| 
 
 
 
CHAPTERS
 - Introduction
 - A Revolution by Vatican II?
 - What is Inspiration ?
 - A Revolution by Pius XII?
 - Using Genre to defend Inerrancy
 - How to Interpret Scripture
 - The l964 Instruction of the Biblical Commission
 - Which are the Inspired Books?
 - The Pentateuch
 - Genesis
 - Exodus
 - Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy
 - Joshua, Judges and Ruth
 - Samuel, Kings, Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah
 - Pre-exilic Prophets
 - Exilic and Post-exilic Prophets
 - The Psalms
 - The Wisdom Literature
 - Daniel
 - The Two Books of Maccabees
 - Judith, Esther, and Tobit
 - The Gospels
 - The Acts of the Apostles
 - St. Paul's Epistles
 - The Catholic Epistles
 - Study Questions
 - Selected Answers
 
 
 
Books/Resources by Fr. Most
 
 - EWTN Scripture Q & A
 - Basic Scripture
 - Bible Commentaries
 - Our Lady in Doctrine And Devotion
 - Outline of Christology
 - An Introduction to Christian Philosophy
 - The Living God
 - The Holy Spirit and The Church
 - Catholic Apologetics Notes
 
 
 
Apologetic Resources
 - Ask Father
 - Biblical Catholicism
 - Theology/Philosophy
 - Scripture Resources
 - Scott Hahns Lectures
 - Apologetics Links
 
 
Other Services
 - Catholic Chaplaincy
 - St. Anthony Communications
 
 
 | 
 
 
 
Chapter 7Which are the Inspired Books?
 
 
 In our sketch of apologetics in chapter 2, we said that the only way to be 
sure which books are inspired is to accept the decision of the Church. 
Actually, the Church was in no hurry to give definitive statements on this 
subject. Why?
 
 We saw in chapter 6 that Form Criticism shows the Church has something more 
basic than the Gospels, its own ongoing teaching. Up to the time of Luther, 
people did not basically depend on Scripture, they simply followed the oral 
teaching of the Church, which, as we said, is primary. Jesus never told the 
Apostles: Write Some books, give out copies, tell people to figure them out 
for themselves. This is what the "Reformers" implied. It is foolish. Copies 
were very expensive, not everyone could read, and the study of Scripture is 
quite difficult, One should know the original languages, genres, history 
and culture among other things. In addition, the Second Epistle of Peter 
tells us (3:15-16) that in the Epistles of St. Paul there are many things 
that are hard are hard to understand: the unlearned and unstable twist them 
to their own destruction. The "Reformers" surely proved that right.
 
 Instead, we find in Second Timothy 1:13: "Hold to the form of sound 
teaching which you heard from me." And again in 2:2: "The things which you 
heard from me, through many witnesses, hand on to trustworthy men, who will 
be able in turn to teach others."
 
 Not strange then that the Church saw no urgent need to draw up a canon, 
that is, a list of inspired books. St. Justin Martyr, in his defense of 
Christianity to the Jew Trypho (Dialogue, chapter 32, cf 68) says he will 
use only the Scripture that the Jews would accept - a natural move in such 
a dialogue.
 
 There was an unofficial list in the Muratorian Fragment - which was found 
at Milan. It dates from late second century, and does give a list of books. 
However we see in it some early hesitations. Not mentioned are the Epistle 
to the Hebrews and the Epistles of James and Peter. It rejects some pseudo-
Pauline letters to Laodicea, and Gnostic, Marcionite and Montanist writings 
in general. From this we gather that a stimulus to make a list came from 
the existence of heretical writings. Marcion rejected the entire Old 
Testament, and three Gospels, keeping part of Luke and some of St. Paul's 
Epistles.
 
 While most of the books of Old and New Testament were accepted by the 
Church from the beginning, there were some hesitations, such as those about 
the so-called Deuterocanonicals, which are, in general those books that are 
found in the Septuagint (the ancient Greek version of the Old Testament) 
but not in the Hebrew Old Testament. (They include in general: Sirach, 
Wisdom, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith and additions to Esther 
and Daniel).
 
 There were also other hesitations, for example, the Epistle to the Hebrews 
was accepted very early in the East, chiefly at Alexandria, but the west 
did not accept it until the fourth century. In reverse, the 
Apocalypse/Revelation was accepted early in the west, only later in the 
East. Many fathers - chiefly: Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, 
Tertullian, Cyprian and Hippolytus believed the John who was its author was 
the Apostle John. Other fathers, chiefly: Denis of Alexandria, Eusebius of 
Caesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen and John Chrysostom thought 
it was not the Apostle John.
 
 St. Augustine accepted the longer canon (list - including the 
deuterocanonicals) and defended it in his De Doctrina Christiana 8. At the 
Council of Hippo, his diocese, in 393 AD the longer canon was accepted, and 
repeated and confirmed in the 3rd and 4th Councils of Carthage in 397 and 
418. At the end of the decree was a request to Pope Boniface to confirm it. 
In 405 St. Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, wrote to Pope Innocent I, asking 
him for a ruling. The Pope wrote back to him, repeating the list drawn up 
by the Councils. As a result there was much unanimity in the west in the 
5th century, though the East was slower to accept, waiting until the 7th 
century.
 
 But even in the west there was some difficulty, especially under the 
influence of St. Jerome, who tended to favor the shorter canon (without the 
deuterocanonicals). So Pope Gregory I spoke of First Macchabees as useful 
for edification but not canonical. Cardinal Cajetan, about a thousand years 
later, expressed a similar view even after the Decree for the Jacobites of 
the Council of Florence (1441: DS 1335).
 
 The really final settlement came from the Council of Trent, against the 
errors of Luther, in 1546 (DS 1501-05). It accepted the same list as the 
African councils.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 |