Was "Deuterocanonical" once a slur?

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Greetings…

As I have approached Orthodoxy/Catholicism, and contemplated conversion, one issue that has been very big for me is the Bible. I have been especially interested in the Biblical texts which were excised from the canon in Protestant Bibles. Over the course of my readings, and my subsequent engagements in what might be called armchair/amateur/novice apologetics, I have taken to referring to those texts as the Deuterocanonicals. On a couple occasions, I have even said to Protestants “I don’t consider them ‘apocryphal’ - to me they arethe Deuterocanonicals”.

Now, while I knew Deuterocanonical meant “second canon,” I always thought it was the official term for those Old Testament texts which are not part of the Jewish canon once it was solidified. However, last night I was reading the introduction to the “Apocrypha” section of Lancelot C.L. Benton’s The Septuagint with Apocrypha, and one statement in that introduction struck me as interesting:

During the Reformation period, the Church of Rome decreed her adherence to the popular view of the Apocrypha held in the main by the early Church, and definitely accepted all the “other books” as canonical, save I. and II. Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh. The Church of England, on the other hand, formally adopted the more critical view of Jerome, and while retaining the Apocrypha in her Bible gave it not canonical but deutero-canonical rank. In more recent times it has been the unfortunate custom of English-speaking people to neglect or despise the Apocrypha

I was struck by the portion I put the emphasis on. It seems this statement (written in the early second half of the 19th century) understood Deuterocanonical to refer to something as somewhat less than canonical. Is that true? Was this term originally a slur that Catholics merely adopted (like “Roman Catholic”)?

I look forward to any light or information anyone can shed on this…

 

[Verbum]

Hi New__,

There is no “rank” in the books of the bible. They are all equally inspired by the Holy Spirit and are the word of God. From the council of Trent:

Following, then, the examples of the orthodox Fathers, it receives and venerates with a feeling of piety and reverence all the books both of the Old and New Testaments, since one God is the author of both; also the traditions, whether they relate to faith or to morals, as having been dictated either orally by Christ or by the Holy Ghost, and preserved in the Catholic Church in unbroken succession.

It has thought it proper, moreover, to insert in this decree a list of the sacred books, lest a doubt might arise in the mind of someone as to which are the books received by this council.[4]

They are the following:

Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses, namely, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first and second of Esdras, the latter of which is called Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets, namely, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of Machabees, the first and second.

Of the New Testament, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke the Evangelist; fourteen Epistles of Paul the Apostle, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two of Peter the Apostle, three of John the Apostle, one of James the Apostle, one of Jude the Apostle, and the Apocalypse of John the Apostle.

If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema.

catholic-forum.com/saints/trent04.htm

As you can see, it does not make any distinctions.

Verbum

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Thank you Verbum!

So, then, would it be safe to say that “Deuterocanonical” is in fact a phrase that was once a slur used by Anglicans which was somehow later adopted by Catholics (analogous to “Roman Catholic”)?

 

[CollegeCatholic]

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

“The terms protocanonical and deuterocanonical, of frequent usage among Catholic theologians and exegetes, require a word of caution. They are not felicitous, and it would be wrong to infer from them that the Church successively possessed two distinct Biblical Canons. Only in a partial and restricted way may we speak of a first and second Canon. Protocanonical (protos, “first”) is a conventional word denoting those sacred writings which have been always received by Christendom without dispute. The protocanonical books of the Old Testament correspond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews, and the Old Testament as received by Protestants. The deuterocanonical (deuteros, “second”) are those whose Scriptural character was contested in some quarters, but which long ago gained a secure footing in the Bible of the Catholic Church, though those of the Old Testament are classed by Protestants as the “Apocrypha”. These consist of seven books: Tobias, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, First and Second Machabees; also certain additions to Esther and Daniel.
It should be noted that protocanonical and deuterocanonical are modern terms, not having been used before the sixteenth century. As they are of cumbersome length, the latter (being frequently used in this article) will be often found in theabbreviated form deutero.”

Also, it is important to note that their article on “Apocrypha” labels any and all circulated books outside of the canon as being Apocryphal.

On my own note, it’s important to recognize that the usage of said word is of Catholic origin as St. Jerome in his translation of the biblical texts into the Vulgate labeled the deuterocanonical texts as “Apocryphal” or “hidden” in reference to their exclusion by the contemporary Jewish authorities.