Replies

“Which is why the definitive Latin version of scripture excluded them. Oh wait. No, it didn’t.

The Vulgate included them. As of 400 AD.”

Jerome translated the vulgate, and says the Apocrypha is not canon.

“Whatsoever is without these, is to be placed among the Apocrypha. Therefore, Wisdom, which is commonly called the Wisdom of Solomon, and the Book of Jesus the son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobit, and the Shepherd are not in the canon.” — Preface to the Book of Kings, vol. 3, book 24.

Cardinal Cajeten expressing Jerome’s position on the matter:

“Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the Apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as is plain from the Prologus Galeatus.

Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome. Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith.

Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.”

-Cardinal Cajetan (16th century)

There are also substantial reasons why the Apocrypha uncanonize themselves.

Tobit, for example, has angels teaching believers how to do magic, as well as showing “Angels of the Lord” telling lies about their identity.

Tobit 6:5-7, “Then the angel said to him: Take out the entrails of this fish, and lay up his heart, and his gall, and his liver for thee: for these are necessary for useful medicines. 6 And when he had done so, he roasted the flesh thereof, and they took it with them in the way: the rest they salted as much as might serve them, till they came to Rages the city of the Medes. 7 Then Tobias asked the angel, and said to him: I beseech thee, brother Azarias, tell me what remedies are these things good for, which thou hast bid me keep of the fish? 8 And the angel, answering, said to him: If thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof driveth away all kind of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they come no more to them.”

It also teaches that alms giving, not the blood of the lamb, cleanses sin.

Tobit 4:11, “For alms deliver from all sin, and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness.”

Judith has wrong historical information and, therefore, cannot be scripture:

Judith 1:5, “Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor, king of the Assyrians, who reigned in Ninive the great city, fought against Arphaxad and overcame him.”

He’s King of the Babylonians, just so you know.

Baruch has similar historical problems:

Baruch 6:2, “And when you are come into Babylon, you shall be there many years, and for a long time, even to seven generations: and after that I will bring you away from thence with peace.”

It was for 70 years, not 7 generations, just so you know.

Maccabees uncanonizes itself, insomuch it tells us directly that it was not written by anyone inspired.

For that cause the Jews rejected the apocrypha, since there were no Prophets in those days who could have composed any of these books:

“From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets.” ... “We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine...”(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8)

For the same cause, Origen, Jerome, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, and “Pope” Gregory the first, rejected most, if not all, of these books as canon.

For example, Gregory on Maccabees:

“Concerning which thing we do nothing irregularly, if we adduce a testimony from the books, which although not canonical are published for the edification of the people. For Eleazar wounding an elephant in battle, slew him, but fell under him whom he had destroyed.” — Morals, book 19, on 39th chap, of Job.

And Athanasius:

“All the Scriptures of us Christians are inspired. And there are riot innumerable books, but on the contrary the books are defined and in cluded in a canon, and these are the books of the Old Testament. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judge*, Ruth, the first and second of Kings, the third and fourth of Kings, the first and second of Chronicles, the first and second of Ezra, the Psalter of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the Twelve Prophets, Amos, Micaiah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habukkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zacha- riah, Malachi. These twelve are in one book. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel. There are other books of the Old Testament be sides these, which are not canonical. The Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobias. These are not canonical.” — Synopsis of the Holy Scriptures. (Paris, 1627.)

“Jerome translated the vulgate, and says the Apocrypha is not canon.”

It wasn’t Jerome’s decision to make. He was a translator. If they were non Canonical - why does Jerome include them? Why weren’t they excluded?

“Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the bible for that purpose.”

And that’s precisely the question Cajetan answers. They are canonical. That is why they were included in the official bible - the Vulgate - long before Luther ever came around.

“There are also substantial reasons why the Apocrypha uncanonize themselves.”

Oh, I see. So the books THEMSELVES decide whether they do or do not belong. Anything to evade the point that the Magisterium decides.

“Tobit 6:5-7, “Then the angel said to him: Take out the entrails of this fish, and lay up his heart, and his gall, and his liver for thee: for these are necessary for useful medicines. And when he had done so, he roasted the flesh thereof, and they took it with them in the way: the rest they salted as much as might serve them, till they came to Rages the city of the Medes. Then Tobias asked the angel, and said to him: I beseech thee, brother Azarias, tell me what remedies are these things good for, which thou hast bid me keep of the fish? And the angel, answering, said to him: If thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof driveth away all kind of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they come no more to them.”

Hmm, that wouldn’t have anything to do with your church’s proscriptions of Incense, now would it? I can see why Luther might want to chop that out of his bible.

Tobit 4:11, “For alms deliver from all sin, and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness.”

“Truly, truly. This I tell you - whatsoever you did for the least of these - you also did for me.”

“He’s King of the Babylonians, just so you know.”

You’ve been called out on this before. King of Babylon became King of Assyria when Babylon defeated Assyria.

“It was for 70 years, not 7 generations, just so you know.”

Even to describes an upper bounded limit.

“Maccabees uncanonizes itself, insomuch it tells us directly that it was not written by anyone inspired.”

Oddly fitting to go with the Epistles of the ‘least of the Apostles”.

“Jews rejected the apocrypha”,

Which is why they were an integral part of the Septuagint.

“For the same cause, Origen, Jerome, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, and “Pope” Gregory the first, rejected most, if not all, of these books as canon.”

Ah, so we accept the Magisterium when it agrees with you and disregard the Magisterium when it disagrees with you.

Do you believe that the Magisterium has authority over the Body of Christ?