Short Answer: Why don't Christians celebrate Jewish holidays?

Dear Apologist, why don’t Christians celebrate Jewish holidays?

For most Christians it is perfectly obvious why we don’t celebrate Muslim or Hindu holidays. However, the matter becomes more confusing when we look at Jewish holidays. The Christian faith grew out of the Judaism, therefore we renounce none of it. However, there is evidence in the New Testament itself that the first Christians were already neglecting the Jewish holy days. In his letter to the Colossians, Saint Paul assures his readers:

“Let no one pass judgment on you with regard to a festival or new moon or Sabbath. These are shadows of things to come; the reality belongs to Christ” - Col 2:16

In other words, there were Christians at the time who were insisting we still have a duty to keep observe Jewish holidays. Paul replied, “No we don’t.” The core reason why we don’t celebrate these festivals is contained in Paul statement at the close of that verse; “These were shadows of things to come, the reality belongs to Christ.”

Consider the holiday Yom Kippur, the annual Jewish day of atonement. As Christians we have a day of atonement. It was Good Friday – the original one – when Christ atoned for the sins of the world. What Christ did on the cross made Yom Kippur obsolete. What’s more, to celebrate it as a Christian today could be viewed as a statement that Christ did not sufficiently atone for our sins. What about Hanukkah? Hanukkah celebrates the dedication of the Temple in Jerusalem. Now, the Temple was the place where God's presence dwelt in a special way. But the New Testament tells us the Temple was always pointing forward to Jesus, who identified His own body as the Temple. And wouldn't you know it, Christians have analogous feasts in the form of the presentation of Jesus and the Baptism of Jesus.

How about Passover? Passover involved the sacrifice of a lamb and the eating of unleavened bread. Saint Paul says Jesus Christ is our Passover lamb and we celebrate our Passover at the Mass. [1Cor 5:7]

One could go down the list of all the Jewish holidays and do this. They were signs pointing forward to their fulfillment in Christ. The early Christians who abandoned these festivals did so for very intentional theological reasons.

Numbering the 10 Commandments...

I learned the Ten Commandments back in the 3rd Grade... or at least I thought I did.  But an odd thing happened when I started talking to my other Christian friends.  Their 10 Commandments list seemed to be different from mine.

In fact, I even began to hear accusations that the Catholic Church had altered the 10 Commandments to remove the ban on "graven images".  That was, of course, all so we could continue worshiping statues.  Because we do that, apparently.

Today I want to look at the 10 Commandments and how they are numbered.  Perhaps we can get to the bottom of this.

How Does a Catholic Read: 1 Corinthians 3:10-15

If you listen to Catholic Q&A shows for any length of time, you will hear the topic of Purgatory brought up repeatedly.  The questions usually fall into one of three categories:

1. What is it?
2. Where is it taught in Scripture?
3. How is it reconciled with this Bible passage which I think contradicts it?

Today I wanted to look more closely at the passage most often cited by Catholics to answer the second question.  Namely, I want to examine 1Corinthians 3:10-15 and see if it is reasonable to draw the doctrine of Purgatory from the text.

[I previously made a post explaining the very concept of Purgatory.  You can find that here.]

Interpreting and Applying Amoris Laetitia

Dear Apologist:  What was the Pope getting at with Amoris Laetitia?  What IS the proper application of that document - and how does it fit into existing Church teaching?

The proper interpretation of Amoris Laetitia has been a contentious topic since its release.  Even today there are a handful of Cardinals who – concerned with widespread misreading of the document – have asked the Vatican to clarify and reiterate certain points.

So this will be my best attempt.

Current Events: Much Ado About Dubium...

Dear Apologist, I recently heard some controversy about a "Dubium" which was submitted to Pope Francis by four Cardinals.  Could you explain that to me?

Current Events: The Pope, Abortion, and Confession...

Dear Apologist, I heard recently that the Pope declared that priests could not forgive abortions in Confession?   Could they not before?  Was abortion unforgivable?

Here is the first thing to keep in mind;  If you are getting news about the Catholic Church from secular news sources such as the Associated Press or Reuters, you are only going to be misled.  Those people do not understand the Catholic faith and have no idea how to accurately present it to readers.  The sources you want to get Catholic news from are the National Catholic Register and EWTN. 

Onto the matter at hand.

My Recent Presentations on Martyrdom

I was recently asked to give a couple presentations to our high school youth ministry group.  The topic was martyrdom.

The first presentation focused on the early martyrs and how their deaths gives evidence for the truth of the faith - as well as explaining how it spread.  The second presentation focused on modern martyrs and how their example applies to the challenges we face today.

Presentation 1: Ancient Martyrs

Presentation 2: Modern Martyrs

Looking at 3 Types of Bible Contradictions...

One thing believed by all Christian traditions is the divine inspiration of the Bible.  That is to say, we believe the words of the Bible are the words of God Himself.

So it can be alarming when we read the four Gospel accounts and find apparent contradictions between them.  It would mean at least one of the texts must be in error.

Many people attempt harmonization of the Gospel accounts - and rightfully so.  But other times we have to go back and reflect on what exactly we mean by "inspiration".  What exactly does that doctrine imply?

Today I wanted to look at three types of apparent contradictions in the Bible and discuss what it means for our understanding of inspiration.

Atheism and Pascal's Wager

One thing I do occasionally at my Bible Study is don the persona of an Atheist and challenge the students from that perspective.  The last time I did this, one of the kids (a new guy) raised his hand and confidently belted out Pascal’s Wager.

I… or rather, Atheist Steve… took the kid to task.  Atheist Steve had heard Pascal’s Wager many times before from his Christian friends and was having none of it.

Today I want to take a look at Pascal’s Wager ... and ask whether it is of any use.

Looking East: Why Not Orthodoxy?

I recently asked a good friend what topic he'd like to see me address.  He asked:

"Why aren't you Orthodox?"

It is a very fair question. There are many “Cradle Catholics” who have never asked themselves why they –as adults - are Catholic and not anything else.  Is it just because I was raised this way?

At the same time, many Christians raised in Evangelicalism begin a hard journey when they read the writings of the ancient Christian church and find a world which looks startlingly like Catholicism and Orthodoxy.  For those who feel conscience-bound to enter that world, the decision between Catholicism and Orthodoxy often becomes a crucial fork in the road.

So why am I not Orthodox?  There are several avenues I could travel down.  But today I'd like to examine the one core reason.

How should a Pro-Life Candidate Respond: Late-term abortion

The topic of abortion – particularly late-term abortion – came up at the final US Presidential debate.  When the question was posed to Hillary Clinton regarding her support for late-term abortion, she appealed to heartbreaking instances of children who won’t survive outside the womb.

Since then I’ve been thinking about how Candidate ACTS Apologist would have replied.  Can we come up with something which responds politically, ethically, and compassionately?  Let’s give it a shot:

Did Jesus Claim to be God in the Synoptics?

Probably the most famous argument in Christian apologetics is the so-called “Trilemma Argument”.  It notes how Jesus’ claim to divinity in the New Testament forces a limited number of choices upon us.

One common way around this argument is to assert that Jesus is not really presented as divine in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.  It sounds something like this:

“All that stuff about Jesus claiming to be God comes from the Gospel of John, which was written long after the original Jesus story had become the subject of myth.  The other, earlier Gospels contain none of these portrayals of a divine messiah.  In those he is just a miracle-working prophet.”

So today I wanted to respond to this by going through five ways Jesus claimed to be God – or was presented as God - in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

Understanding the Eucharist - What is it?

Every now and then the discussion in my Bible Study will veer into the realm of Mormonism.  And when discussing Mormonism, it is easy to poke fun at its more eccentric beliefs.  However, I try to remind the kids that we – as Catholics – have a few doozies of our own.  Probably the hardest one of all is our doctrine on the Eucharist. 

We believe that during the Catholic worship service (the “Mass”), when the priest holds up the bread and wine (the “elements”) and says, “This is my body / this is my blood” … those elements become the body our Savior.  Yet despite this change, the Eucharist retains the same size, shape, weight, taste, and nutritional value it had before.  You could put it under a microscope and you’ll only ever see bread. 

What has changed is the so-called “substance” of those elements.  You might also call it the metaphysical core, the underlying reality, the true nature.  Regardless of how you phrase it, what you now see is only bread and wine by appearance.  But the answer to the question, “What is that?” has radically changed.  That is what the Catholic Church refers to as "transubstantiation".

This has been universally believed since the earliest days of Christianity, and folks have been struggling with it just as long.  How do we understand this bizarre teaching?

Today I want to look at one way of breaking it down and understanding it better.

Responding to the Accusation of Mary-Worship

Probably one of the most common questions one hears on Catholic radio goes something like this:

"One thing I don't understand about the Catholic religion is why ya'll worship Mary.  Doesn't God say you'll worship Him and Him alone?"

This is probably one of the most common accusations which Catholics have to deal with when talking to their non-Catholic friends and acquaintances.  Today I want to look at a couple strategies I use for navigating these exchanges.

Is God Personal, or Not?

The other day I ran into a fella who said he was in an odd theological category.  He explained that his closest sympathies lay with those who imagine God as an impersonal force.  Kinda like... well... the Force.

This would include Taoists who contemplate “the Tao”.  Or Hindus who believe in the impersonal “Brahman”.  Or even the ancient Greek concept of the “Logos”. These ideologies propose the Ultimate Explanation of Existence (UEE) is an eternal, non-personal principle of existence.

This belief would be incompatible with classical theism, which holds that God is inherently personal and rational.  So today I want to go over four arguments which point us toward Theism.

My Favorite NT References to the Deuterocanon / Apocrypha

If you were to lay a Catholic Bible next to a Protestant Bible*, you’d notice there is a slight difference in thickness between these two.

That’s because the Protestant Old Testament excludes 7 books which are included in the Catholic Bible.   Catholics refer to these books as the “Deuterocanon”.  Protestants refer to them as “the Apocrypha”.  They include:

One of the most common arguments one encounters when discussing the Deuterocanon is whether there are any direct quotes of those seven books in the New Testament.  The assertion works like this:

• If there are direct references, you can justify its inclusion in the Old Testament.
• If not, the book should (supposedly) be held in suspicion.  

Now, there are no direct, attributed references to the Deuterocanonical books in the New Testament.  But it doesn't really matter.  There are roughly a dozen Old Testament books which are not directly quoted in the New Testament...

.... and no one is suggesting we remove those.

Still, that’s not the end of the story.  From here one could ask:

“Are there any places where the books of the Deuterocanon are referenced indirectly or alluded to?”

Here the answer is “Yes”.  And today we’re going to look at four of them.

What Did the Early Church Believe About Baptism?

One of my students was recently asked about the Catholic (and Orthodox and Lutheran) practice of baptizing infants.  She did a fine job answering the fella, but she missed one important step.  Before one begins talking about baptizing infants, you first have to be on the same page about the nature of baptism itself.

There are some Christians who practice what is called "believer's baptism".  This view proposes baptism as merely a public sign of one's conversion to Christ.  But of itself, baptism affects no change in the person, confers no graces, and does not change one's status before God.  It is just a sign.  And if one approaches baptism with that framework, it is impossible to understand why one would ever think to baptize an infant.  

So today I wanted to look at the data from Scripture regarding baptism, and then see how that was reflected in the writings of the early Church.

Luther's Blindspot: Why the Church had to say "no"

The 500th anniversary of the posting of Martin Luther’s 95 Theses is coming up next year.  This is marked by many as the dawn of the Protestant era.

Today I wanted to look at a question which is rarely asked:  Why did the Catholic Church reject Luther’s doctrine of “faith alone”?  Was it because they were pure evil?  Or was there was actually something wrong with Luther’s philosophy?

That’s what I want to explore today.

Jesus' Ministry Travels in Matthew

I have been working on a few things lately.  One of which is mapping out Jesus' travels in the various Gospels.  Here are some preliminary results on Matthew:

How Does a Catholic Read: 1Corinthians 4:6

A while ago I had the idea to canvas some of my non-Catholic friends and ask, "What verses of the New Testament do you think Catholics simply don't get? You look at it and think, 'Are Catholics unaware of this verse? What do they do with this?'"

Today I wanted to cover one last verse which relates to Sola Scriptura.  That passage is 1Corinthians 4:6.  Just as before, we're going to examine the passage, apply it to the Sola Scriptura controversy... and answer the question:

"What the heck does a Catholic do with 1Corinthians 4:6?"

How is Baptism to be Performed?

Yesterday at the park I met a youth pastor for a local Christian Church.  I asked what their distinctive beliefs were, and he said they hold strongly to "baptism by full immersion."

Today I wanted to look at the practice of only baptizing by "full immersion."  The folks in his community (and other ones too) believe the only valid or proper baptisms are those which fully immerse the person in water. 

Are they correct?

Pro-Life Presentation 2: Answering Objections and the Hard Cases

Earlier this year I began posting the Pro-Life lectures I was presenting to the local youth ministry.  Unfortunately, the audio for the second one was not usable.  So I finally sat down and recorded it again.

For a link to the presentations, click [here]

Also:  Lecture 1  and Lecture 3

The Chaos Argument Againt Sola-Scriptura

This year I have returned to several times is the issue of "Sola Scriptura".  It is one big diving lines between Catholics and non-Catholics. 

In short, Sola Scriptura is the belief that all Christian doctrine must derive itself from the pages of the Bible.  It also rejects the idea of a central authoritative body which authoritatively bind all Christians to a particular interpretation of the inspired text.

Today I want to look at another argument against Sola Scriptura.  This could be called:

       “The Argument from the Irresolvibility of Doctrinal Disagreements”.

Or perhaps more succinctly – "The Chaos Argument".

Wait....Are We Judged Twice?

One of the basic truths we learn as Christians is that when we die, we personally go before God for judgment.  But then you read the New Testament and notice something odd… the Bible presents the judgment as a massive public event at the end of time.

So which is it?

Well, your eyes do not deceive you – there are two judgment events.  The first occurs upon your death.  The second comes at the end of time.  But why?

That’s what I wanted to go over today.

Could Humans Marry Aliens?

A new Star Trek movie is out, granting everyone the chance to race around the galaxy with Captain Kirk and Spock. 

The first movie of the new continuity explored the marriage between Spock's parents.  Today I want to boldly go into a discussion of the nature of that union from the standpoint of Christian philosophy. 

Is it possible for humans and aliens to form a true marriage?

Five Questions I'd Ask Pro-Choice Catholic Politicians

American politics is full of bizarre things which ought not be.  Foremost among them are people who identify themselves as "Catholics" and yet act against the Church on matters of grave importance. 

It is one thing to debate whether a Catholic should support private school vouchers, increases to the capital gains tax, or what constitutes a fair immigration system.  The Church offers some guiding principles but no specific ruling on those.

However, when it comes to the legality of abortion, the Church could not be any more clear.  In his encyclical letter "Laudato Si", Pope Francis said:

"Concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties?" - Laudato Si, 120

And the Catholic Catechism states:

"The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation.  The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority."  - CCC 2273

However, many Catholic politicians, for reasons I dare not speculate upon, insist on supporting the institution of abortion in America.  Their refrain is always the same:

"I personally oppose abortion, but I think the law should allow a woman the right to choose."

Reporters hear those words and nod piously, never following up with hard questions.

So today I want to look at 5 questions I would pose to Pro-Choice Catholic politicians.

Short Answer: An Analogy for Grace

A while ago a student asked me:

What is grace? What do we mean when we say that word?"

It was a great question.  Sometimes it helps to slow down and see if we actually know the meaning of the words we’re saying.

The problem is there really is no clean way to answer that question.  It’s like trying to explain the meaning of “love” or “beauty”.  Even the Bible does not stop and define what exactly “grace” is.

So today I wanted to look at the answer in the Catechism.  Then I’ll give the analogy to answer the student’s inquiry.

Short Answer: Did the Church Ever Sell Indulgences?

Dear Apologist, is it true that the Church once sold indulgences? 

Is the Church Contradicting Itself by Banning Abortion AND Contraception?

As pretty much everybody knows, the Catholic Church stands firmly against abortion.  What often confuses people is how the Church could then go on to be against contraception too.  Every now and then I'll hear a person say:

"If the Church was really  against abortion, it would be the biggest proponent of contraception.  Properly used, contraception has the power to prevent unwanted pregnancies - thus eliminating the need for abortion.  So it is working cross-purposes in banning both."

That's what I wanted to look at today.

The Gospels and the "Telephone Game"

One of the most widespread arguments regarding the Bible is regarding the proper dating and authorship of the New Testament Gospels.  The earlier those books are dated, the stronger their claim is to accuracy and reliability.  So there is a lot at stake.

A while ago I made a post in which I presented some arguments for the early and genuine authorship of the Gospels.  But today I wanted to look at an alternative perspective.  I call it the "Telephone Game" theory.

This hypothesis holds that the Gospels were composed late in the first century - (after the fall of Jerusalem in the year 70AD) - and do not reflect the original narrative of Christ's life and deeds.  Instead they reflect a gradual mythologizing of the preacher from Nazareth.

The argument typically sounds like this:

"We've all played the children's game where we stand in a line and whisper a message from person to person.  Each time the message is passed there are subtle changes.  When it arrives at the other side of the line, the final message is completely different from the original.   

Something like that surely happened with the Jesus story.  His legend grew bigger and bigger until he became God incarnate.  That's what we see in the Gospels."

How do we respond to this?

What About Feminine Theological Language in the Bible?

A while ago I took a [look] at why Christians refer to God using masculine terminology.  Those reasons were threefold:

1. Jesus is described as the image of God.
2. Jesus exclusively told us to relate to God as Father.
3. The metaphysics of how God creates the universe is more like fatherhood.

But of course that doesn't answer every question.  There are a few points people often raise to the contrary.  Today I want to look at one of them....

...aren't there passages of the Bible which say God is a mother too?

7 More Harmful Catholic Urban Legends

In a previous post I made a list of seven common Catholic urban legends.  These are things which many Catholics believe to be true about their faith, but are actually not the case.  And sometimes these lead people into great harm.

Today I want to continue with seven more. 

Can We Legislate Morality?

Have you ever heard a person say:

"You can’t legislate morality…”

It’s a sort of truism, a motto that is repeated whenever a discussion enters the touchy realm of the “culture wars”.  But is it true?

Well, its true in the sense that you cannot pass a law coercing people's private thoughts on morality.   But that is not what we're typically talking about.

When someone says "legislating morality", what is meant is coercing people to act in accordance to a certain moral code.

Is that off limits?

Can Life Have Meaning Without God?

One long-running discussion between Christians and Atheists has to do with the meaning of our lives.  It is common for Christians to assert that in absence of God, life is ultimately meaningless and absurd.  And, in fact, there are certain Atheists philosophers (such as Bertrand Russell) who would agree.

These claims are usually not well-received by Atheist audiences.  They retort that they can lead happy, meaningful, purpose-filled lives without God.  This is typically coupled with a certain amount of indignance because – let’s face it – no one likes to be told their life is meaningless.

So today I wanted to take a look at this discussion.  Can life have meaning without God?

The Swiss Army Verses: The Rending of the Temple Veil

Today I wanted to begin a two-part series on a couple of New Testament passages which frequently appear in discussions between Catholics and non-Catholics.

These are verses which appear significant, but their implications are not explained in Scripture.  They are seized upon by preachers who say they know the real meaning of the text.  And frequently those interpretations are given in the context of protests against distinctive Catholic beliefs.

I call them .... the "Swiss Army Verses".

A Hidden Reference to the Trinitarian Formula

I recently met a nice fella at the park who was from a Oneness Pentacostal congregation.  After some smalltalk he began telling me I had been baptized improperly.

I had been baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - also known as the Trinitarian formula.  He insisted I needed to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ only.

Today I want to explore why he was saying this.  Then we will look at the witness of the Early Church on the matter, and finally look at a little-known piece of Scriptural evidence for the Trinitarian words of baptism.

The Analogy of John 6

One of the doctrines which separates Christians from one another is the nature of the Lord's Supper.  What exactly did Jesus mean when He said:

"This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me. This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood." - Luke 22: 19-20

Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and some others take Jesus quite literally.  We confess that the Eucharist is the real presence of Jesus Christ's body.  That is to say, Jesus Christ literally makes Himself available as food during the celebration of the Mass (aka the Lord's Supper).

In contrast, Evangelicals, Baptists, and most independent congregations hold that Jesus was speaking figuratively at the Last Supper.  They believe the Eucharist is only a token, a symbol, an emblem of Christ's body.

For simplicity I will call these two camps Group L and Group F.  (Literal and Figurative)

Today I want to discuss why this disagreement between Groups L and F is important.  Then I want to share an insight I had which I think definitively rebuts an argument against the literal bodily reality of the Eucharist.

7 Harmful Catholic Urban Legends

The humorist John Billings once said:

"It ain't ignorance causes so much trouble; it's folks knowing so much that ain't so."

This is especially true in the Catholic faith.  Catholicism is a big crazy thing and there is no telling what people will do with it sometimes.  A person will invent some quirky habit and pass it onto others as if it came straight from the top - so to speak.

Today I want to address seven things which Catholics are often SURE is part of Catholic teaching ... but actually aren't.  What's worse, these myths often leave people hurt and confused.

So let's dive in.

How Does a Catholic Read: Revelation 22:18-19

Recently I had the idea to canvas some of my non-Catholic Christian friends and ask, "What verses of the New Testament do you think Catholics simply don't get?"  One suggestion was Revelation 22:18-19 - a text which is often used to support the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura".

[For background on Sola Scriptura and why it matters, you'll find that discussion -here-]

So today we're going to examine the passage, apply it to the Sola Scriptura controversy... and answer the question:

"What the heck does a Catholic do with Revelation 22:18-19?"

Bathroom Wars 101

Across the United States there is a debate about who gets to enter the Men's and Women's restroom and locker rooms.  I recently made a video in which I explain the philosophy behind the argument.  Enjoy!

A Dangerous Slogan: "The Eucharist is not a reward for the perfect..."

Slogans can be powerful things.  Think of the phrases, "No taxation without representation", "Remember the Alamo", and "Remember the Maine".  Bloody wars were fought over those words.

There has been another slogan I have heard bandied about in Catholic circles for the past couple years.  It has recently been repeated by such notable figures as Pope Francis and Lady Gaga.  That phrase is:

"The Eucharist is not a prize for the perfect, but medicine for sinners."

Today I wanted to discuss why people should be very wary when hearing that slogan.

Two Paths Away From "Pro-Life"

The term "Pro-Life" emerges from the debate surrounding the legality of abortion. In its most basic form it means the following:

 “The right to life – the right to not be unjustly killed - is a basic human right.  It should be protected by law for everyone from the beginning of life to its natural end.”

Since the above position does not entail any particular economic worldview, a wide array of perspectives can fit under the umbrella of the Pro-Life cause.

You could be a Libertarian (someone who favors a minimalist view of the role of government) and affirm it because maintaining non-violence is a legitimate role of the State.  You could also be a Socialist who thinks the State should take care over everyone's needs.  Or many worldviews in between.

So Pro-Lifers might disagree wildly on tons of stuff, but they should be united on one thing:  The conviction that pre-birth babies are real human beings and the legal institution of abortion is a human rights violation which needs to end.

Sometimes, sadly, the reality of American politics leads people astray.  That's what I want to look at today.

How Should Pro-Life Candidates Respond: Assault Cases

In the United States, the debate surrounding abortion is contentious and ongoing.  The public is pretty evenly divided.  However, most of the print and broadcast media is staffed by people who defend the abortion industry and see it as normal.  As a result, Pro-Life candidates are often asked detailed ethical questions about their stance on abortion.  The most common of which is how Pro-Life legislation interacts with the case of rape.  

Unfortunately, many Pro-Life candidates cannot be bothered to prepare for these inevitable questions and end up making fools of themselves when answering these questions on air.  In 2012, Candidate Todd Akin of Missouri infamously responded by theorizing about female biology.  Candidate Richard Mourdock of Indiana decided to mutter something about the will of God.  Both saw their political careers go down in flames.

So what should Pro-Life candidates say?

Here is a response which I think Pro-Life candidates should practice in front of a mirror:

 (It can be recited at a conversational pace in 2 minutes 45 seconds)

Is the Church Inconsistent on Family Planning?

In 1967 Pope Paul VI released encyclical called Humanae Vitae.  The document upheld the perennial (and traditionally Christian) teaching that contraception was contrary to the moral law.  However, the same document goes on to endorse "natural means" of postponing the conception of children.

Humanity has long known that a woman's menstrual cycle has spaces of fertility and infertility.  Couples have used this fact to space out children by not having sex during the fertile periods.

In the past this was done through the "Rhythm Method".  It relied on averages and personal menstrual history to guess where a woman is in her cycle.  Its usefulness and reliability have well-known limitations.

A more modern method is called Natural Family Planning (NFP).  It also uses abstinence during fertile periods, but relies on various biometric markers to identify signs of a woman’s fertility.  This method is far less dependent on a woman's regularity and – (when practiced rigorously) - achieves levels of certainty equivalent to modern forms of contraception.

And again, this method is approved by the Catholic Church.

Some people see the Church’s approval of NFP as arbitrary and inconsistent.  They will commonly object:

“When non-Catholics want to have sex without having a baby, they use contraception.  When Catholics want to have sex without having a baby they use natural family planning.  It’s the exact same thing.”

Well... is it?

My Recent "Intro to New Testament" Talk

I recently gave a speech about the New Testament at a local retreat for high schoolers.  In it, I discuss:

• The creation of the New Testament
• Tips for reading it.
• How to get help.
• A reading of John 9

Here are the slides: [LINK]

Enjoy!!

Was Jesus Thwarted By Ancient Sexism?

A couple weeks ago a student asked why the Catholic ministerial priesthood is reserved to men.  Today I wanted to look at one of the points brought up in that discussion.

In his encyclical “Ordinatio  Sacerdetolis”, Pope John Paul II definitively taught that the Church has no authority to ordain women to the ministerial priesthood.  One of the principle reasons given is the example of Christ, who only chose men to be among the twelve Apostles.

The most common retort is something like this:

"Jesus would have liked to ordain female Apostles, but He knew the cultural misogyny of those times would not have tolerated priestesses or female preachers.  But now we live in more enlightened and egalitarian times.  Thus we can and should ordain women to the ministerial priesthood."

What do we say to that?

Sola Scriptura and the Canon Conundrum

One theme I have returned to several times on this blog is the issue the question of how one comes to know the true content of the Christian faith.  This question forms one of the few – or perhaps the only – bright dividing lines between Catholics and "Protestants".

The “Protestant” position is commonly known as Sola Scriptura, which means “Scriptura Alone”.   While people differ on the details, Sola Scriptura usually entails the following:

“The Bible is the only infallible and authoritative source of Christian doctrine.  It is sufficient on its own to deliver all the truths of the Christian religion.  Conversely, there can be no binding Christian doctrine which is not taught by Scripture." 

A Catholic would disagree with that.  Instead, he would say:

"It is true that the Bible is the inspired word of God.  However, the Christian faith contains things which are not explicitly taught in the text of the Bible.  Likewise, it is necessary to have an official interpreter and teacher of the faith which is authorized by God pass on and preserve the Christian religion.”  

Today I want to take a look at one of the simplest and most powerful arguments against Sola Scriptura.  It is an argument which uses the Bible itself to show the impossibility and incoherence of “Bible Alone”.

I call it “The Canon Conundrum”.

The Church, the Death Penalty, and the Galactic Emperor

The politics of American political landscape does not offer a one-size-fit for Catholics who wish to adhere to the entirety of what the Church proposes.  Politically “progressive” Catholics often subjugate their faith to politics on matters of abortion, euthanasia, and the natural family. On the other hand, politically “conservative” Catholics often feel a similar temptation in regard to the death penalty.

The Church’s stance on capital punishment is nuanced, but it generally stands in opposition to its use.  This led to a question from one my friends:

Would the Church condone capital punishment for Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars?

That's what we'll look at today.

Catholic Bookmarks

Today I wanted to share an arts and craft project:  Catholic Bookmarks!

Legal Penalties for Abortion: What Should a Pro-Life Candidate Say?

In the United States, the Republican party is one which generally opposes the legality of abortion.  However, most of the print and broadcast media is staffed by people who defend the abortion industry and see it as normal.

As a result, Republican candidates who claim to be Pro-Life are often asked detailed ethical questions about their stance on abortion.  Democrat candidates are almost never asked these questions.  This is grossly unfair, but the dichotomy is as predictable as the sunrise.  Therefore, it would be smart for any Republican who wants to run as Pro-Life to take the time to learn how to answer these questions.

Unfortunately most Republicans are dumb.  Many would rather destroy their careers than spend a day learning the basics of Pro-Life apologetics.  

Recently Donald Trump joined this prestigious group of morons when he fielded a question about the legal implications of the Pro-Life movement.  Would a victory for the Pro-Life movement mean women would be prosecuted?  

His answer was: "Yes."

Outrage ensued.  Particularly peeved were actual Pro-Life groups, who never asked to be associated with this belligerent madman.

So today I want to show how I would answer the question.  The following was mostly recited off the top of my head into a recording device.  Then I transcribed it.

The Secret Truth About Easter!

A student recently asked me a question about Easter.  She had encountered a friend who said Easter was of pagan origins.  Most of it was drawn from this website.

The site presents a lot of … ummm … “facts”.  It says the word “Easter” comes from the Mesopotamian goddess "Ishtar".  And the Catholic Church – those dastardly fiends - tricked everyone into worshiping the ancient pagan fertility goddess by popularizing Easter.  Zounds!!

Well, much can be said about crank webpages with no footnotes or citations.  But a couple thoughts come to mind.

The Communion of Saints and the Tapestry of Christian Faith

Back in the 400’s there was a heresy known as Nestorianism.  It proposed that Jesus was not really God incarnate, but was rather a normal man whom God had kinda-sorta possessed.  The Council of Ephesus condemned this idea.  The people of Ephesus – who had always been offended by the heresy - held a torchlit parade to celebrate the council’s decision. 

This is sometimes held out as an example of the “Sensus Fidelium” – or the “Sense of the Faithful”.  It refers to a particular way in which the Holy Spirit guides the Church.  Namely, the people of God are drawn like homing pigeons to the true expression of the faith.  Christians will, in a way, sense the tapestry of the faith and know when something is out of place.

Today I want to point out something which I regard as an instance of Sensus Fidelium.  Namely, the intuitive, magnetic draw which Christians have to the Communion of Saints.  While this is often regarded as a peculiarly Catholic idea, I think it is actually the natural conclusion of Christian thought. 

Did Jesus Start a "Religion" ?

A few years ago there was a fella who made a video in which he rapped (or something) about how much he loves Jesus and hates “religion”.   Recently a student approached me saying a friend recommended the guy’s book to her.  The chapters have titles like:

• Religion Points to a Dim Future / Jesus Points to a Bright Future
• Religion Makes Enemies / Jesus Makes Friends
• Religion Says “God will love you if…” / Jesus says, “God so loved…”
• Fundies, Fakes, and Other So-Called Christians...

The first thing that strikes me is that if you want to make friends and not enemies... perhaps it best not to call people "fakes" and use derogatory terms like "fundies".  Either way, my student wanted to know how we might respond to the fella’s assertions.  That’s what I wanted to look at today. 

What is a “religion” … and did Jesus start one?

Adam, Eve, and Crazed Grasshoppers

Recently one of my fellow parishioners sent me to a website about evolution.  It makes a point of refuting Christian doctrine by showing evidence for polygenism.

Polygenism is a scientific theory regarding the origin of mankind.  It proposes that the human species arose out of a sort of co-evolving group of hominids.  That group eventually split up and developed separately into the different ethnicities we have today.  As it says on the website:

“All the data clearly show that all modern humans, African and non-African alike, descend from one ‘homogeneous ancestral population in the last 100,000 years, with subsequent minor admixture out of Africa from Neanderthals.’ This goes against earlier theories that there is a much older divide separating West African from non-African populations.”

[Note: I hate it when people use the word “data” as a plural word and not a group singular.]

Thus, the author claims to disprove the Biblical description of a distinct two-person origin of humanity presented in the first three chapters of Genesis.  He goes on to note with some delight how “disproved” Biblical doctrines must to retreat into the realm of metaphor.

Today I wanted to take a look at two questions:

• First, what are Christians bound to believe in regard to Adam and Eve?
• Second, how would we reconcile this with modern science?

How Does a Catholic Read: Ephesians 2 and Matthew 25 together?

Recently I had the idea to canvas some of my non-Catholic Christian friends and ask, "What verses of the New Testament do you think Catholics simply don't get? You look at it and think, 'Are Catholics unaware of this verse? What do they do with this?'"

One suggestion was to look at the combination of verses like Ephesians 2:8-9 compared to Matthew 25:34-46.  These passages present apparently opposing messages regarding how much our moral efforts have to do with our salvation.

So today we're going to examine the passage, apply it to the controversy... and answer the question:

"What the heck does a Catholic do with Ephesians 2 and Matthew 25?"

What is "Atheism" Anyway?

One of the most common side-tracks when speaking to a self-described "Atheist" is the question of what the word "Atheism" even means.  The exchange typically goes like this...

Theist: "Can you prove to me that God does not exist?"

Atheist: "You are so ignorant.  You don't even know what atheism is."

... and before you know it, the conversation is derailed.  It then goes down the long fruitless path of debating the meaning of a word and rather than matters of substance.

Today I want to discuss the evolution of the word "Atheist" and how one can avoid falling into this rhetorical ditch.

Does the Bible Count as Evidence?

One of my students recently asked me:

“How do we know any of this is true?  You know, without just relying on the Bible?”

That is a good question – and a common one.  It is influenced by a form of skepticism which is common among modern agnostics.  This form of skepticism treats the Bible as a single “religious text” and then dismisses it as having no evidentiary value.
 
If you have ever heard someone say…

“Can you show me any of this stuff from actual historical sources?  Can you give me some source other than your holy book?”

… you have encountered this form of skepticism.
 
Today I want to take a look at that attitude.  Is it reasonable?   And how should we use the Bible when talking to skeptics?

Recipe: The Lentburger

Last year I decided to give veggie-burgers a try during Lent.  Much to my surprise, I liked them a whole lot.  That is to say... after I put my own spin on it.

Tonight I'd like to share with you my own creation - the Lentburger.

How Does a Catholic Read: 1Peter 3:20

Recently I had the idea to canvas some of my non-Catholic Christian friends and ask, "What verses of the New Testament do you think Catholics simply don't get?  You look at it and think, 'Are Catholics unaware of this verse?  What do they do with this?'"

One passage suggested to me was 1Peter 3:18-21 – a passage which concerns the role of Baptism in one’s salvation.  So today we're going to examine the passage, apply it to the controversy... and answer the question:

"What the heck does a Catholic do with 1 Peter 3:18-21?"

Third Pro-Life Presentation Video

Last Thursday I gave the final Pro-Life presentation for the teens at our parish.  Enjoy!

How Does a Catholic Read: Romans 10:9

Recently I had the idea to canvas some of my non-Catholic Christian friends and ask, "What verses of the New Testament do you think Catholics simply don't get?  You look at it and think, 'Are Catholics unaware of this verse?  What do they do with this?'"

One passage suggested to me was Romans 10:9 – a text which is often used to support a certain version of the doctrine of justification.  So today we're going to examine the passage, apply it to the controversy... and answer the question:

"What the heck does a Catholic do with Romans 10:9?"

How Does a Catholic Read: 1 Timothy 2:5

Recently I had the idea to canvas some of my non-Catholic Christian friends and ask, "What verses of the New Testament do you think Catholics simply don't get?  You look at it and think, 'Are Catholics unaware of this verse?  What do they do with this?'"

One passage suggested to me was 1Tim 2:5  – a verse which can be used to challenge the Catholic practice of confessing sins to a priest*.  So today we're going to examine the passage, apply it to the controversy... and answer the question:

"What the heck does a Catholic do with 1 Tim 2:5?"

How Does a Catholic Read: 2 Timothy 3:16-17

Recently I had the idea to canvas some of my non-Catholic Christian friends and ask, "What verses of the New Testament do you think Catholics simply don't get?  You look at it and think, 'Are Catholics unaware of this verse?  What do they do with this?'"

The first passage which was suggested to me was 2 Timothy 3:16-17 – a text which is often used to support the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura".  So today we're going to examine the passage, apply it to the Sola Scriptura controversy... and answer the question:

"What the heck does a Catholic do with 2 Timothy 3:16-17?"

First Pro-Life Presentation Video

On Thursday I gave the first Pro-Life presentation for the teens at our parish.  Enjoy!

What of the Man on the Island?

One of the most controversial topics in the Christian world is regarding the fate of non-Christians.

Is God really going to condemn every single person who did not come to a conscious belief in the Christian faith?  

The question presents a conundrum for Christians who love God and take their faith seriously.   On the one hand you want to affirm the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation.  On the other hand, you want to affirm the unlimited mercy and love of God.  Considering the fate on non-Christians seems to drive a wedge between the two beliefs.

This is especially the case when we’re considering the fates of decent people for whom hearing the Gospel was completely impossible or for whom believing it is an unreasonable expectation.

That is what I wanted to look at today.  What principles can the Bible give us when considering this problem?  And how is this reflected in the teaching of the Catholic Church?