Msg Base:  AREA 5  - ASK FATHER            CIN ECHO   AMDG
  Msg No: 315.  Wed  6-17-92 22:50  (NO KILL)  (RECV'D)  (MAILED)
    From: Father Mateo
      To: Joseph Alvarez
 Subject: Deuterocanonical books/so

JA|I wrote a while back and I think mentioned that I had spent 10 years
  |in the Protestant outbacks.  I was wondering if you could shed a
  |little light on a few things.  The Protestants do not accept the
  |books of Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Wisdom, etc. Do we refer to them
  |as deuterocanonical, and if so, what does that mean?
  |.
  |Also, my Protestant friends defend sola Scriptura on the grounds of
  |several verses talking about not adding or taking away from what God
  |has commanded or spoken.  These are the verses I have found: Rev.
  |22:19;Deut 4:2; 12:32;and Prov. 30:6.  This is why Protestants cannot
  |accept Catholic teaching on Mary and papal authority/infallibility.
  |.
  |I mention these two issues together because if I can prove the
  |validity of the aforementioned books, then I can charge the
  |Protestants with taking away from what God has spoken.  IÕm sure this
  |is nothing new, but I would be greatly enlightened if you could
  |answer these questions and/or point me to any books or articles that
  |deal with the subject.

Dear Joseph,

You have asked more than one question, so I will write you more than
one answer.

The books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1st and 2nd
Maccabees and parts of Esther and Daniel were accepted by the Jews
until the end of the 2nd century A.D.  Thus they were included in the
translation of the Old Testament into Greek (known as the Septuagint)
in the 3rd century B.C.  Toward the end of the 2nd century A.D., the
Jews formed a definitive canon of Scripture for the first time in
their history.  At that time, they excluded these books for one or
more of three reasons: 1) they were more recent than the other OT
books; 2) they were not written originally in Hebrew; 3) Christians
were using them with great success in preaching Christ.

These are the books called deuterocanonical (meaning, "belonging to
the second list"), not that there are or ever were two lists or
canons of biblical books, but that these books won slow acceptance
in the early Church, both before and after the rabbis excluded them
from the Jewish canon.  In the 16th century, the Protestants
preferred to follow, the 2nd century Jewish canon, and so they
excluded the deuterocanonicals.  At that time also, the Council of
Trent included them in the official Catholic biblical canon on the
basis of their continuous usage in the Church from the beginning.

If your friends are Christians, they will agree with you that Jesus
Christ brought the Old Covenant to an end and instituted a New
Covenant in His blood.  With the Old Covenant at an end, the leaders
of the Old Covenant lost their authority over the Scriptures.  So the
rabbis at the end of the 2nd century A.D. had no authority to form a
scriptural canon.  They might do so as an exercise of scholarship,
but not with any religious authority.  In the New Testament in
Christ's blood, Christ is the Authority, and He has given that
authority to Peter and the apostles to pass on to their successors
(Matt. 16:18-19; 18:18; 28:18-20: John 21:15-17).

The Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth (1st Timothy
3:15).  The Church alone has the authority to determine what is or
is not inspired Scripture.  The Church also is the only authentic
(i.e., Christ-appointed) interpreter of Scripture.

More to come.

                                Sincerely in Christ,


                                        Father Mateo