[annalex]

A quote from the Fathers is historical evidence of what the early Church believed. Since we have a different opinion on what the early church was like, we quote to prove a historical point. We do not say: “St. Irenaeus wrote this so you better believe it” — we do not consider the patristic writing canonical anymore than you do. So it is still a useful quote as we have the same basic understanding of what the patristic writings are. With the deuterocanonical books we don’t share a common assumption, so it cannot close any scriptural arguments, and since it is not a product of the early Church, it doesn’t close any historical argument either.

[wmfights]

A quote from the Fathers is historical evidence of what the early Church believed.

I hope you don't mind me jumping in, but do you quote any of the Donatist's as well? I think their view of historical events and their causes might differ.

[Forest Keeper]

... We do not say: “St. Irenaeus wrote this so you better believe it” — we do not consider the patristic writing canonical anymore than you do. So it is still a useful quote as we have the same basic understanding of what the patristic writings are. With the deuterocanonical books we don’t share a common assumption, so it cannot close any scriptural arguments, and since it is not a product of the early Church, it doesn’t close any historical argument either.

OK, that sounds like a reasonable distinction. Thanks.