Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger (18 page)

Damascene also accepts the old symbolic theory that there
must be twenty-two books of the Old Testament to correspond with the twenty-two
letters of the Hebrew alphabet.
[475]
He states that Wisdom and Sirach are “excellent and useful,
but are not numbered, nor were they placed in the Ark.”
[476]
Being “placed in the Ark” refers to the Law
that was placed in the Ark of the Covenant by the Jews.
[477]
The idea of books being placed in the Ark
comes from Epiphanius’
On Weights and Measures
.
[478]
  Damascene, however, is trying to
reproduce those books that are accepted by rabbinical tradition. He affirmed
Wisdom as divine Scripture when he wrote: “The divine Scripture likewise saith
that ‘the souls of the just are in God’s hand’ [Ws 3:1] and death cannot lay
hold of them.”
[479]
Later in the same book, Damascene quotes Baruch as Holy Scripture.
[480]
Baruch, Zechariah,
and Micah were all quoted as prophecies about the Incarnation.
[481]
Second Maccabees
was used to support the doctrine of God’s omniscience.
[482]

Alcuin (735– 804)

Alcuin was the head of the cathedral school of York before
being commissioned by Charlemagne, in 781, to organize his Palace School. Like
Bede before him, he was a collector of the writings of the Fathers and other
important documents. Alcuin was also commissioned to restore Jerome’s original
Latin
Vulgate
, which had gradually been corrupted by copyist’s errors. The
product of Alcuin’s work became known as the “Charlemagne Bible.”

Protestant apologists often point to Alcuin’s supposed
denial of Sirach in his treatise,
Against Elipandus
, Book 1, 18 because
Elipandus had cited Sirach 34:14, in favor of the heresy of Adoptionism.
[483]
Alcuin replied:

In the books of Jesus, the Son of Sirach, the
aforesaid sentence is read, of which book blessed Jerome and Isidore positively
testify that it is placed among the apocryphal, that is to say, the doubtful
books.
[484]

Here Alcuin is only attempting to weaken Elipandus’ appeal
to Sirach; it is not a rejection of Sirach’s authority. He wishes to point out
that Sirach does not have a pure pedigree, and that some prominent Fathers had
doubted its authority. Of course, the same could be said of certain books of
the New Testament because they too have been doubted at one time or another.
Alcuin’s appeal to Jerome and Isidore is not entirely correct. Jerome did not
list the Deuterocanon as doubtful; he rejected it. Alcuin had softened Jerome’s
comments on the subject. Isidore, on the other hand, has no doubts on the
divinity of the Deuterocanon; he accepted all of them as inspired canonical
writings.
[485]

Elsewhere in his writings, Alcuin shows no scruples in using
the Deuterocanon (including Sirach) as inspired Scripture. For example, in his
treatise,
De Virtutibus et Vitiis
, 15.18, Alcuin writes:

The saying is read in the
divinely inspired
Scriptures
; ‘Son, delay not to be converted to the Lord; because thou
knowest not what the coming day may bring forth.’ [Sir 5:8]
… These are the
words of God,
not mine.
[486]

If
Against Elipandus
truly represented Alquin’s
measured judgment on the book of Sirach, we certainly would not find him
referring to quotations from it as “the words of God.”  In chapter 18 of
the same work, Alcuin quotes Sirach again as “Holy Scripture.”
[487]
Moreover, Alcuin
also includes all of the Deuterocanon in his Charlemagne Bible.
[488]
He also lists them
elsewhere as canonical books.
[489]

Theodulf of Orleans (760–821)

Theodulf was the Bishop of Orleans and a contemporary of
Alcuin. He amended the text of the Vulgate, using Hebrew texts as well as the
Septuagint. Theodulf’s version includes all of the Deuterocanon.

Council of Nicea II (787)

Convoked to deal with the Iconoclast heresy that had gripped
the East, the Council was comprised of somewhere between 330 and 367 bishops.
This Ecumenical Council produced decrees containing authoritative quotes from
the books of Wisdom and Sirach.
[490]

Codex Amiatinus (A)

This codex belonged to the monastery of Amiata, from which
is receives it name. At one time, it was thought to be one of the more pristine
manuscripts of the
Latin Vulgate
and was used in the Sixtus’ edition of
the Bible (1590). Scholars now place its origin, not in Italy, but in northern
England during the early eighth century. It was given to Pope Gregory II in AD
716, and it very likely represents the Scripture brought into England by the
missionaries of Pope Gregory the Great.
[491]
This codex contains all of the Deuterocanon
with the exception of Baruch. The so-called Epistle of Jeremiah is present and
is attached to the Book of Jeremiah. The Codex also contains Jerome’s prefaces,
including the
Prologus Galeatus
.

Nicephorus (758–829)

Nicephorus was the Patriarch of Constantinople and a staunch
defender of the use of sacred images. He represented the Empress at the Council
of Nicea II and played a key role in the condemnation of the Iconoclast heresy.

Nicephorus produced a catalogue of scriptural books
categorized by their degree of certainty. He begins his list of the Old
Testament with the shorter canon of twenty-two books, including Baruch and
omitting Esther, and followed by a list of the New Testament books.

His second category he called “antilegomena,” which means
“those spoken against.”  This list contains the books of Maccabees,
Wisdom, Sirach, the Psalms of Solomon, Esther, Judith, Susanna, and Tobias,
followed by the New Testament antilegomena.
[492]
Nicephorus concludes by listing the
apocrypha.
[493]
 
Nicephorus’ catalogue did not consign the Deuterocanon to the apocrypha, but
listed it as being doubted by some.
[494]

Nicephorus should not be included among those who doubted
the divinity of the Deuterocanon since he uses them in an authoritative manner.
Sirach and Wisdom he quotes right along with Protocanonical books, entirely
without qualification or distinction.
[495]
Baruch is said to be the voice of the Prophet.
[496]
Wisdom is quoted
with the solemn introduction of “It is written.”
[497]
  For Nicephorus, Wisdom 2:12-23 is a
prophecy of Our Lord’s death.
[498]
 

Codex Paulinus (Carolinus) &
Codex Statinus (Vallicellianus)

Both of these codices include the entire Deuterocanon (with,
in
Codex Paulinus
, the single exception of Baruch).

Rhabanus Maurus (780–856)

Born in Falda in 788 to a prominent family, Rhabanus was
raised in a monastery and studied under Alcuin in Tours. When he returned to his
home, he was elected Abbot of the monastery. Later, 847, he was elected
Archbishop of Mayence and became renowned as a zealous guardian of the Faith.

In his book,
De Instituteione Clericorum
, Rhabanus
essentially reproduces the canon of Isidore of Seville, enumerating seventy-two
books as canonical Scriptures.
[499]
Rhabanus Maurus also produced commentaries on the books of
Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, and 1 and 2 Maccabees.

Walafrid Strabo (808–894)

Surnamed Strabo, meaning “the squint-eyed,” Walafrid was
reared in a monastery under Rhabanus Maurus. He eventually became Dean of St.
Gall and later Abbot of Reichenou in Constance. One of his best-known works is
the
Glossia Ordinaria of Sacram Scripturam
. The
Glossia
is essentially
a series of notes written in the margins of the Bible to help illuminate a
given text for the reader. These notations are primarily taken from the works
of the early Church Fathers. Being placed in close proximity to the sacred
text, these notations gained a certain amount of prestige and authority. The
Glossia
became highly influential during the late or high Middle Ages.

Walafrid’s selection of works is important for our
discussion; he has provided evidence both for and against the acceptance of the
books in question. In favor of the Deuterocanon, his
Glossia
adopts
extracts from Rhabanus Maurus’ commentaries on the books of Wisdom, Sirach,
Judith, and 1 and 2 Maccabees. He also uses Bede’s
Commentary on the Book of
Tobit
. On the other hand, Walafrid introduces the book of Baruch with the
following:

The book which is called Baruch is not found in the
Hebrew Canon, but only in the Vulgate edition, as also the Epistle of Jeremiah.
For the knowledge of the readers, they are written here, for they contain many
things relating to Christ and the last times.
[500]

It should be noted that this statement illustrates its
author’s limited range of experience: as we have already seen, it certainly is
not true that Baruch is found “only in the Vulgate edition”—two of the three
great codices contain that book as well. Since Walafrid’s
Glossia Ordinaria
also included quotations from Jerome’s prefaces (highly critical of the
Deuterocanon, of course) the book helped to spread doubt about the longer canon
all through the Middle Ages.

Pope Nicholas I  (d. 867)

Considered by some as one of the greatest popes of the
Middle Ages, Nicholas ascended to the papal throne during one of the darkest
periods in Church history. Charlemagne’s empire was on the verge of collapse,
and Christian morality was lukewarm among the faithful, even worse among
certain worldly clerics. Nicholas also faced the illegitimate appointment of Photius
to the powerful patriarchal see of Constantinople. Nicholas met all these
challenges and prevented matters from escalating. In his
Letter to the
bishops of Gaul
, Pope Nicholas I wrote that the
Decree of Pope Innocent
I
(which reiterated the larger canon of Carthage and Hippo) was part of
the
universal law of the Church
.
[501]

Photius (ca. 815-891)

When it looked as if matters could not be worse for
Christianity, Photius made them worse. Not only did hostile forces threaten the
Church from without, schism and rebellion were boiling up from within. When
Photius, a very learned man of science and dialectics in Constantinople, was
illegitimately elected Patriarch of Constantinople, Pope Nicholas I refused to
accept him. He rallied the Church against Photius, who, in turn,
“excommunicated” the Pope. These actions brought about the first East/West
schism.

In regards to the canon of Scripture, Photius’
Syntagma
Canonum
shows that he adopted the decisions of Trullo, which had accepted
the Eighty-fifth Canon of the Apostles, the sixtieth Canon of Laodicea, and the
twenty-fourth Canon of Carthage.
[502]
Both Protestant and Catholic scholars count him as a
positive witness for the inclusion of the Deuterocanon.
[503]
Photius’ views confirm Nicholas I’s
statement that the Deuterocanon was part of the
universal
law of the
Church.

Council of Constantinople IV (869–870)

At the Eighth Ecumenical Council, Constantinople IV was
requested by Emperor Basil to reinstate Patriarch Ignatius and to depose
Photius. About sixty-five bishops attended the Council.
[504]
  Among the many topics addressed by
this Council was a condemnation of Iconoclasm, an adoption of a new canonical
method for choosing bishops, and a treatment on the unity of the soul. Within
the decrees of Constantinople IV is a quotation from Sirach 11:7, referred to
explicitly as divine scripture.
[505]

Codices Toletanus and Cavensis

Dating from the ninth and tenth centuries, these two Latin
manuscripts come from Spain and both include the entire Deuterocanon.
[506]

Notker Balbulus (840–912)

Virtually nothing is known about Notker, author of
On The
Interpretation of Divine Scripture
. He is given the surname Balbulus, which
means “the stammerer.” He died in the monastery of St. Gall in Ireland.

In his book Notker comments on the Pentateuch, Joshua,
Judges, Samuel, and the Books of Kings and the Prophets. Turning his attention
to Wisdom, Notker writes:

…I have found no author’s exposition, we accept some
testimonies (therefrom) explained in relation to other books. The book is
totally rejected by the Hebrews, and is by Christians considered uncertain,
nevertheless
, since on account of the utility of its doctrine
,
our forefathers were accustomed to read it, and the Jews have it not, it is
called with us Ecclesiasticus. What thou believe of this, it behooves you to believe
also of the books of Jesus the son of Sirach, except that this latter is
possessed and read by the Hebrews… The priest Bede wrote some things on Tobias
and Ezra, more pleasing than necessary, since he has striven to convert simple
history into an allegory. What shall I say of the books of Judith, Esther and
Paralipomenon [Chronicles]? By whom, or how shall they be explained, since
their contents are not intended for authority, but only as a memorial of
wonderful things? This thou mayest also suspect of the Books of Maccabees.
[507]

Notker’s strange canon seems to have been the product of his
own religious imagination; certainly it cannot be shown to have been used by
any other writer or group of Christians.

Wisdom he accepts because he finds it useful; the same seems
to hold true for Sirach. Tobit he finds devoid of spiritual meaning, a mere
secular history; Maccabees, likewise, is only “a memorial of wonderful things.”
[508]
Notker’s usefulness
for Protestant purposes, however, is severely limited by his simultaneous
rejection of Ezra, Esther, and the Chronicles. All in all, Notker is helpful,
mainly, as a witness to how very confused things became once Jerome opened the
door to private, free-lance canon-making.