Victor R. Claveau, MJ
When the books of the Old Testament were formed into a Jewish Canon (The Palestinian Canon) by the remnant of the Diaspora,[1] in approximately 90 A.D. (The Council of Jamnia),[2] those books were given identifying titles within each collection. The earliest instance of titling the numerous writings occurs in Daniel, who refers to “the books”[3] in a manner that seems to mark the prophetic writings as already having been collected into one whole. The Jews in Alexandria (The Alexandrian Canon) applied the same word to the collected books of the Old Testament. The name Bible, or The Book, has since been given to the collected books of both the Old and New Testaments.
The writers of the New Testament spoke of the books of the Old Testament either as The Scripture,[4] The Scriptures,[5] or the Sacred writings.[6] The use of the phrase “old covenant,”[7] meaning, “the law”, as read in the synagogues, led gradually to the extension of the word to include the other books of the Jewish Scriptures. Of the Latin equivalents, Instrumentum (records or documents) and Testamentum (covenant or testament), the latter met with the most general acceptance and gained perpetuity in the languages of modern Europe, wherefrom are derived the terms Old Testament and New Testament, though the Greek word properly signifies “Covenant” rather than “Testament.” But the application of the word “Bible” to the collected books of the Old and New Testaments cannot be traced further back than the fifth century of our era, after Christ.
Evolution of Sacred Scripture: Origins of the Old and New Testament Canons
Since the Bible is a primary source of God’s revelation, it is vital that we understand the Bible’s origins—how, when, where and by whom the various writings were selected and compiled into the canon of Scripture held and venerated by the Catholic Church today. The Old Testament was the official collection of the sacred writings of the Jews before it became a part of the Christian Scriptures. However, note that the Old Testament Canon recognized by the Catholic Church contains seven more books (and parts of two others) than are contained in the present Jewish Bible, or the Canon recognized by Protestants. Moreover, the order of sequence is different. The Hebrew Bible arranges them in a chronological order of their recognition by the Jewish authorities as sacred writings. The Catholic Bible, following the Septuagint (LXX), arranges the books by subject matter.
The Roman Catholic Bible comprises forty-six Old Testament and twenty-seven New Testament books. Although Protestants acknowledge the same number of New Testament books, they maintain an Old Testament list of only thirty-nine books. The Protestant Canon, following the Jewish Palestinian version, omits Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and parts of Esther and Daniel—namely Esther 10:4, 16, 24, and Daniel 3:24-30. These books and portions of books were not included in the Hebrew Bible compiled at the end of the first century A.D., and they have survived only in the Greek Bible adopted by the Catholics. In the Protestant King James Version of the Bible, Esther ends at 10:3, but Daniel 3:24-30 is included.
How did this discrepancy occur? Did the Catholic Church add seven books to their canon, or did Protestants remove seven books? In actuality, neither speculation is accurate. Early on, there existed two Old Testament canons—one used by Jesus and the early Christians (Septuagint, or the Alexandrian canon), and another compiled around the turn of the first century A.D. (Palestinian canon) by the Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah.
The books that are included in the Jewish Bible are referred to as protocanonical (p.c.), and those that had survived in the Greek are named deuterocanonical (d.c.). These terms were first coined by Sixtus of Sienna in 1566, and they suggest the misnomer of two different canons, whereas they are intended to indicate only the chronological priority of the protocanonical over the deuterocanonical as regards to their canonical status, and even then, only in general terms.
The term torah is derived from the Hebrew and it means “to teach”,[8] therefore, “teaching,” “doctrine” or “instruction.” It is also used loosely to designate the body of Jewish laws and the Old Testament as a whole. According to the Talmud (Jewish Civil and Canon Law), the Torah was given by God to Moses—who was the author of the essence of the Torah, although he did not have the capability to write it literally—scroll by scroll, during the Hebrews’ forty-year sojourn in the desert. These were the books that were placed near the Ark of the Covenant, about 3,250 years ago.
Thus began the formulation of the Old Testament canon. The Jews of old never used the words Bible or Testament to describe the Holy Scriptures. They designated the Old Testament according to the three divisions of its books: (1) Torah, or Pentateuch, which, as mentioned previously, comprised the Law; (2) Nevi’im, or the writings of the Earlier Prophets: Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, and the Latter Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi; and (3) Ketuvim, or the sacred writings consisting of Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah and 1 and 2 Chronicles.
Modern Jewish literature refers to the Bible as Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures, using the initial letters of the Torah, Nevi’im, and Ketuvim. Occasionally, you may see the term The Twenty-four Books. This means that, by combining several books into one (for example, the twelve Prophets as one book), they reduced the number of books from thirty-eight to twenty-four, or possibly twenty-two, to conform with the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. As time went on, other writings of significant importance were added to the Old Testament in Greek.
Holy Scripture recounts the invasion of Israel by Nebuchadnezzar (c. 605-562 B.C., the Babylonian king, in 597 B.C.[9] In July 586 B.C., Jerusalem fell for the last time before the Babylonian conquerors, and the Temple built at the command of King Solomon was destroyed, as described in 2 Chronicles: 19:21.
With few exceptions, the entire Jewish population was taken into captivity. This was the beginning of the dispersion, or Diaspora, of the Jews. Through the prophet Jeremiah, God continued to speak to the elders, priests, and the entire nation that had been carried off to Babylon.
For forty-two years, Nebuchadnezzar ruled Babylonia, Syria and Palestine with a strong hand. He was undoubtedly the ablest ruler that Babylon had seen since the great Hammurabi. His ambition was not to conquer new territory but to make Babylon the strongest and most magnificent city in the entire world.
The Jews never forgot the abominable temptations, which had become part of the everyday fabric of their society. Babylon was a cesspool of vice—so much so that, down through the centuries, until the time of Christ, the Jews commonly referred to Babylon as, The Whore of Babylon. When the Book of Revelation refers to “Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations”,[10] it is referencing this period of Jewish captivity.
The first great prophet to arise in Babylon was Ezekiel, a priest, brought to Babylon in the first captivity of 597 B.C. When the Temple fell and the great Judean captivity began, it was Ezekiel who comforted his exiled people. He aroused a new hope in them for the return to Palestine. In his “Vision of the Dry Bones”,[11] he regaled the people with a powerful story about how their God would one day bring the remnants of Judah together again.
As the prophet had foretold, so it came to pass. The Jews were held in captivity until 539 B.C., when Cyrus, King of Persia (who reigned 559 to 530 B.C.) triumphantly marched into the city of Babylon. Cyrus established the greatest and most extensive empire in the history of the Ancient East, extending from Iran to the border of Egypt, which was also conquered in 525 B.C. In the Bible, Cyrus is portrayed as an emissary of the God of Israel. The narration of the story is to be found in II Chronicles.
And so the Lord God freed his people. When King Cyrus freed the Jews, he returned to them the sacred vessels and temple furnishings so that they could rebuild the temple on their return to Israel.[12]. Although most of the Jews decided to remain in Babylon, Ezra describes those who left:
“The whole assembly together was forty-two thousand three hundred and sixty, besides their menservants and maidservants, of whom there were seven thousand three hundred and thirty-seven; and they had two hundred male and female singers.”[13]
Finally free, the Jews set out on the difficult, 540-mile journey home, of which Psalm 126 commemorates the occasion. When they reached Jerusalem with their leaders, Zerubbabel, a descendent of King David, and Joshua, who was to be the high priest of the rebuilt temple, they found their city in ruins. In 536 B.C., an altar of sacrifice was erected on the site of the Temple. Worship was reinstated, and the foundation stone of the Temple had been laid.
The captivity lasted approximately seventy years. The life expectancy for a person living in that period was approximately forty years—a Biblical generation. It is estimated that less than two percent of the people survived more than fifty years; therefore, it is safe to assume that most, if not all, of the Israelites who entered into captivity died in captivity. And it is significant to this chronology of events that, at the time of the Babylonian captivity, the Jews were a Hebrew-speaking people while the Babylonians were an Aramaic-speaking people. After seventy years of living in a Aramaic-speaking land, most of the Jews no longer spoke Hebrew but rather they spoke the language of their captors.
A number of Jews did not return to Israel but went on to Northern Egypt. History records a substantial population in Egypt at the time of Alexander the Great. On the outermost tip of the Nile delta, Alexander built the city that was to bear his name. Alexander decreed that the Jews in Egypt were to have the same rights as those which were accorded to his own people. This decree led to the city becoming one of the great centers of Jewish life. The ancient historian Philo wrote that as many as one million Jews lived in Egypt at that time. It has been estimated that, at the time of Alexander, forty percent of the world’s Jews lived in Alexandria, making it the largest concentration of Jews in the world. Rome came in second, and Jerusalem, third. By that time, Greek had supplanted Aramaic as the international language.
The First Book of Maccabees continues the story, beginning with a history of the conquests of Alexander the Great, who was the most famous leader/warrior that the ancient world had ever seen. He died at the age of 33, in Babylon, from an attack of fever. His death created confusion among his most trusted cohorts. He who had controlled the vast empire left no successor among his bewildered heirs. Rivalries and ambitions that had been held in check under Alexander flared up and destroyed the unity of the empire. Thus began the period called the Diadochi (successors). The succession was as follows.
Regions of the empire were entrusted to Alexander’s most trusted friends. Europe (Greece and Macedonia) was given to Antipater, governor of Macedonia; greater Phrygia to Antigonus Monophthalmus (Cyclops); the part of Phrygia that borders on the Hellespont to Leonatus; Thrace was given to Lysimachus; Cappadocia went to Eumenes, the secretary of Alexander. Ptolemy, who took the name Soter (Savior), received Egypt. It was a short-lived alliance—war broke out among the various factions. The period of the Diadochi lasted until BC 301. Warring continued for the next twenty years or so. In the end, what remained were the kingdoms of Macedonia,[14] Seleucus[15] in Asia, and Ptolemy in Egypt.
There were 15 kings, or pharaohs, who ruled Egypt for approximately two hundred years, until about the time of Cleopatra (30 B.C.). This period is called the Ptolemaic dynasty. Ptolemy II, the second of these pharaohs, is of prime importance in the sequence of events that led to the translation of the Bible into Greek. Under the throne name of Soter, Ptolemy I (323-283 B.C.) and his son, Ptolemy II Philadelphus (283-245 B.C.) made the capitol city of Alexandria an unsurpassed center for Hellenistic culture and learning. The fame of the kingdom extended far beyond its borders, which further attracted immigrants from Israel and other lands. Ptolemy Philadelphus took great pride in the fact that the library in Alexandria possessed the finest collections of books in the world.
It was for the benefit of Greek-speaking Jews and for inclusion in the Alexandrine library, that the Greek translation of the Scriptures known as the Septuagint (LXX) was made.
One of the most valuable contributions of the Hellenistic period was the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek. Because Greek was the international language of the world, it also was the language of the tens of thousands of Jews who knew no other home than Egypt. The Jews of Hellenistic Egypt no longer understood Hebrew as their mother tongue. When the Greek language replaced Hebrew and Aramaic as their vernacular, and the Torah in its original Hebrew was no longer commonly understood, a translation into Greek was made for the Jewish community in Alexandria.
It came to pass that, sometime between 250-200 B.C., devout Jews in Egypt began the translation of the Torah into Greek. This translation was called the Septuagint. The name Septuagint is Latin for “seventy,” from the traditional account that there were seventy-two scholars who did the work. A second possible explanation for the title is that the seventy elders in Jerusalem are purported to have approved the translation.
This translation was for Jews as well as for Christians, one of the most significant events in history. What had been previously known only in the sanctuary, only in Hebrew, and only to the nation of Israel, was now made available and understandable for the common people of other languages and races. The carefully guarded door of Scripture was thrown open as the Septuagint unlocked the treasures of the Hebrew religion to the entire Gentile world. This, together with the vast network of synagogues in every country of the Dispersion and the many thousands of God-fearing people not yet committed to the Jewish religion, prepared the way for the advancement of Christianity and the extraordinary growth of the early Christian Church.
Although the origin of the Septuagint may be shrouded in history, it was the work that became the Bible of the early Church, so much so, that the Jews who continued in Judaism required new versions (e.g., the translation of Aquila) which they could call their own. Christians understood the earlier translation, the Septuagint, in Christian terms.[16] Literally, the Christians used the Septuagint to demonstrate the pre-figurement of Christ.
As to the other Hebrew books (the prophetical and historical), it was natural that the Alexandrine Jews should desire to read the remaining books, which were gradually translated into Greek. It is not possible to accurately determine the precise time those translations were completed, but it is certain that the Law, the Prophets, and at least a part of the other books existed in Greek before the year 130 B.C.
By 100 B.C., a translation of all the Hebrew books had been completed. The entire collection of Scripture—those books originally written in Hebrew and those written in Greek—came to be known as the Septuagint. It is certain that neither Christ nor the apostles ever challenged the value or the accuracy of the Septuagint. That the Apostles and evangelists used the Septuagint is not, nor has it ever been in question. Of approximately three hundred fifty quotations from the Old Testament in the New Testament, about three hundred are direct quotations from the Septuagint, and the remaining are paraphrases, particularly in regard to the prophecies.
That the early Christian Church used the Septuagint is also not in question. As proof, the following are quotes from what are considered reliable, yet non-Catholic, sources:
Encyclopedia Judaica:
“Together with the New Testament, the Septuagint constituted the Bible of the Christian Church, and is still the Bible of the Greek Orthodox Church. The Old Testament contains a translation of all the books of the Hebrew canon. It also embodies the deuterocanonical books of the Catholic Church (Judith, Tobit, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ben-Sira, 1 Baruch).”[17]
Another Jewish source is the TANAKH, The Holy Scriptures:
“With the growth of Christianity in the first century, the Church adopted the Septuagint as its Bible, and the Septuagint was translated into the languages of the various Christian communities.”[18]
Protestant scholar F.F. Bruce:
“There were two main reasons why the Jews lost interest in the Septuagint. One was that from the first century AD onwards the Christians adopted it as their version of the Old Testament, and used it freely in their propagation and defense of the Christian faith.”[19]
It is an embarrassing fact of Jewish history that Rome occupied Jerusalem in 63 B.C.—not by invasion, but by invitation. The throne of Israel was vacant from the time of the Babylonian exile to the time of Alexander Jannæus, a self-proclaimed king and high priest who ruled from 103 to 76 B.C. Driven by a craze for power, he was a cruel, intolerant ruler, involved in political intrigues and warlike campaigns. He died in 76 B.C., and he left the throne to his wife, Alexandra Salome, who ruled until her own death in 67 B.C.
There arose a dispute over who should occupy the throne of Israel upon the death of Queen Alexandra. Two of her sons, Aristobulus II and the high priest Hyrcanus II, entered into a full-scale fraternal and civil war to determine who should reign. The two brothers agreed to submit their dispute to Pompey, the Roman General of Syria, who ruled in favor of Hyrcanus, apparently believing him to be the more pliable of the two. No match for the Roman army, Aristobulus surrendered to Pompey. Hyrcanus’ ability to rule depended upon Roman support; thus he invited the Roman Army to occupy Jerusalem in 63 B.C. As the years passed, there were clashes, and the land seethed with rebellion against all the procurators, good and bad alike.
In the year 66 A.D., Gessius Florus, the last Roman procurator, robbed entire cities and communities, stole vast sums of silver from the Temple, and did not prosecute bandits so long as they gave him part of their booty. The atrocities went unpunished by Rome, and the outraged Jewish masses, led by the Zealots, rioted and wiped out the small Roman garrison stationed in Jerusalem.
Cestius Gallus, the Roman ruler in neighboring Syria, sent in a larger force of soldiers. But the Jewish insurgents defeated them as well. This was a heartening victory that was to have a terrible consequence. Never again were the Jews to achieve so decisive a victory. When the Romans returned, they had 60,000 heavily armed and elite troops. Their first attack was launched against the northern area of Galilee, and an estimated 100,000 Jews were killed or later sold into slavery.
The final catastrophe took place at Jerusalem. Outside the city, Roman troops prepared to besiege it; inside the city, the Jews were engaged in a suicidal civil war. There was a hatred of the people for the aristocratic High Priesthood, and this found expression at the time of the Great Protestant Revolt. When the Zealots dominated Jerusalem, they killed or expelled the priests and chose a stonemason to fill the office of High Priest. He was to be the last Jewish High Priest.
The Jews died by the thousands, more from plague and famine than from the wounds of war. During the summer of 70 A.D., the Romans breached the city’s walls and began an orgy of violence and destruction. Shortly thereafter, they destroyed the Second Temple. This was the final and most devastating blow against Judea.[20] In addition to the more than one million Jews killed, the rebellion resulted in the complete loss of the Levitical priesthood. All the priests who could trace their authority from Aaron, the brother of Moses, were killed.
From that time to the present, there have been no Jewish Temple sacrifices. The Encyclopedia Judaica readily admits: “Those currently designated ‘priests’ are ‘presumed priests,’ inasmuch as there is no legally sufficient proof testifying to their descent from ancient priestly families.”[21] In other words, Jews have no historical proof that any individual “priest” is of Levitical lineage because all the records had been destroyed along with the destruction of the Second Temple. Orthodox Jews still pray thrice daily for the restoration of the Temple and the sacrifices.
Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod, who died in the year 4 B.C. If, as scholars believe, He was thirty-three years old when He was crucified, it would have been in the year 29 A.D. The Jewish war ended approximately forty years later. Why, for forty years before the destruction of the Temple, did God reject the sacrifices of the Jews? Is it because the one true sacrifice of Christ had taken place? Is it possible that God allowed the Jews a generation of forty years in which to accept Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah and to recognize the new priesthood established in, and through, the apostles, and when they did not, is that why God then permitted the destruction of the Temple and the old priesthood?
The next period in the history of the Jewish Bible is at the end of the first century, some ten to thirty years after the destruction of the Temple. By that time, a strong rabbinical academy had been established by Yohanan ben Zakkai at Yavneh (in Greek: Jamnia), located near the coast between Jaffa and Ashod, approximately 12 miles south of present-day Tel Aviv. Rabban (Rabbi) Zakkai knew that, in order to preserve the organic body of Judaism, it would be necessary to have an organized group of men to take over the duties and responsibilities of the then-defunct Sanhedrin.[22] He therefore organized a council of teachers, the Bet Din, which served as senate, as court, and as parliament—in other words, the voice of scattered Israel.
On the whole, the Yavnean sages proved to be very adept ideologically; they mitigated the disaster of 70 A.D. by offering alternate means of religious expression in the absence of the Second Temple.[23] It was at this great center of learning where the rabbis held a synod in 84 A.D., at which two major decisions were reached: First, Judaism would be shaped primarily by the remembered insights of Hillel the Elder[24]; second, the Jewish canon, which had been developing for centuries, was closed, except for some decisions regarding “the Writings” (especially Ben Sirach and Esther).[25] The available evidence points to finalization of the 39-book canon at the end of the 2nd century.
It must be remembered that the New Testament does not provide a list of the Old Testament books used by Christ and His Apostles and, when Christianity began, the Jews had not yet established a canon. It can, however, be proven from tradition that the full list of Old Testament books—including the deuterocanonicals was authorized by the Apostles. The testimony of Christian writers during the first three centuries is unanimous on this point. We can trace the reception of these books from the very time of the Apostles—Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Irenæus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria and others, quoted them, and many other early writers quoted them as Scripture.[26] There is nothing more complete than the pre-Nicene[27] tradition for the Roman Catholic canon of the Old Testament. For the deuterocanonical books, we have the witness of Church Father after Church Father; we find them placed in every manuscript of the Septuagint, translated in the Old Latin version and quoted in controversy against heretics.[28]
The African Church, always a staunch supporter of the contested books, found itself in agreement with Rome on this question. The Synod of Hippo (393 A.D.), and the third and fourth Councils of Carthage (397 and 419 A.D.), in which St. Augustine was the leading spirit, found it necessary to deal specifically with the question of the Canon, and drew up identical lists from which no sacred books are excluded. This list became known as the African Code.
The Ecumenical Council of Second Nicea in 787 A.D. ratified the decision made by the Fathers at Hippo and Carthage:
“In the year 418-419, all canons formally made in sixteen councils held at Carthage, one at Melevis, one at Hippo, that were approved of, were read, and received a new sanction from a great number of bishops, then met in Synod in Carthage. This collection is the Code of the African Church, which was always in greatest repute in all Churches next after the Code of the Universal Church.”[29]
If doubts remained as to the canonical books, they were put to rest by the Councils of Florence and Trent. During the Council of Florence (1442 A.D.), and with its approval, Pope Eugenius IV issued several bulls or decrees. In the Bull of union with the Copts, he wrote:
“It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testaments—that is, the law and the prophets and the gospel—since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows … [the document went on to list the current Canon]”[30]
The Council of Trent promulgated the definitive list of Old Testament canon—the same books used by Jesus Christ and His Apostles.[31] The formation of the New Testament was like that of the Old Testament—a gradual process. While the Old Testament was composed over a period of approximately 1,200 years, the New Testament was written in less than 60 years.
From its very foundation, the Christian Church possessed a Canon of Sacred Scripture—the Old Testament. Our Lord and his Apostles, pious Jews, accepted and referred to the Old Testament as the inspired Word of God. For them and the primitive Church that immediately followed, the Old Testament had absolute authority. Because Jesus had taught from the Old Testament, the Apostles and early Christian apologists appealed to its authority to demonstrate the orthodoxy of their beliefs. Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Romans, Hebrews and Galatians attest to this fact. For the Apostolic Fathers and other early Christians, the Old Testament clearly prophesied the Messiah, and the prophecy was fulfilled in the person of Jesus the Nazarene.
Thus, the early Church had three authoritative sources of revelation—the Old Testament, the Lord Jesus, and the Apostles. But the final decisive authority was Jesus, who spoke directly through His words and actions and indirectly through the witness and testimony of his disciples. It was this situation that prompted the need for a second canon, one in addition to the Old Testament. Initially, the words and deeds of Christ were passed on orally. When it became apparent that Christ’s return might not be imminent, it became necessary to commit His words to writing.
As the Christian community expanded to other localities, it was more expedient to substitute letters for oral preaching. These letters instructed the faithful, answered their questions, and warned them against heretical innovations. They were not received merely as correspondence, but as authoritative declarations.
As time progressed and the Apostles died, each in his own time, it became increasingly vital to refer to their writings in order to settle disputes or clarify doctrine. Keeping in mind that the writings of Saint Paul and the other Apostles were mainly concerned with local issues, it was a long time before they were collected and established as a second canon with incontestable authority, equal to the Old Testament. It wasn’t until the middle of the 2nd century that these writings were considered on a par with, and as authoritative as, the Old Testament.
In committing His Church to the infallible care of the Apostles and their successors, Christ included the custody of the written Scriptures, the unwritten oral Traditions, and all of the divine rules and observances. Thus, after His Last Supper, Jesus established a single Church and endowed it with all truth, with one definitive code of principles and observances, and with a priesthood, whose members were to be its bona fide guardians, servants, and perpetuators.[32]
Because the written Scriptures were only a part of the divine legacy, a Church and an authorized ecclesiastical organization were absolutely essential to secure the preservation and the integrity of the unwritten traditions and of the “many other things which Jesus did”,[33] not to be found in books. In no other manner could all the sacred teachings of Jesus have been preserved authentically and transmitted authoritatively through so many centuries.
We may be quite certain that the holy records and the commandments of God have been preserved within the Church in their original purity, from the fact that “the Spirit of truth has always abided in it and through it, all truth according to the divine promise.”[34] This Heavenly influence has been undoubtedly ever present in the great ecclesiastical councils of the Church, to aid the faithful ambassadors of Christ in their efforts to exclude error and to preserve the truth—and where the Spirit of truth is, error and falsehood cannot stand.
The advocates of private interpretation and of what has been termed flippantly as, “freedom of conscience,” tell us that every person is competent to interpret the mysteries of the gospel; therefore, each individual, however ignorant, should read his Bible, analyze its sacred mysteries, boldly cope with the idiomatic and other peculiarities of an age-long past, of ideas originally expressed in various languages—abounding in figures, parables, and the like—form his conclusions and act in accordance with them. Is such a course calculated to secure unity of faith, harmony among Christians, uniformity and consistency in worship, and concert of action among those who desire to build up the Church of the living God? Let the innumerable and conflicting sects of modern Protestantism, their absurd and contradictory tenets, and the numerous and protracted religious wars among the heretics of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries answer these questions.
Protestantism naturally gives way to toleration of error. Rejecting the principle of authority in religion, it has neither foundation nor clarity of faith. On the principle that every person may interpret the Scriptures according to the dictates of private judgment, it gives birth to endless contradictions and differences. Required by the law of its own powerlessness, because of the lack of any decisive authoritarian voice in matters of faith, it is forced to recognize as valid and orthodox any belief that springs from the exercise of private judgment. Therefore, it arrives at the conclusion that one creed is as good as another, and attempts to cloak this conclusion under the appearance of liberty of conscience. The individual interprets as he pleases, rejecting or accepting what he chooses. This is popularly called freedom of conscience. If one creed is as good as another, then no creed is as good as any. Taking the battlefield with the fatal weapon of Rationalism, infidelity has stormed and taken the very castle of Protestantism, which is helpless against the enemy of its own making.
[1] The dispersion of Jews among the Gentiles after the Babylonian Exile; or the aggregate of Jews or Jewish communities scattered “in exile” outside Palestine or present-day Israel.
[2] Note: The Greek word Kanon, ha-middah in Hebrew, mekhilta in Aramaic–signified a rod or bar, and so came to mean a measuring rod, a standard of excellence or a collection of exemplary objects. Similarly, the rules, decisions and decrees, enacted by the Church to be the standard of doctrine, discipline and worship, are called canons, and for like reason, men talked about the “Canon of Scripture” or the “Canonical Scriptures,” because they contained the rule or standard of faith and morals. The word is first attested in the fourth century when Bishop Athanasius used the word Kanon in reference to the list of books the Church authorized as divinely inspired and hence, canonical.
[3] Daniel. 9:2.
[4] Acts 8:32; Galatians 3:22.
[5] Matthew 21:42; Luke 24:27.
[6] 2 Timothy 3:15.
[7] 2 Corinthians 3:14.
[8] Leviticus 10:11.
[9] 2 Kings. 25.
[10] Revelation 17:5.
[11] Ezekiel 37:1-14.
[12] Ezra 5:13-15.
[13] Ezra 2:64-65.
[14] In 277 B.C. Antigonus II Gonatas was hailed as king by the Macedonian army. Under him the country achieved a stable monarchy-the Antigonid dynasty, which ruled Macedonia from 277 to 168 B.C.
[15] Seleucus I Nicator (b. 358/354 – 281 B.C.) was the son of Antiochus, a general of Philip II of Macedonia. The father of Alexander the Great was a Macedonian army officer who founded the Seleucid Kingdom. In the struggles following the death of Alexander the Great, he rose from governor of Babylon to king of an empire centering on Syria and Iran.
[16] Di Bernardino, Angelo and Studer, Basil. eds. History of Theology, Vol. 1 (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1996), p. 110.
[17] “Bible,” Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. 4, 852-853.
[18] TANAKH, The Holy Scriptures (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1985) xvi.
[19] Bruce, F. F., The Books and the Parchments: How we got our English Bible (Old Tappan: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1984) 141.
[20] Note: As an interesting sidelight, when the Second Temple was destroyed, all the archives were also destroyed. Our Jewish brothers and sisters are still waiting for the Messiah. If today someone claimed to be the long-awaited Messiah, how could he possibly prove he was of the lineage of the House of David? See Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 3, 375.
[21] “Priests and Priesthood,” Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 13, 1088.
[22] Sanhedrin (from the Greek sunedrion, “a council-chamber” commonly but in correctly Sanhedrim), the supreme council of the Jewish people in the time of Christ and earlier. The Sanhedrin is mentioned in the Gospels in relation to the Sanhedrin trial of Jesus and several times in the Acts of the Apostles, including a Great Sanhedrin in chapter 5 where Gamaliel appeared, and in the stoning death of Saint Stephen the deacon in chapter 7.
[23] Shanks, Hershel, ed., Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism: A Parallel History of Their Origins and Early Development (Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1992), p. 133.
[24] Hillel (Zaken “the Elder”; the greatest of the sages of the Second Temple period. He is said to have held the office of patriarch (nasi) for 40 years until approximately the year 10 AD Yohanan ben Zakkai was one of Hillel’s disciples. Hillel’s grandson, Rabban Gamaliel the Elder, who lived in the first half of the first century, is said to have been a teacher of St. Paul (Acts 22:3).
[25] Shanks, Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism: A Parallel History of Their Origins and Early Development, 311.
[26] Addis, William E., ed, A Catholic Dictionary (St. Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1951), p. 105.
[27] The first three centuries of Christianity.
[28] Addis, A Catholic Dictionary. 106.
[29] Schaff, “African Code. 419 A.D.,” The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. XIV, 438.
[30] Tanner, Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. I, 567-568.
[31] Schroeder, Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, 17-20.
[32] John 14:16-17; John 16:12-14; Matt. 28:20.
[33] John 21:25.
[34] Dei Verbum.