Trent and the Biblical Canon

[garysibio]

I hope someone can clear up a point of confusion for me.

James White says that, because of bishops who abstained, only 44% of the bishops actually voted for the inclusion of the deuterocanonical books.

I have heard others say that this is misleading. They say that the inclusion of the books was a unanimous decision. The 44% vote was on whether or not acceptance should be mandated under pain of excommunication.

I haven’t been able to verify either version. Can anyone point me to some evidence?

 

[Salvatore123]

As par for the course with James White, although he often cites statistics that are accurate, he fails to explain the context nor does he match many of his statistics with events to which he claims the statistics belong.

First, the Council of Trent was the first time the Catholic Church OFFICIALLY declared and accepted 73 books of the OT and NT as canonical. Although several popes and several councils had discussed the canon of the bible, no official “decree” was ever passed regarding the biblical canon.

Second, on February 4, 1442, Session 11 at the Council of Florence, the Council proclaimed:

*Most firmly it believes, professes and preaches that the one true God, Father, Son and holy Spirit, is the creator of all things that are, visible and invisible, who, when he willed it, made from his own goodness all creatures, both spiritual and corporeal, good indeed because they are made by the supreme good, but mutable because they are made from nothing, and it asserts that there is no nature of evil because every nature, in so far as it is a nature, is good. It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.

Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John. *

Third, two separate votes at the Council of Trent were taken regarding the canon of the entire bible. The first vote was whether that Council (of Trent) should officially confirm the books listed at the council of Florence (see above). The vote was 100% yea. The second vote was whether or not an anathema should be added to this decree of the canon. That vote went 24 yea, 15 nay, 16 abstain. Remember - the Catholic Church in the West, as evidenced by Pope Damasus I and later, the Council of Florence, had “settled” on 73 books comprising the OT and NT. But no official decree had ever been issued.

So, with a “slight of hand”, White uses factual statistics from the Council of Trent that evidences a vote regarding the canon of the entire bible, but he fails to explain that two votes occurred, and that his “40%” vote did not pertain to only canonicity - it pertained to adding an “anathema” to the canon that had long been accepted (albeit, unofficially).

One thing to keep in mind: St. Jerome himself had serious doubts about the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books, whereas St. Augustine did not. Nevertheless, St. Jerome performed his commission given to him by Pope Damasus I and compiled the deuteros in his Latin Vulgate.

In 1997, in his book “The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance”, Bruce M. Metzger, a noted Protestant biblical scholar, said, beginning on p. 246, “Finally on 8 April 1546, by a vote of 24 to 15, with 16 abstensions, the Council issued a decree (De Canonicis Scripturis) in which, for the first time in the history of the Church, the question of the contents of the Bible was made an absolute article of faith and confirmed by an anathema.”

 

[Salvatore123]

Note: if one is a Catholic and believes that the Holy Spirit exercises its “will” through Holy Mother Church, does the fact that cardinals elected as popes without unanimous votes in their favor, mean they are are any “less a pope” than those cardinals who were elected as pope with a higher percentage of the votes cast?

Of course not.

Well, the same should apply to decrees issued by ecumenical councils. White’s argument STARTS with the false premise that “unless a vote is unanimous, then the Holy Spirit is obviously not in control of the voting”.

You see, THAT is how White operates. If one does not pay attention closely to how he frames his questions and arguments, one can easily be sucked in to his line of thinking and feel trapped.

With White and others of his ilk, don’t begin to answer his question as though the premises he poses just prior to the question are a “given”. They are NOT a given, more often than not.

 

[Salvatore123]

Second note: One needs to also realize that prior to Luther’s “bright ideas”, Luther studied and followed the SAME BIBLE as did the Catholic Church proclaim as canonical at Trent.

In other words, Trent did not put together the 73 books that came to be accepted as the Roman Canon. Trent acted as a bulwark to STOP people such as Luther from REMOVING certain books from the bible because of a personal change in theology. Just consider Luther’s opinions on SEVERAL NT books:

Despite his heavy reliance on the Bible as the source of truth, Luther did not believe it was inerrant. He cast doubts on some traditional dates and authorship of biblical books and questioned the Mosaic authorship of parts of the Pentateuch.

• He rejected the Solomonic origin of Ecclesiastes
• He declared Job to be mere allegory
• He said that Kings was “more to be believed than Chronicles”
• He said that Esther was “without boots or spurs.”
• He said, regarding 2 Maccabees and Esther, that “I am so hostile to this book and to Esther that I could wish they did not exist at all; for they judaize too greatly and have much pagan impropriety.”
• He said that, “The third book of Esdras I throw into the [river] Elbe.”
• He also had serious questions about the book of Jeremiah, Jonah, and the Song of Solomon (also called Song of Songs). Of Jude, he wrote, "He quotes sayings and stories found nowhere else,"3 and noted that "Although I praise the book, it is an epistle that need not be counted among the chief books."4

Having placed emphasis on the New Testament books that glorified Christ, Luther ended up discounting four of the doubtful seven writings previously brought into question by Erasmus. Luther expressed doubts about:

• Hebrews because it refuses a second forgiveness to apostates
• James becaused it declared that ‘faith without works is dead’
• Jude because he thought it derived from 2 Peterr and gave no clear witness to Christ
• Revelation because it was not “clear”, did not properly teach Christ, was neither apostolic nor prophetic, and was subject to personal interpretation

Luther, quite frankly, was so full of hubris that he actually alienated quite a few people who initially began to follow him.

 

[garysibio]

Note: if one is a Catholic and believes that the Holy Spirit exercises its “will” through Holy Mother Church, does the fact that cardinals elected as popes without unanimous votes in their favor, mean they are are any “less a pope” than those cardinals who were elected as pope with a higher percentage of the votes cast?

Of course not.

Well, the same should apply to decrees issued by ecumenical councils. White’s argument STARTS with the false premise that “unless a vote is unanimous, then the Holy Spirit is obviously not in control of the voting”.

You see, THAT is how White operates. If one does not pay attention closely to how he frames his questions and arguments, one can easily be sucked in to his line of thinking and feel trapped.

With White and others of his ilk, don’t begin to answer his question as though the premises he poses just prior to the question are a “given”. They are NOT a given, more often than not.

To be fair White said nothing about unanimity. His (faulty) argument was that it wasn’t even a majority.

 

[melchesidechpio]

I hope someone can clear up a point of confusion for me.

James White says that, because of bishops who abstained, only 44% of the bishops actually voted for the inclusion of the deuterocanonical books.

I have heard others say that this is misleading. They say that the inclusion of the books was a unanimous decision. The 44% vote was on whether or not acceptance should be mandated under pain of excommunication.

I haven’t been able to verify either version. Can anyone point me to some evidence?

I don’t take anything James White says very seriously. The Deuterocanonical books were a topic long before Trent and Florence. Go back to the regional councils of Hippo in the 390’s and Rome of 382. In 382 Pope Damsus I commissioned St. Jerome to translate into Latin

 

[Salvatore123]

Gary,

I agree with you regarding unanimous vs. majority relative to White’s argument. I did not mean to imply that any vote by a council or conclave of cardinals that is less than unanimous is not valid.

Although secret, I suspect that most of the popes were elected with less than unanimous votes. Current canon law stipulates that a person must receive 2/3 of the votes of the electors to be elected pope.

Ironically, a current pope can change the election rules for electing his successor. Pope Paul VI increased the voting age to 79, and increased the number of electors to 120. Another irony is that Paul VI (formerly Archibishop Giovanni Montini) supposedly received several votes for pope BEFORE he was a cardinal, during the election of John XXIII. Montini was made a cardinal very soon after John XXIII became pope, and then succeeded John XXIII as the new Holy Father.

 

[MarcoPolo]

So, with a “slight of hand”, White uses factual statistics from the Council of Trent that evidences a vote regarding the canon of the entire bible, but he fails to explain that two votes occurred, and that his “40%” vote did not pertain to only canonicity - it pertained to adding an “anathema” to the canon that had long been accepted (albeit, unofficially).

This is the correct answer. I came across this issue in another forum. For those interested in where you can find this info, I got the same details about the TWO separate votes on the canon as Salvatore from Gary Michuta’s Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, page 236-237 (who 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”).

 

[MarcoPolo]

James White says that, because of bishops who abstained, only 44% of the bishops actually voted for the inclusion of the deuterocanonical books.

Did you hear White say this in a debate or is it from a particular book or article? I was curious as to his precise wording.

 

[garysibio]

Did you hear White say this in a debate or is it from a particular book or article? I was curious as to his precise wording.

It was on something I read on his Web site although I didn’t save the link. I didn’t think much about it until I heard the refutation.