Sacred Texts

[criticaltom]

Hello! I know that the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly identifies the OT, Deuterocanonical books, and NT as Holy Scripture. But are there other texts which are considered “sacred texts” but not Holy Scripture? Is this in the Catechism?

 

[FightingFat]

Do you mean stuff like the Didache? The writings of the Early Church Fathers? There’s loads of great non biblical but still really important writing out there!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Hello! I know that the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly identifies the OT, Deuterocanonical books, and NT as Holy Scripture. But are there other texts which are considered “sacred texts” but not Holy Scripture? Is this in the Catechism?

It depends on what you mean by “sacred texts.” Technically, that term is reserved for the scriptures.

However, there are a great many documents that carry tradition or Catholic teaching and are worthy of respect and being read. If you simply open the Catechism at “Ecclesiastical Writers” in the Index of Citations (page 741 in my copy), you will find a great many.

 

[criticaltom]

Yes and thank you to both of you. I am using the term “Holy Scriptures” to define the canon. The law in many, if not all, states in the U.S. allow religions to sell “Holy Scriptures” tax free. So that is pretty clear. But is the Didache “Holy Scripture”? I don’t know, perhaps some of you do. If not, wouldn’t it be proper to at least call it “sacred”?

How about canon law and other documents of the church? Perhaps these questions have not been dealt with in a while?

Again, thanks to all who can help.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Yes and thank you to both of you. I am using the term “Holy Scriptures” to define the canon. The law in many, if not all, states in the U.S. allow religions to sell “Holy Scriptures” tax free. So that is pretty clear. But is the Didache “Holy Scripture”? I don’t know, perhaps some of you do. If not, wouldn’t it be proper to at least call it “sacred”?

How about canon law and other documents of the church? Perhaps these questions have not been dealt with in a while?

Again, thanks to all who can help.

The Didache, the Canon Law, and other documents are not “Holy Scripture.” The Church defines Holy Scripture – and limits it to the Canon of the Bible.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Yes and thank you to both of you. I am using the term “Holy Scriptures” to define the canon. The law in many, if not all, states in the U.S. allow religions to sell “Holy Scriptures” tax free. So that is pretty clear. But is the Didache “Holy Scripture”?

No. It is not in the canon of Biblical writings - therefore, it is not Holy Scripture.​

I don’t know, perhaps some of you do. If not, wouldn’t it be proper to at least call it “sacred”?

Not really - it would cause confusion, and it would suggest that the Didache was no different in theological status from those books which are canonical and inspired.​

The notion of inspiration is a bit vague though - at least because though the Biblical texts are inspired, the same word can also be applied to such supremely great literature as is not in the canon. Much of the canon is made up of great literature, but its literary quality is not the reason for its canonisation.

The inspired and canonical writings all have certain theings in common - for example, they are all expressions of God’s dealings with His Chosen People. They all either lead up to Christ, or are consequences of His Coming. The NT writings all function as the Church’s title deeds, the written expression of her continuity with the People from which she came; that is one reason the NT Church took over the Jewish Bible, the Tanakh.

Other writings lack these features, because they are too remote in time or place or language from the Biblical writings to have the same function. And besides, the Church never accepted the Didache or canon law as having the same status as the writings she recognised as inspired. They have a place - but not in the canon.

US commercial law is no basis for Christian theology or doctrine: all sorts of books are held sacred in different religions, so a pluralist society like the US has to recognise this. What believers in other religions hold about the books sacred to them, though interesting, is not immediately relevant to Christian ideas about Christian sacred books. ##

How about canon law and other documents of the church? Perhaps these questions have not been dealt with in a while?

Again, thanks to all who can help.

Canon law is not inspired or in the canon of the Biblical writings.​