Why is it important for the canon to be closed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter phatcatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

phatcatholic

Guest
i’ve been posting at a protestant forum and defending catholicism to the best of my ability. well, they have recently began discussing the possibility of adding new books to the canon of the bible. this seems so utterly absurd to me that i’m having trouble actually coming up with the arguments against this idea. i guess its just the shock-value of such a proposition. it makes it hard for me to focus.but, i figured you guys could help 😉

why is it important that we consider the canon of the bible to be closed? what is the proof or reasoning behind claiming that the canon is closed and that nothing more can be added or taken away?

thanks in advance!

pax christi,
phatcatholic
 
It all comes back to the authority of Christ’s one holy, catholic, apostolic Church doesn’t it? This is Martin Luther’s arbitrary decision to throw books out of the canon in reverse.

Scott
 
If the canons are closed, one should be able to point to a specific Council or Papal Decree that clearly declares the canon to be closed.

In Session IV (April 8, 1546) of the Council of Trent, the fathers solemnly declare a list of books canonical, but nothing is stated about the exclusivity of that list.

Previous declarations have excluded specific books, which are not canonical.

But I am not aware of the Church having ever declared the canon closed.

God bless you all!
 
The bigger question is, why are they talking about adding books to the Bible? What is the context?

Is this simply a hypothetical proposal, or do they have some specific books in mind? Or are they using the possibility of an open canon to somehow discredit Catholicism?

God bless you all!
 
I agree with some of the previous posters the canon is not officially closed the official books are listed that’s all and if not for the protestant controversy they wouldn’t have been listed again at Trent.

But the church alone has the authority to add to the canon. No protestant theologain on his soapbox can add the gnostic gospels for instance. The church has decided upon all the books known to the church at the time of Trent. It is aware there are books of the Bible that the apostle Paul wrote to the early christian community that have been lost to us. If for some reason those were to be found and authentic and valuable the church in theory could add those to the canon. The church however cannot delete books that is has infaliably declared to be canonical. For all the handwringing protestants have over the duueterocanincals the church can never change that decision what is declared canon is always canon.
Trent was an infalliable universal council.
Hippo and Carthage were techniqually western councils but were foundational in understanding the tradition of the canon affirmded at Trent.
 
I guess technically it is not closed, but it practically is. Perhaps if the so-called “Q” Gospel turns up. 😃

Scott
 
The Canon is closed because “inspiration” for public revelation, the basis of scripture, ended with the passing of John.

I pasted the below from: catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0011bt.asp

Just a nibble into the canon. There’s tons out there discussing the canon being closed

Public revelation, Cardinal Ratzinger stresses, came to an end with God’s definitive Word to mankind—Jesus Christ—and with the New Testament. It is contrasted with “the concept of ‘private revelation,’ which refers to all the visions and revelations which have taken place since the completion of the New Testament”

B r a s s T a c k s
Revelation: Public and Private

By James Akin

Ciao,
Dano%between%
 
yea, but what if a document turned up that was revealed during the time when public revelation was still open (as in, when the apostles were still alive)? that could theoretically be added, right? or no? i always thought the canon was closed, so this idea, however theoretical, of documents being added is foreign to me.
 
Your right the canon is still open for addition even though the period of public revelation is over and ended with John’s death.
Like I said there are letters of Paul the church has never found but they knew existed at one time. If they find these who knows?
It’s not likely and in God’s providence we would have found them if they were meant to be in the canon but the way Trent handled the canon is to have an official list as what was recognized as scripture at the time but that did not closed off future reconsiderations.
But we can’t delete what has been canonized.
 
i beleive you when you say that public revelation ended w/ the last apostle, but how does one prove that?
 
40.png
phatcatholic:
i beleive you when you say that public revelation ended w/ the last apostle, but how does one prove that?
Click to expand...
This principle has always been the oral tradition of the church and of the church fathers the cathchism gives this in summary form although it doesn’t get into the exact language of the last apostle the principle is there.

**III. CHRIST JESUS – “MEDIATOR AND FULLNESS OF ALL REVELATION”**25

God has said everything in his Word

[65](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/65.htm’)😉 "In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son."26 Christ, the Son of God made man, is the Father’s one, perfect and unsurpassable Word. In him he has said everything; there will be no other word than this one. St. John of the Cross, among others, commented strikingly on *Hebrews *1:1-2:

In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behavior but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.27

There will be no further Revelation

[66](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/66.htm’)😉 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

[67](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/67.htm’)😉 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. Christian faith cannot accept “revelations” that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such “revelations”.
 
offhand, I would think it would be extremely imporant to sola scriptura Protestants that the canon of scripture be closed, since they insist that all that is necessary for salvation and knowledge of God’s revelation is contained in the bible they proclaim. If they open up the possibility of adding new books, what happens to that dogma? If they are debating the canon decided upon by the Catholic Church in the 4th century and infallibly defined by the Council of Trent in the 16th, which includes OT books in use by Greek-speaking Jews at the time of Christ (and by Christ and His apostles themselves, as well as the Fathers of the Church), that is another issue.
 
Hi Phat,

If Protestants are talking abou coming back to the Catholic canon, then this is a good thing.

If they are talking about adding other books that are not in the Catholic canon, then they are barking up the wrong tree. The Church has already decided which books belong in the Bible.

This however has nothing to do with revelation being closed. When we say this, we mean that, following the death of the last apostles, no new public revelation from God is possible. This is because it’s actually Christ who is the Word of God and he has finished his mission on earth.

Verbum
 
These are all wonderful posts and are very helpful.

I always try to put things in terms that I can understand them. One way I’ve heard this put, is that all that is needed for salvation has been revealed. So, this question might be rephrased, do we have all the revelation we need for salvation? The Church has answered, YES, and I think it is correct.
 
Hi Psalm,

What you say sounds right. Let’s not forget however that the Bible is only part of revelation, the written part.

Verbum
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top