Too busy for the Bible, I
By Diogenes (articles ) | Nov 17, 2004
Our heroes, the US Catholic bishops, have now decided not to release a planned statement calling for greater devotion to the Bible. They had too much other urgent work to do.
But before they tabled the statement, a few pearls of wisdom were dropped:
- Archbishop Daniel E. Pilarczyk of Cincinnati observed that the purpose of the US bishops' conference "is not developing good public relations." And ain't that the truth.
- Bishop Richard J. Sklba, a Milwaukee auxiliary, worried about the "increasingly evangelical slant" of Catholics who read the Bible. You can easily understand his concern: Why, these people might go out and bring their neighbors to the Gospel! They might-- now brace yourself-- convert Jews!
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Progress toward our July expenses ($8,498 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: -
Nov. 17, 2004 8:14 PM ET USA
Does the "increasingly evangelical slant" mean the Catholics don't buy that the Bible isn't just a bunch of myths and that Mark was written before Matthew just because it's shorter (you know, just like the Readers' Digest condensed version Gone With the Wind must have come out before Margaret Mitchell's version because it's shorter)?
Posted by: -
Nov. 17, 2004 6:20 PM ET USA
First, they would have to poll their clergy. It wouldn't go well if the laity knew more about the bible than their pastors, especially when the laity started asking questions they couldn't begin to answer.
Posted by: AveMaria580 -
Nov. 17, 2004 5:46 PM ET USA
They need to find an unexclusived version of the Bible first. So many of the translations lack veracity. We should probably be grateful. Back in the 1800's someone did a "Breeches" translation of the Bible. Called that because Genesis said God made breeches for Adam. The bishops would probably recommend an feminist inclusived translation. We could call it the pantyhose version.
Posted by: Fr. William -
Nov. 17, 2004 3:21 PM ET USA
Yes, these successors to the Apostles have such courage. We should appreciate their concern (Abp. Levada & Bp. Sklba stood to speak about this) & their desire to prevent Catholics from being more versed and immersed in His Word, for such Catholics might become more obedient to His Church & His Magisterium, nourished by His Word & His Sacraments. Indeed, such radical Catholics might bring others to the Gospel, despite bishops of the U.S.! So, we're probably better off w/out a USCCB statement.
Posted by: -
Nov. 17, 2004 2:34 PM ET USA
Perhaps it is just as well that they do not release a statement calling for greater devotion for the Bible. Given their usual mumblings and fumblings it probably would have just turned people away.... Sad to say we are probably beter off without them.
Posted by: -
Nov. 17, 2004 10:11 AM ET USA
"The bishops voted 137 to 102 not to pursue the statement until the conference can decide what its priorities are..." Huh? They still haven't figured out what their priorities are??? I guess they need a 'Mission Statement' or something? Of course, if they had been reading the Bible they might have stumbled on it. Hint: it begins, "Go ye therefore..."