I am wondering...

1. What was the name of the first Church council that determined what would be contained in the canon of Scripture? I think it was in the year 300-something? Where can I find a document that states what books were approved?

2. I have heard 2 different stories - that the Deuterocanonicals were first declared as Scripture at this first council, or at the council of Trent. Please tell me when they were first officially confirmed as Scripture. Also, any documentation of this would be helpful.

I found this at EWTN from the Council of Trent:

Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses, namely, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first and second of Esdras, the latter of which is called Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets, namely, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of Machabees, the first and second.

What I would like to know is did the original council to decide the canon in the year 300-something have a similar list that included the deuterocanonicals?

Thanks and God bless,

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), May 07, 2004

Answers

bump

-- (bump@bump.bump), May 07, 2004.

The 73 books of the Bible were finalized for all time at the Council of Carthage in 397 AD, after much of the preliminary work had been accomplished at the council of Hippo in 394 AD. Nothing has been changed since. The Council of Trent reaffirmed exactly what the Council of Carthage had decreed, changing absolutely nothing in the process.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 07, 2004.

Actually, canonically speaking the Council of Carthage had no power to determine the biblical canon for the whole Church. It was a "provincial" not "ecumenical" council and so was only normative for its province (north Africa, excluding Egypt). Other ancient authorities, such as St. Cyril of Alexandria (Egypt), gave lists of books for the O.T. that were different. Because of this, medieval canonists (e.g. the Ordinary Gloss to the Canon Law in 1210), distinguished between what we now call the pro-canonical (Hebrew) books of the O.T. and the deutero-canonical (extent only in Greek) books of the O.T. In fact, however, this made no theological difference since even though Jerome favored the "short" canon of the O.T. in his later life, all orthodox theologians from the 100s on quoted the "deutero-canonical" books as if they were just as authoritative as the "proto-canonical" books. This was the voice of tradition going back to the time of the Paul and the Gospel writers who generally quote the O.T. from the Greek (and thus longer) text. Only with the Council of Trent did an Ecumenical Council define the extent of the canon for the whole Church officially. Luther, who decided to cut the deutero-canonicals from his bible (mostly because they included prayers for the dead), also knew that the N.T. canon was not "official." So he wanted to cut books like James and Jude from that. His followers finally convinced him to "observe tradition" and leave them in. Eastern Orthodox still debate over what should be in the O.T.--some follow Luther, some the Catholic Church, others add books that even the Catholics don't (e.g. 3 and 4 Maccabees 2 Ezra). Older Protestants -- as opposed to their American offspring -- knew that the problem was complicated: The King James Bible translators included the Deutero-canonicals in an appendix and ordered that it always be included with printings of the Bible. Only in the 1800s did the distributers of the KJB omit (illegally) this appendix. They did so to save weight in shipping. Interesting what matters to some people in what belongs in the Bible.

-- Catholic Observer (nospam@notmail.com), May 08, 2004.

Interesting what matters to some people in what belongs in the Bible

I agree.

The Magisterium's Infallibility as teaching authority was doctrine long before defined at Vatican. I would say it started at Pentecost and started with Peter. However, I think it's possible to say it started with God. Still, there are many precedents going back to the first ecumenical councils and local councils, indeed, the church fathers. It rules out private interpretation of scripture as a way to dissent. But what it really rules out is doctrinal dissention. This is what Martin Luther did. He followed in a long line of heretics. That's the bottom line at Trent.

her·e·sy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hr-s) n. pl. her·e·sies

a. An opinion or a doctrine at variance with established religious beliefs, especially dissension from or denial of Roman Catholic dogma by a professed believer or baptized church member. b. Adherence to such dissenting opinion or doctrine.

Heretics have been around long and forever. One can say the First Heresy was the First Fall. Caution to all: be careful you don't gamble with other people's money. Curiously or not, there has been a reversion back to all the heresies of the early church. Still, wise men will play tricks on the mind. And yet again, Peter spoke first and led at Pentecost. He was the one to call for Judas' replacement and the Spirit came down on him and the rest who heeded his call.

One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church - we are called each by name. If I'm saying anything different from what the Church teaches, please let me know.

God Bless!

-- Vincent (love@noemail.net), May 08, 2004.

Well said, Vincent!

-- Andy S ("aszmere@earthlink.net"), May 08, 2004.

Since the subject of deuterocanonicals has come up again, I'm going to ask this question again.

I read an interesting (Catholic) tract concerning the difference in the number of old testament books between the Catholic and Protestant bibles. It explained that the Palestinian Jewish old testament, once finalized in the first centuries A.D., rejected some of the Greek books that were (by then) in use by the Catholic Church. Were the deuterocanonicals omitted from the finalized Palestinian Jewish canon because of some conflict with Christianity? Does "Daniel" have more than one author? It seems odd to me that only parts of it were ommited from the Jewish and protestant canons.

-- mark advent (adventm5477@earthlink.net), May 08, 2004.

Does the NT ever quote or refer to ideas found in the Deuterocanonicals? If so, where?

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), May 09, 2004.

Emily, yes.

Hebrews 11:35 refers back to 2 Mac 7:9. Note that the author of Herbrews is making a great list of acts of faith. Someone could counter argue that he was pointing back to the historical event recorded in 2 Mac, and not actually giving the text any weight. Every other act of faith in the list comes straight from scripture, so I find that argumetn weak.

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

Dear Dan,

Your comment about the other acts of faith in Hebrews 11:29-39 coming straight from scripture is not quite accurate. Granted, the writer could be pointing to 2nd Maccabees 7:9, he also could be citing I Kings 17:17ff and 2 Kings 4:8ff regarding the resurrection of children. While the stoning that he refers to (Hebrews 11:37) could be about Zechariah (2 Chronicles 24:20-22), he could also be referring to Jewish (non-biblical) legend of Jeremiah’s stoning in Egypt and Isaiah being sawn in two by Manasseh.

In short, the writer was not exclusive in his sources for citations of faithfulness nor was he attempting to authorize his sources. Scripture, history, and legend were used to make his point.

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), May 10, 2004.

Yup, my sloppy.

Apologies for any inaccuracies I presented.

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

If Heb 11:35 does not refer back to 2Mac 7:9, what about verses 36- 38. How does Heb 11 not relate back to Mac 7 or the whole of Maccabees? Was 2 Mac7:9 refering to, Rom 11:2, 1 Cor 6:14. How about Mt 27:52-53. That one eludes. As if that's not enough Paul seems to be saying something in 1 Cor 6:13. Maybe he was refering to scripture, legends, or history or some combination thereof but why does the quote come so far ahead of the explanation in 1 Cor 10:23- 33?

The wisdom of old is a sturdy tree with deep roots. Why look far, the answer stares.

One more conjecture: when the saints of Mt 27:52-53 went around Jerusalem, the mother and her sons might have been saying,"Yep, we told you so."

Mark: Interesting tidbit.

Andy, I am glad and hope we're speaking in the same tongue. I am still slightly troubled by what I have been writing. There's a real danger in private interpreation of sacred scripture. I will try and heed my own caution.

God Bless,

-- Vincent (love@noemail.net), May 10, 2004.

Hi Vincent,

Don't be troubled. From my little bit of experience here, if you misspoke, someone usually catches it and gently corrects. I've learned a lot by posting here and being corrected. Of course, there are some things that aren't so cut and dry and are a matter of personal opinion...

IMHO, this is a great place to learn more about our Catholic faith. Sometimes we have to test our opinions and ideas in a public forum to see if:

1. We really understand what we're saying and

2. what we understand is the truth.

This is a good place to do both.

-- Andy S ("aszmere@earthlink.net"), May 11, 2004.

Amen, Andy. Let me make some things a little clearer. Among what I have been looking at was the Didache, Sirach 28 and where both of those point to: Mt 6:9-15. Of special significance is Mt 6:12 but the rest is still very important to me.

Recently, there's been a lot of chitter-chatter in my family about the Homo Homini Award. It's significance can be brought out in due time if such a time arrives. Interestingly, the phrase occurs only twice in the Latin Vulgate(correct me if I'm wrong) which also IMHO translates accurately from the Septuagint version. I got a little spooked; Sirach truly is an inspired work and the Didache is nothing to pass over lightly. After some thought, I note the good sign even if by chance. Certain things I anticipated were there, others were not, still others hadn't crossed my mind. I found out that I did make a great discovery, but not on my own and only to myself. It feels so good to be a little child again.

I am now glad to have written what I had. Mirabile dictu! no??? Call me an idiot. I'll be glad to take my knocks. Thanks Andy, but also to everyone else: Emily, Cath Obs, Mark, Dan, Rod, EC, Jacob, even Elpidio, and many others.

God Bless!

-- Vincent (love@noemail.net), May 12, 2004.

Vincent,

Thanks for your post. I never realized the connections before. Thanks for pointing out Sirach 28 (especially verse 2) and it's relation to Mt 6:12. I looked at the Didache and it too has great words to live by. With all the violence and evil that seems to be going on in the world lately, these are important words to live by. Just goes to show that it's not necessarily an easy thing to follow Christ. Forgiving those who do harm to us is one of the hardest things for me personally.

I hadn't heard of the Homo Homini Award before. It seems like a good one. It should get more press.

Isn't it awesome how the truth all fits together?

-- Andy S ("aszmere@earthlink.net"), May 13, 2004.

Hi Emily,

Here's a link to quotes of the Fathers from the deuteros.

http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/deutero.htm

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), May 13, 2004.

Here's the actual minutes of the Meeting at Carthage (this was taken from the website of Protestant Bruce Metzger

Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397).

The Third Council of Carthage was not a general council but a regional council of African bishops, much under the influence of Augustine. The English text below is from Bruce Metzger. Canon 24. Besides the canonical Scriptures (listed below), nothing shall be read in church under the name of divine Scriptures. Moreover, the canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the four books of the Kings,(a) the two books of Chronicles, Job, the Psalms of David, five books of Solomon,(b) the book of the Twelve [minor] Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, the two books of Ezra,(c) and the two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament: the Gospels, four books; the Acts of the Apostles, one book; the epistles of the apostle Paul, thirteen; of the same to the Hebrews, one epistle; of Peter, two; of John the apostle, three; of James, one; of Jude, one; the Revelation of John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the Church across the sea shall be consulted. On the anniversaries of martyrs, their acts shall also be read.

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), May 13, 2004.

Here's a link to James Akins' "Deuterocanical References in the N.T."

http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/deutero3.htm

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), May 13, 2004.