Early Church Fathers - Lets be honest

[Hisalone]

I think you are referencing the “Council of Trent”? If so, the 7 Deutero. books were already canonized from antiquity here. What the Council of Trent did was close the arguments of these 7 Deutero. books "Trent never canonized a single book of the bible, but only closed any more disputes about them, any one who rejects these Deutero. books as canonized by the Catholic Church since the fourth century excommunicate themselves from the Church.

If you are one who believes the Catholic Church added 7 books after the reformation?, let the Truth be told you, Protestants removed 7 books of the already canonized bible, Trent closed the argument to these books for all time. You have been greatly misinformed.

Peace be with you.

No Gabe there you go again spreading misinformation
This bogus arguement has been disproved on many levels. The earlier councils were regional not universal. There were many Catholic thinkers and theologians who went without them this was finalized after the Reformation which makes it that the Catholics added the books —get your history right.

 

[greggy53]

No Gabe there you go again spreading misinformation
This bogus arguement has been disproved on many levels. The earlier councils were regional not universal. There were many Catholic thinkers and theologians who went without them this was finalized after the Reformation which makes it that the Catholics added the books —get your history right.

The Bible was established with the Deuterocanonical books included at the council of Rome by the Holy Roman Catholic Church in 382 AD. This is historical fact.

The “Damasine list”, issued by Pope Damasus I at the council of Rome in 382 AD, is as follows:
"It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book;Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [First and Second Books of Kings, Third and Fourth Books of Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book;
Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book.
Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.
Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, one to the Corinthians [2 Corinthians is not mentioned], one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians [First Epistle to the Thessalonians and Second Epistle to the Thessalonians], one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy [First Epistle to Timothy and Second Epistle to Timothy], one to Titus, one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews.
Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book.
Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles [First Epistle of Peter and Second Epistle of Peter]; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles [Second Epistle of John and Third Epistle of John]; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.
Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

All seven books were included in the Bible in 382 AD. Luther decided for himself that those books were not holy Scripture, but from I have learned did not remove them from the Bible. Protestant publishers about 130 years or so ago decided to eliminate them.

 

[Justy90]

I think you are referencing the “Council of Trent”? If so, the 7 Deutero. books were already canonized from antiquity here. What the Council of Trent did was close the arguments of these 7 Deutero. books "Trent never canonized a single book of the bible, but only closed any more disputes about them, any one who rejects these Deutero. books as canonized by the Catholic Church since the fourth century excommunicate themselves from the Church.

If you are one who believes the Catholic Church added 7 books after the reformation?, let the Truth be told you, Protestants removed 7 books of the already canonized bible, Trent closed the argument to these books for all time. You have been greatly misinformed.

Peace be with you.

The Council of Trent was a circus. It had no useful purpose other than to refute Luther and condemn him to hell, while reiterating Roman Catholic propaganda and rhetoric. It was a band-aid council meant to stop Rome from splinterring any further and to keep the masses in check.

 

[ccolley2]

No, actually not true, what so ever.

There is a document, I forget the author, that was written in 90 ad. When your “Christians” were there. The document explained all that went on in ancient masses, it exactly corresponds with the mass today, including the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Explain how that got there, almost 2000 years ago, cause I know I don’t have a time machine (dang that would be useful )

Are you referring to the Didache OR also known as the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. You should be able to find it online…or you can buy the book…The Faith of the Early Fathers. Volume 1 by William Jurgens.
CC

 

[Stephen168]

I was trying to find a non catholic view of the Deuterocanonical Books (The Apocrypha) and ended up on lots of evangelical, presybeteryian and other non catholic christian web sites. Whilst there i noticed that virtually none of them made any mention of how we got the bible even though on the same sites you would see references to John Wycliffe, Luther, Calvin etc.

The intersting thing was that whenever a site did mention the origins of the bible they referred to the “early Church Fathers”. The thing is they would include the Councils of Hippo, Carthage and Nicea in the list of early church fathers but fail to say WHICH church they were in. My thoughts were that the thought of their flocks knowing the truth about the origins of the bible must be so frightening for many church leaders that they either gloss over it or are deceptive.

I once listened to a lecture series by a Protestant on early Christianity. During a 30 minute lecture on the history of the Christian bible, he never once mentioned the Septuagint. Interesting, considering the Septuagint was the basis for the Christian canon of the Old Testament for 1500 years.

It seems like every time there was an ecumenical council there would be a small group of Bishops who would run off in a huff, so there are several Apostolic groups with apostolic succession that could claim the ‘early church fathers’ as there own.

 

[brb2]

The cannon was not closed until after the Reformation

Canon closed 419 AD // 2nd Council of Carthage // Presided over by St. Augustine …

Boniface, Bishop of Rome ‘confirmed’ the council’s work.

 

[SemperReformada]

Canon closed 419 AD // 2nd Council of Carthage // Presided over by St. Augustine …

Boniface, Bishop of Rome ‘confirmed’ the council’s work.

This is not true.

Augustine recognized that Carthage was only a provincial council and could not settle the matter of the OT canon.

The issue remained very much open until Trent.

augustine:

Now, in regard to the canonical Scriptures, he must follow the judgment of the greater number of catholic churches; and among these, of course, a high place must be given to such as have been thought worthy to be the seat of an apostle and to receive epistles. Accordingly, among the canonical Scriptures he will judge according to the following standard: to prefer those that are received by all the catholic churches to those which some do not receive. Among those, again, which are not received by all, he will prefer such as have the sanction of the greater number and those of greater authority, to such as are held by the smaller number and those of less authority. If, however, he shall find that some books are held by the greater number of churches, and others by the churches of greater authority (though this is not a very likely thing to happen), I think that in such a case the authority on the two sides is to be looked upon as equal.

NPNF1, Vol. 2, Augustin, On Christian Doctrine, Book II, Chapter 8.

Note that Augustine does not invoke the Council or Carthage or Hippo as settling the OT canon once and for all. Why? Because they were only provincial councils.

From Newadvent.org we see
OT Canon:

The Tridentine decrees (Trent) from which the above list is extracted was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, addressed to the Church Universal.

If Trent was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement of the Canon simple logic dictates that Carthage or Hippo could not have been the first infallible declaration of the OT canon.

Even at Trent the council fathers had debates over what books were to be included in the OT canon. Apparently to them it wasn’t as clear cut as simply recognizing the canon which was declared a millenia earlier at Carthage and Hippo.
Jedin:

“In his opposition to accepting the Florentine canon and the equalization of traditions with Holy Scripture, Seripando did not stand alone. In the particular congregation of March 23, the learned Dominican Bishop Bertano of Fano had already expressed the view that Holy Scripture possessed greater authority than the traditions because the Scriptures were unchangeable; that only offenders against the biblical canon should come under the anathema, not those who deny the principle of tradition; that it would be unfortunate if the Council limited itself to the apostolic canons, because the Protestants would say that the abrogation of some of these traditions was arbitrary and represented an abuse… Another determined opponent of putting traditions on a par with Holy Scripture, as well as the anathema, was the Dominican Nacchianti. The Servite general defended the view that all the evangelical truths were contained in the Bible, and he subscribed to the canon of St. Jerome, as did also Madruzzo and Fonseca on April 1. While Seripando abandoned his view as a lost cause, Madruzzo, the Carmelite general, and the Bishop of Agde stood for the limited canon, and the bishops of Castellamare and Caorle urged the related motion to place the books of Judith, Baruch, and Machabees in the “canon ecclesiae.” From all this it is evident that Seripando was by no means alone in his views. In his battle for the canon of St. Jerome and against the anathema and the parity of traditions with Holy Scripture, he was aligned with the leaders of a minority that was outstanding for its theological scholarship.”

Source: Hubert Jedin, Papal Legate At The Council Of Trent (St Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1947), 281-282.

While earlier councils did list the OT canon which was finally declared at Trent, none of the earlier councils settled the issue. That had to wait until Trent.

Also please note that these fathers also debated as to whether tradition was the equivalent of scripture.

 

[ccolley2]

Gabe you have all the sound bytes down but very little truth. Catholics added 7 books. The cannon was not closed until after the Reformation

No, Hisalone, we added 27 books, they are called the New Testament. And the cannon of Scripture was closed “officially” in 405 AD by Pope St. Innocent. This cannon(the Catholic cannon) went uncontested for 1600 years until Martin Luther decided to take 7 books out by using the Palestinian cannon instead of the Septuagint. Who would you trust to decide the cannon that you accept, a single fallible man that lived 1600 years after Christ, or the Church in 405 AD working under the protection of the Holy Spirit?
CC

 

[SemperReformada]

No, Hisalone, we added 27 books, they are called the New Testament. And the cannon of Scripture was closed “officially” in 405 AD by Pope St. Innocent. **This cannon(the Catholic cannon) went uncontested for 1600 years until Martin Luther decided to take 7 books out by using the Palestinian cannon instead of the Septuagint. **Who would you trust to decide the cannon that you accept, a single fallible man that lived 1600 years after Christ, or the Church in 405 AD working under the protection of the Holy Spirit?
CC

This simply isn’t true (at least for the OT). Go to www.nenwadvent.org and look at the section on the Canon of the OT. Even at Trent there was dispute as to what constituted the OT canon (see my previoius post).

 

[youngsaint]

No Gabe there you go again spreading misinformation
This bogus arguement has been disproved on many levels. The earlier councils were regional not universal. There were many Catholic thinkers and theologians who went without them this was finalized after the Reformation which makes it that the Catholics added the books —get your history right.

Hisalone, please tell us, why was there the 7 books before the reformation, and still were until the 1830s. Then some “smart guy” protestant decided, oh, I’m going to take these out cause I don’t agree with them.

 

[youngsaint]

Oh, yeah, I found out, he [my friend, a devout Catholic] said it was “St. Justin the Martyr” that wrote the document.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Geeez, I’ve never seen so many misinformed protestants and non catholics about the bible. Please look into these matters with out prejudice, not from misinformed sources.

Let us be clear here. The 7 Deutero’s were included in the original Canonized bible since the first council from the 4th century not “Trent”. The Catholic Church can even go further back to the canon list of “Mileto”, Ireneaus, Eusebius…

If protestants are going to use arguments from St. Jerome, St. Augustine and other Catholic Bishops? Know this, that yes these have contested the already Deutero canonical books, but because Jesus and the apostles quoted from these books, the Popes and the Catholic Church never removed them from the canon list of books in the bible and continued to be used in the Liturgy of the Mass.

Fast foward, during the reformation period, other Catholic Bishops “AGAIN” thanks to the reformers removing the 7 Deutero books, questioned them again. So “Trent” no matter how one views the council, has recorded “NO ONE” is to remove these books, or ever contest these 7 books ever again, “LEST HE BE EXCOMMUNICATED”. “Trent” Concerning the already 7 canonized books (Deutero) before she assembled closed the agument and discussion once and for all.

Council of Laodicea c. 360 List of books similar to Trent’s canon.

Pope Damasus 382 Decree listing the books of Trent’s canon.

Council of Rome 382 Prompted Pope Damasus’ Decree.

Council of Hippo (North Africa) 393 Approved a list of OT and NT Canon (same as later Trent)

Council of Carthage (North Africa) 397 Approved a list of OT and NT Canon (same as later Trent)

Exuperius, Bishop of Toulouse 405 Wrote to Pope Innocent I requesting a list of canonical books. Pope Innocent listed the Trent canon.

Trent never added the 7 books in 1545 when she council ed. Trent council ed to anathematize the new man made theologies “sola fide’ sola scriptura” and anyone contesting or removing of the sacraments and bible books in protestantism.

 

[SemperReformada]

Geeez, I’ve never seen so many misinformed protestants and non catholics about the bible. Please look into these matters with out prejudice, not from misinformed sources.

Let us be clear here. The 7 Deutero’s were included in the original Canonized bible since the first council from the 4th century not “Trent”. The Catholic Church can even go further back to the canon list of “Mileto”, Ireneaus, Eusebius…

If protestants are going to use arguments from St. Jerome, St. Augustine and other Catholic Bishops? Know this, that yes these have contested the already Deutero canonical books, but because Jesus and the apostles quoted from these books, the Popes and the Catholic Church never removed them from the canon list of books in the bible and continued to be used in the Liturgy of the Mass.

Fast foward, during the reformation period, other Catholic Bishops “AGAIN” thanks to the reformers removing the 7 Deutero books, questioned them again. So “Trent” no matter how one views the council, has recorded “NO ONE” is to remove these books, or ever contest these 7 books ever again, “LEST HE BE EXCOMMUNICATED”. “Trent” Concerning the already 7 canonized books (Deutero) before she assembled closed the agument and discussion once and for all.

Council of Laodicea c. 360 List of books similar to Trent’s canon.

Pope Damasus 382 Decree listing the books of Trent’s canon.

Council of Rome 382 Prompted Pope Damasus’ Decree.

Council of Hippo (North Africa) 393 Approved a list of OT and NT Canon (same as later Trent)

Council of Carthage (North Africa) 397 Approved a list of OT and NT Canon (same as later Trent)

Exuperius, Bishop of Toulouse 405 Wrote to Pope Innocent I requesting a list of canonical books. Pope Innocent listed the Trent canon.

Trent never added the 7 books in 1545 when she council ed. Trent council ed to anathematize the new man made theologies “sola fide’ sola scriptura” and anyone contesting or removing of the sacraments and bible books in protestantism.

You have some truth and some error.

• Melito of Sardis rejected most of if not all of the deuteros. There seems to be some controversy as to what book Melito means when he refers to the Wisdom of Solomon.
• Augustine accepted the deuteros but recognized that the North African councils were only provincial.
• There are no quotes whatsoever in the NT that would lead anyone to believe the deutero’s were in fact thought to be inspired. Remember simple quotation means nothing since Paul quotes from sources no Christian would accept as inspired. If it were that simple there would be no controversy.
• In the period between the North African councils and the council of Trent you will find some who accept the deutero’s and some who reject them. Well before Luther, Calvin or any other reformer there is a current in the church hostile to the deutero’s or at least hostile to including them in the canon. Again, go to newadvent.org and take a look at the section on the OT canon.

 

[greggy53]

This simply isn’t true (at least for the OT). Go to www.nenwadvent.org and look at the section on the Canon of the OT. Even at Trent there was dispute as to what constituted the OT canon (see my previoius post).

So what? The council of Trent upheld the same cannon that had been deemed Holy Scripture since 382 AD. You have no argument. The deuterocanonical books are scripture.They have been part of the Bible since 382 AD. They are even in the 1876 edition of the King James Bible that I have. You just don’t want to adimt that your modern Protestant Bibles have been edited. Why not? Why are you trying to argue they weren’t considerd scripture by the early Church (which was Catholic) when all the historical evidence says they were? Sounds to me like you want to justify your beliefs by re-writing history.

 

[ccolley2]

This simply isn’t true (at least for the OT). Go to www.nenwadvent.org and look at the section on the Canon of the OT. Even at Trent there was dispute as to what constituted the OT canon (see my previoius post).

And HERE are MY references:
Beginning Apologetics Book 1
San Juan Catholic Seminars, Fr. Frank Chacon, and Jim Burnham, 1993-2004

Where We Got the Bible: our debt to the Catholic Church, Henry Graham, Catholic Answers, San Diego, 1997).

CC

 

[SemperReformada]

So what? The council of Trent upheld the same cannon that had been deemed Holy Scripture since 382 AD. You have no argument. The deuterocanonical books are scripture.They have been part of the Bible since 382 AD. They are even in the 1876 edition of the King James Bible that I have. You just don’t want to adimt that your modern Protestant Bibles have been edited. Why not? Why are you trying to argue they weren’t considerd scripture by the early Church (which was Catholic) when all the historical evidence says they were? Sounds to me like you want to justify your beliefs by re-writing history.

What have I stated that is in error? I don’t recall “re-writing history”.

 

[Kamalayka]

If the Bible comes from the Catholic church, then why can’t that be found in the Bible? This should be a no brainer but yet nobody can answer that.

The same reason the Didache was not included in the NT canon:

There is no need to state what everybody already knows.

 

[SemperReformada]

And HERE are MY references:
Beginning Apologetics Book 1
San Juan Catholic Seminars, Fr. Frank Chacon, and Jim Burnham, 1993-2004

Where We Got the Bible: our debt to the Catholic Church, Henry Graham, Catholic Answers, San Diego, 1997).

CC

Do either of these authors state, as you did earlier that “This cannon(the Catholic cannon) went uncontested for 1600 years until Martin Luther decided to take 7 books out…”?

 

[Kamalayka]

Dont be flip.
Christians started as house churches , meeting in homes of believers.
The Eucharist was incorporated within the love feast.
These are just two differences. There are many.

What difference does it make if the Catholic church meets in a house or a building?

What about the Didache, written around the same time of the Book of Revelations
(around AD 90)?

Click here:
www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

 

[ccolley2]

Do either of these authors state, as you did earlier that “This cannon(the Catholic cannon) went uncontested for 1600 years until Martin Luther decided to take 7 books out…”?

Yes, Both…
In the Catholic Seminars book, pages 10-11

In Where we Got the Bible, page 25

CC