Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger (11 page)

Then of the New Testament [the books of the New
Testament are listed]
. But let all the rest be put aside in a
secondary rank. And whatever books are not read in Churches, these read not
even by thyself, as thou hast heard me say.
Thus much of these subjects.
[248]

Once again, a careful reading shows that Cyril, like
Athanasius, is actually dividing religious literature into three categories,
not two. In addition to the twenty-two books (including Baruch and the Epistle
of Jeremiah), Cyril mentions two other categories:

But let all the rest be put aside in a secondary rank
[
en deuterw
]. And whatever books are not read in Churches, these
read not even by thyself, as thou hast heard me say.
[249]

Here we see that Cyril’s three classes are: (1) The
twenty-two books, (2) others, of a secondary rank (those en deuterw), which
are, notice, still read openly in the churches, and (3) apocryphal books, which
are not to be read at all, not even privately.
[250]
  We know for certain that Cyril did not
consider the Deuteros to be among this third class because he uses them
extensively in his Catechetical Lectures. In these famous lectures to
catechumens, Cyril cites Baruch as coming from the Prophet.
[251]
Wisdom is likewise used for doctrinal
instruction.
[252]
It
is also elsewhere quoted without distinction or qualification.
[253]
Sirach is used in a
similar manner.
[254]
The Deuterocanonical sections of Daniel are considered authentic portions of
Protocanonical Daniel and occasionally cited with the solemn introduction, “It is
written.”
[255]

It is true that Cyril does not use the Deuterocanon with the
same force and frequency as Athanasius; he may therefore have possibly held
them in a lower rank. Nevertheless, he manifestly did not consider them
apocrypha. It is likely then that Cyril follows Athanasius in holding the
Deuterocanon as a subset of inspired Scriptures.

The Council of Laodicea (343/381)

The local council of Laodicea took place in Pacatian of
Phrygia sometime in the latter half of the fourth century. It is not known how
many bishops attended this council. Laodicea issued no doctrinal decrees; it
only passed disciplinary canons. This district, too, was plagued, apparently,
by apocrypha which had crept into the usage of certain churches. The
Fifty-ninth canon of Laodicea dealt with this problem:

Canon 59

That psalms of private origin are not to be read in
the church, nor uncanonical books, but only the  canonical books of the
Old and New Testaments.

Anti-Catholics sometimes assert that Athanasius and Cyril
rejected disputed books by saying that they were
merely
to be read. This
mistake is perhaps rooted in the fact that most anti-Catholic churches are
non-liturgical—quite unlike both the synagogue and the early Church. Liturgical
believers know that a solemn, public reading, taking place as a ritual part of
divine worship, is the strongest possible affirmation that the text being read
is considered sacred and is
not
an example of mere secular writing.
[256]
Laodicea’s
Fifty-ninth
Canon
reinforced the dividing line between sacred and profane books by
forbidding the reading of uncanonical literature in the churches. Which books
did this council consider canonical? The
Sixtieth Canon
reads:

These are all the books of the Old Testament appointed
to read: Genesis of the world, Exodus from Egypt… Jeremiah and Baruch, the
Lamentation and the Epistle… and these are the books of the New Testament: Four
Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; The Acts of the Apostles;
Seven Catholic Epistles—one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude;
Fourteen Epistles of Paul…
[257]

This
Sixtieth Canon
has some affinity with
Athanasius’ list, in that it includes Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah, but
differs by including Esther.
[258]
It also differs from Cyril, Athanasius, and Origen in that it omits any mention
of the Deuterocanon.
[259]
These oddities only serve to highlight the fact that this canon may very well
be spurious; scholars have long noted that this
Sixtieth Canon
is
missing in an important Greek manuscript and in two early Syriac versions; also
in one of two later Latin manuscripts. The consensus from Catholic and
Protestant scholars alike is that this canon is
not
genuine, but likely
represents a gloss that was incorporated into the text at later date.
[260]
Furthermore, even
if it could be proved to represent the authentic view of the council, this
Sixtieth
Canon
would have been a
disciplinary
measure not a
doctrinal
one.
That is, it sought to legislate the practice of the Church (discipline) and not
the teaching of the Church (doctrine).
[261]
This measure may have been a temporary
restriction on which books could be used in the liturgy, and may not have
reflected the common practice during other periods when circumstances were
different. After the apocrypha problem had subsided, the disciplinary canon
could be rescinded. The deliberations of this council have been lost and it is
impossible to know if these restrictions in the Fifty-ninth canon and/or the
sixtieth canon were to be temporary or permanent or if they were intended to be
enforced locally or universally.

Hilary of Poitiers (315–ca. 367)

Born into a wealthy pagan family in Gaul, Hilary was well
educated and later in life, along with his wife and children, converted to
Christianity. Around AD 350, he was elected Bishop of Poitiers, where he became
famous as a valiant defender of orthodoxy against the Arian heresy. The Arian
metropolitan sent Hilary into exile in Phrygia for his beliefs. In Phrygia,
Hilary proved too much to handle for the Arians in the East so he was sent back
to Gaul where he was received as a hero. Hilary died around the year AD 368.

We have already visited Hilary’s
Prologue on the Psalms
,
in which he enumerated the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, adding: “To
some it has seemed good to add Tobias and Judith, and thus constitute
twenty-four books according to the Greek alphabet….”
[262]
Outside of this eccentric Alexandrian
computation of the canon, Hilary’s Deuterocanonical usage reveals that he
accepted all of the books in question as inspired Scripture.
[263]
Baruch, he uses as an authentic part of
Jeremiah.
[264]
Wisdom,
Hilary refers to as the words of a Prophet,
[265]
and quotes it side by side with the
Protocanonical books without distinction or qualification.
[266]
Sirach is likewise used without
qualification or distinction.
[267]
Judith is quoted as Scripture.
[268]
Tobit is used without any qualification.
[269]
The
Deuterocanonical sections of Daniel are used in a manner indistinguishable from
the Protocanonical books and sections.
[270]
In his work,
On the Trinity
, Hilary
writes:

Since, therefore, the words of the Apostle, One God
the Father, from Whom are all things, and one Jesus Christ, our Lord, through
Whom are all things, form an accurate and complete confession concerning God,
let us see what Moses has to say of the beginning of the world. His words are,
‘And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the water, and let it
divide the water from the water. And it was so, and God made the firmament and
God divided the water through the midst. Here, then, you have the God from
Whom, and the God through Whom.’ If you deny it, you must tell us through whom
it was that God’s work in creation was done, or else point for your explanation
to an obedience in things yet uncreated, which, when God said Let there be a
firmament, impelled the firmament to establish itself.
Such
suggestions are inconsistent with the clear sense of Scripture. ‘For all things’,
as the Prophet says, ‘were made out of nothing
;’ it was no transformation of
existing things, but the creation into a perfect form of the non-existent.
[271]

Here Hilary quotes 2 Maccabees 7:28 as the words of a prophet
quoted from Scripture! Hilary sees 2 Maccabees as capable of confirming
Christian doctrine. He elsewhere quotes from the Maccabees without
qualification or distinction.
[272]

Basil the Great (329–379)

Basil was born into a distinguished Christian home. Along
with Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzus, he is counted as one of the
three Cappadocian Fathers. Excelling in studies, Basil traveled to Caesarea,
Constantinople, and Athens. In Caesarea, he met and became close friends with
Gregory of Nazianzus. In AD 370, Basil became bishop of the See of Caesarea,
where he won renown for his teaching and administration.

Basil quotes the Book of Judith in his treatise,
On the
Holy Spirit
.
[273]
He follows this quote with quotations from the Gospel of John without any
distinction or qualification. Basil holds up the mother of the seven Maccabean
martyrs as an example for Christians.
[274]
Basil elsewhere quotes from Wisdom, Baruch, and the
Deuterocanonical portions of Daniel, always in a manner indistinguishable from
the rest of Scripture.
[275]

Gregory of Nazianzus (330–374)

Another one of the Cappadocian fathers is Gregory of
Nazianzus. The quieter counterpart of Basil the Great, Gregory was born in Asia
Minor in or around the year AD 325. Gregory’s father had been a member of a
heretical sect but converted to orthodox Christianity and was later ordained a
priest. While at the famed school of Caesarea, Gregory met Basil who became his
life long friend. He traveled to Palestine and completed his studies in
Alexandria (where Athanasius was then bishop) and Athens. Gregory became bishop
in Nazian and was later invited to be bishop of Constantinople, but internal
bickering prevented him from accepting the position/post. Gregory retired and
died in seclusion in the year AD 374.

Gregory uses the Deuterocanon as Scripture. He quotes Baruch
3:35-37 to counter his opponent’s position concerning the doctrine of the
Trinity.
[276]
Wisdom
is used as a definition from Solomon.
[277]
Wisdom is frequently quoted among other texts without
qualification or distinction and is often used to confirm doctrine.
[278]
The
Deuterocanonical sections of Daniel are used as an authentic part of Daniel.
[279]
Sirach is also
cited in an authoritative manner.
[280]
Gregory uses Sirach to expound on the Commandment “Honor
your father and your mother.”
[281]
Elsewhere, Sirach, and Proverbs are quoted without
qualification in order to demonstrate that the Holy Spirit is not a created
being.
[282]
A passage
in Judith is introduced as having been taken from Scripture.
[283]

In
Orations
43.70, Gregory recounts numerous examples
drawn from sacred history:

Come then, there have been many men of old days
illustrious for piety, as lawgivers, generals, prophets, teachers, and men
brave to the shedding of blood. Let us compare our prelate with them, and thus
recognize his merit.
[284]

He continues by expounding with the examples of Adam, Enos,
Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Job, Moses, Aaron, Joshua, the
Judges, Samuel, David, Solomon, Elijah, and the seven Maccabean martyrs. In
chapter 75, with examples taken from the New Testament, Gregory’s panorama
covers the whole of biblical history, beginning with Genesis and continuing
through the New Testament. The inclusion of the Maccabees in this context
strongly suggests that Gregory’s Old Testament included the Deuterocanon;
because otherwise it would have terminated at the time of Artaxerxes and
skipped to the time of Christ.

This usage seems to be contradicted by a poem written by
Gregory that reads:

These are all twelve of the historical books, Of the
most ancient Hebrew wisdom: First there is Genesis…The poetic books are five:
Job being first…And five prophetic, likewise inspired…There are the twelve
written in one book…All these are one. The second is Isaiah, Then Ezekiel, and
Daniel’s gift, I reckon, therefore, twenty-two old books, Now count also those
of the new mystery…
[285]

It is important to note not only what Gregory says in this
passage but also what he
does not
say. Gregory does not relegate the
Deuterocanon to the apocrypha as Protestants do today. He omits them only from
the “most ancient Hebrew wisdom” contained in the twenty-two books. The
apocrypha is not mentioned. There is also no indication in his other works that
he ever rejected or even disparaged the Deuterocanon. On the contrary, he uses
them to confirm doctrine and treats them in a manner commensurate with inspired
Scripture. Granting that Gregory is not self-contradictory in his views on the
canon, his list ought to be understood as descriptive and not exhaustive. Like
Athanasius and Cyril of Jerusalem, it is likely that he held a three-fold
division of sacred Scripture.
[286]
If Gregory did deny the Deuterocanon in the passage, then he
would have acted hypocritically by using the Deuterocanon as Scripture against
opponents and Christians while personally holding that they are not worthy of
such use because they are mere human writings.

Amphilochius of Iconium (ca. 339–394)

Amphilochius is not counted as one of the three great
Cappodocian Fathers, but he was an integral member of their company. In AD 374,
Amphilochius became bishop of the See of Iconium. He was known for his learning
and for his close friendship with Basil. The majority of his works are lost,
and the few that have survived are in fragments. One work (long considered the
writing of Gregory of Nazianzus but now attributed to Amphilochius) is called
the
Iambics to Seleucus
. The
Iambics
lists the books of the
Protestant Old Testament canon (including Esther) in verse and the New
Testament canon, although it states that some considered the Book of Revelation
spurious. Amphilochius states: “Here then most certainly you have the Canon of
the divinely inspired Scriptures.”
[287]
However, the
Iambics
do not exclude the Deuterocanon
entirely. As Breen notes, later in the same poem, Amphilochius places the
Deuterocanon in an intermediate place between inspired and non-inspired
writings.
[288]
If
Breen is correct, Amphilochius held an erroneous understanding of inspiration
because God either
is
or
is not
the primary author of a given
writing; there is no middle ground. We have in Amphilochius a three-fold
division of religious literature (e.g. Canonical, Intermediate [those that are
read], and Spurious [apocrypha]) similar to that of Athanasius and Cyril, only
the second category is of inferior substance to the canonical and superior in substance
to mere apocryphal or spurious writings.