Defending the Faith: More Dialogue

A final point about dialogue: it can help foster what has been called "ecumenical apologetics." Ecumenical apologetics is not apologetics engaged in by ecumenists; it is a way of engaging in Catholic apologetics. It begins with the elements of truth in non-Catholic religions and tries to show that the full, integral expression of those truths is found in Catholicism ... Ecumenical apologetics does not start out with "You're wrong, and let me show you where you went astray." It begins with something like this: "What do we agree about? Let's look at that. Then you can tell me where you think the Catholic Church is off the mark or where you have problems with it. Then I'll tell you why I think the Church is correct and where it seems to me you may be missing something."

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

Defending the Faith: Dialogue

Dialogue is the means by which a truth living in one mind becomes a truth living in another. It involves listening as well as speaking, receiving, and giving. The apologist who dialogues with a non-Catholic should listen to what the non-Catholic's faith means to him, as well as present arguments for Catholic beliefs. He should take the time to hear what his non-Catholic discussion partner says, to understand the non-Catholic's worldview and the full force of his objections before responding to them. The key to dialogue is for both participants to understand one another, where they agree, where they disagree, and why.

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics

Defending the Faith: Trying to "Win"

Few of us enjoy being bested in argument. Sometimes the experience can push a person further from the truth. As Archbishop Fulton Sheen used to say, "Win an argument, lose a soul." In fact, it is much better to let someone discover the truth for himself than to try to browbeat him into submission to your case for the truth.

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

Defending the Faith: Instructing the Ignorant

Another source of confusion about allies and enemies is a misunderstanding of the Church's teaching on invincible ignorance and non-Catholics. Some apologists ... think that once Catholicism has been explained to the intelligent Protestant, for instance, he can no longer be invincibly ignorant of it. If he remains a Protestant, he cannot be saved. His remaining a Protestant in such a situation only proves to some apologists that he is not a good man. He is, they think, an enemy, not an ally, of truth.

We should be clear: those who hold this view do not deny that non-Catholics can be saved. They simply think that reasonable non-Catholics who have heard the case for the Catholic Church can no longer be invincibly ignorant. If such a non-Catholic fails to convert, it must be because he is, in his heart of hearts, stubbornly opposing the truth, and, therefore, stubbornly opposing God himself...

The trouble with this scenario is that it does not accurately represent Catholic teaching about ignorance and culpability. Invincible ignorance does not mean one is merely ignorant, through no fault of his own, of what the Catholic Church teaches; it means one is ignorant of its truth -- of the fact that it is true -- through no fault of his own ... after all is said and done, after the Catholic apologist has framed the best arguments he can and after the Protestant has investigated Catholicism honestly and to the best of his ability, the Protestant may still (erroneously and mysteriously, perhaps) think that Catholicism is false or less than completely true. If the Protestant were to become Catholic under those circumstances, he would be embracing what he thinks is untrue. And that would amount to sin, not salvation for him.

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

Again we see the great tribute paid to conscience. If someone is following theirs truly even if they don't agree with you, then they have the right to be wrong (as, indeed, we should have in their eyes).

Defending the Faith: Ecumenism

Some apologists have trouble here because when it comes to dialogue with non-Catholic Christians, they have only half of the equation. These apologists rightly want to present Catholic truth as the fullness of the Christian faith, but they do not necessarily know how to discuss their faith with non-Catholic Christians without entering into full-blown apologetical arguments. They may be great when it comes to arguments, but they seem to be lost when it comes to ecumenism. Among other things, ecumenism means stressing (and valuing) what we Christians have in common, as well as discussing our differences. Both elements are needed if we are to attain the full unity Christ wills for his followers. And both elements have a role to play in the Church's mission...

According to Vatican II's Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, Catholics must make "every effort to eliminate words, judgments, and actions which do not correspond to the condition of separated brethren with truth and fairness and so make mutual relations between them more difficult." Yet how often do we hear Catholic apologists mischaracterize Protestant theology or fail to distinguish among the various Protestant positions on certain subjects? Often, the underlying attitude is this: since the Catholic Church is ultimately right and Protestantism of whatever stripe is ultimately wrong, what does it matter if the Catholic apologist confuses Reformed doctrine with Methodism, or Baptist beliefs with Presbyterianism? Who can keep straight all the varieties of Protestantism anyway? But difficult or not, correctly representing non-Catholic beliefs is part of the Church's ecumenical teaching.

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

I honestly cannot think of a way to insult someone more than to say, "Oh whatever. You Protestants are all alike anyway. Because you're wrong!" Gee whiz. Way to be charitable! Of course, it would be so very nice to say that I have never encountered that lack of understanding (which I prefer to think of as charity) from Protestants. Sadly I can't. How can you properly discuss anything with someone unless you understand their point of view also? Or are at least willing to let them explain it to you?

Defending the Faith and Contentiousness, IV

Previously on Happy Catholic ... part I.

You may ask, "What do you do when your opponent utters nonsense against Christ or the Church?" It is easier to say what you should not do. The general rule the Catholic Evidence Guild followed was never to make a joke at the expense of someone who offers a question or comment, even a hostile or foolish one. The best advice in that regard I ever personally received came from Karl Keating, who said, "Let your opponent's foolishness speak for itself. Your job is to present the truth as winsomely as possible." After all, what do you really accomplish in a battle of wits with a food. If you belittle or make jokes about him, it probably will reflect badly on your and your message...

... When Catholic apologists become contentious, their good sense sometimes disappears and too often with it, any consideration the non-Catholic might have given to the faith. Here the apologist would do well to remember 1 Peter 3:15 and 16. "Always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you," Peter writes, adding, perhaps with the contentious apologist in mind, "yet do it with gentleness and reverence; and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame."

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

Defending the Faith and Contentiousness, III

Previously on Happy Catholic ... part I.

The core of Catholicism is an affirmation, not a denial. It is the Triune God and God's self-donating love and mercy toward us. It is communion with the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit. That, ultimately, is what being a Catholic is all about. We Catholics should defend the Church, because we believe that the Catholic Church is the divinely established sacrament of communion with the Father, through the Son, in the Spirit. But we should not be defensive. We must earnestly contend for the faith (Jude 3) without being contentious (cf. Titus 3:9, 1 Pet. 3:15). ...

Defending the faith is not supposed to be about us but about God and his truth. We should not defend Catholicism because our Church is being attacked; that is the attitude of the nationalist or sectarian. Still less should we be defensive because our personal beliefs are challenged -- as if the Catholic faith were merely a matter of our private philosophy of life or personal theology. No, we should defend the Church because we love God and the Church belongs to him, and because we love our neighbors, and the Church -- on the Catholic view -- is the God-given means of bringing people into full communion with Christ, the only Savior. If we truly belief that, then charity compels us to share the truth of the Catholic faith with others.

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

To be continued ...

Defending the Faith and Contentiousness, II

Previously on Happy Catholic ... part I.

Some religious differences entail real contradictions, on minor or major points. Muslims say Jesus was merely a prophet, inferior to Muhammad. In other words, they claim that Jesus is not God. Christians say he was -- and is -- God incarnate. Muslims and Christians cannot both be right about this, nor is this merely a difference of terminology or emphasis. These beliefs about Jesus cannot both be true: either Jesus is or is not God.

Thus, we can see that to treat all religious differences the same is a grave mistake. The apologist who does so risks unnecessarily alienating people from the Catholic faith by making more of a difference than is necessary or glossing over a difference that is crucial.

But even when he does not treat all differences the same, the contentious apologist can still fixate on them. Instead of understanding Catholicism in terms of the intrinsic structure of Catholic truth, he always places distinctive Catholic tenets at the very top of the "hierarchy of truths." He approaches the faith mainly in terms of what Catholics are against, instead of what we are for. In this way, the contentious Catholic apologist really becomes the anti-Protestant, anti-Orthodox, or anti-non-Christian apologist. As Christopher Derrick points out in his superb apologetical book That Strange Divine Sea, being Catholic means more than screaming, "The Protestants are wrong!" The Catholic faith has positive as well as negative aspects. But contentiousness tends to obscure that fact.

How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

I can definitively say that this is something to be desired that all Christians remember. When I'm not at St. Blog's I hang with a little "gang" of ecumenical Christians ... a few Catholics, a few Protestants. I have always been amazed and delighted at how careful and understanding they are to understand each other and to look at the big picture rather than stabbing each other over variations in understandings of Christianity.

This has led me to try to educate myself better over what various Protestant denominations believe so that I may put their comments in context. It is a slow and imperfect process but already has been very valuable in allowing me to stay in charity with these pals.

To be sure, there are those not of this "gang" who will come into some of those blogs and, under the guise of educating their more ignorant brethren, show such an extreme lack of Christian charity and desire to understand that I have been truly shocked.

This contentiousness has been a good example to me to strive for more charity myself and to remember St. Peter's wise words:

Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence...

1 Peter, 3:15-16

Also, whether for better or worse, it has led me to decide to occasionally put up "educational" posts to explain what Catholics believe and why in an effort to foster ecumenism among those of my nonCatholic friends who may drop by.

To be continued ... both the series of excerpts and the "ecumenical, educational" comments ...

Make Disciples of All Nations, Finis

To read from the beginning ... Part I.

Fifth, "Go make disciples of all nations" means all nations -- the whole world and all its peoples. Jesus is not just "an" answer for some people. Or "the" answer for Western culture. He is not just a teacher like Buddha, or a prophet like Mohammed. He is the Son of God. And what that means is this: Jesus is the answer for every person, in every time, in every nation. There is no other God, and no other Savior. Jesus Christ alone is Lord, and the Catholic Church is the Church he founded. If anyone is saved, he is saved only through Jesus Christ and his Church, whether he knows the name of Jesus or not.

Ecumenical and interreligious dialogues are enormously valuable things. They form us in humility; they deepen our understanding of God; and they teach us respect for our brothers and sisters who don't share our faith but who sometimes radiate Christ's love far better than we do. And yet even our sinfulness does not exempt us from preaching and defending the truth. If we really believe the Catholic faith is the right path to God, then we need to share it joyfully, firmly, with all people and in all seasons. We need to defend it with passion, courage -- and also with charity.

The bottom line is this: Our mission is to advance God's work of redeeming and sanctifying the world. Our mission is to bring all people to salvation in Jesus Christ. That is our mission in community as the Catholic Church and individually as Catholic believers. It's a task of both truth-telling and of love.

Archbishop Charles Chaput
from the introduction to
How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

Make Disciples of All Nations, Part IV

To read from the beginning ... Part I.

Fourth, Jesus does not ask the impossible. If he tells us to teach all nations, it is because it can be done. Nothing is impossible with God. When Paul began his work, conversion of the Roman world seemed impossible. But it happened. When Mother Teresa began her work in Calcutta, no one had any idea she would touch people of all nations with her example of Christ's love. But it happened. Do not worry about the odds. They do not concern us. Never be afraid to speak up for the truth. God will do the rest.

Archbishop Charles Chaput
from the introduction to
How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

To be continued ...

Make Disciples of All Nations, Part III

To read from the beginning ... Part I.

Third, if Jesus speaks to each of us personally, it is because each of us personally makes a difference. God did not create us by accident. He made us to help him sanctify this world, and to share his joy in the next. The biggest lie of our century is that mass culture is so big and so complicated that an individual cannot make a difference.

This is false. This is the Enemy's propaganda, and we should never believe it. We are not powerless. Twelve uneducated Jews turned the Roman world on its head. One Francis Xavier brought tens of thousands of souls to Jesus Christ in the Far East. One Peter Canisius brought tens of thousands of fallen-away Catholics back to the Church.

If Christians were powerless, the world would not feel the need to turn them into martyrs. The gospel has the power to shake the foundations of the world. It has done so many times. It continues to do so today. But it cannot do anything, unless it is lived and preached, taught, explained, and defended. This is why the simplest Christian is the truest and most effective revolutionary. The Christian changes the world by changing one heart at a time.

Archbishop Charles Chaput
from the introduction to
How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

To be continued ...

Make Disciples of All Nations, Part II

To read from the beginning ... Part I.

Second, Jesus is not talking to somebody else. He is talking to you and me. "Go and make disciples of all nations" could not be more personal. Jesus wants you. The work of evangelizing -- and its sibling, apologetics -- is not just a job for "professionals." We are the professionals by virtue of our baptism. If the responsibilities of your life prevent you from going to china or Africa, then witness to and defend your faith where you are -- to your neighbors, you coworkers, your friends. Find ways to talk about your faith with the people you know. Work to conform your life to the things you say you believe. Make your actions support your words, and your words, your actions.

Archbishop Charles Chaput
from the introduction to
How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

To be continued ...

Make Disciples of All Nations, Part I

Go therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age (Matt. 28:18-20).

Simple, direct, no-nonsense. These words of Jesus are the greatest mission statement ever written. But in hearing this Scripture so many times in daily life, we can easily become dull to its power. So let's examine it.

First, it is not a suggestion or a request. It is a command. If we say we believe in Jesus Christ, we must preach the gospel. We must teach the faith, and we must also explain and defend it. There is no Option B. Jesus does not need our polite approval. He does not want our support from the sidelines. He wants us -- our love, our zeal, our whole being -- because through us he completes the work of salvation, which has never been more urgent for the world than right now.

Archbishop Charles Chaput
from the introduction to
How Not to Share Your Faith:
The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics
by Mark Brumley

To be continued ...

Why Do We Need Apologetics?

This weekend I was listening to a podcast where the speaker said that she wasn't a fan of C.S. Lewis' nonfiction writing because she didn't think apologetics were necessary.

"I am against the idea of Christian apologetics anyway because if Christ is true then why do you have to explain him?"

For those who haven't come across this term before, apologetics quite simply is a systematic defense of something.

Now, some of this can be explained by the fact that this person is a young woman who perhaps has not come across some of the obstacles that the rest of us have encountered in our search for Truth. Perhaps, as happens with many of us, she has encountered apologetics as an excuse to bludgeon the other person with your own beliefs, although her comment doesn't indicate that.

However, I think this is a common enough objection that I thought I'd just post a couple of my thoughts on it. First of all, just because something is true doesn't mean that we don't need someone to explain it. Mathematics, physics, and foreign languages are all true, but they are much easier to understand and apply when we are helped along by a good instructor.

We have a sterling example given to us in the Acts of the Apostles.

Then the angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, "Get up and head south on the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza, the desert route."

So he got up and set out. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, that is, the queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury, who had come to Jerusalem to worship, and was returning home. Seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah.

The Spirit said to Philip, "Go and join up with that chariot."

Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and said, "Do you understand what you are reading?"

He replied, "How can I, unless someone instructs me?" So he invited Philip to get in and sit with him.

This was the scripture passage he was reading: "Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and as a lamb before its shearer is silent, so he opened not his mouth.

In (his) humiliation justice was denied him. Who will tell of his posterity? For his life is taken from the earth."

Then the eunuch said to Philip in reply, "I beg you, about whom is the prophet saying this? About himself, or about someone else?"

Then Philip opened his mouth and, beginning with this scripture passage, he proclaimed Jesus to him.

As they traveled along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, "Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?"

Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and he baptized him.

When they came out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away, and the eunuch saw him no more, but continued on his way rejoicing.

Acts 8:27-39, New American Bible

That is a case which might not strictly fit in with apologetics as a defense but is definitely consistent with explaining the faith, which would be the ultimate point of a defense. Certainly, that is more the way that I see C.S. Lewis' books about Christianity. I realize they probably were written more with a point than the one I see, but as Lewis himself was brought to believe in Jesus as Truth thanks to his friends' spirited defense of their faith, then one can see why he would want to pass on the favor. I tend to see his books as springing from much the same point as this blog ... being made so joyful by that Truth that one wishes to share it with as many people as possible.

My own personal experience, as any regular readers will know, is that my siblings and I knew about Christianity and Jesus only as it was presented through secular culture, as we were raised by atheists. Our main exposure to faith came through Ben Hur, The Ten Commandments, and such movies shown at Easter on television. Had not we been exposed to more indepth explanations of Christianity on some level then we would have been left believing the misconceptions and outright lies that secular culture tells as truth.

As I am discovering, my father is probably not actually an atheist as much as he is a hater of Christians and disbeliever in Jesus Christ. That was made abundantly clear during a conversation I had with him recently. I had to practice apologetics in defending the idea of a personal God of love, especially as made manifest to us in the person of Jesus Christ, when he told me that it was supremely arrogant of people to think that the God who created the universe thought of us as anything more than ants. (I have to say that taking on Happy Catholic using The History Channel as your defense is not very wise ... though I was as loving about it as I could be, it still came down to having to talk about a "personal relationship with God." If you think that wasn't hard, well, think again.) This is simply one of many possible scenarios where one can see that a reasoned, and non-hostile, defense of one's faith can be quite necessary simply to give the Truth a chance to shine upon others.

My own policy is to wait until someone comes to me with a question unless I find that there is a misconception being passed along, usually innocently as was the case when a mention of Catholics "worshiping" saints came up during CraftLit's coverage of Frankenstein. (You find chances to enlighten in the oddest places sometimes!) Much of the time, as with Heather, the person is happy to receive the explanations.

The other use I can make of Lewis' books and one of which I hope this young woman will avail herself later in life when needed, is that his writing turns the mirror upon us when we read it. Every time I read one of his books I see another truth about something I should be considering in my own life of faith. He is supremely insightful in a very simple way that is not condescending.

Something that we all should remember when defending the faith is to do so in a spirit of charity and not to try to win. We personally can do nothing to move men's hearts if they will not let us and, ultimately, it is not us at all anyway. The increase is God's alone though we may be his instruments.

A book that I would highly recommend about apologetics is How Not to Share Your Faith: The Seven Deadly Sins of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization. I thought I had posted a review, but actually see that I had a series of excerpts. You may read those here:

• Make Disciples of All Nations: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Finis
  


• Faith and Contentiousness: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV


• Defending the Faith: Ecumenism


• Defending the Faith: Instructing the Ignorant


• Defending the Faith: Friendly Fire


• Defending the Faith: Trying to Win


• Defending the Faith: Dialogue, More Dialogue

Best of 2022 — Books

My top 10 picks from the over 120 books I read last year.

You may find old books here but if they're on this list, then they were new to me! In no particular order.

Note: I've been doing this since 2008 — check the label cloud in the sidebar for "Best of" to see other lists.

2022 BEST BOOKS

Damon Runyon Favorites

by Damon Runyon

This is perfect light-hearted reading along the lines of P.G. Wodehouse or O'Henry. These short stories are set on Broadway,  featuring gangsters, gamblers, guys and dolls who use a colorful vernacular like no other.

(Full review here.)

The End of the Affair

by Graham Greene

Both the prose and the novel itself are simply magnificent. Read it despite the topic. There is much more there than meets the eye so don't judge this book by its cover — or title.

(My review here.)

The Man Who Died Twice
The Bullet That Missed

(Books 2 and 3 of the Thursday Murder Club series)
by Martha Wells

The Thursday Murder Club is a group of four retirees who have become friends through weekly meetings to try to solve cold cases. When a real murder is dropped into their laps (so to speak) they quickly warm to the task of solving a real case. The first one, which I read in 2021, was funny, smart, and entertaining. The second and third books matched the first. This series is just a lot of fun.

Travels on My Elephant

by Mark Shand

Started on a whim and pursued with a passion, modern-day adventurer Mark Shand's remarkable journey through India on the back of a 30-year-old elephant named Tara covered 800 miles, from the Bay of Bengal to the world's largest elephant bazaar at Sonepur on the Ganges.

 

This delightful book gives a good behind-the-scenes look at what elephants are like, what it is like living among Indians, and some of the different cultures are that make up this vast and diverse nation.

(My full review.)

Unexpected Tales form A to Z

by Robert Wenson

These light, funny stories are very appealing and not just for children. They are just a few pages long, featuring quick-witted children who must overcome unlikely, whimsical predicaments, often with equally unlikely solutions. The titles give you a sense of the range but not of the author's comic imagination: Alexandra and the Argumentative Alligator, Hendrik and the Horrible Hollyhocks, Neville and the Negligent Neanderthal, and Yolanda and the Yak Yoghurt.

(My full review.)

The Medieval Mind of C.S. Lewis

by Jason M. Baxter

I am interested in the medieval mindset and this book does a great job of showing how different it was, and also how logical which is not something the modern reader expects. Baxter is equally masterful at laying out the argument for how  Lewis's work is imbued with medieval concepts and acting as a bridge between that time and our own.

(My full review.)

A Beginner's Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy

by Jason M. Baxter

What makes A Beginner's Guide shine is the way Baxter bridges the gap between our different ways of thinking. He explains the theology, the poetry, the context (both historical and literary), and makes Dante more accessible than any other guide I've read — and I've read a lot of very good ones. I really appreciated the way that he kept connecting different parts of the poem to each other for contrasting so that we could get the deeper message as well as appreciate Dante's artistry.

(My full review.)

A Retreat for Lay People

by Ronald Knox

I now can see why C.S. Lewis called Ronald Knox the wittiest man in Europe. At times I kept forgetting I wasn't reading Chesterton but was reading a collection of Monsignor Knox's talks he'd given on many retreats for us regular folk - a.k.a. lay people. These are really wonderful because Knox seemingly effortlessly combines practical advice, inspirational thoughts, and unexpected ways to think about God and our relationship with him.

(My full review.)  

Barchester Towers

by Anthony Trollope

No wonder this is one of Trollope's best loved books. It is a lot of fun and perfect light reading. It makes me think of Thackeray's Vanity Fair although this book is gentler than that but it has the same vibe for me. He carefully builds a complicated tangle of characters who come clashing against each other quite naturally as each works toward a single-minded goal.

(My full review here.)

Praying the Rosary Like Never Before

 by Edward Sri

This is an amazingly thorough book on the rosary which includes so much for meditation. The second half of the book, focusing on the mysteries, was simply amazing. I especially loved the way that Sri didn't focus on just one moment for each mystery but would look at it from many angles. For example, in the Presentation we are shown how Luke is pointing us toward the story of Samuel, how Simeon is responding to the Holy Spirit, and how Simeon's phrasing has special prophetic resonance.

(Read my full review here.)

Meditations onVatican Art: Angels

 by Mark Haydu

These are coffee table sized books with gorgeous reproductions of paintings and lovely page design. They contains the scripture which is being considered along with the painting, insightful commentary and good reflections. They are wonderfully inspirational daily reading and meditating on what the artists were conveying was fascinating.

(My full review here.)

 

The Feast

 by Margaret Kennedy

Midsummer 1947. Pendizack Manor Hotel is buried in the rubble of a collapsed cliff. Seven guests have perished, but what brought this strange assembly together for a moonlit feast before this Act of God -- or Man? Over the week before the landslide, we meet the hotel guests in all their eccentric glory: and as friendships form and romances blossom, sins are revealed, and the cracks widen.

There was equal tension as some characters changed in ways that allowed for growth and redemption of the trajectories their lives had been on. This book is not just about the mystery of who will live and who will die. It is also about spiritual realities by which these people live their lives.

(My full review here.)

 

The Case of the Man Who Died Laughing
The Case of the Deadly Butter Chicken
The Case of the Love Commandos
The Case of the Reincarnated Client

(Books 2-5 of the Vish Puri detective series)
by Tarquin Hall

Vish Puri, Most Private Investigator, does what is needful to solve his cases. They usually involve investigating prospective brides and grooms for arranged marriages, but there are also big, serious cases. The serious cases often highlight a big problem in Indian culture or society. The first book in the series is The Case of the Missing Servant (reviewed here) which I read long ago.

Puri is a judiciously quirky Indian detective (meaning realistic) and his operatives are highlighted, as well as his Mummy who sets out to solve a mystery that her son does not take seriously. These books all get my thumbs up as serious, interesting mysteries which also are enjoyable "cozy" sorts of mysteries, like a trip to India.