Do Catholics Think the Deuterocanonicals Are Important?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dave_Noonan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dave_Noonan

Guest
For all the fuss made by Catholic apologists about the Deuterocanonical texts, I’m wondering why they aren’t made more of a priority in Catholic worship. For example, one would never hear a reading from 1Maccabees or Tobit at Sunday Mass. And even if the daily Mass readings are considered, one would never ever hear from, say, the book of Judith. If those responsible for the Catholic Lectionary (Coetus XI) didn’t consider these books to be a very essential or useful part (praestantior pars) of Scripture, the history of their inclusion or exclusion in the canon seems almost irrelevant—since they are mostly ignored anyway.

Why is that?
 
I don’t have an answer to the question of why, but I do wish we heard more from these great books.

Transubstantiation is all but explicit in Wisdom 19 while Mary and her role in salvation is foreshadowed in the mother of the seven sons in 2 Maccabees 7. Judith’s patience and obedience led to the salvation of all Israel.

I wish we heard more from Songs as well.

-Tim-
 
TimothyH said:
I don’t have an answer to the question of why, but I do wish we heard more from these great books.

Transubstantiation is all but explicit in Wisdom 19 while Mary and her role in salvation is foreshadowed in the mother of the seven sons in 2 Maccabees 7. Judith’s patience and obedience led to the salvation of all Israel.

I wish we heard more from Songs as well.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
Catholics do include a reading from 2Macc 7 at Sunday Mass but that’s it from either of the Maccabees.
 
Mass readings are not chosen in order to emphasis the “importance” of any biblical text but are what the Church wishes us to hear read throughout the year. Large portions of many OT texts are not read at Mass, but they’re certainly in the Canon, so we can read them at any time. The texts selected for Mass are there as subjects for homilies and for our general edification. But we are free to study the Bible if we wish. One may as well complain that no other national songs are ever heard at a ball game than the National Anthem, as if other patriotic songs have some lesser importance to the American national character. 🤷
 
Della said:
Mass readings are not chosen in order to emphasis the “importance” of any biblical text
Click to expand...
Actually that was indeed the standard used to select the lectionary texts by Coetus XI: the praestantior pars: “the more essential, precious, useful part” of Scripture.
 
Dave_Noonan said:
For all the fuss made by Catholic apologists about the Deuterocanonical texts, I’m wondering why they aren’t made more of a priority in Catholic worship. For example, one would never hear a reading from 1Maccabees or Tobit at Sunday Mass. And even if the daily Mass readings are considered, one would never ever hear from, say, the book of Judith. If those responsible for the Catholic Lectionary (Coetus XI) didn’t consider these books to be a very essential or useful part (praestantior pars) of Scripture, the history of their inclusion or exclusion in the canon seems almost irrelevant—since they are mostly ignored anyway.

Why is that?
Click to expand...
I have one more.

The Song of the Three Youths (Hymnus Trium Puerorum, aka the Benedicite) is used as a canticle in Lauds (one of the canonical hours) in the Roman Rite and in the Byzantine Rite in Matins or Orthros, I believe. (In fact, the three main Western liturgies: the Ambrosian, the Mozarabic, and the Roman all have this canticle in Lauds for Sundays and feastdays. Plus, in the EF (Tridentine) form of the Roman Rite, Daniel 3 is actually also one of the twelve readings for Ember Saturday.)

The Mozarabic Rite also has this at the Liturgy in an abridged form, sung just after the Prophecy (the first reading, from the OT) and before the Psallendo (the Psalm). A local council, the Fourth Council of Toledo (633) decreed that the Hymnus Trium Puerorum should be sung at all solemn Masses, but in reality its actual use was not consistent: the rubrics of the Mozarabic Missal used from the 16th century up to after Vatican II - the Missale Mixtum - seems to restrict its use for the first Sunday of Lent and the Feast of St. James. The modern Mozarabic Missal seems to have it (in a further abridged version) sung during the feastdays of martyrs. You had the same custom of the singing of the Benedicite in the Gallican liturgies after the reading of the Epistle (the second reading).
 
Dave_Noonan said:
Actually that was indeed the standard used to select the lectionary texts by Coetus XI: the praestantior pars: “the more essential, precious, useful part” of Scripture.
Click to expand...
But this gauge says nothing about the overall importance of any biblical text. There are readings in the Daily Office that are not read in Mass and vice versa, for instance. How many Protestants do you know who never read Habakkuk, either? It means nothing at all as to their importance as biblical texts. The “more essential, precious, useful part” means that which instructs the faithful in a general way. Catholics worship as a corporate body, not merely as individuals. The Church has decided which texts are most useful for that purpose, that’s all.
 
Actually, a few verses from Judith are read at daily Mass several times a year on feasts of Our Lady (which probably didn’t come up on whatever list you’re looking at because those verses are the responsorial “psalm” instead of one of the readings), and another passage from Judith is an option within the Common of Holy Men and Women.

Obadiah, on the other hand, is never read during the Mass.
 
patrick457 said:
I have one more.

The Song of the Three Youths (Hymnus Trium Puerorum, aka the Benedicite) is used as a canticle in Lauds (one of the canonical hours) in the Roman Rite and in the Byzantine Rite in Matins or Orthros, I believe. (In fact, the three main Western liturgies: the Ambrosian, the Mozarabic, and the Roman all have this canticle in Lauds for Sundays and feastdays. Plus, in the EF (Tridentine) form of the Roman Rite, Daniel 3 is actually also one of the twelve readings for Ember Saturday.)

The Mozarabic Rite also has this at the Liturgy in an abridged form, sung just after the Prophecy (the first reading, from the OT) and before the Psallendo (the Psalm). A local council, the Fourth Council of Toledo (633) decreed that the Hymnus Trium Puerorum should be sung at all solemn Masses, but in reality its actual use was not consistent: the rubrics of the Mozarabic Missal used from the 16th century up to after Vatican II - the Missale Mixtum - seems to restrict its use for the first Sunday of Lent and the Feast of St. James. The modern Mozarabic Missal seems to have it (in a further abridged version) sung during the feastdays of martyrs. You had the same custom of the singing of the Benedicite in the Gallican liturgies after the reading of the Epistle (the second reading).
Click to expand...
I think the Hymnus Trium Puerorum might show up as a daily Mass reading in the Vatican II Catholic lectionary. But by and large, it does seem to have disappeared. Lutherans use it at the Easter Vigil as the Psalm response to the fiery furnace narrative.
 
Dave_Noonan said:
For all the fuss made by Catholic apologists about the Deuterocanonical texts, I’m wondering why they aren’t made more of a priority in Catholic worship. For example, one would never hear a reading from 1Maccabees or Tobit at Sunday Mass. And even if the daily Mass readings are considered, one would never ever hear from, say, the book of Judith. If those responsible for the Catholic Lectionary (Coetus XI) didn’t consider these books to be a very essential or useful part (praestantior pars) of Scripture, the history of their inclusion or exclusion in the canon seems almost irrelevant—since they are mostly ignored anyway.

Why is that?
Click to expand...
I’m just a lay person thumbing threw my Sunday missal because of your question…But I easily found Sunday readings from Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, 1 and 2 Macc. As well as antiphons from Wisdom, Baruch and sirach
 
These books receive equal respect. Macabees has a beautiful summary of Hanukkah. Tobit is one of the most elegant books in the OT, in my opinion.

Jimmy Akin has a list of Deuterocanonical book references in the NT on his blog
www.jimmyakin.com.

Blessings,
Stephie
 
Della said:
The “more essential, precious, useful part” means that which instructs the faithful in a general way. Catholics worship as a corporate body, not merely as individuals. The Church has decided which texts are most useful for that purpose, that’s all.
Click to expand...
What you’ve set out would be a possible standard that could have been used by Coetus XI (say something like, “the biblical texts deemed most appropriate for worship”) but that wasn’t what was set out as the selection criteria used.
 
Deuterocanonical???
There are no deuterocanonical books in the Bible, just the 73 books that belong there.
 
Millie123 said:
I’m just a lay person thumbing threw my Sunday missal because of your question…But I easily found Sunday readings from Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, 1 and 2 Macc. As well as antiphons from Wisdom, Baruch and sirach
Click to expand...
Interesting. So when are the Sunday readings from Tobit and 1 Maccabees? Any Judith?
 
Judith: 1 reading at daily Mass

Tobit: 3 readings at 3 daily Masses

Song of Solomon: 4 readings at 6 daily Masses

Wisdom: 5 readings at 11 Daily Masses and 8 readings at 8 Sunday Masses

Sirach: 11 readings at 15 Daily Masses and 7 readings at 6 Sunday Masses

1 Maccabees: 2 readings at 2 daily Masses

2 Maccabees: 4 readings at 3 daily Masses and 1 reading at 1 Sunday Mass

Baruch: 2 readings at 2 Sunday Masses
 
Dave_Noonan said:
For all the fuss made by Catholic apologists about the Deuterocanonical texts, I’m wondering why they aren’t made more of a priority in Catholic worship. For example, one would never hear a reading from 1Maccabees or Tobit at Sunday Mass. And even if the daily Mass readings are considered, one would never ever hear from, say, the book of Judith. If those responsible for the Catholic Lectionary (Coetus XI) didn’t consider these books to be a very essential or useful part (praestantior pars) of Scripture, the history of their inclusion or exclusion in the canon seems almost irrelevant—since they are mostly ignored anyway.

Why is that?
Click to expand...
Well, they are all Old Testament texts, so they don’t get the same usage that the New Testament, especially the Gospels get. But they are the inspired Word of God, so they are important.
 
Mark1124 said:
Actually, a few verses from Judith are read at daily Mass several times a year on feasts of Our Lady (which probably didn’t come up on whatever list you’re looking at because those verses are the responsorial “psalm” instead of one of the readings), and another passage from Judith is an option within the Common of Holy Men and Women.

Obadiah, on the other hand, is never read during the Mass.
Click to expand...
Nice. I didn’t know this.

-Tim-
 
Dave_Noonan said:
This is the term used by Catholics to describe these books. The “Second Canon”.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am not ignorant of this, however, these are delineated as fully part of the canon of scripture from the Council of Trent as found in the Vulgate, and it is protestants who seek to instigate question of their validity as the Word of God.
“Deuterocanonical” is a term used by theologians in the course of their source criticism, but by Catholics in their life of Faith, the term used is “Bible” or “Scripture” or “Word of God”.
 
Dave_Noonan said:
What you’ve set out would be a possible standard that could have been used by Coetus XI (say something like, “the biblical texts deemed most appropriate for worship”) but that wasn’t what was set out as the selection criteria used.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid I’m not making myself clear. I am explaining what those terms mean to Catholics, not telling you what Coetus XI intended. He in no way was saying that other biblical texts are of less worth, if that’s what you’re getting at. It simply isn’t thought of in those terms at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top