In order to see which books the Church has undoubtedly approved to be part of the canon of Holy Scripture, one must look at the Second Canon of the Quinisext Council (692 A.D.). The entire canon is provided here:
It has also seemed good to this holy Council, that the eighty-five canons, received and ratified by the holy and blessed Fathers before us, and also handed down to us in the name of the holy and glorious Apostles should from this time forth remain firm and unshaken for the cure of souls and the healing of disorders. And in these canons we are bidden to receive the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles [written] by Clement. But formerly through the agency of those who erred from the faith certain adulterous matter was introduced, clean contrary to piety, for the polluting of the Church, which obscures the elegance and beauty of the divine decrees in their present form. We therefore reject these Constitutions so as the better to make sure of the edification and security of the most Christian flock; by no means admitting the offspring of heretical error, and cleaving to the pure and perfect doctrine of the Apostles. But we set our seal likewise upon all the other holy canons set forth by our holy and blessed Fathers, that is, by the 318 holy God-bearing Fathers assembled at Nice, and those at Ancyra, further those at NeoCaesarea and likewise those at Gangra, and besides, those at Antioch in Syria: those too at Laodicea in Phrygia: and likewise the 150 who assembled in this heaven-protected royal city: and the 200 who assembled the first time in the metropolis of the Ephesians, and the 630 holy and blessed Fathers at Chalcedon. In like manner those of Sardica, and those of Carthage: those also who again assembled in this heaven-protected royal city under its bishop Nectarius and Theophilus Archbishop of Alexandria. Likewise too the Canons [i.e. the decretal letters] of Dionysius, formerly Archbishop of the great city of Alexandria; and of Peter, Archbishop of Alexandria and Martyr; of Gregory the Wonder-worker, Bishop of Neo-Caesarea; of Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria; of Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia; of Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa; of Gregory Theologus; of Amphilochius of Iconium; of Timothy, Archbishop of Alexandria; of Theophilus, Archbishop of the same great city of Alexandria; of Cyril, Archbishop of the same Alexandria; of Gennadius, Patriarch of this heaven-protected royal city. Moreover the Canon set forth by Cyprian, Archbishop of the country of the Africans and Martyr, and by the Synod under him, which has been kept only in the country of the aforesaid Bishops, according to the custom delivered down to them. And that no one be allowed to transgress or disregard the aforesaid canons, or to receive others beside them, supposititiously set forth by certain who have attempted to make a traffic of the truth. But should any one be convicted of innovating upon, or attempting to overturn, any of the afore-mentioned canons, he shall be subject to receive the penalty which that canon imposes, and to be cured by it of his transgression. (Canon II, Quinisext Council, 692 A.D., vol. 14, p. 361, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
The Quinisext Council is an Ecumenical Church Council. Therefore, this canon is an authoritative statement of the Church as a whole. The first set of canons that this council approved is the Canons of the Holy Apostles. The 85th Canon of these canons is the one that pertains to the books which belong in the canon of Holy Scripture. Here is the full text of this canon.
Let the following books be esteemed venerable and holy by you, both of the clergy and laity. Of the Old Covenant: the five books of Moses — Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; one of Joshua the son of Nun, one of the Judges, one of Ruth, four of the Kings, two of the Chronicles, two of Ezra, one of Esther, one of Judith, three of the Maccabees, one of Job, one hundred and fifty psalms; three books of Solomon — Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs; sixteen prophets. And besides these, take care that your young persons learn the Wisdom of the very learned Sirach. But our sacred books, that is, those of the New Covenant, are these: the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the fourteen Epistles of Paul; two Epistles of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; two Epistles of Clement; and the Constitutions dedicated to you the bishops by me Clement, in eight books; which it is not fit to publish before all, because of the mysteries contained in them; and the Acts of us the Apostles. (The Canons of the Holy Apostles, Canon 85, vol. 7, p. 505, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
The Second Canon of the Quinisext Council accepted the Canons of the Holy Apostles, but rejected The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles since they had been altered by the introduction of some heretical material into them.
There are some questions that one may have when one looks at this canon. One such question is: What is meant by "two of Ezra?" In the Septuagint, the books commonly known as Ezra and Nehemiah are grouped together to form a single book called Esdras Deuteron or Second Esdras. Was the book of I Esdras included in this list of canonical books? To answer this question, one must look at The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles to see if there is any evidence that Clement used this particular book. There is a quotation from one of the books of Ezra in The Constitutions.
Wise Ezra does also admonish thee and say: “Go your way, and eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and be not sorrowful.” (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VII, section 2, chapter 20, vol. 7, p. 469, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
In I Esdras, it says:
Go then, and eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send part to them that have nothing; for this day is holy unto the Lord: and be not sorrowful; for the Lord will bring you to honour. (I Esdras 9:51, 52)
In Nehemiah, it says:
And the governor said to them, Go, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions to them that have nothing; for the day is holy to our Lord: and faint not, for the Lord is our strength. (Neh. 8:10, LXX)
It appears that Clement may have been quoting from I Esdras. However, the parallel quote in Nehemiah is very similar.
In this canon, Clement listed sixteen prophets but did not name them. The sixteen prophets are most likely: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. One question that one might have here is: Are Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle of Jeremiah included together with the Book of Jeremiah? In The Constitutions, Clement quotes from Baruch and Lamentations, but does not quote from the Epistle of Jeremiah.
For even now, on the tenth day of the month Gorpiaeus, when they assemble together, they read the Lamentations of Jeremiah, in which it is said, “The Spirit before our face, Christ the Lord was taken in their destructions” (Lam. 4:20, LXX); and Baruch, in whom it is written, “This is our God; no other shall be esteemed with Him. He found out every way of knowledge, and showed it to Jacob His son, and Israel His beloved. Afterwards He was seen upon earth, and conversed with men.” (Baruch 3:35-37) (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book V, section 3, chapter 20, vol. 7, p. 448, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
And again: “Blessed are we, O Israel, because those things that are pleasing to God are known to us.” (Baruch 4:4) (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VI, section 4, chapter 23, vol. 7, p. 461, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
Baruch and the Lamentations of Jeremiah were undoubtedly included in this canon. These books were grouped with the Book of Jeremiah and counted as one book. There is no quotation from the Epistle of Jeremiah in The Constitutions, but since it is found in the Septuagint and Clement apparently used the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, it is reasonable to think that it also was included with Jeremiah, Baruch, and Lamentations and all four of those books were counted as one book.
Another question pertains to the Book of Daniel. Did Clement mean the short form of Daniel found in Protestant and Jewish Bibles or did he mean the longer form of Daniel found in Orthodox and Catholic Bibles? To answer this question we must see if there is any evidence that Clement used those portions of Daniel that Protestants and Jews reject. In The Constitutions, there are references to passages in the History of Susannah.
Be ye therefore as skilful dealers in money: for as these reject bad money, but take to themselves what is current, in the same manner it is the bishops’s duty to retain the unblameable, but either to heal, or, if they be past cure, to cast off those that are blameworthy, so as not to be hasty in cutting off, nor to believe all accusations; for it sometimes happens that some, either through passion or envy, do insist on a false accusation against a brother, as did the two elders in the case of Susanna in Babylon, and the Egyptian woman in the case of Joseph. (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, section 5, chapter 37, vol. 7, pp. 413-414, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
But if ye become imitators of the elders in Babylon, who, when they had borne witness against Susanna, unjustly condemned her to death, you will become obnoxious to their judgment and condemnation. For the Lord by Daniel delivered Susanna from the hand of the ungodly, but condemned to the fire those elders who were guilty of her blood, and reproaches you by him, saying: “Are ye so foolish, ye children of Israel? Without examination, and without knowing the truth, have ye condemned a daughter of Israel? Return again to the place of judgment, for these men have borne false witness against her.” (Dan. 1:48,49, LXX; Susannah 48, 49) (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, section 6, chapter 51, vol. 7, p. 419, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
It appears that Clement's Book of Daniel was the larger version used by Orthodox and Catholic Christians and not the abridged version used by the Jews and the Protestants.
Then, there is a question about the Book of Esther. Did Clement mean the larger version of Esther found in the Septuagint or the shorter version of Esther used by Jews and Protestants? In The Constitutions there are no references to those passages not found in the shorter version of Esther, but that does not mean that his version of Esther did not include them. He used the Septuagint version of the Old Testament Scriptures. Therefore, he most likely meant the larger version of Esther in this canon.
In this canon, Clement speaks of the fourteen epistles of Paul. These, of course, are: Romans, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I Thessalonians, II Thessalonians, I Timothy, II Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Hebrews.
The next set of canons listed in the Second Canon of the Quinisext Council that pertain to the limits of the canon of Holy Scripture are "those of Carthage." There were several Councils of Carthage. Most Scholars believe that the one that met in 419 A.D. is the one that the Quinisext Council was talking about. At this council a large collection of canons was drafted and adopted. Some of the canons were canons that had already been written at some earlier Councils of Carthage. This particular Council of Carthage just re-affirmed them by approving them. The canons that this council adopted are called the African Code.*
The canon of this council that pertains to Canon of Holy Scripture is Canon XXIV.
Here is this canon.
Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:
Genesis.
Exodus.
Leviticus.
Numbers.
Deuteronomy.
Joshua the Son of Nun.
The Judges.
Ruth.
The Kings, iv. books.
The Chronicles, ij. books.
Job.
The Psalter.
The Five books of Solomon.
The Twelve Books of the Prophets.
Isaiah.
Jeremiah.
Ezechiel.
Daniel.
Tobit.
Judith.
Esther.
Ezra, ij. books.
Macchabees, ij. books.
The Epistles of Paul, xiv.
The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle, ij.
The Epistles of John the Apostle, iij.
The Epistles of James the Apostle, j.
The Epistle of Jude the Apostle, j.
The Revelation of John, j. book
(The Council of Carthage, 419 A.D., Canon 24, vol. 14, pp. 453-454, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
One of the bishops in the North African jurisdiction was Blessed Augustine of Hippo. He provided a list of canonical books of the Sacred Scriptures in his work, On Christian Doctrine. His list agrees with this one.
But let us now go back to consider the third step here mentioned, for it is about it that I have set myself to speak and reason as the Lord shall grant me wisdom. The most skillful interpreter of the sacred writings, then, will be he who in the first place has read them all and retained them in his knowledge, if not yet with full understanding, still with such knowledge as reading gives, — those of them, at least, that arc called canonical. For he will read the others with greater safety when built up in the belief of the truth, so that they will not take first possession of a weak mind, nor, cheating it with dangerous falsehoods and delusions, fill it with prejudices adverse to a sound understanding. Now, in regard to the canonical Scriptures, he must follow the judgment of the greater number of catholic churches; and among these, of course, a high place must be given to such as have been thought worthy to be the seat of an apostle and to receive epistles. Accordingly, among the canonical Scriptures he will judge according to the following standard: to prefer those that are received by all the catholic churches to those which some do not receive. Among those, again, which are not received by all, he will prefer such as have the sanction of the greater number and those of greater authority, to such as are held by the smaller number and those of less authority. If, however, he shall find that some books are held by the greater number of churches, and others by the churches of greater authority (though this is not a very likely thing to happen), I think that in such a case the authority on the two sides is to be looked upon as equal.
Now the whole canon of Scripture on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books: — Five books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; one book of Joshua the son of Nun; one of Judges; one short book called Ruth, which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings; next, four books of Kings, and two of Chronicles — these last not following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and follows the order of the events. There are other books which seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither with the order of the preceding books nor with one another, such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Ezra, which last look more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which terminates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. Still they are to be reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have attained recognition as being authoritative. The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows: — Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; then there are the four greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel. The authority of the Old Testament is contained within the limits of these forty-four books. That of the New Testament, again, is contained within the following: — Four books of the Gospel, according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke, according to John; fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul — one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews: two of Peter; three of John; one of Jude; and one of James; one book of the Acts of the Apostles; and one of the Revelation of John. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 8, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 14, pp. 538-539, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
So then, in order to understand Canon XXIV of the Council of Carthage, it is a good idea to use one of the bishops who was a part of that jurisdiction of bishops during that time. Blessed Augustine's writings are a good commentary on this canon since he lived during the time of this council and was a bishop within the North African jurisdiction.
Looking at the list of books given in Canon XXIV, we see that it mentions the Psalter or Psalms. The question arises here: Was Psalm 151 included among these Psalms or did this canon mean only the first 150 Psalms? I think that it meant all 151 of them because Blessed Augustine used the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. The other bishops in the North African jurisdiction were most probably using it, too. Blessed Augustine wrote:
Now among translations themselves the Italian (Itala) is to be preferred to the others, for it keeps closer to the words without prejudice to clearness of expression. And to correct the Latin we must use the Greek versions, among which the authority of the Septuagint is pre-eminent as far as the Old Testament is concerned; for it is reported through all the more learned churches that the seventy translators enjoyed so much of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit in their work of translation, that among that number of men there was but one voice. And if, as is reported, and as many not unworthy of confidence assert, they were separated during the work of translation, each man being in a cell by himself, and yet nothing was found in the manuscript of any one of them that was not found in the same words and in the same order of words in all the rest, who dares put anything in comparison with an authority like this, not to speak of preferring anything to it? And even if they conferred together with the result that a unanimous agreement sprang out of the common labor and judgment of them all; even so, it would not be right or becoming for any one man, whatever his experience, to aspire to correct the unanimous opinion of many venerable and learned men. Wherefore, even if anything is found in the original Hebrew in a different form from that in which these men have expressed it, I think we must give way to the dispensation of Providence which used these men to bring it about, that books which the Jewish race were unwilling, either from religious scruple or from jealousy, to make known to other nations, were, with the assistance of the power of King Ptolemy, made known so long beforehand to the nations which in the future were to believe in the Lord. And thus it is possible that they translated in such a way as the Holy Spirit, who worked in them and had given them all one voice, thought most suitable for the Gentiles. But nevertheless, as I said above, a comparison of those translators also who have kept most closely to the words, is often not without value as a help to the clearing up of the meaning. The Latin texts, therefore, of the Old Testament are, as I was about to say, to be corrected if necessary by the authority of the Greeks, and especially by that of those who, though they were seventy in number, are said to have translated as with one voice. As to the books of the New Testament, again, if any perplexity arises from the diversities of the Latin texts, we must of course yield to the Greek, especially those that are found in the churches of greater learning and research. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 15, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, pp. 542-543, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
For while there were other interpreters who translated these sacred oracles out of the Hebrew tongue into Greek, as Aquila, Symmathus, and Theodotion, and also that translation which, as the name of the author is unknown, is quoted as the fifth edition, yet the Church has received this Septuagint translation just as if it were the only one; and it has been used by the Greek Christian people, most of whom are not aware that there is any other. From this translation there has also been made a translation in the Latin tongue, which the Latin churches use. Our times, however, have enjoyed the advantage of the presbyter Jerome, a man most learned, and skilled in all three languages, who translated these same Scriptures into the Latin speech, not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew. But although the Jews acknowledge this very learned labor of his to be faithful, while they contend that the Septuagint translators have erred in many places, still the churches of Christ judge that no one should be preferred to the authority of so many men, chosen for this very great work by Eleazar, who was then high priest; for even if there had not appeared in them one spirit, without doubt divine, and the seventy learned men had, after the manner of men, compared together the words of their translation, that what pleased them all might stand, no single translator ought to be preferred to them; but since so great a sign of divinity has appeared in them, certainly, if any other translator, of their Scriptures from the Hebrew into any other tongue is faithful, in that case he agrees with these seventy translators, and if he is not found to agree with them, then we ought to believe that the prophetic gift is with them. For the same Spirit who was in the prophets when they spoke these things was also in the seventy men when they translated them, so that assuredly they could also say something else, just as if the prophet himself had said both, because it would be the same Spirit who said both; and could say the same thing differently, so that, although the words were not the same, yet the same meaning should shine forth to those of good understanding; and could omit or add something, so that even by this it might be shown that there was in that work not human bondage, which the translator owed to the words, but rather divine power, which filled and ruled the mind of the translator. Some, however, have thought that the Greek copies of the Septuagint version should be emended from the Hebrew copies; yet they did not dare to take away what the Hebrew lacked and the Septuagint had, but only added what was found in the Hebrew copies and was lacking in the Septuagint, and noted them by placing at the beginning of the verses certain marks in the form of stars which they call asterisks. And those things which the Hebrew copies have not, but the Septuagint have, they have in like manner marked at the beginning of the verses by horizontal spit-shaped marks like those by which we denote ounces; and many copies having these marks are circulated even in Latin. But we cannot, without inspecting both kinds of copies, find out those things which are neither omitted nor added, but expressed differently, whether they yield another meaning not in itself unsuitable, or can be shown to explain the same meaning in another way. If, then, as it behoves us, we behold nothing else in these Scriptures than what the Spirit of God has spoken through men, if anything is in the Hebrew copies and is not in the version of the Seventy, the Spirit of God did not choose to say it through them, but only through the prophets. But whatever is in the Septuagint and not in the Hebrew copies, the same Spirit chose rather to say through the latter, thus showing that both were prophets. For in that manner He spoke as He chose, some things through Isaiah, some through Jeremiah, some through several prophets, or else the same thing through this prophet and through that. Further, whatever is found in both editions, that one and the same Spirit willed to say through both, but so as that the former preceded in prophesying, and the latter followed: in prophetically interpreting them; because, as the one Spirit of peace was in the former when they spoke true and concordant words, so the selfsame one Spirit hath appeared in the latter, when, without mutual conference they yet interpreted all things as if with one mouth. (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 43, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, pp. 386-387, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Another question that arises is: What are the Five Books of Solomon? Blessed Augustine explained that they are: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the Wisdom of Solomon, and Ecclesiasticus.
Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 8, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 14, p. 539, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
In Canon XXIV it mentions Twelve Books of the Prophets, but it does not name them. Blessed Augustine named them.
The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows: — Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 8, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 14, p. 539, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Canon XXIV mentions Jeremiah as being one of the books of the Old Testament Canon, but it does not mention Baruch, Lamentations, or the Epistle of Jeremiah. Did this canon mean to include those other books under the name of Jeremiah? Blessed Augustine does not even mention these other books in his list. Did he include them under the name of Jeremiah? The answer to this question can be found by seeing if Blessed Augustine used these books. They are part of the Septuagint version of the Old Testament which he said should be preferred to other versions. There are quotations from Baruch and Lamentations in Blessed Augustine's writings.
And it pleased the Creator to produce them, that it might thus be demonstrated that neither beauty, nor yet size and strength, are of much moment to the wise man, whose blessedness lies in spiritual and immortal blessings, in far better and more enduring gifts, in the good things that are the peculiar property of the good, and are not shared by good and bad alike. It is this which another prophet confirms when he says, “These were the giants, famous from the beginning, that were of so great stature, and so expert in war. Those did not the Lord choose, neither gave He the way of knowledge unto them; but they were destroyed because they had no wisdom, and perished through their own foolishness.” (Baruch 3:26-28) (The City of God, Book XV, chapter 23, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 305, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Jeremiah, like Isaiah, is one of the greater prophets, not of the minor, like the others from whose writings I have just given extracts. He prophesied when Josiah reigned in Jerusalem, and Ancus Martius at Rome, when the captivity of the Jews was already at hand; and he continued to prophesy down to the fifth month of the captivity, as we find from his writings. Zephaniah, one of the minor prophets, is put along with him, because he himself says that he prophesied in the days of Josiah; but he does not say till when. Jeremiah thus prophesied not only in the times of Ancus Martius, but also in those of Tarquinius Priscus, whom the Romans had for their fifth king. For he had already begun to reign when that captivity took place. Jeremiah, in prophesying of Christ, says, “The breath of our mouth, the Lord Christ, was taken in our sins” (Lam. 4:20, LXX), thus briefly showing both that Christ is our Lord and that He suffered for us. Also in another place he says, “This is my God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of Him; who hath found out all the way of prudence, and hath given it to Jacob His servant, and to Israel His beloved: afterwards He was seen on the earth, and conversed with men.” (Baruch 3:35-37) Some attribute this testimony not to Jeremiah, but to his secretary, who was called Baruch; but it is more commonly ascribed to Jeremiah. (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 33, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 379, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Blessed Augustine grouped Baruch and Lamentations together with the Book of Jeremiah. I have not found any quotations from the Epistle of Jeremiah in his writings, but since he used the Septuagint which includes that book in it, it is reasonable to assume that that book was also included as part of the writings of the Prophet Jeremiah in his list of books of the Bible. (In most modern Bibles, the Epistle of Jeremiah is the sixth chapter of Baruch.)
Another question arises in connection with the Book of Daniel. Did the Council of Carthage approve the larger version of Daniel used by Orthodox and Catholic Christians or the smaller version used by the Protestants and the Jews? Blessed Augustine mentions Daniel as one of the books of the Bible in his list, but the way to find out if The History of Susannah, the Song of the Three Holy Children, and Bel and the Dragon were part of his Book of Daniel is to see if he quoted from any of them in his writings. The answer to this question turns out to be: Yes, he did.
Some forsooth by aiming at virginity, have thought marriage hateful even as adultery: but others, by defending marriage, would have the excellence of perpetual continence to deserve nothing more than married chastity; as though either the good of Susanna be the lowering of Mary: or the greater good of Mary ought to be the condemnation of Susanna.
Far be it, therefore, that the Apostle so said, unto such as are married or are about to marry, “But I spare you,” as if he were unwilling to say what punishment is due to the married in another life. Far be it that she, whom Daniel set free from temporal judgment, be cast by Paul into hell! Far be it that her husband’s bed be unto her punishment before the judgment seat of Christ, keeping faith to which she chose, under false charge of adultery, to meet either danger, or death! To what effect that speech, “It is better for me to fall into your hands, than to sin in the sight of God” (Dan. 1:23, LXX; Susannah 23, Protestant Apocrypha): if God had been about, not to set her free because she kept married chastity, but to condemn her because she had married? And now so often as married chastity is by truth of holy Scripture justified against such as bring calumnies and charges against marriage, so often is Susanna by the Holy Spirit defended against false witnesses, so often is she set free from a false charge, and with much greater ado. For then against one married woman, now against all; then of hidden and untrue adultery, now of true and open marriage, an accusation is laid. Then one woman, upon what the unjust elders said, now all husbands and wives, upon what the Apostle would notsay, are accused. It was, forsooth, your condemnation, say they, that he was silent on, when he said, “But I spare you.” Who (saith) this? Surely he, who had said above; “And, if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.” (I Cor. 7:28) Why, therefore, wherein he hath been silent through modesty, suspect yea charge against marriage; and wherein he hath spoken openly, recognize ye not a defense of marriage? What, doth he condemn by his silence them whom he acquitted by his words? Is it not now a milder charge, to charge Susanna, not with marriage, but with adultery itself, than to charge the doctrine of the Apostle with falsehood? What in so great peril could we do, were it not as sure and plain that chaste marriage ought not to be condemned, as it is sure and plain that holy Scripture cannot lie? (On the Good of Marriage, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, paragraphs 19 & 20, 354-430 A.D., vol. 3, p. 423, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Yet, though the fact that the angels are the work of God is not omitted here, it is indeed not explicitly mentioned; but elsewhere Holy Scripture asserts it in the clearest manner. For in the Hymn of the Three Children in the Furnace it was said, “O all ye works of the Lord bless ye the Lord” (Daniel 4:58, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 35, Protestant Apocrypha); and among these works mentioned afterwards in detail, the angels are named. (Dan. 4:60, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 37, Protestant Apocrypha) And in the psalm it is said, “Praise ye the Lord from the heavens, praise Him in the heights. Praise ye Him, all His angels; praise ye Him, all His hosts. Praise ye Him, sun and moon; praise Him, all ye stars of light. Praise Him, ye heaven of heavens; and ye waters that be above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the Lord; for He commanded, and they were created.” (Psalm 148:1-5) Here the angels are most expressly and by divine authority said to have been made by God, for of them among the other heavenly things it is said, “He commanded, and they were created.” (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 33, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 210, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Even as Hezekiah served Him, by destroying the groves and the temples of the idols, and the high places which had been built in violation of the commandments of God (II Kings 18:4); or even as Josiah served Him, by doing the same things in his turn (II Kings 23:4,5); or as the King of the Ninevites served Him, by compelling all the men of his city to make satisfaction to the Lord (Jonah 3:6-9); or as Darius served Him, by giving the idol into the power of Daniel to be broken, and by casting his enemies into the den of lions (Dan. 14:22,42, LXX; Bel 22,42, Protestant Bibles); or as Nebuchadnezzar served Him, of whom I have spoken before, by issuing a terrible law to prevent any of his subjects from blaspheming God. (Dan. 4:97, LXX; Dan. 3:29, Protestant Bibles) In this way, therefore, kings can serve the Lord, even in so far as they are kings, when they do in His service what they could not do were they not kings. (A Treastise Concerning the Correction of the Donatists, chapter 5, paragraph 19, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 4, p. 640, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
So then, the council approved the larger version of Daniel to be used as Holy Scripture.
The next question has to do with the two books of Ezra. Did the council approve I Esdras -- a book that has been labeled apocryphal by Roman Catholics, Protestants, and Jews -- as one of the books of Ezra. Remember that in the Septuagint Ezra and Nehemiah are joined together into a single book called in Greek Esdras Deuteron.
To find the answer to this question we must look at Blessed Augustine's writings to see if he had ever considered I Esdras to be divinely inspired Scripture. In The City of God, we find the answer. Yes, he did.
After these three prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, during the same period of the liberation of the people from the Babylonian servitude Esdras also wrote, who is historical rather than prophetical, as is also the book called Esther, which is found to relate, for the praise of God, events not far from those times; unless, perhaps, Esdras is to be understood as prophesying of Christ in that passage where, on a question having arisen among certain young men as to what is the strongest thing, when one had said kings, another wine, the third women, who for the most part rule kings, yet that same third youth demonstrated that the truth is victorious over all. (I Esdras 3-4) For by consulting the Gospel we learn that Christ is the Truth. (St. John 14:6) (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 36, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 382, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
The passage of Scripture about truth that Blessed Augustine alluded to is not found in either Ezra or Nehemiah, but it is in the third and fourth chapters of I Esdras.
Then, there is the question about the Book of Esther. Did the Council of Carthage approve the larger version of Esther used by Orthodox and Catholics or the smaller version used by Protestants and Jews?
Once again, we must look at Blessed Augustine's writings.
And what is that which Esther the queen prays when she says, “Give me eloquent speech in my mouth, and enlighten my words in the sight of the lion, and turn his heart to hatred of him that fighteth against us?” (Esther 14:13) How does she say such things as these in her prayer to God, if God does not work His will in men’s hearts? But perchance the woman was foolish in praying thus. Let us see, then, whether the desire of the petitioner was vainly sent on in advance, and whether the result did not follow as of one who heard. Lo, she goes in to the king. We need not say much. And because she did not approach him in her own order, under the compulsion of her great necessity, “he looked upon her,” as it is written, “like a bull in the impulse of his indignation. And the queen feared, and her colour was changed through faintness, and she bowed herself upon the head of her maid, who went before her. And God changed him, and converted his indignation into mildness.” (Esther 15:5-8) Now what need is there to relate what follows, where the divine Scripture testifies that God fulfilled what she had asked for by working in the heart of the king nothing other than the will by which he commanded, and it was done as the queen had asked of him? And now God had heard her that it should be done, who changed the heart of the king by a most secret and efficacious power before he had heard the address of the woman beseeching him, and moulded it from indignation to mildness,—that is, from the will to hurt, to the will to favour, — according to that word of the apostle, “God worketh in you to will also.” (Phil. 2:13) (A Treatise against the Two Letters of the Pelagians, chapter 38, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 5, p. 389, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Blessed Augustine listed all of the 27 books that are found in the New Testament and those, of course, are the ones that this council approved.
The Quinisext Council approved the canons of Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria. In Letter XXXIX, St. Athanasius provided a list of books that he approved to be used as Holy Scripture.
There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle, one book; afterwards, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament.
Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.
These are fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness. Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these. For concerning these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees, and said, "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures." (St. Matt. 22:29) And He reproved the Jews, saying, "Search the Scriptures, for these are they that testify of Me." (St. John 5:39)
But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read; nor is there in any place a mention of apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead astray the simple. (Letter XXXIX, paragraphs 4-7, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 552, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
It is obvious from reading this letter, that St. Athanasius accepted Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle of Jeremiah as canonical Holy Scripture. He included them together with the Book of Jeremiah as one book. When he mentioned two books of Ezra, a modern American reader might initially think that he was talking about Ezra and Nehemiah and that St. Athanasius did not regard the so-called "apocryphal book" of I Esdras as having any place at all in the Canon of Holy Scripture. However, if one examines some of the other writings of this ancient Christian bishop, one can see that he did use I Esdras and he did consider it to be divinely inspired Scripture.
The Lord has been made wisdom (I Cor. 1:30): He then that sent out Wisdom was not Wisdom, for “I was she,” saith Wisdom, “in whom He delighted.” (Prov. 8:30) Christ is truth: but “Blessed,” saith He, “be the God of truth”’(I Esdras 4:40). (On the Opinion of Dyonisius, chapter 25, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 186, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Search into the matter, as though Truth were the partner of your throne. She is the defence of Kings, and especially of Christian Kings; with her you will reign most securely, for holy Scripture says, "Mercy and truth preserve the king, and they will encircle his throne in righteousness." (Prov. 20:28) And the wise Zorobabel gained a victory over the others by setting forth the power of Truth, and all the people cried out, "Great is the truth, and mighty above all things" (I Esdras 4:41) (Defence before Constantius, chapter 11, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 242, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Star, for instance, differs from star in glory, and the rest have all of them their mutual differences when compared together; yet it follows not for all this that some are lords, and others servants to the superior, nor that some are efficient causes, others by them come into being, but all have a nature which comes to be and is created, confessing in their own selves their Framer: as David says in the Psalms, "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth His handy work" (Psalm 18:1, LXX; Psalm 19:1, Hebrew); and as Zorobabel the wise says, "All the earth calleth upon the Truth, and the heaven blesseth it: all works shake and tremble at it." (I Esdras 4:36) (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse II, chapter 16, paragraph 20, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 359, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
So, St. Athanasius was talking about I Esdras and the book called Esdras Deuteron by the Greeks. Esdras Deuteron consisted of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah combined together to form a single book.
St. Athanasius placed Esther among the Ecclesiastical Books of the Bible, but his version of Esther was the larger one. He used the Septuagint. In this passage from one of his letters, St. Athanasius said that Esther fasted and prayed.
And blessed Esther, when destruction was about to come on all her race, and the nation of Israel was ready to perish, defeated the fury of the tyrant by no other means than by fasting and prayer to God, and changed the ruin of her people into safety. (Esther 4:16; 14; 15; 9) (Letter IV, paragraph 2, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 516, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Nowhere in the Hebrew Masoretic text of Esther does it say that Esther prayed. However, in the Septuagint version of Esther it is possible to read her prayer. (See Esther 14 in the King James Version Apocrypha.)
As for Daniel, St. Athanasius used the larger version of that book as well. There are quotes from and references to passages from the History of Susannah, the Song of the Three Holy Children, and Bel and the Dragon in his writings.
And in Daniel, "Susanna cried out with a loud voice and said, O everlasting God, that knowest the secrets, and knowest all things before they be." (Dan. 1:42, LXX; Susannah 42, Protestant Apocrypha) (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse I, chapter 13, paragraph 20, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 314, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
This knowing, the martyrs in Babylon, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, arraign the Arian irreligion. For when they say, "O all ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord" (Dan. 4:57, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 35, Protestant Apocrypha), they recount things in heaven, things on earth, and the whole creation, as works; but the Son they name not. For they say not, ‘Bless, O Word, and praise, O Wisdom;’ to shew that all other things are both praising and are works; but the Word is not a work nor of those that praise, but is praised with the Father and worshipped and confessed as God, being His Word and Wisdom, and of the works the Framer. (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse II, chapter 21, paragraph 71, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 387, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
But now, since the Word of God, by whom all things came to be, endured to become also Son of man, and humbled Himself, taking a servant’s form, therefore to the Jews the Cross of Christ is a scandal, but to us Christ is "God’s power" and "God’s wisdom" (I Cor. 1:24); for "the Word," as John says, "became flesh" (it being the custom of Scripture to call man by the name of "flesh," as it says by Joel the Prophet, "I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh" (Joel 2:28); and as Daniel said to Astyages, "I do not worship idols made with hands, but the Living God, who hath created the heaven and the earth, and hath sovereignty over all flesh" (Dan. 14:5, LXX; Bel and the Dragon 5, Protestant Apocrypha); for both he and Joel call mankind flesh). (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse III, chapter 26, paragraph 30, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 410, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
St. Athanasius used the Greek Septuagint. There are 151 Psalms in the Septuagint. The Prayer of Manasseh is also in the Septuagint.
The decretal letters "of Gregory Theologus" were also accepted by the Quinisext Council in its Second Canon. I have provided here what it says in the fourteenth volume of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series.
Let not other books seduce your mind: for many malignant writings have been disseminated. The historical books are twelve in number by the Hebrew count, [then follow the names of the books of the Old Testament but Esther is omitted, one Esdras, and all the Deutero-Canonical books]. Thus there are twenty-two books of the Old Testament which correspond to the Hebrew letters. The number of the books of the New Mystery are Matthew, who wrote the Miracles of Christ for the Hebrews; Mark for Italy; Luke, for Greece; John, the enterer of heaven, was a preacher to all, then the Acts, the xiv. Epistles of Paul, the vii. Catholic Epistles, and so you have all the books. If there is any beside these, do not repute it genuine. (From the Metre Poems of St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 14, p. 612, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
I have not read the Metre Poems, but if St. Gregory said, "two of Ezra," I think that he meant I Esdras (the book Roman Catholics and Protestants think is apocryphal) and II Esdras (the books of Ezra and Nehemiah combined together to form a single book. Like St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. Athanasius the Great, he probably counted Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle of Jeremiah as one book. There are quotations from Baruch in his writings.
But if not, what will you say to the suggestion on the other side, that on your hypothesis the Son has been called the only God. In what passage? Why, in this: — "This is your God; no other shall be accounted of in comparison with Him," and a little further on, "after this did He shew Himself upon earth, and conversed with men." (Baruch 3:35, 37) This addition proves clearly that the words are not used of the Father, but of the Son; for it was He Who in bodily form companied with us, and was in this lower world. (The Fourth Theological Oration, which is the Second Concerning the Son, chapter 13, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 314, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
They play the same trick with the word that describes the Incarnation, viz.: He was made Man, explaining it to mean, not, He was in the human nature with which He surrounded Himself, according to the Scripture, He knew what was in man (St. John 2:25); but teaching that it means, He consorted and conversed with men, and taking refuge in the expression which says that "He was seen on Earth and conversed with Men." (Baruch 3:37) And what can anyone contend further? They who take away the Humanity and the Interior Image cleanse by their newly invented mask only our outside, and that which is seen; so far in conflict with themselves that at one time, for the sake of the flesh, they explain all the rest in a gross and carnal manner (for it is from hence that they have derived their second Judaism and their silly thousand years delight in paradise, and almost the idea that we shall resume again the same conditions after these same thousand years); and at another time they bring in His flesh as a phantom rather than a reality, as not having been subjected to any of our experiences, not even such as are free from sin; and use for this purpose the apostolic expression, understood and spoken in a sense which is not apostolic, that our Saviour was made in the likeness of Men and found in fashion as a Man, as though by these words was expressed, not the human form, but some delusive phantom and appearance. (Epistle CII, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 444, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
His version of Daniel most probably was the larger version used by Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians. St. Gregory makes reference to passages from the History of Susannah and Bel and the Dragon in his writings.
Passing by the elders in the book of Daniel; for it is better to pass them by, together with the Lord’s righteous sentence and declaration concerning them, that wickedness came from Babylon from ancient judges, who seemed to govern the people (Dan. 1:5, LXX; History of Susannah 5, Protestant Apocrypha); how are we affected by Ezekiel, the beholder and expositor of the mighty mysteries and visions? By his injunction to the watchmen (Ezek. 33:2) not to keep silence concerning vice and the sword impending over it, a course which would profit neither themselves nor the sinners; but rather to keep watch and forewarn, and thus benefit, at any rate those who gave warning, if not both those who spoke and those who heard? (Oration II: In Defence of His Flight to Pontus, paragraph 64, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 218, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
How did God sustain her? Not by raining down manna, as for Israel of old or opening the rock, in order to give drink to His thirsting people (Psalm 77:15,24, LXX; Psalm 78:15,24, Hebrew), or feasting her by means of ravens, as Elijah (I Kings 17:6), or feeding her by a prophet carried through the air, as He did to Daniel when a-hungered in the den. (Dan. 14:33-39, LXX; Bel and the Dragon 33-39, Protestant Apocrypha) (Oration XVIII: On the Death of His Father, paragraph 30, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 264, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Since his native language was Greek, he most probably used a Psalter containing 151 Psalms. That is what is in the Septuagint. Although the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus were not mentioned in the Metre Poems, St. Gregory did use these books. There are quotations from them in his writings.
Let all men, young and old, give ear, and press on through the same virtue to the same distinction, "for glorious is the fruit of good labours" (Wisdom 3:15), if they suppose this to be worth striving after, and a part of true happiness. (Oration VII: Panegyric on His Brother St. Caesarius, paragraph 14, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 234, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
And how shall we preserve the truth that God pervades all things and fills all, as it is written “Do not I fill Heaven and Earth? saith the Lord” (Jer. 23:24), and “The Spirit of the Lord filleth the world” (Wisdom 1:7), if God partly contains and partly is contained? (Oration XXVIII: The Second Theological Oration, chapter 8, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 291, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Wisdom and Power, “Christ, the Wisdom of God, and the Power of God.” (I Cor. 1:24) The Effulgence, the Impress, the Image, the Seal; “Who being the Effulgence of His glory and the Impress of His Essence” (Heb. 1:3), and “the Image of His Goodness” (Wisdom 7:26), and “Him hath God the Father sealed.” (Oration XXIX: The Third Theological Oration: On the Son, chapter 17, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 307, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Lead me with your prayers, guide me with your words, establish me with your spirit. "The blessing of the father establisheth the houses of children" (Ecclesiasticus 3:9), and would that both I and this spiritual house may be established, the house which I have longed for, which I pray may be my rest for ever, when I have been passed on from the church here to the church yonder, "the general assembly of the firstborn, who are written in Heaven." (Heb. 12:23) (Oration II: In Defence of His Flight to Pontus, paragraph 116, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 227, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
God doth not so; but saith "Honour thy father and thy mother, which is the first commandment with promise" (Eph. 6:2); "that it may be well with thee" (Exodus 20:12, LXX; Deut. 5:16); and, "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (Lev. 20:9, LXX) Similarly He gave honour to good and punishment to evil. And, "The blessing of a father strengtheneth the houses of children, but the curse of a mother uprooteth the foundations." (Ecclesiasticus 3:9) See the equality of the legislation. There is one Maker of man and woman; one debt is owed by children to both their parents. (Oration XXXVII: On the Words of the Gospel, chapter 6, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 341, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
The Father doth not glory in the dishonour of the Son. If "a wise Son maketh a glad Father" (Prov. 10:1), how much more doth the hon-our of the Son become that of the Father! And if you also accept this saying, "My Son, glory not in the dishonour of thy Father" (Ecclesiasticus 3:10), similarly the Father doth not glory in the Son’s dishonour. If you dishonour the Holy Ghost, the Son receiveth not your honour. (Oration XXXVII: On the Words of the Gospel, chapter 18, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 343, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
St. Gregory even used the Second Book of Maccabees. In his writings, he speaks of the Maccabean Martyrs mentioned in chapters 6 and 7 of that book.
I pass by the rest, the three young men bedewed in the fire (Dan. 4:49-51, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 26-28), the fugitive prophet praying in the whale’s belly (Jonah 2), and coming forth from the creature, as from a chamber; the just man in the den, restraining the lions’ rage (Dan. 7, LXX; Dan. 6, Hebrew), and the struggle of the seven Maccabees (II Maccabees 6:17-7:42), who were perfected with their father and mother in blood, and in all kinds of tortures. Their endurance he rivalled, and won their glory. (Oration XLIII: The Panegyric on St. Basil, paragraph 74, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 420, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
The last decretal letter that pertains to the Canon of Holy Scripture and was accepted by the Quinisext Council is the Iambics of St. Amphilochius of Iconium.
We should know that not every book which is called Scripture is to be received as a safe guide. For some are tolerably sound and others are more than doubtful. Therefore the books which the inspiration of God hath given I will enumerate. [Then follows a list of the proto-canonical books of the Old Testament, Esther alone being omitted. All the, deutero-canonical books are omitted. He then continues] to these some add Esther. I must now show what are the books of the New Testament. [Then follow all the books of the New Testament except the Revelation. He continues,] But some add to these the Revelation of John, but by far the majority say that it is spurious. This is the most true canon of the divinely given Scriptures. (From the Iambics, written by St. Amphilochius of Iconium, 339-403 A.D., vol. 14, p. 612, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Like St. Gregory, St. Amphilochius used the Septuagint. He used the larger version of Daniel a Psalter with 151 Psalms and the writings of the Prophets that included Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah. People often try to use the Church Fathers to support their pre-conceived opinions. They want the Fathers to say that they agreed with their modern notions of the Bible. People must look at the Fathers in the light of their times in order to properly understand them. None of the Church Fathers were Protestants. Protestant theology did not even exist in their day. The King James Version was not even published. To think that the Fathers were carrying around Greek and Latin versions of the King James Version (without the so-called "apocrypha") is to err greatly in one's view of them. The Septuagint was the authoritative text to use for the Old Testament. That is what many Christians read. An Old Latin translation of the Septuagint did exist in the fourth century. Many of the Latin speaking Christians used it.
There are five books that did not make it into the New Testament, but are still to be held in high esteem. The 85th Canon of the Canons of the Holy Apostles mentions three of them: The First Epistle of Clement, the Second Epistle of Clement, and the Canons of the Holy Apostles. The Quinisext Council rejected the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles because some heretical material had been introduced into them. The other two books are the Shepherd and the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. St. Athanasius placed these two books with the Ecclesiastical Books of the Bible. There are a lot things that get placed in an appendix in the back of a Bible nowadays. I think these five books merit being in an appendix at the back of a Bible more than a lot other things that end up there.
Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts, D.D. & James Donaldson, LL.D., volumes 1-10, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, edited by Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., volumes 1-14, Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Massachusetts
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, edited by Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D. & Henry Wace, D.D., volumes 1-14, Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Massachusetts
It has also seemed good to this holy Council, that the eighty-five canons, received and ratified by the holy and blessed Fathers before us, and also handed down to us in the name of the holy and glorious Apostles should from this time forth remain firm and unshaken for the cure of souls and the healing of disorders. And in these canons we are bidden to receive the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles [written] by Clement. But formerly through the agency of those who erred from the faith certain adulterous matter was introduced, clean contrary to piety, for the polluting of the Church, which obscures the elegance and beauty of the divine decrees in their present form. We therefore reject these Constitutions so as the better to make sure of the edification and security of the most Christian flock; by no means admitting the offspring of heretical error, and cleaving to the pure and perfect doctrine of the Apostles. But we set our seal likewise upon all the other holy canons set forth by our holy and blessed Fathers, that is, by the 318 holy God-bearing Fathers assembled at Nice, and those at Ancyra, further those at NeoCaesarea and likewise those at Gangra, and besides, those at Antioch in Syria: those too at Laodicea in Phrygia: and likewise the 150 who assembled in this heaven-protected royal city: and the 200 who assembled the first time in the metropolis of the Ephesians, and the 630 holy and blessed Fathers at Chalcedon. In like manner those of Sardica, and those of Carthage: those also who again assembled in this heaven-protected royal city under its bishop Nectarius and Theophilus Archbishop of Alexandria. Likewise too the Canons [i.e. the decretal letters] of Dionysius, formerly Archbishop of the great city of Alexandria; and of Peter, Archbishop of Alexandria and Martyr; of Gregory the Wonder-worker, Bishop of Neo-Caesarea; of Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria; of Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia; of Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa; of Gregory Theologus; of Amphilochius of Iconium; of Timothy, Archbishop of Alexandria; of Theophilus, Archbishop of the same great city of Alexandria; of Cyril, Archbishop of the same Alexandria; of Gennadius, Patriarch of this heaven-protected royal city. Moreover the Canon set forth by Cyprian, Archbishop of the country of the Africans and Martyr, and by the Synod under him, which has been kept only in the country of the aforesaid Bishops, according to the custom delivered down to them. And that no one be allowed to transgress or disregard the aforesaid canons, or to receive others beside them, supposititiously set forth by certain who have attempted to make a traffic of the truth. But should any one be convicted of innovating upon, or attempting to overturn, any of the afore-mentioned canons, he shall be subject to receive the penalty which that canon imposes, and to be cured by it of his transgression. (Canon II, Quinisext Council, 692 A.D., vol. 14, p. 361, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
The Quinisext Council is an Ecumenical Church Council. Therefore, this canon is an authoritative statement of the Church as a whole. The first set of canons that this council approved is the Canons of the Holy Apostles. The 85th Canon of these canons is the one that pertains to the books which belong in the canon of Holy Scripture. Here is the full text of this canon.
Let the following books be esteemed venerable and holy by you, both of the clergy and laity. Of the Old Covenant: the five books of Moses — Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; one of Joshua the son of Nun, one of the Judges, one of Ruth, four of the Kings, two of the Chronicles, two of Ezra, one of Esther, one of Judith, three of the Maccabees, one of Job, one hundred and fifty psalms; three books of Solomon — Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs; sixteen prophets. And besides these, take care that your young persons learn the Wisdom of the very learned Sirach. But our sacred books, that is, those of the New Covenant, are these: the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the fourteen Epistles of Paul; two Epistles of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; two Epistles of Clement; and the Constitutions dedicated to you the bishops by me Clement, in eight books; which it is not fit to publish before all, because of the mysteries contained in them; and the Acts of us the Apostles. (The Canons of the Holy Apostles, Canon 85, vol. 7, p. 505, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
The Second Canon of the Quinisext Council accepted the Canons of the Holy Apostles, but rejected The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles since they had been altered by the introduction of some heretical material into them.
There are some questions that one may have when one looks at this canon. One such question is: What is meant by "two of Ezra?" In the Septuagint, the books commonly known as Ezra and Nehemiah are grouped together to form a single book called Esdras Deuteron or Second Esdras. Was the book of I Esdras included in this list of canonical books? To answer this question, one must look at The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles to see if there is any evidence that Clement used this particular book. There is a quotation from one of the books of Ezra in The Constitutions.
Wise Ezra does also admonish thee and say: “Go your way, and eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and be not sorrowful.” (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VII, section 2, chapter 20, vol. 7, p. 469, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
In I Esdras, it says:
Go then, and eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send part to them that have nothing; for this day is holy unto the Lord: and be not sorrowful; for the Lord will bring you to honour. (I Esdras 9:51, 52)
In Nehemiah, it says:
And the governor said to them, Go, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions to them that have nothing; for the day is holy to our Lord: and faint not, for the Lord is our strength. (Neh. 8:10, LXX)
It appears that Clement may have been quoting from I Esdras. However, the parallel quote in Nehemiah is very similar.
In this canon, Clement listed sixteen prophets but did not name them. The sixteen prophets are most likely: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. One question that one might have here is: Are Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle of Jeremiah included together with the Book of Jeremiah? In The Constitutions, Clement quotes from Baruch and Lamentations, but does not quote from the Epistle of Jeremiah.
For even now, on the tenth day of the month Gorpiaeus, when they assemble together, they read the Lamentations of Jeremiah, in which it is said, “The Spirit before our face, Christ the Lord was taken in their destructions” (Lam. 4:20, LXX); and Baruch, in whom it is written, “This is our God; no other shall be esteemed with Him. He found out every way of knowledge, and showed it to Jacob His son, and Israel His beloved. Afterwards He was seen upon earth, and conversed with men.” (Baruch 3:35-37) (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book V, section 3, chapter 20, vol. 7, p. 448, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
And again: “Blessed are we, O Israel, because those things that are pleasing to God are known to us.” (Baruch 4:4) (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VI, section 4, chapter 23, vol. 7, p. 461, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
Baruch and the Lamentations of Jeremiah were undoubtedly included in this canon. These books were grouped with the Book of Jeremiah and counted as one book. There is no quotation from the Epistle of Jeremiah in The Constitutions, but since it is found in the Septuagint and Clement apparently used the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, it is reasonable to think that it also was included with Jeremiah, Baruch, and Lamentations and all four of those books were counted as one book.
Another question pertains to the Book of Daniel. Did Clement mean the short form of Daniel found in Protestant and Jewish Bibles or did he mean the longer form of Daniel found in Orthodox and Catholic Bibles? To answer this question we must see if there is any evidence that Clement used those portions of Daniel that Protestants and Jews reject. In The Constitutions, there are references to passages in the History of Susannah.
Be ye therefore as skilful dealers in money: for as these reject bad money, but take to themselves what is current, in the same manner it is the bishops’s duty to retain the unblameable, but either to heal, or, if they be past cure, to cast off those that are blameworthy, so as not to be hasty in cutting off, nor to believe all accusations; for it sometimes happens that some, either through passion or envy, do insist on a false accusation against a brother, as did the two elders in the case of Susanna in Babylon, and the Egyptian woman in the case of Joseph. (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, section 5, chapter 37, vol. 7, pp. 413-414, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
But if ye become imitators of the elders in Babylon, who, when they had borne witness against Susanna, unjustly condemned her to death, you will become obnoxious to their judgment and condemnation. For the Lord by Daniel delivered Susanna from the hand of the ungodly, but condemned to the fire those elders who were guilty of her blood, and reproaches you by him, saying: “Are ye so foolish, ye children of Israel? Without examination, and without knowing the truth, have ye condemned a daughter of Israel? Return again to the place of judgment, for these men have borne false witness against her.” (Dan. 1:48,49, LXX; Susannah 48, 49) (The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book II, section 6, chapter 51, vol. 7, p. 419, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
It appears that Clement's Book of Daniel was the larger version used by Orthodox and Catholic Christians and not the abridged version used by the Jews and the Protestants.
Then, there is a question about the Book of Esther. Did Clement mean the larger version of Esther found in the Septuagint or the shorter version of Esther used by Jews and Protestants? In The Constitutions there are no references to those passages not found in the shorter version of Esther, but that does not mean that his version of Esther did not include them. He used the Septuagint version of the Old Testament Scriptures. Therefore, he most likely meant the larger version of Esther in this canon.
In this canon, Clement speaks of the fourteen epistles of Paul. These, of course, are: Romans, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I Thessalonians, II Thessalonians, I Timothy, II Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Hebrews.
The next set of canons listed in the Second Canon of the Quinisext Council that pertain to the limits of the canon of Holy Scripture are "those of Carthage." There were several Councils of Carthage. Most Scholars believe that the one that met in 419 A.D. is the one that the Quinisext Council was talking about. At this council a large collection of canons was drafted and adopted. Some of the canons were canons that had already been written at some earlier Councils of Carthage. This particular Council of Carthage just re-affirmed them by approving them. The canons that this council adopted are called the African Code.*
The canon of this council that pertains to Canon of Holy Scripture is Canon XXIV.
Here is this canon.
Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:
Genesis.
Exodus.
Leviticus.
Numbers.
Deuteronomy.
Joshua the Son of Nun.
The Judges.
Ruth.
The Kings, iv. books.
The Chronicles, ij. books.
Job.
The Psalter.
The Five books of Solomon.
The Twelve Books of the Prophets.
Isaiah.
Jeremiah.
Ezechiel.
Daniel.
Tobit.
Judith.
Esther.
Ezra, ij. books.
Macchabees, ij. books.
The New Testament.
The Acts of the Apostles, j. book.The Gospels, iv. books.
The Epistles of Paul, xiv.
The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle, ij.
The Epistles of John the Apostle, iij.
The Epistles of James the Apostle, j.
The Epistle of Jude the Apostle, j.
The Revelation of John, j. book
(The Council of Carthage, 419 A.D., Canon 24, vol. 14, pp. 453-454, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
One of the bishops in the North African jurisdiction was Blessed Augustine of Hippo. He provided a list of canonical books of the Sacred Scriptures in his work, On Christian Doctrine. His list agrees with this one.
But let us now go back to consider the third step here mentioned, for it is about it that I have set myself to speak and reason as the Lord shall grant me wisdom. The most skillful interpreter of the sacred writings, then, will be he who in the first place has read them all and retained them in his knowledge, if not yet with full understanding, still with such knowledge as reading gives, — those of them, at least, that arc called canonical. For he will read the others with greater safety when built up in the belief of the truth, so that they will not take first possession of a weak mind, nor, cheating it with dangerous falsehoods and delusions, fill it with prejudices adverse to a sound understanding. Now, in regard to the canonical Scriptures, he must follow the judgment of the greater number of catholic churches; and among these, of course, a high place must be given to such as have been thought worthy to be the seat of an apostle and to receive epistles. Accordingly, among the canonical Scriptures he will judge according to the following standard: to prefer those that are received by all the catholic churches to those which some do not receive. Among those, again, which are not received by all, he will prefer such as have the sanction of the greater number and those of greater authority, to such as are held by the smaller number and those of less authority. If, however, he shall find that some books are held by the greater number of churches, and others by the churches of greater authority (though this is not a very likely thing to happen), I think that in such a case the authority on the two sides is to be looked upon as equal.
Now the whole canon of Scripture on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books: — Five books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; one book of Joshua the son of Nun; one of Judges; one short book called Ruth, which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings; next, four books of Kings, and two of Chronicles — these last not following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and follows the order of the events. There are other books which seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither with the order of the preceding books nor with one another, such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Ezra, which last look more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which terminates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. Still they are to be reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have attained recognition as being authoritative. The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows: — Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; then there are the four greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel. The authority of the Old Testament is contained within the limits of these forty-four books. That of the New Testament, again, is contained within the following: — Four books of the Gospel, according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke, according to John; fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul — one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews: two of Peter; three of John; one of Jude; and one of James; one book of the Acts of the Apostles; and one of the Revelation of John. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 8, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 14, pp. 538-539, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
So then, in order to understand Canon XXIV of the Council of Carthage, it is a good idea to use one of the bishops who was a part of that jurisdiction of bishops during that time. Blessed Augustine's writings are a good commentary on this canon since he lived during the time of this council and was a bishop within the North African jurisdiction.
Looking at the list of books given in Canon XXIV, we see that it mentions the Psalter or Psalms. The question arises here: Was Psalm 151 included among these Psalms or did this canon mean only the first 150 Psalms? I think that it meant all 151 of them because Blessed Augustine used the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. The other bishops in the North African jurisdiction were most probably using it, too. Blessed Augustine wrote:
Now among translations themselves the Italian (Itala) is to be preferred to the others, for it keeps closer to the words without prejudice to clearness of expression. And to correct the Latin we must use the Greek versions, among which the authority of the Septuagint is pre-eminent as far as the Old Testament is concerned; for it is reported through all the more learned churches that the seventy translators enjoyed so much of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit in their work of translation, that among that number of men there was but one voice. And if, as is reported, and as many not unworthy of confidence assert, they were separated during the work of translation, each man being in a cell by himself, and yet nothing was found in the manuscript of any one of them that was not found in the same words and in the same order of words in all the rest, who dares put anything in comparison with an authority like this, not to speak of preferring anything to it? And even if they conferred together with the result that a unanimous agreement sprang out of the common labor and judgment of them all; even so, it would not be right or becoming for any one man, whatever his experience, to aspire to correct the unanimous opinion of many venerable and learned men. Wherefore, even if anything is found in the original Hebrew in a different form from that in which these men have expressed it, I think we must give way to the dispensation of Providence which used these men to bring it about, that books which the Jewish race were unwilling, either from religious scruple or from jealousy, to make known to other nations, were, with the assistance of the power of King Ptolemy, made known so long beforehand to the nations which in the future were to believe in the Lord. And thus it is possible that they translated in such a way as the Holy Spirit, who worked in them and had given them all one voice, thought most suitable for the Gentiles. But nevertheless, as I said above, a comparison of those translators also who have kept most closely to the words, is often not without value as a help to the clearing up of the meaning. The Latin texts, therefore, of the Old Testament are, as I was about to say, to be corrected if necessary by the authority of the Greeks, and especially by that of those who, though they were seventy in number, are said to have translated as with one voice. As to the books of the New Testament, again, if any perplexity arises from the diversities of the Latin texts, we must of course yield to the Greek, especially those that are found in the churches of greater learning and research. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 15, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, pp. 542-543, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
For while there were other interpreters who translated these sacred oracles out of the Hebrew tongue into Greek, as Aquila, Symmathus, and Theodotion, and also that translation which, as the name of the author is unknown, is quoted as the fifth edition, yet the Church has received this Septuagint translation just as if it were the only one; and it has been used by the Greek Christian people, most of whom are not aware that there is any other. From this translation there has also been made a translation in the Latin tongue, which the Latin churches use. Our times, however, have enjoyed the advantage of the presbyter Jerome, a man most learned, and skilled in all three languages, who translated these same Scriptures into the Latin speech, not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew. But although the Jews acknowledge this very learned labor of his to be faithful, while they contend that the Septuagint translators have erred in many places, still the churches of Christ judge that no one should be preferred to the authority of so many men, chosen for this very great work by Eleazar, who was then high priest; for even if there had not appeared in them one spirit, without doubt divine, and the seventy learned men had, after the manner of men, compared together the words of their translation, that what pleased them all might stand, no single translator ought to be preferred to them; but since so great a sign of divinity has appeared in them, certainly, if any other translator, of their Scriptures from the Hebrew into any other tongue is faithful, in that case he agrees with these seventy translators, and if he is not found to agree with them, then we ought to believe that the prophetic gift is with them. For the same Spirit who was in the prophets when they spoke these things was also in the seventy men when they translated them, so that assuredly they could also say something else, just as if the prophet himself had said both, because it would be the same Spirit who said both; and could say the same thing differently, so that, although the words were not the same, yet the same meaning should shine forth to those of good understanding; and could omit or add something, so that even by this it might be shown that there was in that work not human bondage, which the translator owed to the words, but rather divine power, which filled and ruled the mind of the translator. Some, however, have thought that the Greek copies of the Septuagint version should be emended from the Hebrew copies; yet they did not dare to take away what the Hebrew lacked and the Septuagint had, but only added what was found in the Hebrew copies and was lacking in the Septuagint, and noted them by placing at the beginning of the verses certain marks in the form of stars which they call asterisks. And those things which the Hebrew copies have not, but the Septuagint have, they have in like manner marked at the beginning of the verses by horizontal spit-shaped marks like those by which we denote ounces; and many copies having these marks are circulated even in Latin. But we cannot, without inspecting both kinds of copies, find out those things which are neither omitted nor added, but expressed differently, whether they yield another meaning not in itself unsuitable, or can be shown to explain the same meaning in another way. If, then, as it behoves us, we behold nothing else in these Scriptures than what the Spirit of God has spoken through men, if anything is in the Hebrew copies and is not in the version of the Seventy, the Spirit of God did not choose to say it through them, but only through the prophets. But whatever is in the Septuagint and not in the Hebrew copies, the same Spirit chose rather to say through the latter, thus showing that both were prophets. For in that manner He spoke as He chose, some things through Isaiah, some through Jeremiah, some through several prophets, or else the same thing through this prophet and through that. Further, whatever is found in both editions, that one and the same Spirit willed to say through both, but so as that the former preceded in prophesying, and the latter followed: in prophetically interpreting them; because, as the one Spirit of peace was in the former when they spoke true and concordant words, so the selfsame one Spirit hath appeared in the latter, when, without mutual conference they yet interpreted all things as if with one mouth. (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 43, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, pp. 386-387, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Another question that arises is: What are the Five Books of Solomon? Blessed Augustine explained that they are: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the Wisdom of Solomon, and Ecclesiasticus.
Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 8, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 14, p. 539, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
In Canon XXIV it mentions Twelve Books of the Prophets, but it does not name them. Blessed Augustine named them.
The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows: — Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, chapter 8, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 14, p. 539, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Canon XXIV mentions Jeremiah as being one of the books of the Old Testament Canon, but it does not mention Baruch, Lamentations, or the Epistle of Jeremiah. Did this canon mean to include those other books under the name of Jeremiah? Blessed Augustine does not even mention these other books in his list. Did he include them under the name of Jeremiah? The answer to this question can be found by seeing if Blessed Augustine used these books. They are part of the Septuagint version of the Old Testament which he said should be preferred to other versions. There are quotations from Baruch and Lamentations in Blessed Augustine's writings.
And it pleased the Creator to produce them, that it might thus be demonstrated that neither beauty, nor yet size and strength, are of much moment to the wise man, whose blessedness lies in spiritual and immortal blessings, in far better and more enduring gifts, in the good things that are the peculiar property of the good, and are not shared by good and bad alike. It is this which another prophet confirms when he says, “These were the giants, famous from the beginning, that were of so great stature, and so expert in war. Those did not the Lord choose, neither gave He the way of knowledge unto them; but they were destroyed because they had no wisdom, and perished through their own foolishness.” (Baruch 3:26-28) (The City of God, Book XV, chapter 23, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 305, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Jeremiah, like Isaiah, is one of the greater prophets, not of the minor, like the others from whose writings I have just given extracts. He prophesied when Josiah reigned in Jerusalem, and Ancus Martius at Rome, when the captivity of the Jews was already at hand; and he continued to prophesy down to the fifth month of the captivity, as we find from his writings. Zephaniah, one of the minor prophets, is put along with him, because he himself says that he prophesied in the days of Josiah; but he does not say till when. Jeremiah thus prophesied not only in the times of Ancus Martius, but also in those of Tarquinius Priscus, whom the Romans had for their fifth king. For he had already begun to reign when that captivity took place. Jeremiah, in prophesying of Christ, says, “The breath of our mouth, the Lord Christ, was taken in our sins” (Lam. 4:20, LXX), thus briefly showing both that Christ is our Lord and that He suffered for us. Also in another place he says, “This is my God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of Him; who hath found out all the way of prudence, and hath given it to Jacob His servant, and to Israel His beloved: afterwards He was seen on the earth, and conversed with men.” (Baruch 3:35-37) Some attribute this testimony not to Jeremiah, but to his secretary, who was called Baruch; but it is more commonly ascribed to Jeremiah. (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 33, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 379, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Blessed Augustine grouped Baruch and Lamentations together with the Book of Jeremiah. I have not found any quotations from the Epistle of Jeremiah in his writings, but since he used the Septuagint which includes that book in it, it is reasonable to assume that that book was also included as part of the writings of the Prophet Jeremiah in his list of books of the Bible. (In most modern Bibles, the Epistle of Jeremiah is the sixth chapter of Baruch.)
Another question arises in connection with the Book of Daniel. Did the Council of Carthage approve the larger version of Daniel used by Orthodox and Catholic Christians or the smaller version used by the Protestants and the Jews? Blessed Augustine mentions Daniel as one of the books of the Bible in his list, but the way to find out if The History of Susannah, the Song of the Three Holy Children, and Bel and the Dragon were part of his Book of Daniel is to see if he quoted from any of them in his writings. The answer to this question turns out to be: Yes, he did.
Some forsooth by aiming at virginity, have thought marriage hateful even as adultery: but others, by defending marriage, would have the excellence of perpetual continence to deserve nothing more than married chastity; as though either the good of Susanna be the lowering of Mary: or the greater good of Mary ought to be the condemnation of Susanna.
Far be it, therefore, that the Apostle so said, unto such as are married or are about to marry, “But I spare you,” as if he were unwilling to say what punishment is due to the married in another life. Far be it that she, whom Daniel set free from temporal judgment, be cast by Paul into hell! Far be it that her husband’s bed be unto her punishment before the judgment seat of Christ, keeping faith to which she chose, under false charge of adultery, to meet either danger, or death! To what effect that speech, “It is better for me to fall into your hands, than to sin in the sight of God” (Dan. 1:23, LXX; Susannah 23, Protestant Apocrypha): if God had been about, not to set her free because she kept married chastity, but to condemn her because she had married? And now so often as married chastity is by truth of holy Scripture justified against such as bring calumnies and charges against marriage, so often is Susanna by the Holy Spirit defended against false witnesses, so often is she set free from a false charge, and with much greater ado. For then against one married woman, now against all; then of hidden and untrue adultery, now of true and open marriage, an accusation is laid. Then one woman, upon what the unjust elders said, now all husbands and wives, upon what the Apostle would notsay, are accused. It was, forsooth, your condemnation, say they, that he was silent on, when he said, “But I spare you.” Who (saith) this? Surely he, who had said above; “And, if thou shalt have taken a wife, thou hast not sinned; and, if a virgin shall have been married, she sinneth not.” (I Cor. 7:28) Why, therefore, wherein he hath been silent through modesty, suspect yea charge against marriage; and wherein he hath spoken openly, recognize ye not a defense of marriage? What, doth he condemn by his silence them whom he acquitted by his words? Is it not now a milder charge, to charge Susanna, not with marriage, but with adultery itself, than to charge the doctrine of the Apostle with falsehood? What in so great peril could we do, were it not as sure and plain that chaste marriage ought not to be condemned, as it is sure and plain that holy Scripture cannot lie? (On the Good of Marriage, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, paragraphs 19 & 20, 354-430 A.D., vol. 3, p. 423, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Yet, though the fact that the angels are the work of God is not omitted here, it is indeed not explicitly mentioned; but elsewhere Holy Scripture asserts it in the clearest manner. For in the Hymn of the Three Children in the Furnace it was said, “O all ye works of the Lord bless ye the Lord” (Daniel 4:58, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 35, Protestant Apocrypha); and among these works mentioned afterwards in detail, the angels are named. (Dan. 4:60, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 37, Protestant Apocrypha) And in the psalm it is said, “Praise ye the Lord from the heavens, praise Him in the heights. Praise ye Him, all His angels; praise ye Him, all His hosts. Praise ye Him, sun and moon; praise Him, all ye stars of light. Praise Him, ye heaven of heavens; and ye waters that be above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the Lord; for He commanded, and they were created.” (Psalm 148:1-5) Here the angels are most expressly and by divine authority said to have been made by God, for of them among the other heavenly things it is said, “He commanded, and they were created.” (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 33, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 210, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Even as Hezekiah served Him, by destroying the groves and the temples of the idols, and the high places which had been built in violation of the commandments of God (II Kings 18:4); or even as Josiah served Him, by doing the same things in his turn (II Kings 23:4,5); or as the King of the Ninevites served Him, by compelling all the men of his city to make satisfaction to the Lord (Jonah 3:6-9); or as Darius served Him, by giving the idol into the power of Daniel to be broken, and by casting his enemies into the den of lions (Dan. 14:22,42, LXX; Bel 22,42, Protestant Bibles); or as Nebuchadnezzar served Him, of whom I have spoken before, by issuing a terrible law to prevent any of his subjects from blaspheming God. (Dan. 4:97, LXX; Dan. 3:29, Protestant Bibles) In this way, therefore, kings can serve the Lord, even in so far as they are kings, when they do in His service what they could not do were they not kings. (A Treastise Concerning the Correction of the Donatists, chapter 5, paragraph 19, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 4, p. 640, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
So then, the council approved the larger version of Daniel to be used as Holy Scripture.
The next question has to do with the two books of Ezra. Did the council approve I Esdras -- a book that has been labeled apocryphal by Roman Catholics, Protestants, and Jews -- as one of the books of Ezra. Remember that in the Septuagint Ezra and Nehemiah are joined together into a single book called in Greek Esdras Deuteron.
To find the answer to this question we must look at Blessed Augustine's writings to see if he had ever considered I Esdras to be divinely inspired Scripture. In The City of God, we find the answer. Yes, he did.
After these three prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, during the same period of the liberation of the people from the Babylonian servitude Esdras also wrote, who is historical rather than prophetical, as is also the book called Esther, which is found to relate, for the praise of God, events not far from those times; unless, perhaps, Esdras is to be understood as prophesying of Christ in that passage where, on a question having arisen among certain young men as to what is the strongest thing, when one had said kings, another wine, the third women, who for the most part rule kings, yet that same third youth demonstrated that the truth is victorious over all. (I Esdras 3-4) For by consulting the Gospel we learn that Christ is the Truth. (St. John 14:6) (The City of God, Book XVIII, chapter 36, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 2, p. 382, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
The passage of Scripture about truth that Blessed Augustine alluded to is not found in either Ezra or Nehemiah, but it is in the third and fourth chapters of I Esdras.
Then, there is the question about the Book of Esther. Did the Council of Carthage approve the larger version of Esther used by Orthodox and Catholics or the smaller version used by Protestants and Jews?
Once again, we must look at Blessed Augustine's writings.
And what is that which Esther the queen prays when she says, “Give me eloquent speech in my mouth, and enlighten my words in the sight of the lion, and turn his heart to hatred of him that fighteth against us?” (Esther 14:13) How does she say such things as these in her prayer to God, if God does not work His will in men’s hearts? But perchance the woman was foolish in praying thus. Let us see, then, whether the desire of the petitioner was vainly sent on in advance, and whether the result did not follow as of one who heard. Lo, she goes in to the king. We need not say much. And because she did not approach him in her own order, under the compulsion of her great necessity, “he looked upon her,” as it is written, “like a bull in the impulse of his indignation. And the queen feared, and her colour was changed through faintness, and she bowed herself upon the head of her maid, who went before her. And God changed him, and converted his indignation into mildness.” (Esther 15:5-8) Now what need is there to relate what follows, where the divine Scripture testifies that God fulfilled what she had asked for by working in the heart of the king nothing other than the will by which he commanded, and it was done as the queen had asked of him? And now God had heard her that it should be done, who changed the heart of the king by a most secret and efficacious power before he had heard the address of the woman beseeching him, and moulded it from indignation to mildness,—that is, from the will to hurt, to the will to favour, — according to that word of the apostle, “God worketh in you to will also.” (Phil. 2:13) (A Treatise against the Two Letters of the Pelagians, chapter 38, by Blessed Augustine of Hippo, 354-430 A.D., vol. 5, p. 389, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series)
Blessed Augustine listed all of the 27 books that are found in the New Testament and those, of course, are the ones that this council approved.
The Quinisext Council approved the canons of Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria. In Letter XXXIX, St. Athanasius provided a list of books that he approved to be used as Holy Scripture.
There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle, one book; afterwards, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament.
Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.
These are fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness. Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these. For concerning these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees, and said, "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures." (St. Matt. 22:29) And He reproved the Jews, saying, "Search the Scriptures, for these are they that testify of Me." (St. John 5:39)
But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read; nor is there in any place a mention of apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead astray the simple. (Letter XXXIX, paragraphs 4-7, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 552, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
It is obvious from reading this letter, that St. Athanasius accepted Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle of Jeremiah as canonical Holy Scripture. He included them together with the Book of Jeremiah as one book. When he mentioned two books of Ezra, a modern American reader might initially think that he was talking about Ezra and Nehemiah and that St. Athanasius did not regard the so-called "apocryphal book" of I Esdras as having any place at all in the Canon of Holy Scripture. However, if one examines some of the other writings of this ancient Christian bishop, one can see that he did use I Esdras and he did consider it to be divinely inspired Scripture.
The Lord has been made wisdom (I Cor. 1:30): He then that sent out Wisdom was not Wisdom, for “I was she,” saith Wisdom, “in whom He delighted.” (Prov. 8:30) Christ is truth: but “Blessed,” saith He, “be the God of truth”’(I Esdras 4:40). (On the Opinion of Dyonisius, chapter 25, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 186, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Search into the matter, as though Truth were the partner of your throne. She is the defence of Kings, and especially of Christian Kings; with her you will reign most securely, for holy Scripture says, "Mercy and truth preserve the king, and they will encircle his throne in righteousness." (Prov. 20:28) And the wise Zorobabel gained a victory over the others by setting forth the power of Truth, and all the people cried out, "Great is the truth, and mighty above all things" (I Esdras 4:41) (Defence before Constantius, chapter 11, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 242, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Star, for instance, differs from star in glory, and the rest have all of them their mutual differences when compared together; yet it follows not for all this that some are lords, and others servants to the superior, nor that some are efficient causes, others by them come into being, but all have a nature which comes to be and is created, confessing in their own selves their Framer: as David says in the Psalms, "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth His handy work" (Psalm 18:1, LXX; Psalm 19:1, Hebrew); and as Zorobabel the wise says, "All the earth calleth upon the Truth, and the heaven blesseth it: all works shake and tremble at it." (I Esdras 4:36) (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse II, chapter 16, paragraph 20, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 359, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
So, St. Athanasius was talking about I Esdras and the book called Esdras Deuteron by the Greeks. Esdras Deuteron consisted of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah combined together to form a single book.
St. Athanasius placed Esther among the Ecclesiastical Books of the Bible, but his version of Esther was the larger one. He used the Septuagint. In this passage from one of his letters, St. Athanasius said that Esther fasted and prayed.
And blessed Esther, when destruction was about to come on all her race, and the nation of Israel was ready to perish, defeated the fury of the tyrant by no other means than by fasting and prayer to God, and changed the ruin of her people into safety. (Esther 4:16; 14; 15; 9) (Letter IV, paragraph 2, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 516, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Nowhere in the Hebrew Masoretic text of Esther does it say that Esther prayed. However, in the Septuagint version of Esther it is possible to read her prayer. (See Esther 14 in the King James Version Apocrypha.)
As for Daniel, St. Athanasius used the larger version of that book as well. There are quotes from and references to passages from the History of Susannah, the Song of the Three Holy Children, and Bel and the Dragon in his writings.
And in Daniel, "Susanna cried out with a loud voice and said, O everlasting God, that knowest the secrets, and knowest all things before they be." (Dan. 1:42, LXX; Susannah 42, Protestant Apocrypha) (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse I, chapter 13, paragraph 20, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 314, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
This knowing, the martyrs in Babylon, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, arraign the Arian irreligion. For when they say, "O all ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord" (Dan. 4:57, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 35, Protestant Apocrypha), they recount things in heaven, things on earth, and the whole creation, as works; but the Son they name not. For they say not, ‘Bless, O Word, and praise, O Wisdom;’ to shew that all other things are both praising and are works; but the Word is not a work nor of those that praise, but is praised with the Father and worshipped and confessed as God, being His Word and Wisdom, and of the works the Framer. (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse II, chapter 21, paragraph 71, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 387, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
But now, since the Word of God, by whom all things came to be, endured to become also Son of man, and humbled Himself, taking a servant’s form, therefore to the Jews the Cross of Christ is a scandal, but to us Christ is "God’s power" and "God’s wisdom" (I Cor. 1:24); for "the Word," as John says, "became flesh" (it being the custom of Scripture to call man by the name of "flesh," as it says by Joel the Prophet, "I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh" (Joel 2:28); and as Daniel said to Astyages, "I do not worship idols made with hands, but the Living God, who hath created the heaven and the earth, and hath sovereignty over all flesh" (Dan. 14:5, LXX; Bel and the Dragon 5, Protestant Apocrypha); for both he and Joel call mankind flesh). (Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse III, chapter 26, paragraph 30, by St. Athanasius the Great, 296-373 A.D., vol. 4, p. 410, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
St. Athanasius used the Greek Septuagint. There are 151 Psalms in the Septuagint. The Prayer of Manasseh is also in the Septuagint.
The decretal letters "of Gregory Theologus" were also accepted by the Quinisext Council in its Second Canon. I have provided here what it says in the fourteenth volume of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series.
Let not other books seduce your mind: for many malignant writings have been disseminated. The historical books are twelve in number by the Hebrew count, [then follow the names of the books of the Old Testament but Esther is omitted, one Esdras, and all the Deutero-Canonical books]. Thus there are twenty-two books of the Old Testament which correspond to the Hebrew letters. The number of the books of the New Mystery are Matthew, who wrote the Miracles of Christ for the Hebrews; Mark for Italy; Luke, for Greece; John, the enterer of heaven, was a preacher to all, then the Acts, the xiv. Epistles of Paul, the vii. Catholic Epistles, and so you have all the books. If there is any beside these, do not repute it genuine. (From the Metre Poems of St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 14, p. 612, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
I have not read the Metre Poems, but if St. Gregory said, "two of Ezra," I think that he meant I Esdras (the book Roman Catholics and Protestants think is apocryphal) and II Esdras (the books of Ezra and Nehemiah combined together to form a single book. Like St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. Athanasius the Great, he probably counted Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle of Jeremiah as one book. There are quotations from Baruch in his writings.
But if not, what will you say to the suggestion on the other side, that on your hypothesis the Son has been called the only God. In what passage? Why, in this: — "This is your God; no other shall be accounted of in comparison with Him," and a little further on, "after this did He shew Himself upon earth, and conversed with men." (Baruch 3:35, 37) This addition proves clearly that the words are not used of the Father, but of the Son; for it was He Who in bodily form companied with us, and was in this lower world. (The Fourth Theological Oration, which is the Second Concerning the Son, chapter 13, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 314, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
They play the same trick with the word that describes the Incarnation, viz.: He was made Man, explaining it to mean, not, He was in the human nature with which He surrounded Himself, according to the Scripture, He knew what was in man (St. John 2:25); but teaching that it means, He consorted and conversed with men, and taking refuge in the expression which says that "He was seen on Earth and conversed with Men." (Baruch 3:37) And what can anyone contend further? They who take away the Humanity and the Interior Image cleanse by their newly invented mask only our outside, and that which is seen; so far in conflict with themselves that at one time, for the sake of the flesh, they explain all the rest in a gross and carnal manner (for it is from hence that they have derived their second Judaism and their silly thousand years delight in paradise, and almost the idea that we shall resume again the same conditions after these same thousand years); and at another time they bring in His flesh as a phantom rather than a reality, as not having been subjected to any of our experiences, not even such as are free from sin; and use for this purpose the apostolic expression, understood and spoken in a sense which is not apostolic, that our Saviour was made in the likeness of Men and found in fashion as a Man, as though by these words was expressed, not the human form, but some delusive phantom and appearance. (Epistle CII, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 444, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
His version of Daniel most probably was the larger version used by Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians. St. Gregory makes reference to passages from the History of Susannah and Bel and the Dragon in his writings.
Passing by the elders in the book of Daniel; for it is better to pass them by, together with the Lord’s righteous sentence and declaration concerning them, that wickedness came from Babylon from ancient judges, who seemed to govern the people (Dan. 1:5, LXX; History of Susannah 5, Protestant Apocrypha); how are we affected by Ezekiel, the beholder and expositor of the mighty mysteries and visions? By his injunction to the watchmen (Ezek. 33:2) not to keep silence concerning vice and the sword impending over it, a course which would profit neither themselves nor the sinners; but rather to keep watch and forewarn, and thus benefit, at any rate those who gave warning, if not both those who spoke and those who heard? (Oration II: In Defence of His Flight to Pontus, paragraph 64, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 218, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
How did God sustain her? Not by raining down manna, as for Israel of old or opening the rock, in order to give drink to His thirsting people (Psalm 77:15,24, LXX; Psalm 78:15,24, Hebrew), or feasting her by means of ravens, as Elijah (I Kings 17:6), or feeding her by a prophet carried through the air, as He did to Daniel when a-hungered in the den. (Dan. 14:33-39, LXX; Bel and the Dragon 33-39, Protestant Apocrypha) (Oration XVIII: On the Death of His Father, paragraph 30, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 264, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Since his native language was Greek, he most probably used a Psalter containing 151 Psalms. That is what is in the Septuagint. Although the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus were not mentioned in the Metre Poems, St. Gregory did use these books. There are quotations from them in his writings.
Let all men, young and old, give ear, and press on through the same virtue to the same distinction, "for glorious is the fruit of good labours" (Wisdom 3:15), if they suppose this to be worth striving after, and a part of true happiness. (Oration VII: Panegyric on His Brother St. Caesarius, paragraph 14, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 234, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
And how shall we preserve the truth that God pervades all things and fills all, as it is written “Do not I fill Heaven and Earth? saith the Lord” (Jer. 23:24), and “The Spirit of the Lord filleth the world” (Wisdom 1:7), if God partly contains and partly is contained? (Oration XXVIII: The Second Theological Oration, chapter 8, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 291, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Wisdom and Power, “Christ, the Wisdom of God, and the Power of God.” (I Cor. 1:24) The Effulgence, the Impress, the Image, the Seal; “Who being the Effulgence of His glory and the Impress of His Essence” (Heb. 1:3), and “the Image of His Goodness” (Wisdom 7:26), and “Him hath God the Father sealed.” (Oration XXIX: The Third Theological Oration: On the Son, chapter 17, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 307, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Lead me with your prayers, guide me with your words, establish me with your spirit. "The blessing of the father establisheth the houses of children" (Ecclesiasticus 3:9), and would that both I and this spiritual house may be established, the house which I have longed for, which I pray may be my rest for ever, when I have been passed on from the church here to the church yonder, "the general assembly of the firstborn, who are written in Heaven." (Heb. 12:23) (Oration II: In Defence of His Flight to Pontus, paragraph 116, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 227, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
God doth not so; but saith "Honour thy father and thy mother, which is the first commandment with promise" (Eph. 6:2); "that it may be well with thee" (Exodus 20:12, LXX; Deut. 5:16); and, "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (Lev. 20:9, LXX) Similarly He gave honour to good and punishment to evil. And, "The blessing of a father strengtheneth the houses of children, but the curse of a mother uprooteth the foundations." (Ecclesiasticus 3:9) See the equality of the legislation. There is one Maker of man and woman; one debt is owed by children to both their parents. (Oration XXXVII: On the Words of the Gospel, chapter 6, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 341, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
The Father doth not glory in the dishonour of the Son. If "a wise Son maketh a glad Father" (Prov. 10:1), how much more doth the hon-our of the Son become that of the Father! And if you also accept this saying, "My Son, glory not in the dishonour of thy Father" (Ecclesiasticus 3:10), similarly the Father doth not glory in the Son’s dishonour. If you dishonour the Holy Ghost, the Son receiveth not your honour. (Oration XXXVII: On the Words of the Gospel, chapter 18, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 343, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
St. Gregory even used the Second Book of Maccabees. In his writings, he speaks of the Maccabean Martyrs mentioned in chapters 6 and 7 of that book.
I pass by the rest, the three young men bedewed in the fire (Dan. 4:49-51, LXX; Song of the Three Holy Children 26-28), the fugitive prophet praying in the whale’s belly (Jonah 2), and coming forth from the creature, as from a chamber; the just man in the den, restraining the lions’ rage (Dan. 7, LXX; Dan. 6, Hebrew), and the struggle of the seven Maccabees (II Maccabees 6:17-7:42), who were perfected with their father and mother in blood, and in all kinds of tortures. Their endurance he rivalled, and won their glory. (Oration XLIII: The Panegyric on St. Basil, paragraph 74, by St. Gregory the Theologian, 325-391 A.D., vol. 7, p. 420, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
The last decretal letter that pertains to the Canon of Holy Scripture and was accepted by the Quinisext Council is the Iambics of St. Amphilochius of Iconium.
We should know that not every book which is called Scripture is to be received as a safe guide. For some are tolerably sound and others are more than doubtful. Therefore the books which the inspiration of God hath given I will enumerate. [Then follows a list of the proto-canonical books of the Old Testament, Esther alone being omitted. All the, deutero-canonical books are omitted. He then continues] to these some add Esther. I must now show what are the books of the New Testament. [Then follow all the books of the New Testament except the Revelation. He continues,] But some add to these the Revelation of John, but by far the majority say that it is spurious. This is the most true canon of the divinely given Scriptures. (From the Iambics, written by St. Amphilochius of Iconium, 339-403 A.D., vol. 14, p. 612, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Like St. Gregory, St. Amphilochius used the Septuagint. He used the larger version of Daniel a Psalter with 151 Psalms and the writings of the Prophets that included Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah. People often try to use the Church Fathers to support their pre-conceived opinions. They want the Fathers to say that they agreed with their modern notions of the Bible. People must look at the Fathers in the light of their times in order to properly understand them. None of the Church Fathers were Protestants. Protestant theology did not even exist in their day. The King James Version was not even published. To think that the Fathers were carrying around Greek and Latin versions of the King James Version (without the so-called "apocrypha") is to err greatly in one's view of them. The Septuagint was the authoritative text to use for the Old Testament. That is what many Christians read. An Old Latin translation of the Septuagint did exist in the fourth century. Many of the Latin speaking Christians used it.
There are five books that did not make it into the New Testament, but are still to be held in high esteem. The 85th Canon of the Canons of the Holy Apostles mentions three of them: The First Epistle of Clement, the Second Epistle of Clement, and the Canons of the Holy Apostles. The Quinisext Council rejected the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles because some heretical material had been introduced into them. The other two books are the Shepherd and the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. St. Athanasius placed these two books with the Ecclesiastical Books of the Bible. There are a lot things that get placed in an appendix in the back of a Bible nowadays. I think these five books merit being in an appendix at the back of a Bible more than a lot other things that end up there.
The Books of the Bible
The Old Testament
The Old Testament
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
Joshua
Judges
Ruth
I Kings (or I Samuel)
II Kings (or II Samuel)
III Kings (or I Kings)
IV Kings (or II Kings)
I Chronicles
II Chronicles
The Prayer of Manasseh
I Esdras
Ezra
Nehemiah
Tobit
Judith
Esther (the larger version)
Job
Psalms (includes Psalm 151)
Proverbs
Ecclesiastes
The Song of Solomon
The Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus (or The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach)
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Baruch
The Lamentations of Jeremiah
The Epistle of Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Daniel (includes Susannah, the Song of the Three Holy Children, and Bel and the Dragon)
I Maccabees
II Maccabees
III Maccabees
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John
Acts
Romans
I Corinthians
II Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
I Thessalonians
II Thessalonians
I Timothy
II Timothy
Titus
Philemon
Hebrews
James
I Peter
II Peter
I John
II John
III John
Jude
Revelation
I Clement
II Clement
The Canons of the Holy Apostles
The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (or the Didache)
The Shepherd
Steve
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
Joshua
Judges
Ruth
I Kings (or I Samuel)
II Kings (or II Samuel)
III Kings (or I Kings)
IV Kings (or II Kings)
I Chronicles
II Chronicles
The Prayer of Manasseh
I Esdras
Ezra
Nehemiah
Tobit
Judith
Esther (the larger version)
Job
Psalms (includes Psalm 151)
Proverbs
Ecclesiastes
The Song of Solomon
The Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus (or The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach)
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Baruch
The Lamentations of Jeremiah
The Epistle of Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Daniel (includes Susannah, the Song of the Three Holy Children, and Bel and the Dragon)
I Maccabees
II Maccabees
III Maccabees
The New Testament
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John
Acts
Romans
I Corinthians
II Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
I Thessalonians
II Thessalonians
I Timothy
II Timothy
Titus
Philemon
Hebrews
James
I Peter
II Peter
I John
II John
III John
Jude
Revelation
Appendix to the Bible
I Clement
II Clement
The Canons of the Holy Apostles
The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (or the Didache)
The Shepherd
Steve
* Johnson writes an excellent Introduction to his Epitome of these Canons, as follows:
“Councils were nowhere more frequently called in the Primitive Times than in Africa. In the year 418–19, all canons formerly made in sixteen councils held at Carthage, one at Milevis, one at Hippo, that were approved of, were read, and received a new sanction from a great number of bishops, then met in synod at 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. This code was of very great authority in the old English Churches, for many of the Excerptions of Egbert were transcribed from it. And though the Code of the Universal Church ends with the canons of Chalcedon, yet these African Canons are inserted into the Ancient Code both of the Eastern and Western Churches. These canons though ratified and approved by a synod, yet seem to have been divided or numbered by some private and unlearned hand, and have probably met with very unskilful transcribers, by which means some of them are much confounded and obscured, as to their sense and coherence. They are by Dionysius Exiguus and others entituled The Canons of the Synod of Africa. And though all were not originally made at one time, yet they were all confirmed by one synod of African bishops, who, after they had recited the Creed and the twenty canons of the Council of Nice, proceeded to make new canons, and re-enforce old ones.”
In his “Library of Canon Law” (Bibliotheca Juris Canonici) Justellus gives these canons, and, in my opinion, gives them rightly, the title “The Code of Canons of the African Church” (Codex Canonum Ecclesioe Africanoe), although Hefele describes them as “the collection of those African Canons put together in 419 by Dionysius Exiguus.” Hefele says that the title Dionysius gave them in his collection was “The Statutes of an African Council” (Statuta Concilii Africani) which would certainly be wholly inadequate and misleading; but in the edition of Dionysius in Migne’s Patrologia Latina (Tom. LXVII., col. 181) in the Codex Canonum Ecclesiasticorum no such title occurs, but the perfectly accurate one, “A Synod at Carthage in Africa, which adopted one hundred and thirty-eight canons.” This is an exact description of what took place and of the origin of these most important dogmatic and disciplinary enactments. Hefele must have been thinking of Dionysius’s Preface where the expression does occur but not as a title. (Beveridge. Synodicon, Tom. II., p. 202.)
Carthage was formerly the head of the whole of Africa, as St. Augustine tells us in his Epistle CLXII. From this cause it happened that a great number of councils were held there, gathered from all the provinces of Africa. Especially while Aurelius as Archbishop was occupying the throne were these meetings of bishops frequently holden; and by these, for the establishing of ecclesiastical discipline in Africa, many canons were enacted. At last, after the consulate of Honorius (XII.) and Theodosius (VIII.), Augustuses, on the eighth day before the Calends of June, that is to say, on May 25, in the year of our Lord 419, another Council was held in the same city at which all the canons previously adopted were considered, and the greater part of them were again confirmed by the authority of the synod. These canons, thus confirmed by this council, merited to be called from that day to this “The Code of Canons of the African Church.” These canons were not at first adopted in Greek but in Latin, and they were confirmed in the same language. This Dionysius Exiguus distinctly testifies to in his preface to the “Code of Ecclesiastical Canons,” in which they are included. It is uncertain when the canons of this Carthaginian synod were done into Greek. This only is certain, that they had been translated into Greek before the Council in Trullo by which, in its Second Canon, they were received into the Greek Nomocanon, and were confirmed by the authority of this synod; so that from that time these canons stand in the Eastern Church on an equality with all the rest. (vol. 14, pp. 438-439, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
“Councils were nowhere more frequently called in the Primitive Times than in Africa. In the year 418–19, all canons formerly made in sixteen councils held at Carthage, one at Milevis, one at Hippo, that were approved of, were read, and received a new sanction from a great number of bishops, then met in synod at 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. This code was of very great authority in the old English Churches, for many of the Excerptions of Egbert were transcribed from it. And though the Code of the Universal Church ends with the canons of Chalcedon, yet these African Canons are inserted into the Ancient Code both of the Eastern and Western Churches. These canons though ratified and approved by a synod, yet seem to have been divided or numbered by some private and unlearned hand, and have probably met with very unskilful transcribers, by which means some of them are much confounded and obscured, as to their sense and coherence. They are by Dionysius Exiguus and others entituled The Canons of the Synod of Africa. And though all were not originally made at one time, yet they were all confirmed by one synod of African bishops, who, after they had recited the Creed and the twenty canons of the Council of Nice, proceeded to make new canons, and re-enforce old ones.”
In his “Library of Canon Law” (Bibliotheca Juris Canonici) Justellus gives these canons, and, in my opinion, gives them rightly, the title “The Code of Canons of the African Church” (Codex Canonum Ecclesioe Africanoe), although Hefele describes them as “the collection of those African Canons put together in 419 by Dionysius Exiguus.” Hefele says that the title Dionysius gave them in his collection was “The Statutes of an African Council” (Statuta Concilii Africani) which would certainly be wholly inadequate and misleading; but in the edition of Dionysius in Migne’s Patrologia Latina (Tom. LXVII., col. 181) in the Codex Canonum Ecclesiasticorum no such title occurs, but the perfectly accurate one, “A Synod at Carthage in Africa, which adopted one hundred and thirty-eight canons.” This is an exact description of what took place and of the origin of these most important dogmatic and disciplinary enactments. Hefele must have been thinking of Dionysius’s Preface where the expression does occur but not as a title. (Beveridge. Synodicon, Tom. II., p. 202.)
Carthage was formerly the head of the whole of Africa, as St. Augustine tells us in his Epistle CLXII. From this cause it happened that a great number of councils were held there, gathered from all the provinces of Africa. Especially while Aurelius as Archbishop was occupying the throne were these meetings of bishops frequently holden; and by these, for the establishing of ecclesiastical discipline in Africa, many canons were enacted. At last, after the consulate of Honorius (XII.) and Theodosius (VIII.), Augustuses, on the eighth day before the Calends of June, that is to say, on May 25, in the year of our Lord 419, another Council was held in the same city at which all the canons previously adopted were considered, and the greater part of them were again confirmed by the authority of the synod. These canons, thus confirmed by this council, merited to be called from that day to this “The Code of Canons of the African Church.” These canons were not at first adopted in Greek but in Latin, and they were confirmed in the same language. This Dionysius Exiguus distinctly testifies to in his preface to the “Code of Ecclesiastical Canons,” in which they are included. It is uncertain when the canons of this Carthaginian synod were done into Greek. This only is certain, that they had been translated into Greek before the Council in Trullo by which, in its Second Canon, they were received into the Greek Nomocanon, and were confirmed by the authority of this synod; so that from that time these canons stand in the Eastern Church on an equality with all the rest. (vol. 14, pp. 438-439, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series)
Bibliography
Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts, D.D. & James Donaldson, LL.D., volumes 1-10, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, edited by Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., volumes 1-14, Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Massachusetts
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, edited by Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D. & Henry Wace, D.D., volumes 1-14, Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Massachusetts
No comments:
Post a Comment