The Road to Emmaus: Recognizing Christ in the Breaking of the Bread, Not Merely in Words

The Road to Emmaus: Recognizing Christ in the Breaking of the Bread, Not Merely in Words

On that first Easter Sunday, two disciples walked the road from Jerusalem to Emmaus, their hearts heavy with disappointment and confusion. The man they had hoped was the Messiah had been crucified. Their dreams lay shattered. A stranger joined them on the journey, and as they conversed, He opened the Scriptures to them, explaining how the prophets foretold the suffering and glory of the Christ. Yet it was not in the explanation of the Word alone that their eyes were opened. It was only when the stranger "took the bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them" (Luke 24:30) that "their eyes were opened and they recognized him" (Luke 24:31). He vanished from their sight, but they exclaimed, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he spoke to us on the way and opened the Scriptures to us?" (Luke 24:32). They immediately returned to Jerusalem to tell the others: "The Lord has truly been raised and has appeared to Simon!" (Luke 24:34). And they recounted "what had happened on the way and how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread" (Luke 24:35).

This profound episode from Luke's Gospel is not merely a charming resurrection appearance story. It is a blueprint for how Christ continues to make Himself known to His Church. The apostles—and by extension, all believers—encounter the risen Lord primarily in the Eucharist, the true presence of Jesus' Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity under the appearances of bread and wine. The Scriptures play an essential preparatory role, kindling faith and understanding, but recognition and intimate communion occur in the breaking of the bread. This truth stands at the heart of Catholic teaching and worship. Yet many Protestants, emphasizing sola scriptura (Scripture alone), have downplayed or denied this Real Presence, prioritizing a written book compiled centuries later over the living Sacrament instituted by Christ Himself.

 Unpacking the Emmaus Narrative: Liturgy in Miniature

The Road to Emmaus account unfolds like a miniature Mass. The disciples are on a journey—much like our pilgrimage through life. They are downcast, much as we can be amid trials. The unrecognized Jesus draws near, as He does in every liturgy through the priest acting in persona Christi. He explains the Scriptures, corresponding to the Liturgy of the Word. Their hearts burn, but full recognition awaits the table. Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it, and gives it—echoing the words and actions of the Last Supper (Luke 22:19). At that precise moment, their eyes open. This is no coincidence. Luke uses Eucharistic language deliberately: "took... blessed... broke... gave." These verbs mirror the feeding of the five thousand and the institution of the Eucharist.

Early Church Fathers and modern Catholic theologians, such as Scott Hahn and Brant Pitre, see this as intentional. The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes that the Eucharistic celebration includes the proclamation of the Word, thanksgiving, consecration, and participation in the banquet (CCC 1408). Emmaus encapsulates this "one single act of worship." The disciples did not say, "We recognized Him in the brilliant exegesis of the prophets." They said He was "known to them in the breaking of the bread." The Word prepares; the Sacrament fulfills and reveals.

Imagine the scene in vivid detail. The sun dips low over the Judean hills as the three travelers approach Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. Cleopas and his companion (possibly his wife) pour out their grief to the stranger. Jesus rebukes their slowness to believe but does so with patience, walking alongside them. He begins with Moses and all the prophets, showing how the Messiah must suffer and enter glory. This sermon—often called the greatest never recorded—ignites hope. Yet intellectual assent alone does not suffice for full encounter. Hospitality leads to table fellowship. The stranger assumes the role of host, performing the actions of the Eucharist. In that instant, the veil lifts. The Resurrected One stands before them, truly present. Joy replaces sorrow. They rush back in the dark, transformed.

This pattern repeats in the Acts of the Apostles and early Christian writings. The early Church gathered for the "breaking of the bread" (Acts 2:42), not merely Bible studies. The Eucharist was central from the beginning.

 The Real Presence: Apostolic and Patristic Witness

Jesus instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper: "This is my body... This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matthew 26:26-28). He commanded, "Do this in remembrance of me" (Luke 22:19). St. Paul reinforces this in 1 Corinthians 11, warning against unworthy reception because it is truly the Body and Blood. John 6's Bread of Life discourse scandalized listeners when Jesus insisted they must eat His flesh and drink His blood for eternal life. Many left Him; the apostles stayed.

The early Church unanimously affirmed the Real Presence. St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD), disciple of John the Apostle, wrote: "They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again." He called it "the medicine of immortality."

St. Justin Martyr (c. 150 AD) explained in his First Apology: "Not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but... the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer... is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus." This was no symbol for the early Christians. It was the living Christ.

St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, and countless others echoed this. The belief was universal until the Reformation. Protestants who claim the early Church was "symbolic" ignore this overwhelming patristic consensus. The Road to Emmaus models exactly what these Fathers experienced: Christ known in the breaking of the bread.

 Protestant Emphasis on the Word: A Historical and Theological Shift

The Reformation brought sola scriptura, elevating the Bible as the sole infallible authority. While Scripture is inspired and vital (2 Timothy 3:16), this approach often sidelines the Eucharist. Many Protestant traditions view Communion as a memorial ordinance or symbolic meal, denying the substantial Real Presence. Lutherans retain a form of presence (consubstantiation or sacramental union), but Reformed, Baptist, and evangelical groups largely see it as figurative.

This creates an imbalance. Protestants flock to dynamic preaching, Bible studies, and personal devotion to the "Word," but often lack the intimate, sacramental encounter Jesus modeled at Emmaus. The irony is stark: the very book they prioritize was not directly mandated by Jesus as a compiled volume. Jesus established the Church, gave the apostles authority to teach and forgive sins (Matthew 16:18-19; John 20:23), and instituted the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist as the "source and summit" of Christian life.

Jesus never said, "Write a book and distribute it." He said, "Teach all nations" (Matthew 28:19) and "Do this" regarding the bread and wine. The New Testament writings emerged organically from the apostolic Church's life, worship, and needs. The canon—the official list of inspired books—was discerned by the Catholic Church over centuries.

 The Catholic Church and the Canon: Pope Damasus and the Council of Rome (382 AD)

The Bible as we know it did not drop from heaven. The early Church used the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament, including deuterocanonical books) and various apostolic letters and Gospels. Disagreements arose over which books were inspired. Pope Damasus I (366-384 AD) convened the Council of Rome in 382 AD, which produced a decree listing the canonical books—identical to the 73-book Catholic canon affirmed later at Trent. This included the deuterocanonicals (Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1-2 Maccabees) that Protestants later removed.

Damasus also commissioned St. Jerome to translate the Scriptures into Latin, producing the Vulgate, the Church's standard for over a millennium. This was no arbitrary decision by "men." It was the Holy Spirit guiding the Church that Christ founded (1 Timothy 3:15 calls the Church the "pillar and bulwark of the truth"). The same apostolic authority that produced the New Testament discerned its canon. Protestants accept the 27 New Testament books on the authority of this Catholic process but reject the Church's role in the full canon and its teaching on the Eucharist.

Critics note debates on the exact historicity of the 382 decree (some link parts to the later Gelasian Decree), but the substance holds: the Catholic Church, under papal leadership, settled the canon. Jesus entrusted this authority to Peter and the apostles, not to a future collection of writings. The Word of God is first and foremost Jesus Himself (John 1:1, 14), then the oral apostolic Tradition, and the written Scriptures interpreted by the Church.

 Why the Eucharist Matters: Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity

Catholic doctrine holds that in the Eucharist, by the power of the Holy Spirit and the words of consecration spoken by the ordained priest, the substance of bread and wine becomes the substance of Christ's Body and Blood while the appearances (accidents) remain. This is transubstantiation, defined at the Fourth Lateran Council and Trent. It is not cannibalism or magic but a sacramental mystery. Christ is truly, really, and substantially present.

This fulfills John 6: "My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him." It unites us to the once-for-all sacrifice of Calvary, making it present. It forgives venial sins, strengthens against temptation, and unites the Church as one Body. The Road to Emmaus shows this presence transforms despair into mission. The disciples, once fleeing, become evangelists.

Protestant alternatives—memorialism, spiritual presence—cannot account for the early Church's reverence, the miracles associated with the Eucharist, or Jesus' plain words. If it were merely symbolic, why the strong language causing disciples to leave? Why Paul's warnings of judgment for unworthy reception (1 Corinthians 11:27-29)? Emmaus proves the point: recognition comes in the breaking, not endless discussion.

 Living the Emmaus Experience Today

Every Catholic Mass replays Emmaus. We bring our burdens. The Liturgy of the Word opens the Scriptures, and our hearts burn. Then, in the Liturgy of the Eucharist, Christ takes, blesses, breaks, and gives Himself. We receive Him—Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. Our eyes are opened by faith. We are sent forth, like the disciples, to proclaim the Resurrection.

This is why the Church urges frequent reception. This is why adoration of the Blessed Sacrament draws souls. Protestants who love Scripture deeply would find their love fulfilled and deepened in the full sacramental life Christ intended. The written Word, compiled by the Church, points to the living Word in the Eucharist.

Critics may accuse Catholics of "works" or ritualism, but the Eucharist is pure gift—Christ's self-donation. It requires faith, preparation, and worthy reception, but it is grace upon grace. Emmaus invites all Christians to return to this table.

 Conclusion: Back to the Table

The Road to Emmaus challenges us. In a world of information overload and spiritual hunger, many wander like the disciples, knowledgeable in Scripture yet unrecognized Christ. He walks with us still, in the Church, in the poor, but supremely in the Blessed Sacrament. Let us not ignore the gift. Let us invite Him to stay: "Stay with us, Lord, for it is nearly evening" (Luke 24:29). In the breaking of the bread, He reveals Himself, and our hearts find rest.

The apostles saw Jesus in the bread. So must we. The Eucharist is not an optional add-on or mere symbol. It is Jesus—true Presence for our true nourishment. The Catholic Church preserves this apostolic faith, discerned the Scriptures under the Holy Spirit's guidance, and invites all to the feast. Come to Emmaus. Come to Mass. Recognize Him there.

 

References:

- Holy Bible (various translations, esp. NABRE, RSV).

- Catechism of the Catholic Church.

- Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans.

- Justin Martyr, First Apology.

- Council of Rome (382) Decree on the Canon.

- Works by Brant Pitre, Scott Hahn, and Catholic World Report articles on Emmaus.

Further reading: The Eucharist by Alexander Schmemann; Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist by Brant Pitre.

Refutation Rick Brennan JR Protestant Apologetic on the Biblical Canon

Refutation of the Presented Protestant Apologetic on the Biblical Canon

The article (https://rickbrennanjr.substack.com/p/the-canon-of-scripture) provided offers a detailed Protestant perspective on the biblical canon, emphasizing a 66-book Bible, the rejection of the deuterocanonical books (often called the Apocrypha by Protestants), a "bottom-up" organic recognition process guided by the Holy Spirit, and the supremacy of sola scriptura. It portrays the early Church as gradually acknowledging an already self-evident canon, with councils merely ratifying what was obvious, and contrasts this with Roman Catholic views on Church authority, Tradition, and the inclusion of seven additional Old Testament books.

This narrative, while internally coherent within a Reformed framework, contains significant historical inaccuracies, selective interpretations, and theological overreach. Below is a structured refutation addressing the core claims, drawing on historical evidence from early Church sources, councils, and scholarly consensus.

 1. The Claim of a Fixed Jewish Canon in the First Century, Excluding the Deuterocanonicals

The text asserts that by the time of Christ, the Jewish canon was closed at 39 books (equivalent to the Protestant Old Testament), fixed around 435 BC after Malachi, and that Jesus and the apostles affirmed only these, never citing the deuterocanonicals as Scripture.

This is historically unsubstantiated. Scholarly consensus holds that the Jewish canon was not definitively fixed until the second century AD or later. There was no single, universally agreed-upon Jewish canon in the first century; different Jewish communities (Palestinian Pharisees, Hellenistic Diaspora Jews, Essenes at Qumran) used varying collections. The Pharisees' tradition, which became dominant rabbinic Judaism post-70 AD, favored a narrower canon, but even this was debated into the second-third centuries (e.g., disputes over Esther, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes).

Evidence:

- Fragments of deuterocanonical books (Tobit in Aramaic/Hebrew, Sirach in Hebrew) were found at Qumran and Masada, indicating acceptance in some Jewish circles.

- The Septuagint (LXX), widely used by Hellenistic Jews and quoted extensively in the New Testament (over 300 times, often diverging from the Hebrew Masoretic Text), included the deuterocanonicals.

- No pre-Christian Jewish source lists a fixed 22/24/39-book canon excluding them. Josephus (late first century) mentions 22 books but does not enumerate them precisely matching the Protestant canon.

- Jesus references the Scriptures broadly (Luke 24:44: Law, Prophets, Psalms) without excluding deuterocanonicals; New Testament allusions (e.g., Hebrews 11:35-36 to 2 Maccabees 7; Romans 1:18-32 to Wisdom 13-14) suggest familiarity.

The idea of a "Council of Jamnia" (c. 90 AD) closing the canon is a 19th-century myth; it was a rabbinic academy discussing disputed books like Ecclesiastes, not issuing a binding canon.

Jesus and the apostles used the LXX, which included these books, reflecting the broader canon of many first-century Jews.

 2. The Process of Canon Formation: "Recognition" vs. Church Authority

The text describes canonization as a "bottom-up" organic recognition of inherently authoritative books, with councils (Hippo 393, Carthage 397) merely confirming what the undivided Church already acknowledged under the Spirit's guidance. It denies that councils "created" or "conferred" authority, contrasting this with alleged Roman Catholic claims.

This minimizes the Church's role. While the canon emerged gradually through usage, disputes persisted, requiring authoritative discernment:

- The Muratorian Fragment (c. 170-200 AD) includes most NT books but excludes Hebrews, James, 1-2 Peter, and 3 John; it accepts the Apocalypse of Peter and Wisdom of Solomon.

- Eusebius (c. 324 AD) categorizes books as accepted, disputed (including Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Revelation), and spurious.

- Athanasius' 39th Festal Letter (367 AD) is the first list matching the 27 NT books exactly, but he places Baruch with Jeremiah and excludes Esther from the canon while listing deuterocanonicals as "readable."

- Regional variations continued; Revelation was disputed in the East longer.

Councils like Hippo and Carthage (influenced by Augustine) explicitly listed and affirmed the canon, including deuterocanonicals, stating these alone should be read as divine Scripture in church. These were local but influential; later councils (Florence 1442, Trent 1546) reaffirmed them ecumenically for Catholics.

The process involved Church discernment, not pure "recognition" of self-evident books. Disputed books (antilegomena) required resolution through ecclesiastical authority guided by the Spirit.

 

3. The Deuterocanonical Books: Early Rejection vs. Acceptance

The text claims Jesus/apostles never cited deuterocanonicals as Scripture, early fathers preferred the Hebrew canon, and Reformers rightly excluded them for lacking apostolic origin, containing errors, and not being quoted by Christ/NT.

Early Christianity predominantly accepted deuterocanonicals:

- Most pre-Nicene codices (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus) include them.

- Fathers like Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, and Augustine quoted them as Scripture.

- Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419) included them in the OT canon.

- Jerome resisted but deferred to Church judgment, including them in the Vulgate.

NT allusions are numerous (e.g., Matt 7:12 to Sirach 31:15; Heb 1:3 to Wisdom 7:26). No direct quotes do not prove rejection; many protocanonical books (e.g., Ruth, Ezra) are not quoted either.

"Errors" claims are subjective; alleged inconsistencies exist in protocanonicals too. Reformers removed them partly because they supported doctrines like purgatory/prayers for the dead (2 Macc 12:38-46), contradicting emerging Protestant theology.

Trent (1546) did not "add" books but reaffirmed longstanding Church usage against Protestant removal.

 4. Authority: Scripture Self-Authenticating vs. Church/Tradition

The text promotes a self-authenticating canon (inner Spirit testimony + divine qualities), rejecting Church magisterium as conferring authority, and critiques Catholic "living tradition" as ongoing revelation eclipsing Scripture sufficiency.

This faces circularity: How do we know which books are self-authenticating without external criteria? Disputed books required Church resolution.

Catholic teaching (Dei Verbum, CCC 80-100): Scripture and Tradition form one deposit of revelation; Magisterium interprets authentically but serves, not rules over, the Word. Public revelation ended with apostles; "living tradition" transmits unchanging truth.

Examples like Mary's Assumption (1950) draw from apostolic deposit, not new revelation.

Protestant self-authentication leads to subjectivity; historical disputes show no unanimous "self-evident" canon without Church guidance.

 5. Modern Implications and "Incompatible Religions"

The text equates liberal denial of Scripture with Catholic Tradition/Magisterium, calling the latter "sola ecclesia" obscuring the gospel.

This is polemical overstatement. Catholicism affirms Scripture's inspiration/sufficiency (for salvation, with Tradition) but not sola scriptura, which lacks biblical warrant and led to interpretive fragmentation.

Both traditions uphold core gospel truths; differences on authority do not make them "incompatible religions."

The presented view idealizes a historically unattested first-century closed canon, downplays Church authority in resolving disputes, and misrepresents Catholic teaching on revelation. The 73-book canon reflects early Christian usage; Protestant removal was a 16th-century innovation driven by doctrinal needs.

Christians should approach these differences charitably, recognizing shared faith in Christ while honestly engaging history.

No one can dispute the role of the Catholic Church in the formation of the Bible.  This is why Protestants can never answer the following questions:

• Where in the Bible's inspired texts can we find the canon of inspired books, and in what order should they be placed?
• Where in the Bible's inspired texts does it say who wrote the Gospels and what Paul wrote?
• Where in the Bible's inspired texts does it refer to the Bible as the "Word of God?"
• Where in the Bible does it call itself the "Bible?"
• Where in the Bible's inspired texts does it say "Sola Scriptura?"
• If the Bible was already compiled before the Council of Carthage, why don't we see direct quotes and citations of the Gospels in New Testament books?
• Who had the authority to decide the Canon of Scripture before the Bible was completed?

It is no wonder why Rick Brennan blocked our Sacerdotus account from posting on his Substack. What is he afraid of?

 Sources

1. Edmon L. Gallagher and John D. Meade, The Biblical Canon Lists from Early Christianity: Texts and Analysis (Oxford University Press, 2017).

2. Bruce M. Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (Clarendon Press, 1987).

3. F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (InterVarsity Press, 1988).

4. J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (HarperOne, 1978).

5. Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd ed., 1997), paragraphs 74-100.

6. Vatican II, Dei Verbum (1965).

7. Lee Martin McDonald, The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority (Hendrickson, 2007).

8. David Brakke (ed.), The Canon Debate (Hendrickson, 2002).

9. Michael J. Kruger, Canon Revisited (Crossway, 2012) – for Protestant perspective and critique.

10. Gary Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger (Grotto Press, 2017) – for Catholic perspective.

11. Josephus, Against Apion 1.37-43.

12. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.25, 6.14.

13. Athanasius, 39th Festal Letter (367 AD).

14. Council of Trent, Session 4 (1546), Decree on Canonical Scriptures.

15. Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), Canon 36/24.

16. Jerome, Prologue to Kings (Vulgate).

17. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine 2.8.

18. Pontifical Biblical Commission, "The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures" (2001).

19. R.T. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church (Eerdmans, 1985).

20. Britannica and Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church entries on "Biblical Canon" and "Jamnia."

Pope Damasus I: The Pope Who Gave Us The Bible

Title: Pope Damasus I: The Pope Who Shaped the Bible

Pope Damasus I, who served as the Bishop of Rome from 366 to 384 AD, played a pivotal role in the development of the Christian Bible as we know it today. His contributions to the canonization of the Bible and his support for the creation of the Vulgate Bible were instrumental in shaping the sacred scriptures of Christianity.

Early Life and Papacy

Born around 305 AD in Rome, Damasus I was elected pope in 366 AD during a time of significant theological and political challenges. His papacy was marked by efforts to combat heresies, promote orthodoxy, and strengthen the authority of the Roman See. Damasus was known for his eloquence, administrative skills, and dedication to the Church.

Council of Rome and the Canon of Scripture

One of Pope Damasus I's most significant contributions was his role in the Council of Rome in 382 AD. This council was convened to address various theological issues and to determine the canon of sacred scripture. Under Damasus' leadership, the council produced a list of books that were considered divinely inspired and authoritative for the Christian faith. This list included the books of the Old and New Testaments that are recognized by the Catholic Church today, 46 in the Old and 27 in the New.

The Council of Rome's decisions were crucial in establishing a standardized canon of scripture, which helped to unify the Christian community and provide a clear foundation for teaching and doctrine. Damasus' efforts in this regard were instrumental in shaping the Bible as a cohesive and authoritative text. He and Pope Siricius called this Canon, the "Word of God."  

Commissioning of the Vulgate Bible

Perhaps the most enduring legacy of Pope Damasus I was his commissioning of St. Jerome to produce a new Latin translation of the Bible. At the time, there were various Latin translations of the scriptures, which led to inconsistencies and confusion. Recognizing the need for a reliable and uniform text, Damasus tasked Jerome with the monumental project of revising the existing Latin translations and producing a new, standardized version.

St. Jerome's work, known as the Vulgate, became the definitive Latin translation of the Bible and remained the standard text for the Catholic Church for over a millennium. The Vulgate was instrumental in making the scriptures accessible to the Latin-speaking world and played a key role in the spread of Christianity throughout Europe.

Combating Heresies and Promoting Orthodoxy

During his papacy, Damasus I was also active in combating various heresies that threatened the unity and orthodoxy of the Church. He spoke out against Apollinarianism, which denied the full humanity of Christ, and Macedonianism, which denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit. By addressing these heresies and promoting orthodox teachings, Damasus helped to solidify the faith and ensure the integrity of Christian doctrine.

Legacy and Veneration

Pope Damasus I's contributions to the Church and the development of the Bible have left an indelible mark on Christian history. He is venerated as a saint in the Catholic Church, with his feast day celebrated on December 11. His efforts to establish a standardized canon of scripture and to commission the Vulgate Bible have had a lasting impact on the Christian faith and the dissemination of the sacred texts.

Conclusion

Pope Damasus I's role in shaping the Bible cannot be overstated. Through his leadership at the Council of Rome and his commissioning of the Vulgate Bible, he provided a foundation for the Christian scriptures that has endured for centuries. His dedication to promoting orthodoxy and combating heresies further strengthened the Church and ensured the preservation of its core teachings. As we reflect on his legacy, we recognize the profound influence he had on the development of the Bible and the Christian faith.

The Bible would not exist had it not been for Pope Damasus I.  This is why it is absurd for Protestants, especially small sects to use the Bible in bad attempts to discredit the Catholic Church, its origin!  

Sources: 

: [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Damasus_I)

: [Britannica](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Damasus-I)

: [My Catholic Life](https://mycatholic.life/saints/saints-of-the-liturgical-year/11-december-saint-damasus-i-pope-optional-memorial/)

Saint Damasus I | Franciscan Media

Pope Saint Damasus I - Saints & Angels - Catholic Online

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Pope St. Damasus I

Pope St. Damasus

The Catholic Church Made the Bible

How the Catholic Church Gave Us the Bible

If you are a Christian who loves reading the Bible, you might wonder how this sacred book came to be. Who decided which books should be included in the Bible? How were they preserved and transmitted throughout history? And what role did the Catholic Church play in this process?

In this blog post, I will try to answer these questions and show you how the Catholic Church gave us the Bible.

The Old Testament

The Old Testament is the collection of books that were written by the ancient Israelites before the coming of Christ. They contain God's revelation to his chosen people, his promises and prophecies, and his laws and wisdom.

The Old Testament was originally written mostly in Hebrew, with some parts in Aramaic. The books were not all written at the same time, but over a period of about 1000 years, from the time of Moses (around 1400 BC) to the time of Malachi (around 400 BC).

The Old Testament was not a fixed canon, but a fluid collection of writings that varied in different Jewish communities. Some books were more widely accepted than others, and some were only used by certain groups, such as the Essenes or the Samaritans.

The most common version of the Old Testament among the Jews was the one used in Palestine, which had 39 books. However, there was another version that was used by the Jews in Egypt and other parts of the world, which had 46 books. This version was translated into Greek around 250 BC and was called the Septuagint.

The Septuagint was not only a translation, but also an expansion of the Hebrew Scriptures. It included seven books that were not in the Palestinian canon: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees. It also had longer versions of Esther and Daniel.

The Septuagint was widely used by the Jews of the Diaspora (those who lived outside Palestine), and also by the early Christians. Many of the quotations from the Old Testament in the New Testament are taken from the Septuagint. For example, when Matthew cites Isaiah's prophecy about the virgin birth of Christ (Matthew 1:23), he uses the Septuagint version, which says "virgin" (parthenos), instead of the Hebrew version, which says "young woman" (almah).

The New Testament

The New Testament is the collection of books that were written by the apostles and their followers after the coming of Christ. They contain God's revelation in Jesus Christ, his life, death and resurrection, his teachings and miracles, and his establishment of his Church.

The New Testament was originally written in Greek, which was the common language of the Roman Empire at that time. The books were not all written at the same time, but over a period of about 50 years, from the time of James (around AD 50) to the time of John (around AD 100).

The New Testament was also not a fixed canon, but a fluid collection of writings that varied in different Christian communities. Some books were more widely accepted than others, and some were disputed or rejected by some groups. For example, some Christians did not accept Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation. On the other hand, some Christians accepted other writings that were not part of the New Testament canon, such as the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, or the Epistle of Barnabas.

The process of forming the New Testament canon was guided by several criteria: apostolicity (the book had to be written by an apostle or a close associate), orthodoxy (the book had to agree with the apostolic teaching), catholicity (the book had to be accepted by most of the churches), and inspiration (the book had to show evidence of being inspired by God).

The Role of the Catholic Church

The Catholic Church played a crucial role in giving us both the Old and New Testaments. The Catholic Church wrote the New Testament. The authors of all the books of the New Testament were either Catholic bishops (such as Peter, James or John), Catholic priests (such as Paul or Mark), or Catholic deacons (such as Luke). They wrote under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and with the authority given to them by Christ.

The Catholic Church also preserved and transmitted both Testaments throughout history. The Catholic Church copied and distributed both Testaments by hand for centuries before printing was invented. The Catholic Church also defended both Testaments from corruption and distortion by heretics and enemies. The Catholic Church also translated both Testaments into different languages to make them accessible to different peoples.

Finally, the Catholic Church decided which books should be included in both Testaments. The Catholic Church finally agreed on which writings should go into the Bible at the Council of Rome in 382 AD during the time of Pope Damasus. Damasus encouraged St. Jerome to translate the Scriptures into Latin since Latin was the common language of all educated people. This translation, called the Vulgate, became the official version of the Bible for the Catholic Church for over 1000 years.

The biblical canon was reaffirmed by the regional councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), and then definitively reaffirmed by the ecumenical Council of Florence in 1442. The Catholic Church accepted the 46 books of the Septuagint as the Old Testament, and the 27 books of the apostolic writings as the New Testament, for a total of 73 books.

Pope Siricius called it "Bible." The word is not in the Bible in reference to itself, only other texts or writings (see: Strong's Greek: 976. βίβλος (biblos) -- (the inner) bark (of a papyrus plant), hence a scroll, spec. a book (biblehub.com)).  Tertullian in 200 AD developed the term "New Testament" while St. Augustine called the Hebrew Scriptures the "Old Testament."  Pope Damasus called it the "Word of God." This term is only used to describe Jesus, not Scripture.  The Scriptures lacked punctuation and structure, so they had to be added along with a chapter system. Cardinal Hugo De Caro and Archbishop Stephen Langton are credited for creating the chapter and verse system used in every Bible. The Catholic Church was already up and running as the New Testament was still being written.  

The Catholic Church gave us the Bible as a gift from God, and as a guide for our faith and life. The Bible is not a book that we can interpret by ourselves (2 Peter 1:20-21), but a book that we need to read with the help of the Church, which is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Timothy 3:15).

So if you are a Christian who is not fully Catholics, you have to thank the Catholic Church for the Bible. It is our book, our creation.  

What do you think? Post your comment below on Disqus.  Be sure to follow the rules so your comment can go through.  

References

The Third Council of Carthage on the Canon of Scripture (bible-researcher.com)

: https://www.catholic365.com/article/3595/did-the-catholic-church-give-us-the-bible.html

: https://cruxnow.com/faith/2015/11/a-quick-history-of-the-catholic-church-and-the-bible

: https://www.ncregister.com/news/how-catholicism-contributed-to-the-king-james-bible

: https://www.catholic.com/qa/who-compiled-the-bible-and-when

https://psalm91.com/who-made-the-bible/#:~:text=Jerome%2C%20aided%20by%20the%20Holy,means%20a%20collection%20of%20books.