Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: vladimir998; Mr Rogers; All

“Actually, no.”


Simple negation cannot delete his post or mine.

“Yes - but not just the ones you favor. You forget the decisions of synods, regional councils, and Fathers who don’t agree with you.”


Most of the fathers agree with me. Rufinus, and others, on the claims of tradition; Jerome, on the basis of scholarship. But even those who disagree with me still had their own reservations:

“Moreover, I do not seem to have correctly called prophetic the words in this passage: “Why is earth and ashes proud?” [Sirach 10:9] for the book in which this is read is not the work of one whom we can be certain that he should be called a prophet.” (Augustine, Retractions, Section 3 of the Retractions regarding On Genesis Against the Manicheans, p. 43, The Fathers of the Church, Volume 60, Sister M. Inez Bogan, R.S.M. translator.)

Augustine also rejected the idea that any “church with greater authority” could establish the canon, but valued the decision of the majority:

“But let us now go back to consider the third step here mentioned, for it is about it that I have set myself to speak and reason as the Lord shall grant me wisdom. The most skillful interpreter of the sacred writings, then, will be he who in the first place has read them all and retained them in his knowledge, if not yet with full understanding, still with such knowledge as reading gives,—those of them, at least, that arc called canonical. For he will read the others with greater safety when built up in the belief of the truth, so that they will not take first possession of a weak mind, nor, cheating it with dangerous falsehoods and delusions, fill it with prejudices adverse to a sound understanding. Now, in regard to the canonical Scriptures, he must follow the judgment of the greater number of catholic churches; and among these, of course, a high place must be given to such as have been thought worthy to be the seat of an apostle and to receive epistles. Accordingly, among the canonical Scriptures he will judge according to the following standard: to prefer those that are received by all the catholic churches to those which some do not receive. Among those, again, which are not received by all, he will prefer such as have the sanction of the greater number and those of greater authority, to such as are held by the smaller number and those of less authority. If, however, he shall find that some books are held by the greater number of churches, and others by the churches of greater authority (though this is not a very likely thing to happen), I think that in such a case the authority on the two sides is to be looked upon as equal.” (Augustine, NPNF1: Vol. II, On Christian Doctrine, Book II, Chapter 8. See also John E. Rotelle, O.S.A., ed., The Works of Saint Augustine, Part 1, Vol. 11, trans. Edmund Hill, O.P., De Doctrina Christiana, Book II, Chapter 8 (New York: New City Press, 1996), p. 134.)

“It has multiple deuterocanonicals.”


But not all of them, and you can’t remove Jerome out of it, which differentiates them all from the standard canon.

“False reasoning. Abortion is settled as an issue in the Catholic Church. Are there Catholics STILL objecting to the Church’s teaching on abortion? You bet.”


When the Papists have a council to authoritatively reassert it, then your argument will have weight. In the meantime, I’ll stick with the New Catholic encyclopedia and the Jerome Biblical commentary.


67 posted on 01/29/2014 9:51:37 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

“Simple negation cannot delete his post or mine.”

Simple negation was all that was needed. Deleting a post is unnecessary and not necessarily beneficial. It is more beneficial for your errors to stay visible.

“Most of the fathers agree with me.”

Really? On the Eucharist? On the importance of Tradition? On the office of Bishop? On what Baptism really is? On how we are saved? On prayers for the dead?

“But not all of them, and you can’t remove Jerome out of it, which differentiates them all from the standard canon.”

No. It doesn’t need all of them for very few Bibles contained all the books judged canonical even by Protestants standards simply because of the size of the book required.

“When the Papists have a council to authoritatively reassert it, then your argument will have weight. In the meantime, I’ll stick with the New Catholic encyclopedia and the Jerome Biblical commentary.”

No, I don’t think you will.


75 posted on 01/30/2014 4:56:04 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Now the whole canon of Scripture on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books:—Five books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; one book of Joshua the son of Nun; one of Judges; one short book called Ruth, which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings; next, four books of Kings, and two of Chronicles—these last not following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and follows the order of the events. There are other books which seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither with the order of the preceding books nor with one another, such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Ezra, That is, Ezra and Nehemiah which last look more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which terminates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. Still they are to be reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have attained recognition as being authoritative. The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows:—Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; then there are the four greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel. The authority of the Old Testamentis contained within the limits of these forty-four books. (Augustine. “Christian Doctrine.” Edited by Philip Schaff. In A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church Series 1 Vol. II (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993), 2.8.13.)


76 posted on 01/30/2014 5:18:48 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson