I've been waiting for decades for these two books to be written!

No joke -- I've wanted the knowledge that is in these books for so long, nicely consolidated for me and easily available on my bookshelf, and here they suddenly come on the heels of one another, written by my friends, Stacy Trasancos and Trent Horn, who are also friends of the Bubble!

You all are going to love this.

In my opinion, the toughest and most common questions (sometimes accusations) that we Catholics have to answer are questions of 1) reconciling faith and science, and 2) questions about the "hard sayings" of the Bible, including the "mean God" of the Old Testament and all the "inconsistencies and contradictions".

Dr. Stacy Trasancos' book, Particles of Faith: A Catholic Guide to Navigating Science tackles the question of faith and science. Written for for the average layman who may or may not have a background in science (I do not!), Stacy takes us first through her fascinating personal story, including her movement away from the Protestantism of her childhood and into a kind of religious indifference as she moved through her doctoral studies and career as a research chemist. Not without suffering, Stacy ultimately found her way to Catholicism and now occupies space on both sides of the science vs. faith debates, which makes her voice invaluable to all of us today.

The epiphany of how she personally reconciled faith and science is not what I expected, and I could never do it justice here. Expressed so intimately and beautifully, her perspective shuts down the erroneous idea that faith and science must constantly be fighting, and she describes this mystery in a way that only a brilliant scientist and a servant of God can. 

Some of the questions she breaks down and explains:

Can a Christian accept evolution? Does quantum mechanics explain free will? Does the Big Bang prove God? Are Creationism and Intelligent Design correct? When does human life begin? 

There are passages that describe the basics of the atomic world and points of chemistry that I found fascinating but didn't fully absorb (my brain really does not work spatially and scientifically), and that's okay. Skim or skip the technical explanations if you must, and you won't miss a beat. 

Aside from her personal journey ("A Story About the Chasm"), the most compelling part of the book for me was her explanation of the origins of man, specifically, how to reconcile what we know through scientific discovery with our belief in Adam and Eve, our first parents. I feel like I finally have a language for discussing the subject, and much more deeply and thoroughly than I had before.

If you have ever been confused or tongue-tied about how science and faith fit together, read Particles of Faith (available for pre-order now). If you are like me, you'll read it straight through and then keep coming back to it when you need it. I am so grateful to have it. 

I am also incredibly grateful for Trent Horn's Hard Sayings: A Catholic Approach to Answering Bible Difficulties. Trent is a writer, speaker, and radio host for Catholic Answers, and I'm not the only one who believes that he is the best Catholic apologist of our day. The man has a gift, people! 

Trent's book covers just about every biblical "hard saying" and misunderstanding you can imagine (and have likely been confronted with) and explains each one with incredible clarity. You will feel blissfully knowledgeable when you walk away from each chapter.

And it's all there:

Is the Old Testament just Bronze Age ignorance? What of legendary biblical creatures, mythical patriarchs, and bungled history? Aren't there 1001 internal contradictions in the Bible? Gospels that can't agree, conflicting advice, and contradictory names and numbers?

And what about all the evil? Isn't the Bible just evil? What of the bad role models, misogyny, bizarre laws, and cruel punishments? Doesn't the Bible (thus God) endorse slavery and genocide? And so much more, including the Catholic view of Scripture and whether or not the Bible has been corrupted.

Hard Sayings is that reference book that you'll return to time and again, sometimes for your own edification and knowledge, and sometimes when a particular question or accusation has been thrown your way.


We are so blessed to have these great minds using their gifts and talents to help the rest of us better understand and defend our Catholic Faith.

Thank you, Stacy and Trent!



_________


On a personal note, I apologize for the dearth of blog posts lately! Believe it or not, I have just today (finally!!) finished writing my book, Raising Chaste Catholic Men, and after I attend to the details of the publishing part of it, it should be ready by (please God) the end of this month. Meantime, I will be taking one of my sons off to his freshman year of college soon, at which point exactly half my children will have flown the coop. Sob! 

Thanks for bearing with me, thanks for any prayers you can spare, and I will be back in the saddle just as soon as I can!

Dear Protestant: Where did you get your New Testament?

Greek Manuscript New Testament

At least a couple of times every week, Protestants use New Testament verses to show me where the Catholic Church is wrong about something. I always make them take the necessary step back by asking the following:

"Where did you get your New Testament?"

When they answers that it came from God (as indeed it did), I say, "Yes, but what was the mechanism God used to bring it to you today? How did it come to you, historically and in real time, since it did not drop out of Heaven into your hands, leather-bound?"

Nine times out of ten, they have no answer because they have never considered the question.

The quick answer:

The Catholic Church officially determined and set the canon of of the New Testament approximately 400 years after Christianity began. The canon was declared by the body of Catholic bishops at the Council of Carthage (397 A.D.) and confirmed by Pope Boniface (419 A.D.).  

This is historical fact.

Let me flesh out a few more of the details, which very few Christians (Protestant or Catholic) know.

After Christ's ascension into Heaven, and after the Holy Spirit descended upon the first Christians at Pentecost, the Church thrived and grew exponentially for years before even one line of the New Testament was written. Let that sink in: Baptisms, catechesis, communal worship, conversions of thousands of sinners, Apostles and their companions traveling to other lands and risking imprisonment, torture, and death to evangelize the world with zeal -- all went on for over a decade before the New Testament was even begun, much less completed.

Without having written a word, the Church was teaching, preaching, growing, and flourishing for many years.

Eventually, a very few Apostles and their disciples starting writing down some of the Church's oral Tradition: The Gospels, which recorded the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and also the Epistles (letters) of St. Paul and others, which gave encouragement and instruction to local churches being established throughout the world. The young Church cherished those gospels and letters, and began to incorporate them into her liturgies and masses.

More and more written accounts and testimonies materialized as the Church grew, but contrary to today's popular belief, it was not obvious to the early Christians which of these writings were truly God-inspired.

As brutal persecution of the Church continued in those first centuries, clarity about Christian writings became important. After all, Christians were being martyred routinely, and it was necessary to know which books were worth dying for.

Three categories of writings existed at that time:

1. Those writings that were universally acknowledged/accepted
2. Those writings that were disputed or controverted
3. Those writings that were known to be spurious or false

The first group included divinely-inspired books that we have in our Bible today, such as the four Gospels, the Epistles of St. Paul, and the Acts of the Apostles.

The second group included books that were simultaneously accepted in some Christian regions, rejected in others, and disputed in others. Some of these were indeed divinely-inspired, such the Epistles of James and Jude, one of Peter's, two of John's, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Book of Revelation, even as many Christians did not believe they were. Some were books that never made it into the final canon of the New Testament, but which several Christian communities considered inspired (and even used for catechizing and in the liturgy), such as the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, Apostolic Constitutions, the Epistle of St. Clement, St. Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans, etc.

The third group consisted of the fakes floating around, spurious works which were never acknowledged or claimed by the Church, such as about 50 false gospels including the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of James, a couple dozen "Acts" (Acts of Pilate, Acts of Paul and Thecla, etc.), and some epistles and apocalypses.

Under the promised guidance of the Holy Spirit and after a long series of historical events, a gathering of Catholic bishops went through the process of authoritatively and infallibly setting the books of the Christian canon, using the following criteria: a) The book in question must have been written in apostolic times by an Apostle or one close to an Apostle, and b) The book in question had to be doctrinally sound, completely conforming to Catholic Church teaching.

Several books met those criteria, and so it happened that some four centuries and 20 generations after Christ's Resurrection, the Magisterium of the Catholic Church authoritatively set the canon of the New Testament, ending all confusion and doubt among the faithful.

Rome had spoken, and the canon was closed.


Which leaves us with some takeaways:


-- If the Catholic Church (bishops and pope) had the authority from God to set the New Testament canon, then she cannot be the corrupt and un-Christian "Whore of Babylon" as is claimed by many Protestants.

-- If one accepts the canon of the New Testament, one must also accept the authority of the entity who gave it to us, i.e., the Catholic Church.

-- If one rejects the authority of the Catholic Church, one should and must also reject the canon of the New Testament that came to us through the authority of the Catholic Church. (It makes sense that Martin Luther, the rebel behind the Protestant Reformation in the 1500s, wanted to throw out several of the New Testament books that he despised.)

-- The New Testament cannot be "personally interpreted" by each individual Christian, because it was never meant to be taken outside of the Church from which it came.

-- The New Testament cannot and does not contradict Catholic doctrine, as it was Catholic doctrine that was used as a criterion for its authenticity and authority.

-- The New Testament was discerned and canonized by men who had divine authority to do so -- men who believed explicitly in the Mass, the Eucharist, the ministerial priesthood, Confession, Purgatory, veneration of Mary, infant baptism and infused grace, justification by faith and works, the Communion of Saints, etc., etc.

-- The Bible came from the Church. In other words, the Bible is Church-based, not the other way around. If you get this paradigm wrong, you get some messed-up theology.

-- If a Protestant uses Scripture to attack the Catholic Church, it's like ripping off a man's arm to beat him with it. Using a Catholic Book to beat up the Catholic Church makes no sense.

-- If you believe that your eternal salvation is based entirely on a Book, isn't it important to know where the Book came from and who was given authority to proclaim it? Who meticulously copied, preserved, protected, and guarded it with their lives, and who ultimately vouched for the fact that it is indeed the written Word of God?


There is so much more to discuss, and I would love to do so in the comments. Meanwhile, one of the best books on the subject, which I devoured when I came back to the Church, is Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church, by Henry G. Graham.





**Note: I did not include the Old Testament canon in this post, because I wanted to work with something that both Protestants and Catholics agree on, namely, the 27 books of the New Testament.

Why is the God of the Old Testament so mean?

I am very excited! In a post last week, I asked for topic suggestions, and got some great questions about Scripture. 

Now, I'm not a Scripture scholar... far from it! But I do have a dear friend who teaches Scripture, and I always run to her like a little child when I have a question that's too much for me! She is the same dear friend that I shoved out of the way to get to Fr. Tad last month! She graciously forgave me, because she is a super-classy broad!!

Anyway, I'm doing a dance, because this dear friend, Gayle Somers, has kindly agreed to be the honorary Bubble Scripture lady!! She will help us when we need answers regarding a question of Scripture!! I am giddy, aren't you???

Here's a small peek at her many credentials: Gayle was an evangelical Christian for nearly thirty years of her adult life. She has her Masters in Theological Studies from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, taught Scripture and lectured for decades as a Protestant, and was a contributor to The Women's Study Bible. She was received into the Catholic Church in 1995, and she's been leading parish Bible studies since 1996. Gayle is the author of three published Bible studies, she blogs on the Book of Romans at Catholic Exchange, and is a research fellow with the St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology, which promotes biblical literacy for laymen. She also has her own website, Cor Ardens Catholic Scripture Study.

Whew! And that's just for starters!! So, she's got the killer credentials, and now she has...................... 

her own Bubble icon!!!!!

What more could a woman achieve in one lifetime?!


So, let's get to it. 


Our first question comes from God Alone Suffices, who asks about the harshness we see from God in the Old Testament, a harshness we don't find in the New Testament, "almost like there are two different Gods": 

Why would God give the Jews such a harsh Law? The stoning and burning people just disturbs me. I had a history professor tell me that God created the Law and it was impossible to follow, and that's why they needed Jesus. Well, why would God give them a Law that was impossible to follow in the first place? I'm sorry if I'm not making any sense! I've just never really received a satisfying answer to this question, and it keeps bugging me! :) 

Gayle's answer:


There seem to be two questions here:  (1) Why were OT punishments harsh?  (2) Why did God give the Jews a law they couldn't keep?


(1) First, we want to remind ourselves that punishment from God is a sign of His love, not His hate. Parents know that punishment is an important part of taming a child's natural self-serving (and often destructive) impulses. A parent is willing to inflict temporary suffering on his beloved child (a spanking, a time-out, a grounding, etc.) in the hope of sparing him a greater suffering should his impulsive behavior continue and become a habit. We should be happy to see God punish His people in the OT, for it proves they are His children and not chattel. 


Second, it helps to know that God had to give His people a "second law" (Deuteronomy) in the wilderness because they proved, by their infidelity to the covenant He made with them, that they were not ready to live as a kingdom of priests as He intended (read Ex. 19:4-6), spreading the knowledge of Him throughout the world.  


The Mosaic (deuteronomic) Law was given after the 10 Commandments (God's unchangeable moral law) in recognition that Israel could only live like the other nations at that time in their development, and not in fulfillment of their original vocation.  


Their civil law looked much like the civil laws of the surrounding nations. Whatever harshness it contained was a taste of what life is like outside covenant life with God, although it should be noted that Israel's civil law was far more just and humane than the laws of its neighbors. It was going to take time for Israel to be ready to live by the law of love -- they had to live their history to reach the place of humility and longing for God to be in their midst. Jesus was born in the "fullness of time." They were ready.  


Thirdly, before we lay any charge against God for His punishments in the OT, we need to read the entire OT with a yellow marker, noting all the places of His forgiveness, mercy, provision, protection, and guidance. When we get the final tally sheet of punishment/kindness, we can figure out if the God of the OT is the same God of the NT. My prediction: We won't get beyond Genesis 3 before we realize that God's love for us is "crazy love," as St. Catherine of Sienna said, the self-same Love we see on the Cross.  


Lastly, we must recognize that there is always a tension in the OT between God's justice and His mercy. We are supposed to feel it when we read it. Harsh punishment tells us that sin is serious; God's forbearance tells us He is merciful.  Only in Jesus does the tension get resolved: Sin is serious and is punished (justice), but Jesus takes it for us (mercy).


(2)  The problem with the 10 Commandments wasn't in the Law -- it was in the heart of man. When parents make rules for a household, do they expect children to always perfectly keep them? When a society writes laws for its citizens, does it expect them to be perfectly kept? We could ask, "Why bother?"  Yet we know why we bother -- we all need a standard of behavior that is explicit and preserves the idea of both moral and civil order.  


God's law for Israel was simply a codification of what is inscribed on all our hearts: We should love God and man. If we are not able to keep the law (as Israel wasn't), we find out something very important about ourselves.  Something is wrong with us! Humility replaces pride. We are ready to ask for help. We need forgiveness and can freely accept the help of a Savior. The law was a "tutor" until grace arrived, as St. Paul tells us. Never underestimate the importance of self-knowledge in life with God.


I don't know about you, but I learned a lot from this answer!! If any of you have a Scripture question you'd like Gayle to address, either email me or put it in the comments, and I will pick one to give her for the next installment of "Ask Gayle Somers"! (a.k.a., "Gayle in the Bubble"!)


Thanks so much, Gayle!!

Pilate said to him, "What is truth?"

Remember when I said that my blog had two purposes? That I want it to be a teaching blog and a learning blog? Well, this post covers both.

First, the teaching part:

One of the most dramatic moments in the Gospels is the exchange between Jesus Christ (who is on trial for his life) and Pontius Pilate (who ultimately orders Jesus' execution). Here is John 18:37-38:

Jesus [said]...."For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears my voice."

Pilate said to him, "What is truth?"

Thus we see the two main worldviews regarding truth: One is Jesus' and one is Pilate's. The two views are irreconcilable. Choose a side.

If you want to be a Christian, you must choose Jesus' side. The secular world increasingly chooses Pilate's side.

Now, let's be clear: I am not talking about subjective truth, such as whether you prefer red wine to white, or what you think of grandma's new hairdo.

I am talking objective truth. Truths that are true no matter what you or I think. Truths about who we are and who God is. Truths of "faith and morals".... back to that Deposit of Faith I was talking about here.

Truth cannot contradict itself. So, it's either true that killing innocents is wrong, or it's not. It's either true that rape is wrong, or it's not. It's either true that God exists, or it's not. It can't be "your truth" or "my truth" -- objective truth exists outside of ourselves and will remain true even if the whole world doesn't believe it. Truth is not ours to determine, it is ours to seek and find.

Think about it:

The whole world once believed the earth to be flat. That belief didn't make the world flat. The earth was as round as ever back then, despite public opinion to the contrary.

Believing doesn't make something true. But, if something is true, it is right to believe it. I remember a great line from a Peter Kreeft book: "The only reason to believe something is because it's true." If I have cancer, what good is it for me to believe that I don't have cancer? If it's snowing outside, what good is it for me to believe it's scorching hot? If the light is red, what good is it for me to believe that it's green? We should believe what is true, not what we wish to be true.

Truth is what is real.

Truth would exist even if we didn't. We don't decide what is true or not, we receive what is true (this is known as revelation). We are not the arbiters of Truth, but we hand down what we have received (this is known as catechesis).

We live in a world that increasingly rejects the idea of objective truth. Instead, we are surrounded by Pilate's worldview: "What is truth?" You have your "truth" and I have mine, and it doesn't matter if these "truths" contradict. In fact (and ironically), the only "truth" is that there is no Truth! Pilate's words are conventional wisdom today, but we Christians must understand that Pilate's worldview -- the worldview that all truth is subjective -- is incompatible with Christianity.


Now, on to the learning part of the post, because I really want to know:

To those of you who hold a worldview of "you have your truth and I have mine," please explain the difference between your truth and your opinion.

Thanks, and I look forward to learning how you reconcile the two concepts.

Not for a prize, but still...

This little tidbit of information was soooo interesting to me when I read about it several years ago, and I want to see if anyone else knows. So, for no prize, but just for fun, do any of you know what Barabbas' first name was? Yep, Barabbas, the criminal that the crowd told Pilate to set free instead of Jesus.

Don't look it up!!! I really want to know if anyone already knew, and also if that person could explain the significance of the name.

Books in the Bubble -- Jesus-Shock!

I am not sure who has enough time to read books these days, including me, but I crave it. I've got shelves full of great books, most of which I will never actually read this side of Heaven.


That bums me out, because I want to read them all!


Still, I have occasionally found time to read those rare books which grab my attention quickly and leave a lasting impression.


Because you might also have limited time and patience, Books in the Bubble is born! This latest Bubble feature will offer "don't waste my time" book recommendations. 


Soooooo, have you been shocked -- I mean really shocked -- by Jesus lately?! 

I have. I just read, Jesus-Shock, by Peter Kreeft. The title got my attention, and that's basically the whole point of the book -- to get our attention!



If you are not utterly shocked by your encounters with Jesus Christ -- in Scripture, in Sacrament, in everything -- then your faith and existence need a jump start. In the comfort and affluence of America especially, we Christians have become complacent (I know I have). This book will shake you up and re-introduce you to the God-Man who walked the earth 2000 years ago, truly present, and who still dwells in our Tabernacles today, truly present.


The book starts with a quiz (which I failed), and then goes on to tell you why and how Jesus Christ has shocked, stunned, amazed, frightened and/or horrified everyone He's ever come in contact with. Not exactly the "nice," bland, milquetoast "community organizer" Jesus we see thrown at us by the secular culture and even within our own churches. 


If you aren't shaken to your core by the glory and power of Jesus, then you haven't been paying attention. You haven't met the Jesus of the Gospels, the same One who comes to you in the Eucharist. Kreeft goes through a host of Bible passages, quoting the jarring reactions that come from those who encounter Jesus. Having it laid out like that really opened my eyes. I am so "used to" Jesus that I hadn't noticed that no one "got used to" Jesus in Scripture!


Kreeft spends the second half of this small book discussing the "Jesus-shock" we Catholics should be experiencing when we encounter Jesus in the Eucharist, both in Holy Communion and Adoration. Kreeft, a convert from Calvinism, makes some of the best, most succinct apologetics arguments for Catholicism that I have ever read (and believe me, I have read a lot of apologetics over the past 15 years!).


My only complaint? There are several typos in the book (which, as a former editor, bugs me!!), and the physical book itself looks like it was hurriedly put together. However, the work itself was not hurried, as it took the author ten years to complete (he wrote fifteen other books while still working on Jesus-Shock). Kreeft has written almost 60 books (many of you are familiar with his work), but he says that if he could only write one book, Jesus-Shock would be it. I can understand why.


*Update: I should note that the "shock" is not about getting us to have an "emotional high" about Jesus. It's definitely not about subjective "feelings".




Recommended for: Those who have grown complacent in their relationship with Christ, and who need to go back to the foundation of everything, which is the Person of Jesus.

Bible in the Bubble, First Edition! Play along!

So, I am sitting around thinking of the topic for my next Doctrinal Quiz Show, and I get this great idea for it. I start to type out a post, and then I realize that the topic is not so much about doctrine as it is about the Bible (Bible trivia). I think of a few more topics that fit that bill, and suddenly I realize: I need a new feature in the Bubble!


Thus, Bible in the Bubble was born this day.


Remember, noooooooooooooo peeking in the Bible, googling, asking Father, running to the concordance, or otherwise cheating! No cheats in the Bubble!


You do not need to know or cite the book, chapter or verse in your answer (though you might get bonus points if you do, but then again I also might suspect that you are cheating, ha ha), but you do need to provide the specific circumstances or events which apply.


Here is your first question:


There are only TWO times in the entire Bible when God breathes on man. Name them. (And, if you can tell why the events are significant, extra points for you!)


The winner will receive a lovely prize, to be revealed with the correct answer.


Go on now, impress me!!


Hint: More likely than not, all my Bible trivia will have specifically Catholic overtones.