winchester]

[quote]Today was "Communion Day" at two church's I attended. I had to go to another one, Presbyterian one with a friend then on to my AofG church. Both do communion once a month.

Guess what. The WORDS surrounding the communion were just about identical in both, and almost perfectly identical to the Catholic Church communion part of Mass.

The ONLY thing really 'different' was the Priest.

The passages, invocations, and such are so similar, that you could swear they are all the same.

So, it is the PRIEST, the MAN up front, that is the differentiating factor, not what is done.

So, you really believe more in the PRIEST than activity, the consecration is the issue, not the communion.

Of course, you would have to take the blinders off to notice the similarities, and have less denominational bias. Not really all that likely.

[/quote]
Leaps of logic that would stun a dog.
It is not a question of believing more in the priest, as your mutant version of a syllogism proposed, it is the authority handed down that gives the activity meaning. I can repeat all the speeches, write out all the commands given by a president, but since I hold not his office, they are merely the motions.

It's a question of authority, not of "the MAN"

Try harder, Brucey; you look like the Chickster out there, cripes.

[Bruce S]

[quote]you look like the Chickster out there, cripes...[/quote]

Nah, you are not the Whore of Babylon...grin, or ARE you? And don't forget to mention my "support" for the wafer god too.... [not], but then again...grin.

Chick pisses you off, he must be hitting some raw nerves, I might have to buy some tracts.

Hey, some are cartoonists, others KNOW, and some that do know, don't think you are right on many things, I guess that is why we don't worship in the same Cathedral..

Smooch.

Remember, 2/3rds of Americans are NOT Catholic, and do NOT agree with most of this stuff, and in Europe, where Catholicism is almost officially the state religions, latest polls show that ONLY 15% to 5% of those living in France, Italy, Spain even bother to go to Mass on a given Sunday.

Here in the USA it is 40-45% by most polls. And this is higest in the South, where you call it the Bible belt, and I guess, it is.

[quote]PRINCETON, N.J. -- Weekly church attendance among U.S. Catholics "appears to be on the rebound" from an all-time low of 35 percent last February, but the level of church attendance by Protestants remains higher, according to poll data released by Gallup.

"Historical [b]Gallup Poll data show that Protestants have now clearly overtaken Catholics in church attendance, for the first time in Gallup polling history," [/b]said a commentary by George H. Gallup Jr., chairman of the George H. Gallup International Institute.

The November 2003 data show that 45 percent of Catholics and 48 percent of Protestants say they attend church services weekly. Nine months earlier, the figures were [b]35 percent for Catholics and 47 percent for Protestants.[/b]
COPYRIGHT 2004 [b]National Catholic Reporter[/b]
[/quote]

Note source.

[quote]The traditional pattern of Catholics being less likely than Protestants to attend church during the weekend has returned. While in 2000 49% of Catholics attend church in a typical week, compared to 47% of Protestants, (2000), [b]2002 saw 53% of Protestants attend church versus 46% of Catholics. (2002)[/b]
Source: Barna Research[/quote]

[quote]The survey released December 18 said the number of Catholics who said they had attended Mass in the last week fell to 41 percent, compared to 46 percent in 2001.

The organization said it could not provide a direct link between the scandal and Mass attendance, because Catholic church attendance had started dropping before the crisis erupted last January. But the survey also found that there was no similar decline in church attendance by Protestants over the same period. For the first time in the decades-long history of the Gallup survey,[b] Protestants now attend weekly church services at a higher rate than Catholics, 47 percent to 41 percent.[/b]Source: CWNews [/quote]

[Livin_the_MASS]

lol, you like pointing the fingure huh? lol give it up Bruce!