Originally posted by trying2understand:
Yes, that is what I want.
So far you have failed to do so.
Although you did take the time and effort to type out a long and pointless distraction.
I await either your quote from the Catechism, your admission that you are wrong and bearing false witness, or your continued lack of proof of your acusation which I will accept as proof of your false witness.
It's up to you.
Ron
This is not from the Catechism, but it is from one of your official sources. I am sure that will do.
THE DOCUMENTSD OF VATICAN II
Walter M. Abbott, S.J., General Editor
Chapter 6
Sacred Scripture in the Life of the Church
Page 128, Paragraphs 25, 26
“It devolves on sacred bishops, ‘who have the apostolic teaching,’ to give the faithful entrusted to them suitable instruction in the right use of the divine books, especially the New Testament and above all the Gospels, through translations of the sacred texts. Such versions are to be provided with necessary and fully adequate explanations so that the sons of the Church can safely and profitably grow familiar with the sacred Scriptures and be penetrated with their spirit.
Furthermore, editions of the sacred Scripture, provided with suitable comments, should be prepared also for the use of non-Christians and adapted to their situation. Both pastors of souls and Christians generally should see to the wise distribution of these in one way or another.”
“In this way, therefore, through the reading and study of the sacred books, let ‘the word of the Lord run and be glorified’ (2Th.3:1), and let the treasure of revelation entrusted to the Church increasingly fill the hearts of men. Just as the life of the Church grows through persistent participation in the Eucharistic mystery, so we may hope for a new surge of spiritual vitality from intensified veneration for God’s word, which ‘lasts forever’ (is.40:8; cf. 1Pet.23-25).”
“Each and every one of the things set forth in this Constitution has won the consent of the Fathers of this most sacred Council. We too, by the apostolic authority conferred on us by Christ, join with the Venerable Fathers in approving, decreeing, and establishing these things in the Holy Spirit, and we direct that what has thus been enacted in synod be published to God’s glory.”
Rome, at St. Peter’s November 18, 1965
I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church
(Then followed the signatures of the Fathers)
This is the last part of the chapter. It is basically directed to the clergy of the church, as they should be the ones that should study and interpret the Scriptures for others.
Frederick C. Grant (in the same book) printed this response:
“But we get the impression that from being forbidden, the reading of the Bible is
now commanded. Why not simply invited, and encouraged?
Why is not more said about the importance of Bible study in the training of the clergy, and in their whole way of life? By that I mean more than the selections use in the liturgy and the Offices, and much more than patristic or mediaeval allegorism in interpretation, or purely homiletical expositions, whatever the date. I mean the solid linguistic, historical, critical study of holy Scripture in the ‘sacred languages,’ Hebrew and Greek as well as Latin, and with all the most up-to-date texts and reference books—such, for example, as the magnificent ‘Dictionary of the Bible’ by father John McKenzie, S.J. (Bruce, 1965). This is the kind of scholarship all clergy should aspire to, and should constantly use—and also all layman and women seriously concerned with the study of holy Scripture. And teachers—of course! Many of the outstanding works of Catholic biblical scholarship, especially those produced on the Continent but also some in Great Britain (and therefore in the English language), are almost unknown over here.
Finally, how can such study continue without freedom for research? The appendix to Cardinal Bea’s ‘The Study of the Synoptic Gospels’ (Harper, 1965) warns Ordinaries (bishops and superiors) to ‘keep watch with great care over popular writings…on biblical subjects.’ This is clearly censorship, and suffocating. The Constitution doe not go that far, but it could—and should, I think—have said something about the scholar’s liberty of conscience, and his duty to follow truth wherever it leads, for ‘Truth is mighty, and prevails’ (1Esd.4:38), as all modern efforts at suppression and dictation of religious convictions and of scientific research are making dreadfully clear! For the sake of safeguarding the common faith of all Christians, the Church’s scholars must be free and unfettered in pursuing their tasks. Of course they must be responsible. But to whom? To God, not merely the ecclesiastical authorities with their interpretations.”
I hope this will give you some satisfaction.
DHK
