“I appeal to you brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgement.”
1 Cor 1:10-12
A Divided Kingdom Cannot Stand
Jesus said:
“If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand.”
Mk 3:24-25
It is not surprising then, that Christianity is in decline. The schism between the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Christianity in the 11th century, and then the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, have resulted in thousands of different Christian denominations, all proclaiming different, and many times, contradictory versions of Christianity. Is this what Christianity was supposed to be? Is this how It was at the beginning?
The answer is no. As the Evangelical John H. Armstrong wrote in ‘Your Church is Too Small’: “denominations are clearly not found in the Bible, and it is time everyone admits this fact.” And although many Christians believe that “non-denominationalism” is the answer, these non-denominational churches are not theological neutral ground. They have their own set of beliefs, many times in line with one of the mainline Protestant denominations. It’s just that they are not “officially” affiliated to any.
The early Christian Church wasn’t like that. Although there were some dissenters and heretics, the early Christians were not only one church, they were “of one heart and one mind” (Acts 4:32) as the apostles exhorted them to be (1 Cor 1:10-12, 1 Pet 3:8).
Many atheists point out that the discrepancies and contradictions among Christians in regards to the faith and teachings make Christianity hard to believe. If Christ is supposedly the truth, then why can’t Christians agree on what that truth is? He must not be the truth then, they argue. That’s a good point.
This essay is about history, the history of how we got the Bible and how we ended up with different Bibles, something that most Christians don’t know. Even though I became convinced of the resurrection (as I wrote before here), it wasn’t until I learned and understood the origin of the Bible that I became a Christian, and I was able to answer the atheists’ question above. I think the origin of the Bible is the key to reconcile differences and divisions among Christians and hopefully become one Church as Christ intended.
Jesus Prayed for Unity
On the night He was betrayed, Jesus was alone with His apostles in the upper room (Jn 13-17) and before entering into His passion He prayed these words to God the Father:
“Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one… Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth… I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one… so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”
Jn 17:11-21
It is clear that Jesus wanted His apostles, and those who believed in Him through them, to be united as a communion of believers. Moreover, it seems that, for Jesus, this unity was crucial for the world to believe that He is the Son of God. As I mentioned above, a divided Christianity is not credible.
Also, notice that the unity Jesus prayed for, was meant to be in union with His apostles. In other words, His church was meant to be apostolic. Since the beginning of His ministry, Jesus claimed to have divine authority to teach and interpret the Jewish Scriptures (Mt 21:42; Mk 1:22,27; Mk 2:10; Lk 4:21; Jn 5:27; Jn 10:33-34). Jesus then gave His divine authority to His apostles and founded His Church in them, with St Peter as the head (Mt 16:18-19; Mt 28:18-20; Jn 1:42; Jn 16:12-15; Jn 20:21-23).
To discuss these Bible passages is futile, because the problem is that Christians interpret these passages and the Bible differently. It’s a matter of interpretation, and everyone claims to have the right one. As a result, everyone has their own version of Christ.
For example, even two of the fathers of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli, while affirming the authority of the Bible alone (a pillar of Protestant doctrine), disagreed on the meaning of Jesus’ words “This is my body” at the Last Supper. Luther (like Catholics and Eastern Orthodox), gave a literal/sacramental interpretation and believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, while Zwingli (like most Protestants/Evangelicals) believed that Jesus’ words were merely symbolic. Same passage (and a crucial one), different interpretation, both claiming to be right.
The Misinterpretation of the Bible
At the dawn of the Protestant Reformation, while debating Martin Luther in Leipzig (June 1519), the theologian Johann Eck said these important words:
“There is no one of the heresies which have torn the bosom of the church, which has not derived its origin from the various interpretations of the Scripture. The Bible itself is the arsenal whence each innovator has drawn his deceptive arguments.”
By taking passages of Scripture out of context many have come up with their own Christian theology. That’s why the divisions and discrepancies within Christianity are to a great extent rooted in the misinterpretation, and consequently, the misunderstanding, of the Bible. Not only that, but misinterpreting the Bible has led many Christians to abandon their faith, even some in Christian seminaries. Why? Because Scripture is hard to understand. As a matter of fact, St Peter warned us about it:
“First of all you must understand this, that no prophesy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation because no prophesy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
2 Pet 1:20-21
“There are some things in [Paul’s letters] hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.”
2 Pet 3:16
The reality is that we must have an authoritative interpreter of Scripture, just like the first Christians had in Jesus and then in the apostles. Remember when Jesus met the two disciples on the road to Emmaus after His resurrection and He “interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself (Lk 24:27).” Also, remember when St Phillip the apostle had to explain Isaiah’s prophecy about Christ to the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:30-38).
To make matters worse, the problem is not just that Christians disagree on the interpretation of the Bible, but that we actually have different Bibles. Protestant/Evangelical Bibles have 66 books, Catholic Bibles have 73 books and Eastern Orthodox Bibles have as many as 81 books (the New Testament is the same for all). So, if we are to seek Christian unity as Christ intended, at least we must first agree on the correct Bible. The question then is: which one is the authentic Bible? And how did we get it? The answers are not in the Bible, but in history.
The Origin of the Bible
The New Testament began to be written around 50 AD. So, for the first 20 years the Christian faith was exclusively transmitted orally by the apostles and their disciples. As St Paul wrote:
“So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes from the word of Christ.”
Rom 10:17
The Protestant New Testament scholar Lee Martin McDonald wrote:
“While the memory of the apostolic witness was still fresh in the minds of the Christians and conveyed by eyewitness to the events of Jesus’ life and fate, there was little need in the Church for attention to be given to written records.”
‘The Biblical Canon – It’s Origin, Transmission and Authority’
In other words, first came the Church, then came the books of the New Testament. Keep in mind that these were scrolls and there wasn’t a Bible yet. Also, in addition to the Old and New Testament scrolls there were other early Christian writings such as those of the Apostolic Fathers (the disciples of the apostles) that circulated throughout the churches and were used in the Divine Liturgy (the Mass) of each city. However, there was no universal agreement on which writings to use.
Furthermore, besides these books, there were also forgeries and heretical books circulating, such as the ‘gnostic gospels.’ As a result, the Church saw an increasing need to establish the canon of Scripture, (divinely inspired books approved for reading in the Liturgy) that would be binding to all Christians in matters of faith and practice. We know this as the Bible.
This was a long process that culminated in the late 4th century. Even though there were different proposed lists of books, the definitive canon of Scripture was declared and reaffirmed by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church at the councils of Rome (382 AD), Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 & 419 AD). The Magisterium is the living teaching office of the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome (the pope). The Bible was thus compiled into 73 books: 46 books in the Old Testament and 27 books in the New Testament.
The criteria the Magisterium used to discern which books were canonical and which books weren’t was based on the books that were handed on by the apostles through the succession of bishops. In other words, it was the apostles who chose the books that were to be used as divine Scripture for Christian worship. The Magisterium merely recognized what was handed on through the centuries (suggested reading: ‘Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger’ by Gary Michuta’).
According to Lee Martin McDonald again:
“The apostolic deposit – genuine witness to and from Jesus Christ (the church’s true canon) – was transmitted faithfully from the apostles to the church through its succession of bishops.”
‘The Biblical Canon – It’s Origin, Transmission and Authority’
Eastern Orthodox Bibles have more than 73 books but the number is not uniform across regions, with some having up to 81 books. Basically, they failed to recognize the Old Testament canon agreed upon at the Council of Carthage. Eastern Orthodox Christians say that they are not bound to those 4th/5th century councils (because they were not ecumenical) or to the Bishop of Rome (whose authority they don’t recognize). However, they forget that the eastern Council of Trullo (692 AD), which was intended to complete the Fifth and Sixth Ecumenical Councils, to which Eastern Orthodox Christians are bound, did recognize the binding prescriptions of Carthage (see canon #2 of the Council of Trullo). The great schism of 1054 AD between East and West probably made things worse for the adoption of the carthagian canon of Scripture in the East.
The question now is, how did Protestant Christians end up with an Old Testament containing only 39 books?
The Removal of the Deuterocanon from the Bible
The Deuterocanon (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are the 7 disputed books in the Old Testament (1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, and Judith). Apocrypha means non-canonical, and Protestants claim that Catholics added these 7 books to the Bible at the Council of Trent (1545-1563) in response to Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation (1517). As we’ll see, this is simply not true. These books were removed from the Bible by Protestant Bible societies in the 19th century (not by Luther as it is sometimes believed).
For instance, after the printing press appeared in Europe in the mid-15th century, the first Bible ever to be printed, the Gutenberg Bible (1455), was a Catholic Bible, that is, it contained 73 books including the Deuterocanon. This was decades before the Protestant reformation and a century before the Council of Trent. This council merely reaffirmed what the previous Church councils, since the late 4th century, had declared and affirmed.
Ironically, Luther himself appealed to the Deuterocanon as scriptural defense of two of his Ninety-Five Thesis (which began the Reformation). However, two years later Luther rejected the same books and in his German translation of the Bible, he placed them between the Old and the New Testaments as an appendix named ‘Apocrypha’.
Why didn’t he remove them if he believed they were not divine Scripture? Perhaps because removing them would’ve been too radical, since the new Protestants, all former Catholics, were used to the Deuterocanon as part of the Old Testament. Luther’s re-formatting of the Bible though, paved the way for future radical changes.
Not many people know that the Apocrypha appendix was also part of the 1611 King James Bible, and part of the Geneva Bible brought to America by the Pilgrims. Of note, these kept the original cross-references between the New Testament and the Deuterocanon.
Why would the authors of the New Testament make reference to the Deuterocanon? As Gary Michuta wrote:
“The inspired authors of the New Testament referenced, used and integrated the Deuterocanon into their work just as they did the other Old Testament texts… [they] didn’t regard the Deuterocanon as human apocrypha, but as an integral part of Sacred Scripture.”
‘Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger’
That is why these references were eventually removed; they told an inconvenient truth. According to the Protestant theologian William Daubney:
“Plainly, the references to the Apocrypha told an inconvenient tale of the use which the Church intended should be made of it.”
‘Use of the Apocrypha in the Christian Church’
Subsequently, the Protestant Synod of Dort in 1618 moved the Deuterocanon to the end of the Bible. And finally, it was 19th century Protestant Bible societies that ultimately removed these books from the Bible. The Second Statement of the Edinburgh Bible Society, while admitting that the Deuterocanon presents itself as Scripture, feared that those who read it may convert to Catholicism. Despite some opposition within Protestantism, they believed that the removal of the Deuterocanon fulfilled the wishes of the Protestant Reformers.
Question: can Joel Osteen, or anyone else, remove parts of the Bible that don’t fit into their own Christian theology, and still call it the Bible? No, right? But that’s exactly what Protestant Bible societies did.
Consider then, that a Protestant Bible in the 21st century is not only different than a Catholic Bible, it is also different than previous Protestant Bibles. This has been largely forgotten, but a century ago the memory was still fresh. Here is part of a sermon by Episcopal minister Rev. Milo H. Gates, which he gave in Manhattan, on December 6, 1915:
“The time has come when all real Protestants should demand from the Bible societies the whole Bible… One of the greatest libraries of sacred writing is contained in what is known as the Apocrypha… It is the fault of Bible societies that this wonderful part of holy writ has been stolen from the Bible.”
Why This Matters
1) The totality of God’s revelation.
a) Sacred Scripture. Most Protestant Christians aren’t aware that these 7 books are part of Scripture, so many times they don’t understand Catholic teaching, and call it unbiblical. However, as the Bible says:
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”
2 Tim 3:16
So, for instance, Catholic doctrines like praying for the souls of the faithful departed or praying to the saints in heaven for their intercession, are supported by 2 Maccabees 12:42-44 and 2 Maccabees 15:12-17, respectively.
These are biblical teachings. The problem for Protestants is that an incomplete Scripture leads to an incomplete understanding of the faith and the wrong teachings.
b) Sacred Tradition. As I mentioned above, the apostolic teachings have been handed on faithfully by the apostles to the Church through the succession of bishops.
The Church teaches that:
“Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the Word of God, committed to the Church (Dei Verbum 10).” Therefore, the Catholic Church “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone (Dei Verbum 9).”
2) Authoritative interpretation of Scripture. Without an authoritative interpretation of Scripture, what we have is the chaos that we are in. People come up with their own interpretation, some leave the faith and others want to change it. It is logical that the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, who was given the authority to compile the Bible, also has the authority to interpret it.
However, some Protestant scholars, even though they know the history of the canon, do not consider the Magisterium of the Catholic Church to be infallible in the declaration of the canon, and hence do not recognize its authority. They argue that what we have in the Bible is a fallible collection of infallible documents.
The problem with that logic is that, without the God-given infallible authority of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, we wouldn’t know if the books in the Bible are truly canonical or not. Because if the Magisterium was not given infallible authority in the declaration of the canon, that means that they could’ve made a mistake and included a book that wasn’t truly inspired revelation, or perhaps left out a book that was truly divine Scripture.
For example, why not include the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, such as the Epistles of St Clement of Rome or of St Ignatius of Antioch? Or why not include the so called “gnostic gospels”, such as the gospel of Peter, the gospel of Mary Magdalene, the gospel of Judas or the gospel of Thomas? Because these books were not recognized as divine Scripture by the apostles and their successors, and therefore were left out of the Bible by the Magisterium.
The Magisterium of the Catholic Church has always protected the faith that was handed on by the apostles against many heresies and false teachings over the centuries. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church says:
“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.”
CCC 85
3) Recognize authentic Christian teachings. St Paul wrote to Timothy:
“For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths.”
2 Tim 4:3-4
Many Christian churches have abandoned the teachings of Christ and have succumbed to the pressures of secular society. For example, not many people know that up to 1930 all Christian traditions condemned contraception. However, that year, the Anglican Church convened at the Lambeth Conference and allowed contraception for the first time, under certain circumstances. Subsequently, they allowed it across the board, and eventually all Protestant/Evangelical denominations followed suit. Today, despite increasing pressure, the only church that remains faithful to 2000 years of Christian teaching is the Catholic Church (see St Paul VI’s encyclical ‘Humanae Vitae’).
The teachings of Christ have always been hard to accept. That’s why many left Him then (see Jn 6:60-66) as they continue to leave Him now. So, how do we know what is sound Christian teaching and what is not? Where do we find the truth St Paul speaks about? He told Timothy:
“I am writing you about these matters, although I hope to visit you soon. But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.”
1 Tim 3:14-15
Jesus gave us a Church that, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, guides all generations in truth. As Scripture says, He told His apostles (alone):
“I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth.”
Jn 16:12-13
For example, the Bible doesn’t mention the term ‘Holy Trinity’. This most fundamental dogma of our faith was formally promulgated by the Church at the Council of Nicea (325 AD). Similarly, the Bible is silent about embryonic stem cell research or in vitro fertilization, but the Church is not. Throughout the centuries, controversies and heresies (usually arising from the misinterpretation of Scripture) have always been clarified by the Catholic Church (through documents or councils), not by the Bible.
4) Christian unity. If Christians ought to be “of one heart and one mind” as the early Church was, we must recognize the authentic Sacred Scripture and its authentic interpretation, as well as the Sacred Tradition of the apostles, and the authority given to the Magisterium. Only when I discovered this, is that I knew what I ought to believe as a Christian in matters of faith and morals. The Catechism says this about the formation of Christian conscience:
“In the formation of conscience, the Word of God is the light for our path, we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.”
CCC 1785
So, the path to the visible unity, in heart and mind, that Christians once had, is through the Catholic Church. That is the way Christ intended it to be.
Why Would Anyone Want to be Catholic?
Here is the short answer, and GK Chesterton said it best:
“The difficulty of explaining “why I am a Catholic” is that there are ten thousand reasons all amounting to one reason: that Catholicism is true.”
‘Why I Am Catholic’
Certainly, there are many reasons people find for leaving, or not joining, the Catholic Church, but I believe it stems from a lack of knowledge of what the Church is, and a misunderstanding of her teachings. Actually, that was my case. As Venerable Fulton Sheen put it:
“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
It’s true that we cannot ignore the horrible and inexcusable abuses that have been done within the Catholic Church by clergy and laity. There’s been corruption at many different levels and even bad popes. No doubt it is outrageous, but think about this: would a merely human institution conducted like that have survived 2000 years? I think not. For Jesus said:
“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”
Mt 16:18
“And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”
Mt 28:20
Keep in mind that Jesus Himself warned us about the evils within the Church in the parable of the weeds among the wheat (Mt 13:24-30) and about “false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inward are ravenous wolves.” (Mt 7:15).
St. Paul made a similar warning to the Church in Ephesus:
“I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.”
Acts 20:29
Likewise, St. Peter wrote:
“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their licentiousness, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words.”
2 Pet 2:1-3
This sounds familiar: false teachers among Christians, even bishops and clergy, some of whom by their actions deny Christ and bring sexual immorality, corruption and destruction to the Church. Certainly, there have been many Judases in Church history.
What about bad popes? Yes, there have been bad popes. Popes are sinners too and they can make mistakes. Moreover, remember that the first pope denied Jesus Christ three times and abandoned Him at the cross. And prior to that, Jesus even rebuked Peter at one point saying “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hinderance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but on the side of men (Mt 16:23)”. Jesus said this to Peter right after He appointed him the head of His Church in Mt 16:18.
Above all this, we must recognize that the Church is not only made of sinners, but also made of saints. We should judge the Church by their example. Thanks to them, the Catholic Church has been a force for good in this world. But more importantly, the Church is holy only because it was founded by the Son of God, Jesus Christ.
To finish, I’ll leave you with Jesus’ prayer for unity, and an invitation to reflect on it. This Easter season, let’s all pray for the unity Our Lord prayed for:
“Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me; I have guarded them, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. But now I am coming to you and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. I have given them your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world. I do not pray that you should take them out of the world, but that you should keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth. I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.” – Jn 17:11-21
- Suggested books:
- Why We’re Catholic, by Trent Horn
- The Case for Catholicism, Answers to Classic and Contemporary Protestant Objections, by Trent Horn
- Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger, by Gary Michuta
- Pope Peter: Defending the Church’s Most Distinctive Doctrine in a Time of Crisis by Joe Heschmeyer.
- Bearing False Witness, Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History, by Rodney Stark
- Suggested websites:
- Catholic Answers (www.catholic.com)
- Called to Communion (www.calledtocommunion.com)
- The Coming Home Network (https://chnetwork.org)
