Council of Carthage -- Canons of Scripture

  • Thread starter Thread starter RomanCatholic66
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RomanCatholic66

Guest
Is there any quote or reference to after Carthage that a Pope or an ecumenical council confirmed the canons of the bible at Carthage before The Council of Trent? :confused:

I need specific quotes… (Debating a Lutheran)
 
RomanCatholic66 said:
Is there any quote or reference to after Carthage that a Pope or an ecumenical council confirmed the canons of the bible at Carthage before The Council of Trent? :confused:

I need specific quotes… (Debating a Lutheran)
Click to expand...
There was a 15th century council that listed them but did not make them binding. If there was another council or papal decree, Trent would not have had to do so.

Another point to keep in mind is that the canon established by Trent was not even a majority opinion. A lot of the bishops decided not to vote at all. Only 44% of the bishops voted in favor of the canon.
 
garysibio said:
There was a 15th century council that listed them but did not make them binding. If there was another council or papal decree, Trent would not have had to do so.

Another point to keep in mind is that the canon established by Trent was not even a majority opinion. A lot of the bishops decided not to vote at all. Only 44% of the bishops voted in favor of the canon.
Click to expand...
Your absolutley right… But I already found the answer and that is in the official “Decretal Gelasius”…or Decree of Gelasius in only the 5th century… Just after Carthage he must have summoned a “Council of Rome”…local council like Carthage was and he confirmed every single book of the OLD and NEW Testaments same as the Council of Carthage!!! YAY!!!

My friend is now absorbing it. I don’t think he knows exactly what to say accept …Oooops… YA!

Anyway, for anyone who wants to now about this “DECREE” that validates all the OT and NT books ratified by Carthage, I will put them below.

HERE BEGINS THE COUNCIL OF ROME UNDER POPE DAMASUS “ON EXPLAINING THE FAITH” (Which include 5 topics one among them being the Books of The bible which include all the books that Prots consider Deutero…

tertullian.org/decretum_eng.htm

bible-researcher.com/gelasius.html
 
RomanCatholic66 said:
Is there any quote or reference to after Carthage that a Pope or an ecumenical council confirmed the canons of the bible at Carthage before The Council of Trent? :confused:

I need specific quotes… (Debating a Lutheran)
Click to expand...
There may have another one… Ad 403 or so…look for Pope Boniface, i think.

but keep in mind…after carthage, the canon had been pretty much settled.
 
pablope said:
There may have another one… Ad 403 or so…look for Pope Boniface, i think.

but keep in mind…after carthage, the canon had been pretty much settled.
Click to expand...
I know it was settled…but my friend wanted an explicit confirmation of this by a Pope or Council…Well, he got both… 😉

And I could not find any quotes in 403…so unless you have some to share…🤷
 
garysibio said:
There was a 15th century council that listed them but did not make them binding. If there was another council or papal decree, Trent would not have had to do so.

Another point to keep in mind is that the canon established by Trent was not even a majority opinion. A lot of the bishops decided not to vote at all. Only 44% of the bishops voted in favor of the canon.
Click to expand...
That 44% quote is taken out of context. The vote re: the Deuterocanon was a vote on whether they should draw up a new canon or restate the one that had been drawn up at the Council of Florence in the 15th century. They all voted unanimously not to draw up a new one, but simply to repeat the Canon that had been listed at the Council of Florence, which included the Deuterocanon. The official language was: “Et omnes responderunt placet” – “And all responded yes.” After that, they held a vote on whether they should include an anathema which would excommunicate all who disagreed; that was where only 44% voted in favor of the anathema. But the Canon itself was unanimously approved with the Deuterocanon. source
 
dmar198 said:
That 44% quote is taken out of context. The vote re: the Deuterocanon was a vote on whether they should draw up a new canon or restate the one that had been drawn up at the Council of Florence in the 15th century. They all voted unanimously not to draw up a new one, but simply to repeat the Canon that had been listed at the Council of Florence, which included the Deuterocanon. The official language was: “Et omnes responderunt placet” – “And all responded yes.” After that, they held a vote on whether they should include an anathema which would excommunicate all who disagreed; that was where only 44% voted in favor of the anathema. But the Canon itself was unanimously approved with the Deuterocanon. source
Click to expand...
No matter what way you look at it, only 44% of the bishops wanted the canon to stay as is.

Interestingly, I’ve mentioned the 44% figure on CAF before. Each time someone has said I was taking it out of context but each person also had a different idea of what the true context was.
 
garysibio said:
Another point to keep in mind is that the canon established by Trent was not even a majority opinion. A lot of the bishops decided not to vote at all. Only 44% of the bishops voted in favor of the canon.
Click to expand...
Where do you get that info? My source, Gary Michuta’s Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, cites 100% yea vote at Trent to approve the canon asserted at Florence, which is identical to Rome, Carthage, Hippo… Michuta in turn cites Peter Duncker, “The Canon of the Old Testament at the Council of Trent” as well as Hubert Jedin, “The History of the Council of Trent”.

Then there was an additional vote as to whether there should be an anathema attached to the decree. That vote went 24 yea, 15 nay.
 
garysibio said:
No matter what way you look at it, only 44% of the bishops wanted the canon to stay as is.
Click to expand...
If only 44% wanted the Canon to stay the same, then why did they all vote unanimously to keep it the same?
 
The Canon of Scripture listed in Canon 27 of the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) which was received by the Council of Trullo (A.D. 692) and ratified by 7th Ecumenical Council (A.D. 787).
Canon 24 (Greek 27)

That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture.

Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:
Genesis.
Exodus.
Leviticus.
Numbers.
Deuteronomy.
Joshua the Son of Nun.
The Judges.
Ruth.
The Kings, 4 books [1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings].
The Chronicles, 2 books.
Job.
The Psalter.
The Five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach].
The Twelve Books of the Prophets [Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi].
Isaiah.
Jeremiah.
Ezechiel.
Daniel.
Tobit.
Judith.
Esther.
Ezra, 2 books [Ezra, Nehemiah].
Macchabees, 2 books.

The New Testament.
The Gospels, 4 books [Matthew, Mark, Luke, John].
The Acts of the Apostles, 1 book.
The Epistles of Paul, 14 [Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews]
The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle, 2.
The Epistles of John the Apostle, 3.
The Epistles of James the Apostle, 1.
The Epistle of Jude the Apostle, 1.
The Revelation of John, 1. book.

Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

Source: ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xv.iv.iv.xxv.html
 
RomanCatholic66 said:
Your absolutley right… But I already found the answer and that is in the official “Decretal Gelasius”…or Decree of Gelasius in only the 5th century… Just after Carthage he must have summoned a “Council of Rome”…local council like Carthage was and he confirmed every single book of the OLD and NEW Testaments same as the Council of Carthage!!! YAY!!!

My friend is now absorbing it. I don’t think he knows exactly what to say accept …Oooops… YA!

Anyway, for anyone who wants to now about this “DECREE” that validates all the OT and NT books ratified by Carthage, I will put them below.

HERE BEGINS THE COUNCIL OF ROME UNDER POPE DAMASUS “ON EXPLAINING THE FAITH” (Which include 5 topics one among them being the Books of The bible which include all the books that Prots consider Deutero…

tertullian.org/decretum_eng.htm

bible-researcher.com/gelasius.html
Click to expand...
Pope Damasus was pope at the 382 council of Rome…

36.Liberius (352-66) Opposed by Felix II, antipope (355-365)
37.St. Damasus I (366-83) Opposed by Ursicinus, antipope (366-367)
38.St. Siricius (384-99)
39.St. Anastasius I (399-401)
40.St. Innocent I (401-17)
41.St. Zosimus (417-18)
42.St. Boniface I (418-22) Opposed

He was not pope in Ad393.

check this link also:

catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm

(iii) Here, as I said before, comes in the Council of Carthage, 397 A.D., confirming and approving the decrees of a previous Council (Hippo, 393 A.D.) declaring, for all time to come, what was the exact collection of sacred writings thenceforth to be reckoned, to the exclusion of all others, as the inspired Scripture of the New Testament. That collection is precisely that which Catholics possess at this day in their Douai Bible. That decree of Carthage was never changed. It was sent to Rome for confirmation. As I have already remarked, a Council, even though not a general Council of the whole Catholic Church, may yet have its decrees made binding on the whole Church by the approval and will of the Pope. A second Council of Carthage over which St Augustine presided, in 419 A.D., renewed the decrees of the former one, and declared that its act was to be notified to Boniface, Bishop of Rome, for the purpose of confirming it. From that date all doubt ceased as to what was, and what was not ‘spurious’, or ‘genuine’, or ‘doubtful’ among the Christian writings then known. Rome had spoken. A Council of the Roman Catholic Church had settled it. You might hear a voice here or there, in East or West, in subsequent times, raking up some old doubt, or raising a question as to whether this or that book of the New Testament is really what it claims to be, or should be where it is. But it is a voice in the wilderness.
 
Zekariya said:
The Canon of Scripture listed in Canon 27 of the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) which was received by the Council of Trullo (A.D. 692) and ratified by 7th Ecumenical Council (A.D. 787).
Canon 24 (Greek 27)

That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture.

Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:
Click to expand...
A strange quote, since it omits Lamentations (maybe it was considered to be part of Jeremiah; although one wonders why Jeremiah is not counted as “two books”) and Baruch.
 
Bible_Reader said:
A strange quote, since it omits Lamentations (maybe it was considered to be part of Jeremiah; although one wonders why Jeremiah is not counted as “two books”) and Baruch.
Click to expand...
Presumably Lamentations was included with Jeremiah. The Decree of Damasus at the Synod of Rome in 382 states, “Jeremiah, along with Quinot, that is, his Lamentations: a book”. Later lists lumped them together. Even the councils at Florence and Trent lump Lamentations into Jeremiah.
 
Yes, as my earlier message indicated, I can understand that Lamentations might be considered as part of Jeremiah. But what happened to Baruch?
 
Zekariya said:
The Canon of Scripture listed in Canon 27 of the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) which was received by the Council of Trullo (A.D. 692) and ratified by 7th Ecumenical Council (A.D. 787).
Canon 24 (Greek 27)

That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture.

Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:
Genesis.
Exodus.
Leviticus.
Numbers.
Deuteronomy.
Joshua the Son of Nun.
The Judges.
Ruth.
The Kings, 4 books [1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings].
The Chronicles, 2 books.
Job.
The Psalter.
The Five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach].
The Twelve Books of the Prophets [Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi].
Isaiah.
Jeremiah.
Ezechiel.
Daniel.
Tobit.
Judith.
Esther.
Ezra, 2 books [Ezra, Nehemiah].
Macchabees, 2 books.

The New Testament.
The Gospels, 4 books [Matthew, Mark, Luke, John].
The Acts of the Apostles, 1 book.
The Epistles of Paul, 14 [Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews]
The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle, 2.
The Epistles of John the Apostle, 3.
The Epistles of James the Apostle, 1.
The Epistle of Jude the Apostle, 1.
The Revelation of John, 1. book.

Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

Source: ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xv.iv.iv.xxv.html
Click to expand...
Where is Sirach and Buruch?
 
Zekariya said:
It is Baruch is the last chapter of Jeremiah in the East.
Click to expand...
Actually, that is not correct; the last chapter of Baruch is made into a separate book in Eastern Bibles: “The Letter of Jeremiah.” The first five chapters of Baruch are purportedly written by Baruch and in Eastern Bibles, given their own book.

Western Bibles, on the other hand, combine the first five chapters of Baruch and include the “Letter of Jeremiah” as a sixth chapter.
 
Bible_Reader said:
Actually, that is not correct; the last chapter of Baruch is made into a separate book in Eastern Bibles: “The Letter of Jeremiah.” The first five chapters of Baruch are purportedly written by Baruch and in Eastern Bibles, given their own book.

Western Bibles, on the other hand, combine the first five chapters of Baruch and include the “Letter of Jeremiah” as a sixth chapter.
Click to expand...
You are right. 😊 Thanks. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top