[wmfights]

...what was good enough for Peter, Paul and John is good enough for me.

In following this discussion about the apocrypha it's stunning how historical fact is ignored. I believe St. Athansius was the first to use his office as Bishop to clearly state for churches under his direction what the books of the Canon were. He followed in the long line of theologians and the long held practices of individual churches. IOW, he just made clear what was already accepted truth. Athansius clearly stated to his churches that the apocrypha was good for devotional and historic reading, but was not as Canonical authorities.

[Quix]

My goodness, wm!

What place do you think historical fact and logic have in an FR religion thread???

Good one. Thx.

[kawaii]

wouldn't letting a single bishop's perception settle the matter be a papist idea?

[annalex]

Athansius clearly stated to his churches that the apocrypha was good for devotional and historic reading, but was not as Canonical authorities.

Another authority of that opinion was St. Jerome, but that notwithstanding, the West followed the canon of Hippo and Carthage, and the East simply used the complete Canon, to this day. Opinions of individuals are interesting, but the Church as a whole disposes.

[kosta50]

Athansius clearly stated to his churches that the apocrypha was good for devotional and historic reading, but was not as Canonical authorities

Please document your claim. +Athanasius considered some 'apocryphal' books in the Seoptuagint as non-canonical, but not all of them.