Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger (17 page)

Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus (490–583)

Cassiodorus’ life is divided into his political career and
his life as a monk. Several works of his have survived. One of these, the
famous
De Institutione Divinarum Litterarum,
addresses the contents of
the Old Testament canon.
[454]
De Institutione,
which was written between AD 543 and 555, was intended
as an introduction to Scripture for the brothers at his monastery and a guide
to the study of Scripture. It contains three lists: Jerome’s
Prologus
Galeatus
or
Helmeted Prologue
(the Protestant canon.); Augustine’s
list in
On Christian Doctrine
(the Catholic canon); and the books of the
Latin Vulgate
(the Catholic canon). Cassiodorus presents these lists
without commenting upon the contradictions involved.

Isidore of Seville (ca. 560–636)

Born in Cartagena, Spain, Isidore was educated at the
Cathedral School in Seville where he mastered Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. He
became bishop of Seville and was instrumental in rebuilding a new culture that
had been destabilized by the invasion of the Goths. He also played a key role
in the council of Seville and the two councils of Toledo. The Catholic
Encyclopedia states,

Isidore was the last of the ancient Christian
Philosophers, as he was the last of the great Latin Fathers. He was undoubtedly
the most learned man of his age and exercised a far-reaching and immeasurable
influence on the educational life of the Middle Ages.
[455]

Protestant apologists sometimes include Isidore as one who
rejected the Deuterocanon. They appeal to a passage in his book, Etymologies
,
in which Isidore states, “The Hebrews on the authority of Ezra receive
twenty-two books of the Old Testament.”
[456]
He continues by listing the books of the
Protestant canon and dividing them into the Law, the Prophets, and the Holy
Writings. Frequently omitted by these apologists is what Isidore writes later
in the same passage:

There is a fourth order with us of those books of the
Old Testament, which are not in the Hebrew Canon. The first of these is Wisdom;
the second Ecclesiasticus; the third, Tobias; the fourth, Judith; the fifth and
sixth, the Maccabees... the Church of Christ honors them and promulgates them
as divine books.
[457]

Being conversant with the Hebrew language, Isidore knew the
rabbinical tradition of limiting Scripture to twenty-two books. Nevertheless,
he acknowledges that the Deuterocanon contains
divine books
and that it comprises
a fourth division within the Old Testament. Another list in his work,
De
Ecllesiasticis Officiis,
likewise, confirms the Deuterocanon:

These are the seventy-two
canonical
books, and on this account Moses elected the elders, who should prophesy; For
this cause, the Lord Jesus sent seventy-two disciples to preach.
[458]

Isidore’s views on the Deuterocanon are very clearly stated
in his
Prologue to the Old Testament:

Of these (the historical books), the Hebrews do not
receive Tobias, Judith, and Maccabees,
but the Church ranks them
among the Canonical Scriptures.
Then follow also those two great books—books
of holy teaching, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus; which, although they are said to
be written by Jesus the son of Sirach, nevertheless, on account of the
similarity of diction, are called of Solomon.
And these are acknowledged to
have, in the Church, equal authority with the other Canonical Scriptures
.
[459]

Isidore is an excellent example of how a writer acknowledges
the rabbinical canon without rejecting the Deuterocanon. He is merely passing
on information for the benefit of his reader and not suggesting that that
position is correct. Isidore can be used for support of the Protestant canon
only if readers commit the fallacy of Special Pleading (i.e. accepting only the
passages that agree with their position).

The Chaldean Nestorians, Jacobites, Copts,
Monophysites, and Islam

During the fifth and sixth centuries, several important churches
in the southeastern part of the Empire rejected the Christology of the Councils
of Ephesus and Chalcedon and broke away from the main body of Christianity.
Even in this separated condition, however, they retained the books of the
Deuterocanon as authentic parts of the Old Testament.
[460]
Islam, which arose in the seventh century,
went farther and rejected the divinity of Christ altogether (though retaining
Him as a very important prophet); yet even several Muslim jurists quote from
the Deuterocanon, sometimes ascribing it to the Torah (i.e. Old Testament).
[461]

Syro-Hexaplar, Paul of Tella (616)

The Hexaplar is a six-columned document used to compare
various versions or translations of Scripture. Centuries earlier, Origen
produced a
Hexaplar
containing columns in Hebrew, a Greek
transliteration of the Hebrew, and four Greek translations of the Old Testament
(
Aquila
,
Symmachus
,
Theodotion
, and the
Septuagint
).
At the beginning of the seventh century, a Syrian named Paul of Tella made a
new version of Origen’s
Hexapla
, known as the
Syro-Hexapla
. It
includes the Deuterocanonical books of Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch.
[462]

Eugenius II (the younger) (d. 647)

Eugenius was bishop of Toledo from AD 647 until his death in
AD 657. Known for his poetry, Eugenius II set Isidore’s canonical list
(including the Deuterocanon) to Latin verse.
[463]

Ildephonsus (Archbishop of Toledo, ca. 600–667)

Ildephonsus, the nephew of Eugenius II and successor of the
same bishopric in Toledo, penned several spirited works, among them a
Treatise
on Baptism
which includes Augustine’s longer canon.
[464]

The Sixty Books (after 650)

The
Sixty Books,
found among the manuscripts of
Anastasius of Sinai’s
Questions and Responses,
is an ancient manuscript
written by an unknown author
.
[465]
It lists all of the books of Protocanon except Esther. Its
New Testament listing fails to include the book of Revelation. It is an
exhaustive list because it distinguishes the sixty books from the Apocrypha.
Included in a section of apocrypha are Esther, 3 and 4 Maccabees.

The Council of Trullo (Quinisext) (692)

The Council of Trullo or Quinisext met to pass the
disciplinary canons that were lacking in the Fifth and Sixth Ecumenical
Councils. As the anti-Catholic historian Philip Schaff notes, it adopted 102
canons (“canons” in this sense, means legal decrees, not lists of Scripture),
most of them taken from previous councils. It must be emphasized, however, that
these decrees were not legally or ecumenically sanctioned. They were signed by
the emperor, with a second place being left blank for the signature of the
pope; but that place was never filled. The names of Paul of Constantinople,
Peter of Alexandria, Anastasius of Jerusalem, George of Antioch, and other
important prelates were added; 211 Greek and Oriental bishops or their
representatives in all, of whom 43 had been present at the Sixth Ecumenical
Council. Yet no pope ever approved the canons of the Council of Trullo—though
some attempt was later made to sanction as many of them as might be
acceptable. 

Trullo adopted the decrees of both the councils of Carthage
and Laodicea, including perhaps, the spurious sixtieth canon as well. Unless
the Trullian Fathers rejected Laodicea’s sixtieth canon or found some way to
harmonize the incompatible lists which would have resulted, their position on
Scripture remains hopelessly at odds with itself. To make matters even more
confusing, the Trullian council also sanctioned the eighty-fifth decree of the
so-called
Apostolic Canons,
which accepts the
four
books of
Maccabees.
[466]
The
council also affirmed the teachings of several Church Fathers on the subject;
of whom at least two (e.g. Gregory of Nazianzus and Amphilochius) omitted the
Deuterocanon from their lists. In short, Trullo’s decrees are a confusing mixed
bag from which no clear teaching on Scripture emerges. Arthur Sippo offers one
possible way to understand these canons in a more coherent fashion:

As to the ‘contradictions’ between the canon of Hippo
on the Canon of Scripture and those of St. Amphilocus & St. Athanasius,
there was actually a total of 5 different listings of the Canon of Scripture
among the 102 Canons at Quinisext. None of them are identical with each
other. To counter the argument that they were contradictory to each other,
Percival opined that the affirmation of these canons was ‘not specific but
general’ (page 611).  In other words, Quinisext was giving a general
witness to the usage of the Scriptures in the Early Church with these different
canons.  As in any law code, there are bound to be portions of that code
that are obsolete, superceded, or over-turned by judicial authority. 
Since the long Canon has always predominated in the Eastern Church we can only
surmise that Quinisext would have given pride of place to the Canon of
Scripture from Hippo/Carthage.
[467]

The Protestant scholar Osterley, likewise, argues that
Trullo accepted the Deuterocanon, because it gave a place of primacy to the
canons of the council of Carthage.
[468]

Bede (ca. 673–735)

Born in Northumberland, England, Bede began his education in
the monastery of St. Peter and Paul. By the age of thirteen, he had become a
priest and joined the religious leaders at the monastery. He is best known as
an historian, especially for his work, Ecclesiastical
History of the English
People.
Bede was a devoted reader and commentator on Scripture. He once
wrote,

From the time of my admission to the priesthood to my
present fifty-ninth year, I have endeavored for my own use and that of my
brethren, to make brief notes upon the holy Scripture, either out of the works
of the venerable Fathers or in conformity with their meaning and
interpretation.
[469]

Two passages are sometimes offered as evidence that Bede
rejected the disputed books. The first passage is in his
De Temporum
Ratione,
written about AD 703. It reads:

Thus far divine Scripture contains the
series
of events
. The subsequent history of the Jews is exhibited in the book of
Maccabees, and in the writings of Josephus and Africanus, who continue the
subsequent history down to the time of the Romans.
[470]

The work,
De Temporum Ratione,
recounts history from
Creation down to Bede’s own time. Bede’s concern is not to determine the limits
of the canon of the Old Testament  but to explain what sources are
available to cover this particular period in the history of the Jews. As Breen
explains:

We believe, therefore, that in distinguishing
Maccabees from the other historical books of divine Scripture, he merely wishes
to point out that it does not alone continue the series of historical events
from Ezra to the era of the Romans. Up to the time of Ezra, indeed, not all
historical events were written, but enough was written to form a continuous
chain of chief events, and no other writings contain the events of those times
except the Holy Books, which follow each other in a certain historical series.
But after Ezra a great lacuna occurs in the history of the Jews down to the
time of the Romans, which is only partly bridged over by the combined data of
Maccabees, Africanus, and Josephus. The second book of Maccabees covers a
period of only about sixteen years; the first, of about forty. They are partly
synchronous, and combined they would not cover a period over fifty years. Hence
Bede could not say that the divine Scripture contained the series of events
down to the Roman epoch. He, therefore, drew a distinction between Maccabees,
and the preceding historical books, not from the nature of the books, but from
the fact that the scriptural history of the Jews became broken at Ezra, and the
fragment of it which existed in Maccabees had to be supplemented by the two
cited authors.
[471]

Bede’s comments then are similar to those of Josephus’ in
that writer’s work
Against Apion
. As a historian, Bede’s continuous
narrative breaks down after Ezra and is picked up again by Maccabees, the New
Testament, and other books. This point is affirmed by examining the rest of
De
Temporum Ratione
and Bede’s other works. He quotes all of the
Deuterocanonical books freely, often introducing them with solemn formulas
commonly restricted to Scripture. Bede’s
Commentary on the Book of Tobit
interprets
Tobit as an allegory concerning Christ and His Church.
[472]
It is true that, like Primasius before him,
Bede adopts Jerome’s interpretation of the twenty-four elders in Revelation; but
the clear acceptance of the Deuterocanon in his other works demonstrates that
Bede could not have adopted Jerome’s views on the canon.
[473]

John Damascene (of Damascus) (676–730)

In his youth, Damascene excelled in the areas of science and
theology, eventually becoming the Chief Councilor of Damascus. Later, he felt
called to the religious life and entered the monastery in St. Sabas near
Jerusalem. As an ordained a priest, he fought against the Iconoclastic heresy.
[474]
The Synod of
Constantinople denounced him in AD 754, but some 35 years later his opposition
to iconoclasm was vindicated by the Second General Council of Nicea. With John
Damascene the patristic age comes to a close in the East; he is usually
reckoned as the last of the eastern Fathers.