What is a Catholic Defense for the Apocrypha?
I am currently in RCIA classes and they gave me a Catholic bible recently which has the Apocrypha. I have heard that it is a contradicting set of books. What is the Catholic Defense for it? Since I can’t seem to wait long until next Sunday.
First of all you need to understand that the books called apocrypha by Protestants are not really apocrypha . That is a pejorative term given to the books by the Protestants. the true Apocrypha books were never a part of the Bible and were banned by Pope St. Gelasius in the fifth century. The correct name are the Deuterocanonical books. Here is the correct history of the Scriptures:
In first century Jerusalem there were at least four OT Canons in use by different Jewish Groups. There was the Canon of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Ethiopian Jews and the Diaspora/Essene Jews. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora/Essenes. We know this because it is quoted in the New Testament. This Canon continued to be the Canon of Christians until after the Reformation and, in fact until about 200 years ago when the Protestants adopted a condensed version of the Canon eliminating the Deuterocanonicals from their Bibles. Even the AKJ originally contained the complete Christian Canon. It has been said by critics of Christ’s Church that the Deuterocanonicals were never believed to be inspired and just the opposite is true. The decision by Christians as to which books are inspired and useful for teaching was decided at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth century. There was never a question about their inspiration.
The OT Canon chosen by the Protestants is actually a Jewish Canon not chosen by the Jews until after the establishment of Christianity as a result of the spread of Christianity to slow the growth of the new group in Jerusalem after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. Until then as I said previously there were many Canons in use. The adoption of the Canon missing the Deuterocanonicals united the Jews against the Christians was decided in the Jewish Council of Jamnia because the Deuterocanonicals referred too strongly to the Messiah fulfilled in Christ.
Some Protestants will claim that only the Jews have the authority to choose Canon but the Church deferred that decision to Christ and the disciples and it is clear through biblical research, that the Septuagint is the Bible used by the first century Church and quoted in the NT Scriptures. The fact that Protestants choose to adopt the Canon that was approved by the same Jews that accused our Lord that resulted in His crucifixion suggests the source of this confusion as from the father of lies who led the Pharisees to accuse Christ and petition for His punishment. It is another way that Satan divides the body of Christ and separates the faithful denying Christ’s prayer that we all be one in Christ through His Church. The Christian Church has always used the Septuagint as Canon and never the truncated version of modernist Protestants.
Some Protestants erroneously believe that Catholics added to the Bible with the Deuterocanonicals but this shows an ignorance of their own history and the history of Christianity as witnessed by Christ’s Church. The facts are that the Protestants removed the Deuterocanonicals and even considered strongly to remove some of the NT books currently in use by Protestants and Catholics. Fr. Martin Luther was in favor of removing the book of James because it conflicted with His heretical man made doctrines of the “Solas”, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. The heretic Ulrich Zwingli wanted to remove the Gospel of John because of its teaching of the commandment to Eat Christ’s Body and drink His Blood which contradicted his view of a real absence of Christ instead of a real presence in the Eucharist. Even Fr. Martin Luther could not endorse such a departure from Scriptures and deny that Christ is truly and really present in the Eucharist in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 07 2010 11:20 pm | Catholic
CALLUM on 08 Feb 2010 at 5:02 am #
Before it was recognised as a large scale religion Christianity was forced upon all whom fell within its grasp.The illiterate where denied the right of choice. Gregory IX was very severe towards heretics, who in those times were universally looked upon as traitors and punished accordingly. Upon the request of King Louis IX of France, he sent Cardinal Romanus as legate to assist the king in his crusade against the Albigenses. At the synod which the papal legate convened at Toulouse in November, 1229, it was decreed that all heretics and their abettors should be delivered to the nobles and magistrates for their due punishment, which, in case of obstinacy, was usually death. When in 1224 Frederick II ordered that heretics in Lombardy should be burnt at the stake, Gregory IX, who was then papal legate for Lombardy, approved and published the imperial law. During his enforced absence from Rome (1228-1231) the heretics remained unmolested and became very numerous in the city. In February, 1231, therefore, the pope enacted a law for Rome that heretics condemned by an ecclesiastical court should be delivered to the secular power to receive their "due punishment". This "due punishment" was death by fire for the obstinate and imprisonment for life for the penitent. In pursuance of this law a number of Patarini were arrested in Rome in 1231, the obstinate were burned at the stake, the others were imprisoned in the Benedictine monasteries of Monte Cassino and Cava (Ryccardus de S. Germano, ad annum 1231, in Mon. Germ. SS., XIX, 363). It must not be thought, however, that Gregory IX dealt more severely with heretics than other rulers did. Death by fire was the common punishment for heretics and traitors in those times. Up to the time of Gregory IX, the duty of searching out heretics belonged to the bishops in their respective dioceses. The so-called Monastic Inquisition was established by Gregory IX, who in his Bulls of 13, 20, and 22 April, 1233, appointed the Dominicans as the official inquisitors for all dioceses of France (Ripoil and Bremond, "Bullarium Ordinia Fratrum Praedicatorum", Rome, 1729, I, 47).
References :
cristoiglesia on 08 Feb 2010 at 5:21 am #
First of all you need to understand that the books called apocrypha by Protestants are not really apocrypha . That is a pejorative term given to the books by the Protestants. the true Apocrypha books were never a part of the Bible and were banned by Pope St. Gelasius in the fifth century. The correct name are the Deuterocanonical books. Here is the correct history of the Scriptures:
In first century Jerusalem there were at least four OT Canons in use by different Jewish Groups. There was the Canon of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Ethiopian Jews and the Diaspora/Essene Jews. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora/Essenes. We know this because it is quoted in the New Testament. This Canon continued to be the Canon of Christians until after the Reformation and, in fact until about 200 years ago when the Protestants adopted a condensed version of the Canon eliminating the Deuterocanonicals from their Bibles. Even the AKJ originally contained the complete Christian Canon. It has been said by critics of Christ’s Church that the Deuterocanonicals were never believed to be inspired and just the opposite is true. The decision by Christians as to which books are inspired and useful for teaching was decided at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth century. There was never a question about their inspiration.
The OT Canon chosen by the Protestants is actually a Jewish Canon not chosen by the Jews until after the establishment of Christianity as a result of the spread of Christianity to slow the growth of the new group in Jerusalem after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. Until then as I said previously there were many Canons in use. The adoption of the Canon missing the Deuterocanonicals united the Jews against the Christians was decided in the Jewish Council of Jamnia because the Deuterocanonicals referred too strongly to the Messiah fulfilled in Christ.
Some Protestants will claim that only the Jews have the authority to choose Canon but the Church deferred that decision to Christ and the disciples and it is clear through biblical research, that the Septuagint is the Bible used by the first century Church and quoted in the NT Scriptures. The fact that Protestants choose to adopt the Canon that was approved by the same Jews that accused our Lord that resulted in His crucifixion suggests the source of this confusion as from the father of lies who led the Pharisees to accuse Christ and petition for His punishment. It is another way that Satan divides the body of Christ and separates the faithful denying Christ’s prayer that we all be one in Christ through His Church. The Christian Church has always used the Septuagint as Canon and never the truncated version of modernist Protestants.
Some Protestants erroneously believe that Catholics added to the Bible with the Deuterocanonicals but this shows an ignorance of their own history and the history of Christianity as witnessed by Christ’s Church. The facts are that the Protestants removed the Deuterocanonicals and even considered strongly to remove some of the NT books currently in use by Protestants and Catholics. Fr. Martin Luther was in favor of removing the book of James because it conflicted with His heretical man made doctrines of the “Solas”, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. The heretic Ulrich Zwingli wanted to remove the Gospel of John because of its teaching of the commandment to Eat Christ’s Body and drink His Blood which contradicted his view of a real absence of Christ instead of a real presence in the Eucharist. Even Fr. Martin Luther could not endorse such a departure from Scriptures and deny that Christ is truly and really present in the Eucharist in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
References :
robert C on 08 Feb 2010 at 5:49 am #
they were rejected by martin luther at the time of the reformation, because there were verses that would have ruined his agenda.
remember they were in the bible for 1100 yrs before that so you should have no problem accepting them.
if you have any doubts read revelation, 22 :19.
the book of wisdom is a beautiful book to read, as well as the others
References :
XAndrewX on 08 Feb 2010 at 5:56 am #
It’s quite easy. The Deuterocanonical books are found in the oldest surviving bible, the codex sinaiticus (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8135415.stm), the greek septuagint bible that Jesus and the Apostles used and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
They were also in he 1611 King James Version bible.
The quote that most Protestants use from Romans comes from the septuagint bible in the book of Sirach.
Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) 8:5 Shame not the repentant sinner, remember, we are all guilty
Peace be with you
<<<Devout Catholic>>>
References :
.
.
****DAVID PLEASE PRAY NOW:
LORD FORGIVE ME FOR MY IGNORANCE AND HATE I HAVE IN MY HEART FOR ALL CHRISTIANS WHO DONT BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE BECAUSE I DONT KNOW WHAT I BELIEVE. FORGIVE ME FOR TRYING TO WORK MY WAY TO HEAVEN BY ATTACKING OTHER BELIEVERS. I ASK THAT YOU HAVE MERCY ON ME AND CONVERT MY HEART BEFORE I CONDEMN MYSELF TO HELL. HELP ME TO LOVE MY NEIGHBOR AS YOUR SON JESUS CHRIST COMMANDS I DO. IN JESUS’ NAME I PRAY.
THE SPLIT SECOND YOU PRAY THIS YOU WILL BE FREE FROM YOUR DEMONS AND WILL BE HUMBLED.
Randy N on 08 Feb 2010 at 6:40 am #
Once again, I can’t improve on "cristoiglesia" ’s answer. Father Joseph knows his stuff. God Bless you.
References :
I’ve been a Roman Catholic for almost 60 years now.
David N on 08 Feb 2010 at 6:56 am #
I am Eastern Orthodox and our Bible also contains what Protestants call "the Apocrypha."
There is no need to defend the Deuterocanonical books in the Bible.
These books were included when the Council of Carthage decided what was to be included in the Canon in 397.
These books are in the Septuagint.
When I went to a Lutheran College we used The Oxford Annotated Bible With Apocrypha in our biblical studies.
The more appropriate question is:
Why did Protestants take these books OUT of the Bible?
.
References :
Councils of Carthage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Councils_of_Carthage
Daver on 08 Feb 2010 at 7:03 am #
APOCRYPHA – Originally writings that claimed a sacred origin and were supposed to have been hidden for generations; later, a well-define class of literature with scriptural or quasi-scriptural pretensions, but lacking genuineness and canonicity, composed during the two centuries before Christ and the early centuries of our era. Protestants apply the term improperly to denote also Old Testament books not contained in the Jewish canon but received by Catholics under the name of deuterocanonical. The following is a list of the Apocrypha:
Apocrypha of Jewish Origin: Jewish Apocalypses; Book of Henoch; Assumption of Moses: Fourth Book of Esdras; Apocalypse of Baruch; Apocalypse of Abraham. Legendary Apocrypha of Jewish Origin: Book of Jubilees, or Little Genesis; Third Book of Esdras; Third Book of Maccabees; History of Maxims of Ahikar the Assyrian. Apocryphal Psalms and Prayers: Psalms of Solomon; Prayer of Manasses. Jewish Philosophy: Fourth Book of Maccabees.
Apocrypha of Jewish Origin with Christian Accretions: Sibylline Oracles; Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs; Ascension of Isaias.
Apocrypha of Christian Origin: Apocryphal Gospels of Catholic Origin: Protoevangelium Jacobi, or Infancy Gospel of James, describing the birth, education, and marriage of the Blessed Virgin; Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew; Arabic Gospel of the Infancy; History of Joseph the Carpenter; Transitus Mariae, or Evangelium Joannis, describing the death and assumption of the Blessed Virgin. Judaistic and Heretical Gospels: Gospel according to the Egyptians; Gospel of Peter; Gospel of Philip; Gospel of Thomas; Gospel of Marcion; Gospel of Bartholomew; Gospel of Matthias; Gospel of Nicodemus; Gospel of the Twelve Apostles; Gospel of Andrew; Gospel of Barnabas; Gospel of Thaddeus; Gospel of Philip; Gospel of Eve; Gospel of Judas Iscariot. Pilate Literature and Other Apocrypha Concerning Christ: Report of Pilate to the Emperor; Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea; Pseudo-Correspondence of Jesus and Abgar, King of Edessa. Gnostic Acts of the Apostles: Acts of Peter; Acts of John; Acts of Andrew; Acts and Martyrdom of Matthew; Acts of Thomas; Acts of Bartholomew. Catholic Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles: Acts of Peter and Paul; Acts of Paul; Acts of Paul and Thecla; Acts of Philip; Acts of Matthew; Acts of Simon and Jude; Acts of Barnabas; Acts of James the Greater. Apocryphal Doctrinal Works: Testamentum Domini Nostri Jesu; Preaching of Peter, or Kerygma Petri. Apocryphal Epistles: Pseudo-Epistles of Paul; Pseudo-Epistles to the Laodiceans; Pseudo-Correspondence of Paul and Seneca. Christian Apocryphal Apocalypses: Apocalypse of Peter; Apocalypse of Paul. (Etym. Latin apocryphus, uncanonical, apocryphal; from Greek apokryphos, hidden.)
DEUTEROCANONICAL – Referring to those books and passages of the Old and New Testaments about which there was controversy at one time in early Christian history. In the Old Testament they are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I and II Maccabees, parts of Esther (10:4-16, 14) and Daniel (3:24-90, 13, 14). In the New Testament are Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John, Revelation, and Mark 16:9-20. All of these are recognized by the Catholic Church as part of the biblical canon. Among Protestants the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament are rejected as apocryphal, along with the last twelve verses of Mark’s Gospel.
References :
Karol Wotjyla on 08 Feb 2010 at 7:36 am #
The Roman Catholic Church uses the Septuagint which is the original text used by the Essence a Jewish group Jesus has huge contacts with the group so it is only rightful that the Roman Catholic Church uses the Canons which Jesus chosen
There were initially 4 groups.They were the Pharisees,the Sadducee’s, The Essence and the Ethiopian Jews.In the Jewish Council of Jammah the Jews rejected the Canons used by the Essence as it reminded them of the Messianic Prophecy of Jesus
The Protestants used the Cannons used by the Jews but this is wrong as Jesus used the Septugaint and doing anything contary would be disobedience to the teaching of Jesus as insituted by Jesus himself and that is wrong
Yours in Christ
References :
Roman Catholic.To be a Catholic priest in Melbourne.Pray the Rosary
Dina on 08 Feb 2010 at 7:56 am #
The only thing contradicting is any previous Bibles you had that these 7 books were REMOVED.
If your in RCIA , this subject and many others can be discussed.
References :
Mediator on 08 Feb 2010 at 8:26 am #
You should probably be using a New American Bible, one which is painstakingly accurate in modern word usage. You will see soooooo many arguments over semantics, and a good NAB also has a concordance, word list and best of all for you, a lectionary table so you can follow the Mass. You know of course from RCIA that you will read nearly the entire Bible every three years if you attend Mass every day. Or follow along in the lectionary if you can’t attend every bleedin’ day. As far as Apocrypha, there are as some users have noted several uses for that word. If you mean the inclusion of all of the original books of the Bible, the defense is simple. Inspired writings were chosen very close to the time of the formation of the Roman Catholic Church. Those people knew better than anyone what should be included. It’s amazing they did not include epistles by Pope Clement (who never signed anything, hence they didn’t make it in) or Ignatius. Or Iraneaus. Or so many other Church Fathers. But if you look at it, we really don’t need more. Christ never ordered anything be written down because he was well aware of how that could have thwarted a force as large as Christianity in the face of Roman Rule. That’s also the reason so many "unknowns" were never documented for EVERYONE to see, and why there are so many opinions about whether the early Church was this or that. Peter of course followed Christ’s discretion, that is evident from the fact that he never claimed his papacy even though everyone including Paul recognized his leadership. Peter certainly helped for the final books of the Bible. As did John. No one knows for certain — there is only speculation — about the origin of the Gospels themselves. Perhaps they really were written by Apostles and copyists’ names found their way out of the catacombs. You can go on and on delving into the physical history and nature of the Bible. But it isn’t what matters. What matters is what you do with it. The Roman Catholic Church has spent over 2,000 years charting paths for uncountable Christians, creating the Liturgy, Mass, Sacraments, basically a structure within which you can put the lessons from Scripture into every day use. Don’t get hung up on a book. It is a wonderful reference, but your fellow man should be your source of consolation. That is where Christ lives today. Not in a book. Keep the faith.
References :
Ray M on 08 Feb 2010 at 8:49 am #
It isn’t contradicting. That’s false information.
The defense? It’s always been there. At the very least since 393 at the council of hippo.
But it’s really been there since the very beginning. The protestants took them out in the 16th century. I’m not sure how they can say it was never there.
References :