Interesting. I wonder why Catholics call certain books “deuterocanonical” when they are part of canon literature. I thought the prefix “deuter” meant “lacking” or “comes up short”. If they’re lacking canon, why are they considered canonical?
“Deuter” means “second”, so “Deuteronomy” is the “second law”, and “deuterocanonical” is the “second canon”.
As the Gospels, in a sense, are regarded more highly than the Epistles, so too is the deuterocanon secondary. Nevertheless, all of these books are included in the canon of Scripture.