Pope Gregory deny 1 maccabees?

“We shall not act rashly, if we accept a testimony of books, which, although not canonical, have been published for the edification of the Church.” Moral Treatises 19.21 talking about 1 maccabees

Wouldnt it be mortally sinfull for him to do so, since a papal decree is authoritative?

EWTN already covered this. Pope Gregory was expressing his personal opinion and not formally teaching it as an infallible truth of the Church.



Yeah wouldnt that still be wrong since there was an offical canon in place

+10 char

1 Like

I still dont understand what the author is trying to say

Bishops denied the canonicity of these books right into the 16th century. At the Council of Trent the vote was 24 to 15 with 16 abstentions. Not very impressive.
People cite the Councils of Hippo and Carthage to say they were always the same Canon but this is really Catholic propaganda. Those two Councils were regional and only citing those two is citing the two with the same Canon as we have today. The fact is there were other Councils, not accepted in the west. For example, Trullo said 3 books of Maccabees. Others excluded them all together.
Plus , the book known as 1 Esdras , traditionally 3 Esdras in the Vulgate appendix very well could belong in the Bible. At the time of these Councils, and even Jerome himself, Ezra and Nehemiah were one book. They weren’t separated until a couple centuries later. More than likely it seems the Council meant Ezra-Nehemiah and 1(3) Esdras as the two books accepted. After Ezra and Nehemiah became known as first and second Esdras in the Vulgate and remained this way for centuries it is plausible the Councils of Florence and Trent thought it was only referring to modern Ezra and Nehemiah.

1 Like
  1. Too little information. What is the full context of those comments?
  2. The OT canon was not set in stone until Trent (1545-1563).
  3. Pope Gregory I lived from 540-604, 1,000 years before Trent.
  4. The Pope can comment on anything, including the weather. Does not mean his statements are infallible.

Wasent the synod or Rome followed by a papal decree listing the canon

Gregory the Great, The Book of the Morals (Moralia) or An Exposition on the Book of Blessed Job, Book 19, Paragraph 34.

Thank you, Tood. Rather heady reading, but so it goes with the Doctors of the Church. An excerpt, showing that there was perhaps more to the story - and indeed there was:

**34. With reference to which particular we are not acting irregularly, if from the books, though not Canonical [Note: Cited by Cosin, Scholast. Hist. of Canon, c. viii. art. xcix. where some attempts at reconciling such statements with the decree of the Council of Trent are discussed. The same work contains a general review of authorities on the Canon of H. S. a subject too extensive for a mere note.], yet brought out for the edifying of the Church, we bring forward testimony. **

So, revealed truth is a matter of believing those whom you favor? As you must know - or should if you seek to shoot the Catholic Church down - “Bishops” are not infallible and hold opinions all over the map. How about other great thinkers: Arius? Pelagius? Nestorius? Why not follow them?

If you like unanimity, how about the very first collegial decision of the Apostles? They voted unanimously with their feet to flee and abandoned our Lord at Gethsemane. Sometimes, being unified is not evidence of wisdom or truth.

I will grant you the freedom to believe as you wish. You have made your choice and you should therefore be delighted with it. But it seems you are not…

So what does that mean in plain english?

Basically that there was more discussion on the subject, as the book in question (1 Macccabees) was not at the time considered canonical, but also that the OT canon was not a settled issue.

This thread is discussing basically the same issue: Why Protestant Bibles Are Smaller

Wasent the canon made at the synod of Rome in the 300s?

The NT at Nicea in 380-382, IIRC. The OT though challenged and discussed through the centuries, was not settled in stone until Trent.

Get the book. Read the book. It is not a scholastic publication, but written for you and I. If you have not read the Didache, it is also a quick read and reveals that the nascent Church, in the Apostle John’s lifetime, relied on not one bit of scripture.

The OT at the synod of Rome was still authortative right?

It does seem to be, and the list is what we have today.

As I recall, any differences in the number of books deals with books that were combined, being by the same author and broaching the same subjects.

That was like when Cardinal Gibbens returned from a trip to Rome. the reporters asked him if he really believed in papal infallibility. The cardinal said that when he met with the Pope called him "Cardinal Jibbens.

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.