Did Catholics canonize the Bible?

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Jerome (346 - 420) translated the complete Catholic canon into Latin, a version known as the Vulgate. A “Hebrew snob” of sorts (he had rabbis as friends and colleagues) he doubted the seven extra books from Septuagint on this basis, but obedient to Pope Damasus I, Jerome included them as scripture in the Vulgate.

Augustine of Hippo (354 - 430) considered Septuagint cannonical and listed 44 books which agreed with today’s Catholic Old Testament of 46 books. The differenCE in total number is because he combined Lamentation and Baruch (with Letter of Jeremiah) with Jeremiah.

Pope Damasus in 382 approved Augustine’s list at Council of Rome.

Same list reaffirmed at Church Council in Hippo (Augustine’s see) in 393

Also reaffirmed third (provincial) Council of Carthage in 397.
Once again confirmed at fourth council of Carthage in 419 All four councils also declared the canon of New Testament 27 books.

So, all 46 books of Catholic Old Testament along with the with 27 books of New Testament were declared in fourth CEntury not in sixteenth CEntury. The 16th DOGMATIC reaffirmation of the Catholic Canon at Trent was done in response to Protestant challenges to a canon which hCE been essentially unchallenged for 1100 years!

While not denying Tobith, Judith, Baruch, Sirach, Wisdom and 1 and 2 Maccabees were first disputed and came into canon at later state, this also is true of Esther and some New Testament books (2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, Jude, James, Hebrews, Revelation).

The councils at Hippo and Carthage were not ecumenical councils, so this accounts for differenCEs of some of the manuscript of the Bible (see below) mCEe in and after 4th CEntury. This shows that the canon of scripture was not so important an issue that it REQUIRED an ecumenical council.

Codex Sinaiticus (4th CEntury) includes Tobith, Judith, 1 & 4 Maccabees, Wisdom and Sirach.

Codex Vaticanus (4th CEntury) has Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobit, Baruch and Letter of Jeremiah.

6th CEntury Codex Alexandrinus has Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, Tobit, Judith, 1-4 Maccabees, Wisdom and Sirach.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Almost all deutercannonical rejecters (from Martin Luther onward) cite as authoritative Jewish opinion regarding the OT canon the declarations of Yohanan ben Zakkai, the Chief Rabbi at the theological school (yeshiva) at Jamnia (or Javneh) in the late 1st CEntury (circa 80-90 AD) to CEopt the Palestinian Canon as Jewish scripture. However, the reliance on Jamnia has several insurmountable problems:

1.  If  the Jamnia council ever authoritatively declared the Jewish Canon is a  matter of debate--at most they seem to have settled on some principles  that would have excluded the deutercannonical books (no surviving Hebrew  texts and of later composition)

2. Mainstream Rabbinic Judaism  did NOT settle the Jewish Canon  until Centuries AFTER Jamnia.  The  Encyclopedia of Judaism (page 117) says the limit of the third part  (Writings) was not finalized until middle of the second CEntury. Some  books (Song of Songs, Eccleisastes) were disputed until the late 3rd  CEntury. In CEdition, the Palestinian canon was never acCEpted by  Ethiopian Jews who, to this day, accept the Septuagint (minus  Ecclesiasticus) (Encyclopaedia of Religion, Vol. 2, page 174).

 3. Unlike the Sanhedrin of pre 70 AD, Jamnia was NOT an authoritative  body that could make declarations binding on all Jews. As stated before,  it was only a theological school, however highly regarded.

4.  Jamnia's excluding criteria were based on their antagonism to  Jewish-Christians who used the Septuagint to support their claim to  Jesus' status as Messiah (See Wisdom, 2nd chapter, and the use of the  koine Isaiah which explicitly states the Messiah will be born of a  virgin and not just a "young woman" as found in the Hebrew text).

5. Jamnia apparently held the Hebrew texts of Esther, Song of Songs,  and Ecclesiates as non-authoritative; Esther, because God is never  mentioned (but IS mentioned in the koine!), the Song of Songs because of  its sexual allegories, and Ecclesiastes because of its  sometimes-nihilistic outlook.

Christians had and have NO reason to accept a Jewish canon declared after our Lord’s ascennsion by an institution automatically hostile to Christian claims. CEditionally, if one is arguing from authority, Jamnia was the same “authority” who declared the infamous" Bar Kochbah " as THE Messiah-whose 131-133 revolt against Rome ended in another military disaster for the Jewish people, furthering the Diaspora from the Holy land for near 1900 years.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

The great majority of Jews in the 1st CEntury lived outside of Palestine and Judea–overwelmingly they considered the Greek “koine” language Septuagint (“of the seventy”, the supposed number of elders who translated it from the Hebrew) as authortitative. It is this longer canon which contains the ADditional seven books which the Catholic Church considers as authoritative.

The Septuagint is divided into four divisions:

1.The Law
2.Historical books
3.Poetical and Wisdom books
4.Prophetical Books

Detailed linguistic analysis of the NT’s quotations from the OT confirm AT LEAST 86% of the quotations are derived from the koine Septuagint. This alone is a very strong indication that the NT’s writers considered the Septuagint as authoritative and did not limit themselves to Hebrew texts.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Most Christians know the Catholic Canon of the Old Testament (OT) contains seven books (plus additional chapters in Daniel and Esther) not considered as cannonical (or “authoritative”) by non-Catholic Christians (or by non-Christian groups such as the Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses). These seven books are : Tobith, Judith, Baruch (with letter of Jeremiah), Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus), Wisdom and 1 and 2 Maccabees, and are properly refered to as the “Deutercannonicals” which means “second canon” from their somewhat later date of inclusion into the Jewish Scriptures. Protestants usualy refer to these books as the “Apocrapha” which means “obscure” or “hidden”, however these books were NEVER hidden and, as we shall see, largely reAD by the Early Church as authoritative scripture with little or no distinction between them and the other 39 books of the OT. (Yes, St. Jerome refered to the Deuterocannonicals as “Apochrapha” but he was more than a bit of a Hebrew-text snob, and while he considered the DT books as less authoritative, he did NOT discount them as spurious or utterly lacking scriptural authority).

Just what was accepted as authoritative scripture by Jews in the 1st CEntury of the Christian era is anything but cut and dried. Quite frankly, Jewish canons varied according to location, theological opinion, and even how one group the books or defined the various categories of scripture.

Pharisiac Jews in Palestine during the time of the Incarnation generaly used a 24 book Hebrew language canon, generaly called the "Palestinian Canon"with three divisions:

1.The Law (5 books of Moses or Pentateuch)
2.The Prophets (4 former and 4 latter prophets)
3.The Writings (11 books).

This canon was mostly agreed upon by the Pharisees, however there was some variation of opinion even among the Pharisees.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

The Sadducees mostly rejected Daniel (it supports the Resurection in 12:2) and many rigorists among this group rejected all but the Pentateuch as authoritative.

The Essenes at Qumran apparently did not acCEpt Esther.

While technicaly not “Jewish”, the Samaritans held (and still do) only their Aramaic version of the Pentateuch as cannonical.

Josephus wrote (c. 90 AD) the Jews recognized 22 books, divided in three divisions:

5 books of Moses, 
13 books of the Prophets
4 Remaining books.

The differences in the number of books in the second and third divisions MIGHT be because Josephus’ numbers are a condensed listing of the 24-book Palestinian canon–sinCE Josephus did not explicitly list each book, this supposed condensement can ONLY be a speculation.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Now for the NT…

That’s right, the SAME canon of the NT that is used by Protestants (including Fundamentalists and even "non-denominationals) was defined and declared by the Catholic Church (which begs the question, what else did we get right?)

The first Early Church Father (ECF) to declare the NT canon as we now have it was St. Athanasius in his Festal Letters circa 367 AD.

All earlier ECF lists and authoritative-citations (or anonymous lists such as the Muratorion Canon) either did not mention certain gospels and epistles, or EXPLICITLY rejected or called “disputed” ones we now accept as canonical or EXPLICITLY accepted as authoritative ones we do not now accept (Such as the The Didache, Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas).

What CAN be agreed upon by Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants is there was “general” agreement among Christians who were actualy Christians of the NT canon prior to the 5th C. NO ECF lists or mentions any gnostic “gospel” or semi-gnostic text (such as “Gospel of Thomas”) as anything but spurious or heretical.

However, “general agreement” means just that and no more. It is truly faulty scholarship by fundamentalists to conflate ECF lists (spead over 3 centuries) and ignore how they disagree with each other, other dioceses, and the NT canon that was eventually worked out by CATHOLIC councils in the 4th C.

It was not until the Synod of Rome (382) and the provincial councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) in the 4th C. that there was any sort official declaration on the NT and OT canon. These local synods and councils with the backing of the Roman Pontiffs SETTLED (with a few here and there temporary objections) the scriptural canon for 1100 years.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

This over-300 years gap between the founding of the Church circa 32 AD and any sort of OFFICIAL declaration is very hard to understand if one is a Protestant holding to the belief of “sola scriptura” because such a declaration of what WAS scripture and what was NOT scripture would have been a top priority if “scripture alone” as THE rule of faith HAD been a belief taught by the first christians. For Catholics (and Orthodox) it presents NO PROBLEM since Apostolic (Oral) Tradition along with Sacred Scripture are considered EQUALLY authoritative sources of “public revelation” with the teaching authority of the Church (Magesterium) being the IMMEADIETE rule of faith for the believer. Under the latter belief, an officially defined canon of scripture was simply not as important an issue as the teachings about the Trinity and Incarnation were.

The ONLY reason the Catholic Church felt compelled to later infallibly once-and-for-all declare the canon of Scripture (both Old and New Testaments) at the Ecumenical Council of Trent in the 16th century was because of Protestant challenges to the canon (both old and new). Almost all dogmatic declarations by the Catholic Church are done to define an ALREADY held belief and refute some RECENT challenge to that already held belief. These dogmatic declarations (either “ex cathedra” by a reigning pontiff or by ecumenical council ratified by a reigning pontiff) do NOT “create new teaching” they defend what has ALWAYS been held!

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

(The following listing is taken from:

media.isnet.org/off/Xtian/gapai/canonnew.html

Canon of The New Testament
by W. Hartono)

The Detailed Listing:

Muratorian canon (C. 170 AD perhaps in response to Marcion’s “Apostilikon”):

Four Gospels, 
Acts, 
13 Paul's epistles, 
Jude, 
2 John, 
Apocalypse of John (Revelation) 
Apocalypse of Peter
Wisdom of Solomon.

–Apocalypse of Peter now does not belong to our New Testament, while Wisdom of Solomon is now part of (Catholic) Old Testament.

–The compiler mentioned about Shepherd of Hermas which can be read but not to be given to people.

–He also wrote about Paul epistle to Laodicean (Col 4:16) and to Alexandrines which he claimed to be forged but was apparently accepted by some as authoritative).

Iranaeus, bishop of Lyon (c. 170 AD):

quoted Shepherd of Hermas as scripture.

and
1 and 2 John
1 Peter

–most likely knew all 13 Paul’s epistles (exADpt Philemon)

–MAYBE James and Hebrews and Revelation.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Tertullian of Carthage (c. 200 AD):

The four Gospels
Acts, 
13 Paul's epistles, 
1 Peter, 
1 John, 
Jude
Revelation.

He mentioned Hebrews as the work of Barnabas and in his judgment was worthy to be included in the canon.

Origen (185 - 254 AD)

Distinguished the undisputed and the disputed books of New Testament

Undisputed:

Four Gospels 
Acts, 
1 Peter, 
1 John
Revelation.

Disputed:

2 Peter, 
2 and 3 John, 
James, 
Jude, 
Didache

Also refered to Epistle of Barnabas as Catholic epistle (a term now applied to all seven non-Pauline epistles)

He was the first known Christian writer to mention 2 Peter. He also considered Shepherd of Hermas as scripture and mentioned the Gospel according to Hebrews and Acts of Paul and some other books.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Cyprian (third century) listed:

four Gospels, 
Acts, 
9 Paul's epistles (minus Philemon), 
1 Peter, 
1 John 
Revelation.

He also cited Shepherd of Hermas as scripture
Recognized Didache as apostolic quotations.

Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine (314 - 339 AD) divided New Testament books into three categories:

Universally acknowledged:

four gospels, 
Acts, 
Pauline 14 epistles (including Hebrews),
1 John, 
1 Peter 
Revelation

Disputed:

James, 
Jude, 	
2 Peter, 
2 and 3 John

Spurious:

Acts of Paul, 
Shepherd of Hermas, 
Apocalypse of Peter, 
Epistle of Barnabas, 
Didache
Revelation

Note that Revelation was listed both as the first and the third category. It shows the two different opinions of the canonicity of Revelation, which was especially true among the eastern churches.

He also mentioned Gospel of Peter, which was read and appreciated by Christians in the second century and quoted by Justin Martyr.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Eusebius also mentioned as heretical books like Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Matthias and groups of books of Acts bearing names of apostles (Paul, Peter, Andrew, John and Thomas). All these books and others which do not belong to our present New Testament canon are now known as New Testament apocrypha.

In 367 AD, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria gave the list of 27 New Testament books, for the first time without making any distinction of them and which now becomes our New Testament.

Council of Laodicea (c 363 AD) gave the list of 26 New Testament books (Revelation was not included).

The same list of 26 books was given by Cyril of Jerusalem (died 386 AD) and by Gregory of Nazianzen.

Amphilochius of Iconium gave the 27 books but mentioned that some of them (Hebrews, 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation) as spurious.

John of Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople from 397 to 407 AD gave list which excluded 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation.

The Syriac church’s earliest canon of New Testament consisted of:

4 gospels or Diatessaron, 
Acts 	
14 Pauline epistles.

5th century onward included:

James, 
1 Peter
1 John.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Not until 508 AD did the Monophysite branch of Syriac church finally include the other five books while the other branch, Nestorians accepts only 22 books to this day.

Pope Damasus I ordered Jerome to translate the 27 books into Latin (Vulgate).(5th C.)

Augustine in the fifth cenntury listed the 27 books in his work, “On Christian Learning”

Those 27 books were later declared at the Council of Hippo in 393 AD and at Third Council of Carthage in 397 AD.

The same councils also declared the list of Old Testament books which now become Catholic Old Testament.

The sixth Council of Carthage in 419 AD repromulgated the (same) canon of the Bible.

It can be said that the 27 books of New Testament (together with Catholic Old Testament books) were determined in the fourth ADntury.

Among the 27 books, seven (James, Jude, Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John and Revelation) books entered the list after some disputes.

Codex Sinaiticus (4th century) has all 27 books of our present New Testament, but also includes Epistle of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas.

Codex Vaticanus (4th century) was torn at the end, so does not reveal the whole list—the existing part consists of 21 books and part of Hebrews of our present New Testament.

Codex Alexandrinus (5th century) has the 27 books plus:
1 and 2 Clement.

Codex Claromontanus (6th century):

has no Philimon,
no 1 and 2 Thessalonians
no Hebrews

but includes Epistle of Barnabas,
Shepherd of Hermas,
Acts of Paul
Revelation of Peter.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

4th century “Cheltenham list”:

4 gospels,
13 Pauline epistles (minus Hebrews)
Acts,
Revelation,
1 John
1 Peter.