Is this Liturgy Roman?

The source for this Anaphora is The Apostolic Tradition (or Egyptian Church Order), which was rediscovered in the 19th century and given the name of “Egyptian Church Order”. In the first half of the 20th century, this text was commonly identified with the lost Apostolic Tradition presumed to have been written by Hippolytus of Rome. Due to this assumption, and the apparent early date of the text, Apostolic Tradition played a crucial role in the liturgical reform of the Liturgical Movement and the Second Vatican Council, where it was commonly believed to be the ancient Roman liturgy and authored by Hippolytus of Rome.

In 1906, Eduard von der Goltz was the first to propose that the anonymous manuscript found in the 19th century was the Apostolic Tradition, which has been historically linked to Hippolytus of Rome. If the Apostolic Tradition is the work of Hippolytus of Rome, it would be dated before AD 235 (the year of Hippolytus’s martyrdom), and would have a Roman origin, which is Rome (Brent and Stewart). Opposing this view, Paul Bradshaw argued that the liturgical text was a patchwork from different sources, some Roman and some not, dating from the mid-second to the fourth century and redacted around 375-400 in Egypt or Syria. Lawrence Johnson suggests that the text of the Apostolic Tradition describes a liturgy that was never actually celebrated.

Liturgical scholar Dom Gregory Dix focused on the Anaphora of “Hippolytus” in his research for his 1945 book The Shape of the Liturgy. This book led to the common belief that this Eucharistic prayer represented the ancient Roman Eucharistic Prayer before the development of the Roman Canon in the fourth century. Even if it was the Eucharistic Prayer of Hippolytus, it may represent a schismatic Eucharistic prayer, since Hippolytus was an antipope at odds with several valid popes. It is quite a stretch to say that the Anaphora of “Hippolytus” is actually that of the historical Hippolytus. And even if it were, it may not represent the primordial Roman liturgy of the Catholic Church.

Eucharistic Prayer II and the Napkin Story

Eucharistic Prayer II, although supposedly based on Hippolytus’s text, includes additions like the “dewfall” imagery from later Latin traditions and modifications to conform to modernized liturgical standards. Archives from the Consilium show Eucharistic Prayer II was drafted and revised over several months, with input from experts such as Cipriano Vagaggini and Louis Bouyer.

The “napkin story” about Eucharistic Prayer II being written on a napkin in a Roman tavern comes from an anecdote in the memoirs of Fr. Louis Bouyer, a French theologian and liturgist involved in the post-Vatican II liturgical reforms. The specific source is Bouyer’s Mémoires,[1] published after his death in 2014 by Éditions du Cerf.

[1] Bouyer, Louis. Mémoires. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 2014, pp. 96–97.

In it, Bouyer recalls that he and Dom Bernard Botte, a Benedictine liturgist, finalized revisions to Eucharistic Prayer II during a late-night meeting at a trattoria in Trastevere, Rome, under pressure to deliver a corrected draft by the next morning. The story is often exaggerated to suggest the entire prayer was written on a napkin, but Bouyer’s account indicates they were refining an existing draft, not creating it from scratch.

Pope Paul VI and Eucharistic Prayer II

Pope Paul VI approved Eucharistic Prayer II in May 1968. Afterwards, Pope Paul VI told Bouyer that he was not fully satisfied with the texts, saying, “Why did you all get mired in this reform?” Bouyer replied, “Because Bugnini kept assuring us that you absolutely wanted it.” Pope Paul VI responded, “But how is this possible? He told me that you were all unanimous in approving it.”[2]

[2] Bouyer, Louis. Mémoires. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 2014, p. 97. An English translation of this passage is referenced in secondary sources, such as a 2014 article by Sandro Magister on his blog Chiesa (republished by Rorate Caeli on October 23, 2014). See “Original Sins: Eucharistic Prayer II – composed in a few hours in a Roman Trattoria.” Rorate Caeli, September 16, 2014. https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/09/original-sins-eucharistic-prayer-ii.html.

This side-by-side comparison reveals that while Eucharistic Prayer II draws language from the Anaphora of Hippolytus, it is not identical to that prayer. The table below indicates that Eucharistic Prayer II accounts for less than 20% of the Anaphora of Hippolytus. The claim that Eucharistic Prayer II is the Anaphora of Hippolytus is highly misleading.

Side-by-Side Comparison

The red text denotes verbiage shared by neither prayer. The bold text denotes verbiage that is shared by both prayers.

Note from Taylor. It almost impossible to format the table showing the side-by-side in html here on the site, so I have included a link to the PDF, which was easier to format: Side-by-side comparison showing that Eucharistic Prayer II is NOT the Anaphora of Hippolytus (click to download).

You do not need to be a scholar to see that the two prayers barely align. There is only about a 20% match in words and concepts. Eucharistic Prayer II is an entirely modern prayer that uses the reputation of the so-called Anaphora of Hippolytus to give the appearance of antiquity and authority. It is a contemporary innovation. While it may not have been written in toto on the back of  a napkin, it does not represent the ancient Roman liturgy.

Ferrari Analogy

Imagine finding the ruins of an old car in a car scrap heap. Two experts say, “This car could very well be the famous 1963 Ferrari 250 GTO!”

Meanwhile, various experts cannot agree whether the discovered car is definitely a 1963 Ferrari 250 GTO. Dom Gregory Dix then writes an extremely popular book, Old Classic Ferraris, in which he claims that the discovered car is definitely the ultra-rare 1963 Ferrari 250 GTO, and this leads all automotive experts to study the scrap heap car. Then everyone bases all their knowledge of Ferraris on this now famous car found in the scrap heap.

They then announce the unveiling of the 1963 Ferrari 250 GTO to the public! To create this car, they take a mere 20% of the parts and styling from the junk heap car (of questionable origin) and the remaining 80% of the needed parts from modern race cars. Voila! They then enshrine the new creation and place a plaque saying, “Behold, this is the original 1963 Ferrari 250 GTO.”

This is Eucharistic Prayer 2. A manuscript of unknown origin was discovered. It was attributed to St Hippolytus (an antipope) as the ancient Roman Eucharistic Prayer. Then 20% of that prayer was used to create an entirely new prayer and published in 1970 with the reputation of being “The Eucharistic Prayer of Hippolytus.”

The folly is manifest.

ad Jesum per Mariam,
Taylor R. Marshall

PS: Use the Roman Canon!

The post Eucharistic Prayer 2 is NOT the Prayer of Hippolytus appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

The Latin Text of Gelasius

The passage is from Pope Saint Gelasius’ work De duabus naturis in Christo Adv. Eutychen et Nestorium (On the two natures of Christ against Eutyches and Nestorius) at section 14. I have included the original Latin text:

*There is an alternative reading provided by Schwartz for verse 5:

Standard reading         ut sicut in hanc, scilicet in divinam transeant
Schwartz reading:       ut sicut haec licet in divinam transeant

The difference doesn’t substantially change the meaning of the text. The primary difference being:

Haec is nominative
Hanc is accusuative

Does Gelasius Contradict the Council of Trent?

The important text is verse 2, where Saint Gelasius explicitly states, “yet the substance or nature of bread and wine (substantia vel natura panis et vini) does not cease.” Strictly speaking, this would place Saint Gelasius at odds with the dogmatic definition of the Council of Trent on transubstantiation, which reads as follows:

“If anyone says that in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and singular change of the whole substance of the bread into the body and the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the appearances only of bread and wine remaining, which change the Catholic Church most aptly calls transubstantiation, let him be anathema.” (Council of Trent, Session 13, Canon 2).”

Trent rejects the affirmation that the substances of bread and wine remain after the consecration. Gelasius says “the substance or nature of bread and wine (substantia vel natura panis et vini) does not cease.”

Two Possible Responses

The Catholic is faced with two possible responses to the formulation of Pope Gelasius:

1. Gelasius was wrong and held an incorrect belief about the Eucharist. But it doesn’t matter because Popes can be personally mistaken on matters of doctrine before their dogmatization.
2. Gelasius used “substance or nature” analogically to refer to what later Catholics called the “accidents of bread and wine,” and verses 5 and 7 reveal his clarification on that matter as in conformity with later Catholic teaching.

The proper response is that the second option, that Gelasius clarified his meaning in verses 2, 5, and 7. Let us look at the passages:

In verse 2, Gelasius states:

“the sacrament which we receive, the body and blood of Christ, is a divine thing (divina res).”

The Latin “res” refers to what is real. Our English word “real” comes from res. It is a divina res, or divine reality. Only after stating this does Gelasius say that “the substance or nature of bread and wine do not cease.” This is problematic because res usually refers to substance. However, we find clarification in verses 5 and 7.

In verse 5, Gelasius states:

5) That just as they pass into this, namely into the divine substance, the Holy Spirit perfecting, nevertheless remaining in the propriety of its nature.

Gelasius states in verse 5 that the bread and wine transeant (pass into or transition into) the divine substance. I have never heard a Protestant affirm that the bread and wine transition into the divine substance. Gelasius then affirms “nevertheless remaining in the propriety of its nature.” The bread and wine here retain not their “natures,” but he clarifies that they retain what is “propriety of its nature.” Gelasius refers here to what is proper to the nature of bread and wine, but this time does not denote “nature” simply. He is clarifying his statement in verse 2. What is proper to the nature of bread? Texture, smell, taste, etc. These are what would later be separated as the “accidents” or sensible features pertaining to the substance of bread. But the res is divine. This essentially clears up the misunderstanding.

Moving to verse 7:

From which permanent things, the one Christ, properly, remains constant, because the integrity and truth are shown to remain.

Gelasius here indicates that the one Christ is constant or enduring in the Eucharist. The full presence of Christ is in the Eucharist.

Two Possible Positions

From this analysis, Gelasius could be said to hold either of the two positions:

1. Consubstantiation: The substances of bread and wine are united to Christ’s divine and human substances. This is problematic because it creates a second hypostatic union with bread and wine. So that Christ now has a divine substance, a human substance, a bread substance, and a wine substance. Actually, it would create a second hypostatic union (union with bread substance) and then a third hypostatic union (with wine substance), since the consecration of each species is separate from the other.
2. Transubstantiation: The substances bread and wine are transubstantiated into the substances of Christ’s divine substance and human substance—the position of the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Trent.

One could argue that Gelasius affirms consubstantiation, but he is undoubtedly not affirming a symbolic or memorialist Eucharist held by most Protestants. I think the strongest argument is that Gelasius is describing transubstantiation, because he describes the bread and wine “remaining in the propriety of its nature.” He clarifies “nature” as actually being what is “proper to its nature.”

Furthermore, Gelasius was pope from 492 to his death on 21 November 496. He was daily praying the Roman liturgy with the fully developed Roman Canon as the Eucharistic anaphora or prayer. It is difficult to read the Roman Canon with its prayers over the Eucharist and deduce anything less than transubstantiation. Even Martin Luther (who held something closer to consubstantiation) felt the need to reject the Roman Canon (as used by Gelasius in the fifth century) because of its “transubstantiation” theology.

Imprecision is not Heresy

In conclusion, Gelasius affirmed the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and asserts that it enters into the divine substance. He remarks that the substance or nature of bread and wine does not cease, but just after that, he clarifies his meaning by his reference to what is proper to their nature.

This debate is akin to that of the miaphysite arguments after the Council of Chalcedon. Miaphysite teaching is based on Saint Cyril of Alexandria’s formula μία φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένη, meaning “one physis of the Word of God made flesh.” Chalcedon declared “two natures” in Christ but never doubted Saint Cyril’s orthodoxy or sanctity. Saint Cyril defended the right concept but used a different (misleading) formulation regarding one physis or nature with respect to the incarnation. Nobody doubts that Saint Cyril was correct, but later Catholic teaching rejects the “one nature” formulation of Saint Cyril in favor of “two natures.”

Gelasius is teaching the Catholic (Tridentine) doctrine of the Eucharist, but with the confusion about “substance or nature” not being what later Catholic dogma would articulate. Nevertheless, Gelasius does clarify in verse 5 that he is speaking of that which is proper to the nature of bread and wine.

Conclusion

Pope Gelasius (pope from 492-496) would be in continuity with his papal predecessor Pope Leo the Great (pope from 440 to 461) who wrote:

“Dearly beloved, utter this confession with all your heart and reject the wicked lies of heretics, that any contagion with error may not pollute your fasting and almsgiving: for then is our offering of the sacrifice clean and our gifts of mercy holy, when those who perform them understand that which they do. For when the Lord says, “unless ye have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man, and drunk His blood, ye will not have life in you,’ you ought so to be partakers at the Holy Table, as to have no doubt whatever concerning the reality of Christ’s Body and Blood. For that is taken in the mouth which is believed in faith, and it is vain for them to respond ‘Amen’ who dispute that which is taken.” Pope Saint Leo the Great, Sermon 91:3

The worst-case scenario is that Gelasius was teaching consubstantiation (not Protestant symbolism), but this is unlikely. The context of the passage seems to indicate that the bread and wine “enter into the divine substance,” but the properties of bread and wine remain. The entire context suggests what later theologians would call “transubstantiation,” even if Gelasius’s formulation is awkward. The goal here is to use the Eucharist as an analogy in discussing Christology, not as a dogmatic statement about the metaphysics of the Eucharist. That’s why the passage isn’t a major issue for Catholic theologians.

The post Did Pope Gelasius deny transubstantiation? Nature and Substance Debate appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

In the New Testament, the term “bishop” or its Greek equivalent ἐπίσκοπος (episkopos), meaning “overseer,” appears in several passages.

The English word “bishop” derives from the Greek word “episcopos”:

Episcopos > Episcop > Piscop > Biscop > Bishop

The post Bishops in the New Testament – Study on Episcopos appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

The simplest solution is that the Last Supper was not the legal Passover meal of the Jews at which a slain lamb was roasted and eaten. The best harmonization of the four gospels requires that the Last Supper was a New Rite or a New Passover that superseded the Passover instituted by Moses and happened 24 hours before the legal Passover meal of the Jews.

I will prove that Christ kept the Last Supper 24 hours before the legal Passover of the Jews and that Christ died on the day of Nisan 14, the day of preparation for the Passover on which the lambs were slain. The Last Supper did not feature a dead animal lamb. Rather Christ’s presented Himself as teh edible Lamb at the Last Supper. The next day, Christ died at the same time as the passover lambs were slain. I will prove that this is the dominant position of the Church Fathers.

The Problem: Did Jesus die on Passover or the Day After Passover?

1. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke (MML), Jesus claims to “eat this passover” (Luke 22:15) with His Apostles on the night before He died. Was that meal an actual Passover meal?
2. The temple Jews, early on the next morning after the Last Supper, had not eaten the Passover: “Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium. It was early. They themselves did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover.” (John 18:28) The temple Jews had not yet eaten Passover on the morning after the Last Supper, and were preparing to eat it later that night (which was after the death of Christ). Clearly, Jesus did not keep Passover at the same time as the temple Jews.
3. Some say that Matthew, Mark, and Luke (MML) contradict John. MML place Christ’s Last Supper meal the night before Christ’s death. John places Jewish Passover on day that Christ died.

Possible Solutions:

1. MML are correct and John was wrong or manipulated the story so that Jesus as “Lamb of God” died while the animal passover lambs were also killed at 3pm on Passover day.
2. MML are wrong and John is correct.
3. There is a way to harmonize the accounts. I will show the harmonization, because Sacred Scripture (and the four Gospels) cannot contradict one another.

How Passover Dates Work

Let’s understand how Moses set up the date structure for Passover:

1. Jewish days begin at sundown (~6pm), not at midnight or at daybreak. All biblical calculations of time must account for this.
2. “Nisan” is the Hebrew name of a month in Spring in which Passover feast occurs.
3. The Jewish months were truly lunar, so the Nisan 1 is a new moon and Nisan 14 is a full moon.
4. The Passover feast has two phases the pertains to two distinct days:
   1. Nisan 14: The passover lambs are slaughtered at the temple on the afternoon of Nisan 14 (3pm-5pm). They are then roasted and prepared to eat around 6pm at sundown.
   2. Nisan 15: After sundown (starting a new Jewish day with the initial hours of Nisan 15, the passover lambs are eaten by families as a liturgical rite. (Exodus 12:6)

The Passover Sequence of Jesus Christ and the Last Supper

1. In the Synoptic MML, Jesus had his Last Supper on the evening before He was crucified. MML have Christ referring to this meal as a “Passover.”
2. If the Last Supper was truly a Passover meal, then the passover lambs would have been killed on Nisan 14. This requires that Christ kept His Last Supper in the beginning hours of Nisan 15 and was crucified the next day on Nisan 15.
3. However, if Jesus is the “Lamb of God,” then He should have died at the same time the other animal lambs were slaughtered on Nisan14, not on Nisan 15.
4. John presents Nisan 14 as the day of His crucifixion and death and that the temple Jews had not yet eaten the Passover lambs.

Christian Controversy in Second Century

In the second century AD, a liturgical conflict emerged. Christians in Ephesus, Smyrna and Sardis celebrated Nisan 14 as the day of Christ’s death (not as “Easter” or “resurrection” as many sources falsely report), regardless of what day of the week Nisan 14 fell. This group was called the Quatrodecimans (from Latin quarta decima, meaning “fourteenth”).

The Quartodeciman Christians align almost perfectly with the seven churches mentioned in Revelation 2 and 3:

Ephesus
Smyrna
Pergamum
Thyatira
Sardis
Philadelphia
Laodicea

These seven churches were ruled by a bishop (called “an angel” in Revelation). They seem to have fallen under Saint John the Apostle who served as a Metropolitan Archbishop over the region. The regional popularity of Quartodeciman theology also maps onto the churches listed in the Apocalypse.

The Quatrodeciman Christians claimed their tradition came from Saint John the Apostle. This accurately conforms to John’s Gospel showing that Jesus died on Nisan 14 when the lamb’s were being slain.

Quartodeciman Theology and Praxis

Quatrodeciman Christians kept the custom of keeping Nisan 14 as a strict day of fasting from all food and then having a feast that night. Presumably a night Eucharist but in a manner similar to a Jewish Passover meal. Presumably, they observed the resurrection on Nisan 16, which would be the “third day.”

The Didascalia Apostolorum (c. 230 AD, Syria) describes the practice:

“On the fourteenth day of the moon… fast ye then also, and keep the Passover of the Lord, for on this day our Lord suffered… and on the evening of the fourteenth break your fast, and eat unleavened bread with Him who was sacrificed for us.” -Didascalia Apostolorum, Chapter 21

Saint Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, visited Rome around AD 155 to discuss the Paschal date with Pope Anicetus of Rome. Polycarp defended keeping Nisan 14, claiming it came from the Apostle John and other apostles. Though no direct ritual details are given, this establishes the practice’s apostolic origin and Polycarp’s adherence to keeping Nisan 14 as the day of Christ’s death.

“For Anicetus [bishop of Rome] could not persuade Polycarp to forgo the observance [of Nisan 14], inasmuch as these things had been always observed by John the disciple of our Lord, and by other apostles with whom he had been conversant… Polycarp himself was instructed by the apostles and conversed with many who had seen Christ.” – Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.24.16-17 (quoting Irenaeus’ letter to Victor I)

And not just Polycarp. Writing c. AD 190 AD to resist Pope Victor’s push for Sunday Pascha, Polycrates asserts that Asia Minor’s bishops universally kept Nisan 14 as the day of Christ’s death, tying it to apostolic tradition (John, Philip) and martyrs (Polycarp).

“We therefore observe the genuine [fourteenth] day, neither adding thereto nor taking therefrom. For in Asia great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord’s appearing… Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who sleeps in Hierapolis… John, who rested upon the bosom of our Lord… Polycarp of Smyrna, both bishop and martyr… All these observed the fourteenth day of the Passover according to the gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith.” – Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.24.2-6 (Polycrates’ letter to Victor I)

In Rome and Alexandria, the churches kept the death and resurrection of the Lord always on a Friday and Sunday, respectively. In Rome and Alexandria, the Sunday after Nisan 14 was liturgically celebrated as the day of Christ’s resurrection and the Friday preceding (Good Friday) as the day of Christ’s death. The Roman and Alexandrian custom became standard way for all Christians to keep Pasch since at least the 4th century. The Roman and Alexandrian tradition sought to preserve the the resurrection as connected to Sunday, and by extension the death of Christ to Good Friday.

The important witness is that the Quadrodeciman Christians in the second century claimed that Saint John had taught them:

1. Jesus died on Nisan 14
2. That they should fast on Nisan 14 as the annual day of his death, regardless of what day of the week it fell upon.

This is a very strong witness that Jesus Christ died on Nisan 14 and not Nisan 15. This means we must show that the “passover” meal of Jesus at the Last Supper was not actually the legal passover of the temple Jews but something different.

Here’s how John conveys his timeline:

1. Timing of the Crucifixion: Preparation Day (John 19:14, 31)

John 19:14:
“Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He [Pilate] said to the Jews, ‘Behold your King!'”

The “day of Preparation of the Passover” refers to Nisan 14, the day when Jews prepared for the Passover feast by slaughtering the lambs in the afternoon (Exodus 12:6). The “sixth hour” (around noon) is when Pilate sentences Jesus, with the crucifixion beginning shortly after (John 19:16-18). This sets the stage for Jesus’ death later that afternoon, overlapping with the lamb slaughter.

John 19:31:
“Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away.”

The urgency to remove the bodies before the Sabbath (Nisan 15, a “high day” as the first day of Unleavened Bread, Leviticus 23:6-7) confirms it’s still Nisan 14 during the crucifixion. The lambs were killed that afternoon, typically between 3:00 PM and 5:00 PM (per Jewish tradition in the Mishnah, Pesachim 5:1), and Jesus dies within this window.

2. Jesus’ Death at the Ninth Hour (Cross-Reference with Synoptics)

Though John doesn’t specify the exact hour of Jesus’ death, the Synoptic parallel helps:

Mark 15:34-37 (cf. Matthew 27:46-50, Luke 23:44-46):
“And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?’ … And Jesus uttered a loud cry and breathed his last.”

The “ninth hour” is the ninth hour from daybreak and corresponds to our 3:00 PM. John’s timeline—from sentencing at 12pm (John 19:14) to death before sunset (John 19:31)—fits this, placing Jesus’ death in the late afternoon of Nisan 14, precisely when the Passover lambs were being sacrificed in the Temple.

3. John’s Fulfillment of Christ as the Passover Lamb

John 19:36:
“For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: ‘Not one of his bones will be broken.'”

This quotes Exodus 12:46 (and Numbers 9:12) which commands that the Passover lambs’ bones remain unbroken. John notes that Jesus’ legs weren’t broken (unlike the two thiefs, John 19:32-33), explicitly linking his death to the sacrificial lamb’s requirements. The slaughter of lambs must happen on Nisan 14, reinforcing the timing and allegorical connection.

John 1:29:
“The next day he [John the Baptist] saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, ‘Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!'”

John’s gospel frames Jesus as the ultimate sacrificial Lamb of God, a theme fulfilled when he dies on the day and at the literal hour when the Passover lamb slaughter on Nisan 14.

4. Absence of a Passover Meal

John explicitly states that the Last Supper occurs before the feast of Passover:

John 13:1-2:
“Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father … supper being ended.”

John 18:28:
“Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium. It was early. They themselves did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover.”

The Jewish temple leaders hadn’t yet eaten the Passover meal when Jesus was brought to Pilate on the morning of Nisan 14, meaning the lambs hadn’t been slain yet. This positions the crucifixion later that day as the lambs were being prepared and killed, not after the meal as in the Synoptics MML.

Timeline in John

1. The Passover lambs were slain on Nisan 14 around 3pm in the temple. Jesus dies at this time and connects Him to the lambs being killed by the Jewish priests.
2. The sacrificed animal lambs were then roasted for the meal eaten after sunset at about 6pm. (beginning Nisan 15). John places.
3. Jesus’s body is removed from cross before sundown so that it would not defile the the eating of the Passover lambs by the Jews.
4. Jesus’s body is placed in tomb.
5. Jews go home to eat their legal Passover meals with lambs killed earlier in the day of Nisan 14.

John synchronizes Jesus’ death with the lamb slaughter to portray him as the true Passover Lamb, sacrificed at the same time the temple ritual occurred. The unbroken bones and Preparation Day timing seal this parallel.

Harmonizing MML Synoptics with John

In the Synoptics MML, Christ must have meant something new when he said :

“With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you, before I suffer.” (Luke 22:15)

What is the nature of “this Passover”? Was Christ desiring to simply eat a normal Passover, or is something more indicated by “this Passover”?

Several possibilities emerge:

1. Jesus and His Apostles kept a different calendar or calculated Passover differently so that their Passover fell one day early. Perhaps, they calculated the full moon of Nisan 14 as having happened a day prior.
2. Jesus simply anticipated the meal by one day since He knew He would be killed the following day.
3. Jesus was instituting a new kind of Passover or “This Passover.” This is perfectly reasonable since the temple Jews had been trying trap and kill Jesus for over one year. Jesus, who was a hunted man, would not likely have lined up at the temple to receive slaughtered lamb with the rest of the Jews in Jerusalem. The Apostles had also known that Christ was called “Lamb of God” by John the Baptist at His baptism. Christ is doing something new and He institutes “the New Covenant in my Blood” at this Last Supper. The New Covenant supersedes the Old Covenant.

Jesus Kept a New Eucharistic Passover WITHOUT an Animal Lamb

The third option is the best solution. Jesus Christ wanted to change the meaning of the Passover by doing it a day early and by not including an animal lamb from the temple sacrifice. “This Passover” is something unique and new.

There is no mention of a slaughtered lamb at the “passover” Last Supper of Christ in all four gospels. Since there was no slaughtered lamb at this dinner, it is obvious that Jesus Christ is the Lamb and His Body should be eaten for “this Passover.” The Last Supper inaugurates “the New Covenant in my blood” and thus there should be no roasted animal lamb present on the table/altar.

Church Fathers on No Lamb at Last Supper and Death on Nisan 14

Saint John states that Christ died on Nisan 14:

Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews, “Behold, your King!” (John 19:14)

Tertullian states that Christ died on Nisan 14:

On the first day of unleavened bread, on which they slew the lamb at even, just as had been enjoined by Moses. Accordingly, all the synagogue of Israel did slay Him … Which prediction was thus also fulfilled, that “on the first day of unleavened bread” you slew Christ; … (that the prophecies might be fulfilled) the day hasted to make an “eventide,”— that is, to cause darkness, which was made at mid-day.” (Tertullian, An Answer to the Jews, Chapter 8-10)

Origen of Alexandria (c. 184–253 AD) teaches that the Lord did not eat the lamb according to legal rite and the Passover of the Jews was not yet:

“The Passover of the Jews was not yet, as John shows, and the Lord did not eat the lamb with His disciples according to the legal rite, but rather instituted a new Passover, giving His own body as the food of salvation.” (Origen, Commentary on Matthew, Series 81)

Saint Peter of Alexandria, writing AD 300 to 311, states that Christ did not eat “the legal Passover” and that Christ died on Nisan 14:

At the time, therefore, in which our Lord and God Jesus Christ suffered for us, according to the flesh, He did not eat of the legal Passover; but, as I have said, He Himself, as the true Lamb, was sacrificed for us in the feast of the typical Passover, on the day of the preparation, the fourteenth of the first lunar month. The typical Passover, therefore, then ceased, the true Passover being present: For Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us, as has been before said, and as that chosen vessel, the apostle Paul, teaches. (Peter of Alexandria, first chapter of his fifth fragmentary writing)

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260–340 AD) sates that Christ did not eat the lamb and the Supper was before the Passover sacrifice:

“The Lord did not partake of the lamb slain according to the custom of the Jews, for He was Himself the Lamb, and the Supper was before the time of their Passover sacrifice.” (Eusebius, Questions and Answers on the Gospels, preserved in fragments)

Saint John Chrysostom (c. 347–407 AD) also stated that Jesus Christ did not eat the “legal Passover” and that He was crucified on Nisan 14:

“For it was not at the feast that He ate the Passover, but on the day before the feast He celebrated it with His disciples, giving them the mystery of His body and blood. For the Jews were still to eat the Passover on the next day, as it is written, ‘They themselves did not enter the Praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover.’” (Homily 82 on John 18:28)

Jerome (c. 347–420 AD) supported the Johannine view that Jesus was crucified on Nisan 14, the preparation day, aligning with the slaughter of Passover lambs. This suggests the Last Supper lacked the lamb.

“The Lord did not eat the Passover according to the Law with His disciples on the day of unleavened bread, but on the day before, as John clearly shows, when the Jews had not yet eaten it.” (Jerome, Commentary on Matthew)

Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD) attempted to harmonize the Gospels but leaned toward the idea that Jesus died on Nisan 14, aligning with John’s timeline.

“For it was not on the feast day itself that He suffered, but on the day before the feast… The Jews were still to eat the Passover, while He had already given His own body as the true Passover to His disciples.” (Augustine, From Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractate 55)

Saint Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376–444 AD) states that Christ did not eat the Passover lamb and that the Last Supper occurred before the Jews celebrated Passover:

“For the Passover of the Jews had not yet been celebrated when the Savior suffered, but it was near… He did not eat the lamb of the Law with His disciples, but rather gave them the bread of life, Himself being the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world.” (Saint Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on John, Book 11 (John 18:28)

Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393–457 AD) taught that Jesus died on Nisan 14 and that the Last Supper was not a legal Passover meal with a lamb.

“The Savior did not partake of the Passover lamb with His disciples, for He was Himself the Lamb, slain on the fourteenth day of Nisan, as the Evangelist John declares, when the Jews were still preparing to eat their Passover.” (Theodoret of Cyrus, From Commentary on the Gospel of John)

Severus of Antioch (c. 465–538 AD), a key figure in the Monophysite movement, holds that Jesus died on Nisan 14 and that the Last Supper was a distinct event, not the Jewish Passover with a lamb.

“The Lord instituted the mystery of His body and blood before the Passover of the Jews, not eating the lamb of the old Law, but becoming the Lamb sacrificed for us on the fourteenth of Nisan.” (Severus, From a homily preserved in fragments)

Bede the Venerable (c. 673–735 AD), an Anglo-Saxon monk and historian, adopted the Johannine timeline in his biblical exegesis, suggesting Jesus died on Nisan 14 and that the Last Supper preceded the Passover sacrifice.

“The Lord did not celebrate the Passover of the Jews with a lamb, for He was crucified on the Preparation Day, the fourteenth of Nisan, as John testifies, when the lambs were being slain.” (Bede, Homilies 13 on John)

Conclusion: A New Passover with Christ as “This Passover”

There was no animal lamb at the Last Supper. Christ is the Lamb. Christ was crucified on Nisan 14.

In conclusion, Last Supper images that depict a roasted lamb on the table, like this one, are heretical:

Whereas images hat depict no animal Lamb (an empty dish), but Christ holding the Eucharist are orthodox:

Since the Last Supper was on the anticipated evening of Nisan 14, His death happened on the same day of Nisan 14 and this unites the Eucharistic Last Supper as on the same day as the death of Christ–uniting the two events.

The Passover, then, is anytime the Eucharist is celebrated. Christ has transformed the Passover into the Eucharist. Passover is whenever the Eucharist is celebrated and is not relegated to Nisan 14/15.

– Dr. Taylor Marshall

PS: St Thomas Aquinas somehow gets all this wrong and cites Jerome, but is not aware that elsewhere Jerome affirmed that Christ died on Nisan 14. Thomas affirms that Christ died on Nisan 15:

“From which, as Jerome, says, “since the fourteenth day of the first month is called the day of the Azymes, when the lamb was slain, and when it was full moon,” it is quite clear that Christ kept the supper on the fourteenth and died on the fifteenth.” Summa Theologica, Third Part, Question 46, Article 9

The post Did Jesus die on Passover? Was Last Supper a Passover? Harmonizing Synoptics with John appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Hebrews 8:13: “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete.”

“Finally, He says to them: ‘Your new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot endure.’ You see what He means: it is not the present Sabbaths that are acceptable to Me, but the one which I have made, when, giving rest to all things, I shall make the beginning of an eighth day, that is, the beginning of another world.

Wherefore also we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day on which Jesus rose from the dead, and after He had appeared, ascended into the heavens.”

Epistle of Barnabas 15:8–9 (Ante-Nicene Fathers [ANF], Vol. 1, p. 147).

Why Christians Worship on Sunday Instead of Saturday

From a Christian viewpoint, the shift from worshiping on Saturday (the Jewish Sabbath) to Sunday (Christian Lord’s Day) is a profound theological and historical development rooted in the New Testament, early Church tradition, and the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in Christ.

Today, I’ll explore why Christians do not communal worship on Saturday but instead on Sunday, drawing on Sacred Scripture—particularly the New Testament—and the writings of early Church Fathers like Ignatius of Antioch and the author of the Epistle of Barnabas. We now belong to the New Testament and the New Creation in the New Adam, who is Jesus Christ.

Christ’s Resurrection and the Lord’s Day

The New Testament provides the foundational basis for Sunday worship, emphasizing Christ’s resurrection as the defining event that transforms the rhythm of Christian life. In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus rises on “the first day of the week” (Matthew 28:1), which corresponds to Sunday in the Jewish reckoning of days beginning at sundown. Similarly, Mark 16:2 states, “And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb,” and Luke 24:1 echoes, “But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb.” John 20:1 reinforces this: “Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early.” This consistent testimony across the Gospels identifies Sunday as the day of Christ’s triumph over death, a pivotal moment that Catholics see as inaugurating a new creation.

New Testament Witness

This resurrection significance extends to early Christian practice. Acts 20:7 records, “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them.” The phrase “break bread” is widely understood in Catholic tradition as a reference to the Eucharist, the central act of worship. This gathering on Sunday reveals a shift from the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) to a new day of Eucharistic worship tied to Christ’s rising. Likewise, 1 Corinthians 16:2 advises, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up,” indicating a regular Sunday collection during worship, further evidencing its liturgical prominence.

Revelation 1:10 adds a theological layer: “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day.” Though not explicitly cited as “Sunday,” early Christians interpreted “the Lord’s Day” (kyriakē hēmera) as the first day of the week, commemorating Christ’s resurrection. The Didache (c. AD 70–120) and later Fathers confirm this usage. Thus, the New Testament establishes Sunday as the day when Christians gathered to celebrate the Eucharist and honor Christ’s victory, distinguishing it from the Jewish Sabbath.

Fulfillment of the Sabbath in Christ

The New Testament views the Sabbath—a commandment to rest on the seventh day (Exodus 20:8–11)—as part of the old creation and old covenant, fulfilled and transformed by Christ in the New Covenant.

Colossians 2:16–17 states, “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” Paul here identifies the Sabbath as a “shadow,” a prefigurement of the spiritual rest found in Christ, not a perpetual obligation for Christians.

Hebrews 4:9–10 deepens this: “So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God’s rest has also rested from his works as God did from his.” This “Sabbath rest” is eschatological, realized in Christ’s redemptive work, not tied to a specific day.

The Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) further supports this shift. When debating whether Gentile converts must follow Mosaic Law, the apostles, led by Peter, ruled that only minimal requirements (e.g., abstaining from idolatry and immorality) were necessary, omitting Sabbath observance (Acts 15:28–29). This decision, authoritative for Christians, signals that the ceremonial laws, including the Saturday Sabbath, do not bind Christians.

Early Church Fathers: Ignatius of Antioch

Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. AD 108), a disciple of the Apostle John, provides early testimony to the abandonment of Saturday worship in favor of Sunday. In his Epistle to the Magnesians 9:1, he writes,

“If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death—whom some deny… how shall we be able to live apart from Him?” (ANF, Vol. 1, p. 62).

Ignatius contrasts the Jewish Sabbath with the Lord’s Day (Sunday), linking the latter to Christ’s resurrection as the source of new life. His phrase “no longer observing the Sabbath” explicitly rejects Saturday worship for Christians, emphasizing a theological shift rooted in Easter.
Ignatius’ context is anti-Judaizing: he warns against Christians reverting to Jewish practices, which he sees as denying Christ’s grace (Magnesians 8:1: “If we still live according to the Jewish law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace”). For Christians, Ignatius’ witness, as an Apostolic Father, carries weight, reflecting apostolic tradition that Sunday supplants Saturday as the day of worship.

Early Church Fathers: Epistle of Barnabas

The Epistle of Barnabas (c. AD 70–132), though not canonical, offers a sharp critique of literal Sabbath-keeping, reinforcing the Catholic view. In Barnabas 15:8–9, the author declares,

“Finally, He says to them: ‘Your new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot endure.’ You see what He means: it is not the present Sabbaths that are acceptable to Me, but the one which I have made, when, giving rest to all things, I shall make the beginning of an eighth day, that is, the beginning of another world. Wherefore also we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day on which Jesus rose from the dead” (ANF, Vol. 1, p. 147).

Citing Isaiah 1:13, the author argues that God rejects the Jewish Sabbath, reinterpreting it as an eschatological rest fulfilled in Christ. The “eighth day” (Sunday, following the seventh-day Sabbath) symbolizes this new era, aligning with resurrection theology.

Christians observe this as evidence of an early Christian consensus that Saturday worship is obsolete, replaced by Sunday’s celebration of the “new world” begun in Christ. While Barnabas is polemical and not magisterial, its influence on early theology underscores the shift away from Judaizing practices.

Theological Rationale: Sunday as the Day of the New Creation

Christian doctrine ties Sunday worship to the concept of a “new creation.” Just as God rested on the seventh day after creating the world (Genesis 2:2–3), Christ’s resurrection on the first day marks the renewal of a new creation. Christ fulfills the Sabbath’s purpose—rest and communion with God—in a new context, as Christ’s victory over sin and death (Romans 6:4) surpasses the old order.

The Church Fathers amplify this. Ignatius’ “life has sprung up again” (Magnesians 9) and Barnabas’ “beginning of another world” (15:8) echo 2 Corinthians 5:17: “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.” Sunday thus becomes the day when Catholics celebrate this renewal through the Mass, which re-presents Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection.

Traditional Witness and Authority

Historically, Christian Sunday communal worship emerged early, as seen in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2, and was codified by Church authority. The Council of Laodicea (c. AD 363–364), Canon 29, later declared, “Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day… preferring in honor the Lord’s Day” (NPNF, Series 2, Vol. 14, p. 148). This reflects a Catholic reliance on apostolic tradition and the Magisterium to interpret Scripture, per 2 Thessalonians 2:15: “Stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us.”

Conclusion for Christians

Christians worship on Sunday, not Saturday, because the New Testament establishes it as the day of Christ’s resurrection (Matthew 28:1, Acts 20:7), fulfilling the Sabbath’s shadow (Colossians 2:16–17) in a New Covenant of grace (Acts 15). Fathers such as Ignatius of Antioch confirm this shift, rejecting Sabbath observance for the Lord’s Day (Magnesians 9:1), while Barnabas redefines rest as an eschatological reality celebrated on the “eighth day” (15:8–9). Theologically, Sunday honors the new creation in Christ, a truth the Catholic Church, guided by apostolic authority, has upheld since the resurrection of Christ. For Christians, this is not a rejection of the Sabbath’s sanctity but its transformation into a higher celebration of redemption, lived out each Sunday in the Eucharist.

Are you interested in going deeper? Please sign up for my online Theology course at: nsti.com.

The post Should Christians Keep the Seventh-Day Sabbath? appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

1. Didache
2. Epistle of Clement of Rome
3. Epistle of Barnabas

Brief history of the Epistle of Barnabas:

1. The Epistle of Barnabas dates between AD 70 and AD 135 with an attribution to the Apostle Barnabas, the co-missionary with the Apostle Paul. “When the apostles Barnabas and Paul had heard, rending their clothes, they leaped out among the people, crying.” (Acts 14:13) Barnabas speaks of the Jerusalem temple being destroyed, an event that happened in AD 70.
2. Barnabas is quite familiar with New Testament literature and he refers to or cites Matthew, John, Romans, 1 Corinthains, Hebrews, and 1 Peter.
3. The complete text of Barnabas is preserved in the 4th-century Codex Sinaiticus. It appears at the end of the New Testament, following the Book of Revelation and before the Shepherd of Hermas.
4. Some early Fathers of the Church ascribed it to the Barnabas mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles. Early Egyptian Christians, namely Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Didymus the Blind quoted from Barnabas. May scholars today attribute it to an otherwise unknown early Christian teacher. I personally believe it was written by Saint Barnabas, who appears in Acts. The theological argument corresponds closely to the theology of Paul’s Galatians and Hebrews (yes, I also believe Paul is the author of Hebrews with Luke as a writer).

Who is the Evil Angel?

Barnabas on the Deception of Food Laws

1. Swine: Forgetfulness of God and ingratitude
2. Eagle, Hawk, Kite, Crow: Stealing dead meat as injustice, oppression, and greed
3. Fish Without Scales: Instability and wickedness living at the bottom in darkness
4. Rabbit: Sexual immorality, pederasty and promiscuity
5. Hyena: Sexual perversion and transgenderism
6. Weasel: Sins of the mouth, such as slander and oral sodomy

Is the Evil Angel the Demiurge or Satan?

Satan as Evil Angel

The post Who is the Evil Angel in the Epistle of Barnabas? Are the Rabbis Satanic? appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

1. Baruch
2. Tobit,
3. 1 Maccabees,
4. 2 Maccabees
5. Judith
6. Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach)
7. Wisdom
8. In addition, the Septuagint Old Testament contains extra chapters and verses for Daniel and Esther

Christ and the Apostles

For example, in John 10:36, our Lord Jesus Christ accepts the inspiration of 2 Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.

Christ our Lord also accepts Tobit, as His parable on the seven brothers who die in the context of marriage (Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29) refers back to the details about the seven brothers who die after marriage in Tobit 3:8 and 7:11.

Saint Paul also quotes the book of Wisdom in Romans 1 when he discusses the depravity of worshipping creation in the form of men, birds, animals and reptiles. (See Wisdom 11:15;12:24-27;13:10;14:8). Moreover, Wisdom 14:24-27 describes how sexual degeneracy follows this idolatry. It’s easy to see that Paul had the book of Wisdom open before him when he wrote Romans, or had it memorized.

Dead Sea Scrolls

It was long assumed the Deuterocanonical books were Greek additions to the Hebrew Old Testament. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery has proved that these books had Hebrew originals and were widely read and circulated by Jews before Christ.

1. The Book of Sirach, whose Hebrew text was already known from the Cairo Geniza, has been found in two of the Dead Sea Scrolls (2QSir or 2Q18, 11QPs_a or 11Q5) in Hebrew.
2. The Hebrew scroll of Sirach has been found in Masada (MasSir).
3. Five fragments from the Book of Tobit have been found in Qumran written in Aramaic and in one written in Hebrew (papyri 4Q, nos. 196–200).
4. The Letter of Jeremiah, which is Baruch chapter 6, has been found in cave 7 (papyrus 7Q2) in Greek.

Early Councils

The Council of Rome (AD 382), Synod of Hippo (AD 393), followed by the Council of Carthage (AD 397) and the Council of Carthage (AD 419) affirm the exact canon received today by the Roman Catholic Church:

Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Kings IV books [1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings], Chronicles II books, 150 Psalms, three books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs], Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Cinoth i.e. his lamentations, Ezechiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habbakuk Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Job, Tobit, Esdras II books [Ezra, Nehemiah], Ester, Judith, Maccabees II books.

Early Church Fathers

The Christians that lived after the Apostles and the subsequent Church Fathers also accepted these books:

1. Epistle of Barnabas
2. Didache
3. Clement of Rome
4. Polycarp of Smyrna
5. Irenaeus of Lyons
6. Tertullian
7. Clement of Alexndria
8. Origen of Alexandria
9. Hippolytus of Rome
10. Cyprian of Carthage
11. Cyril of Jersualem
12. Athanasius of Alexandria
13. Basil the Great
14. Gregory Nazianzus
15. Gregory Nyssa
16. Hilary of Poitiers
17. Ambrose of Milan
18. Damasus of Rome
19. Augustine of Hippo
20. John Chrysostom

Church Fathers Citing the Deuterocanonical Books:

Below are all the quotations of the Church Fathers citing the deuterocanonical books. This extensive list was paintstakenly compiled by “Scripture Catholic” and can be found at this link.

Here begins the list:

“What, then, again says the prophet? ‘The assembly of the wicked surrounded me; they encompassed me as bees do a honeycomb,'[Ps. 22:17,118:12] and ‘upon my garment they cast lots'[Ps. 22:19]. Since, therefore, He was about to be manifested and to suffer in the flesh, His suffering was foreshown. For the prophet speaks against Israel, ‘Woe to their soul, because they have counselted an evil counsel against themselves[Isa. 3:9,] saying, Let us bind the just one, because he is displeasing to us'[Wisdom 2:12]. And Moses also says to them, ‘Behold these things, saith the Lord God: Enter into the good land which the Lord sware tto give to Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and inherit ye it, a land flowing with milk and honey'[Ex. 33:1, Lev. 20:24].” Epistle of Barnabas, 6 (A.D. 74).

“Having then this hope, let our souls be bound to Him who is faithful in His promises, and just in His judgments. He who has commanded us not to lie, shall much more Himself not lie; for nothing is impossible with God, except to lie. Let His faith therefore be stirred up again within us, and let us consider that all things are nigh unto Him. By the word of His might He established all things, and by His word He can overthrow them. ‘Who shall say unto Him, What hast thou done ? Or, who shall resist the power of His strength?'[Wisdom 12:12,ll:22] When and as He pleases He will do all things, and none of the things determined by Him shall pass away? All things are open before Him, and nothing can be hidden from His counsel. ‘The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handy-work. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge. And there are no words or speeches of which the voices are not heard.'[Ps. 19:1-3].” Clement of Rome,To the Corinthians, 27:5 (c. A.D. 80).

“‘Be just in your judgement’ [Deut 1:16,17 Prov 31:9] make no distinction between man and man when correcting transgressions. Do not waver in your decision. ‘Do not be one that opens his hands to receive, but shuts them when it comes to giving’ [Sirach 4:31].” Didache, 4:3-5 (A.D. 90).

“Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the Lord, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood, and being attached to one another, joined together in the truth, exhibiting the meekness of the Lord in your intercourse with one another, and despising no one. When you can do good, defer it not, because ‘alms delivers from death'[Tobit 4:10,12:9]. Be all of you subject one to another? [1 Pt 5:5] having your conduct blameless among the Gentiles,’ [1 Pt 2:12] that ye may both receive praise for your good works, and the Lord may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the Lord is blasphemed! [Isa 52:5] Teach, therefore, sobriety to all, and manifest it also in your own conduct.” Polycarp, To the Phillipians, 10 (A.D. 135).

“Melito to his brother Onesimus, greeting: Since thou hast often, in thy zeal for the word, expressed a wish to have extracts made from the Law and the Prophets concerning the Saviour and concerning our entire faith, and hast also desired to have an accurate statement of the ancient book, as regards their number and their order, I have endeavored to perform the task, knowing thy zeal for the faith, and thy desire to gain information in regard to the word, and knowing that thou, in thy yearning after God, esteemest these things above all else, struggling to attain eternal salvation. Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes, Song off Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books.” Melito of Sardes, Fragment in Eusebius’ Ecclesiatical History, 4:26 (A.D. 177).

“Those, however, who are believed to be presbyters by many, but serve their own lusts, and, do not place the fear of God supreme in their hearts, but conduct themselves with contempt towards others, and are puffed up with the pride of holding the chief seat, and work evil deeds in secret, saying, ‘No man sees us,’ shall be convicted by the Word, who does not judge after outward appearance (secundum gloriam), nor looks upon the countenance, but the heart; and they shall hear those words, to be found in Daniel the prophet: ‘O thou seed of Canaan, and not of Judah, beauty hath deceived thee, and lust perverted thy heart'[Daniel 13:56-Susanna]. Thou that art waxen old in wicked days, now thy sins which thou hast committed aforetime are come to light; for thou hast pronounced false judgments, and hast been accustomed to condemn the innocent, and to let the guilty go free, albeit the Lord saith, The innocent and the righteous shalt thou not slay’ [Daniel 13:52-53-Susanna]. Of whom also did the Lord say: “But if the evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming, and shall begin to smite the man-servants and maidens, and to eat and drink and be drunken; the lord of that servant shall come in a day that he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, and shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.’ [Matt 24:48].” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:26:3 (A.D. 180).

“For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in [the times of] which [resurrection] the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord: and through Him they shall become accustomed to partake in the glory of God the Father, and shall enjoy in the kingdom intercourse and communion with the holy angels, and union with spiritual beings; and [with respect to] those whom the Lord shall find in the flesh, awaiting Him from heaven, and who have suffered tribulation, as well as escaped the hands of the Wicked one. For it is in reference to them that the prophet says: ‘And those that are left shall multiply upon the earth,’ And Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out, that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left upon earth, should both be under the rule of the saints to minister to this Jerusalem, and that [His] kingdom shall be in it, saying, “Look around Jerusalem towards the east, and behold the joy which comes to thee from God Himself. Behold, thy sons shall come whom thou hast sent forth: they shall come in a band from the east even unto the west, by the word of that Holy One, rejoicing in that splendour which is from thy God. O Jerusalem, put off thy robe of mourning and of affliction, and put on that beauty of eternal splendour from thy God. Gird thyself with the double garment of that righteousness proceeding from thy God; place the mitre of eternal glory upon thine head. For God will show thy glory to the whole earth under heaven. For thy name shall for ever be called by God Himself, the peace of righteousness and glory to him that worships God. Arise, Jerusalem, stand on high, and look towards the east, and behold thy sons from the rising of the sun, even to the west, by the Word of that Holy One, rejoicing in the very remembrance of God. For the footmen have gone forth from thee, while they were drawn away by the enemy. God shall bring them in to thee, being borne with glory as the throne of a kingdom. For God has decreed that every high mountain shall be brought low, and the eternal hills, and that the valleys be filled, so that the surface of the earth be rendered smooth, that Israel, the glory of God, may walk in safety. The woods, too, shall make shady places, and every sweet-smelling tree shall be for Israel itself by the command of God. For God shall go before with joy in the light of His splendour, with the pity and righteousness which proceeds from Him.'[Baruch 4:36-5:9].” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V:35:1 (A.D. 180).

“For, when one reads of God as being ‘the searcher and witness of the heart’ [Wisdom 1:6]; when His prophet is reproved by His discovering to him the secrets of the heart; when God Himself anticipates in His people the thoughts of their heart, ‘Why think ye evil in your hearts?'[Matt 9:4] when David prays ‘Create in me a clean heart, O God'[Ps 51:12], and Paul declares, ‘With the heart man believeth unto righteousness,'[Romans 10:10] and John says, ‘By his own heart is each man condemned’[1 John 3:20]; when, lastly, ‘he who looketh on a woman so as to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart’ [Matt 5:28],–then both points are cleared fully up, that there is a directing faculty of the soul…” Tertullian, On the Soul, 15 (A.D. 197).

“[New Testament books…] The Epistle of Jude, indeed, and two belonging to the above-named John–or bearing the name of John–are reckoned among the Catholic epistles. And the book of Wisdom, written by the friends of Solomon in his honour.” Muratorian Fragment (A.D. 200).

“Our instruction comes from ‘the porch of Solomon,’ who had himself taught that ‘the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart'[Wisdom 1:1].” Tertullian, Prescription Against the Heretics, 7 (A.D. 200).

“For they remembered also the words of Jeremias writing to those over whom that captivity was impending: ‘And now ye shall see borne upon men’s shoulders the gods of the Babylonians, of gold and silver and wood, causing fear to the Gentiles. Beware, therefore, that ye also do not be altogether like the foreigners, and be seized with fear while ye behold crowds worshipping those gods before and behind, but say in your mind, Our duty is to worship Thee, O Lord'[Baruch 6:3]. Therefore, having got confidence from God, they said, when with strength of mind they set at defiance the king’ s threats against the disobedient: ‘There is no necessity for our making answer to this command of yours. For our God whom we worship is able to deliver us from the furnace of fire and from your hands; and then it will be made plain to you that we shall neither serve your idol, nor worship your golden image which you have set up'[Daniel 3:16]’” Tertullian, Scorpiace, 8 (A.D. 205).

“At this stage some rise up, saying that the Lord, by reason of the rod, and threatening, and fear, is not good; misapprehending, as appears, the Scripture which says, ‘And he that feareth the Lord will turn to his heart'[Sirach 21:6], and most of all, oblivious of His love, in that for us He became man. For more suitably to Him, the prophet prays in these words: ‘Remember us, for we are dust'[Ps 103:14]; that: is, Sympathize with us; for Thou knowest from personal experience of suffering the weakness of the flesh. In this respect, therefore, the Lord the Instructor is most good and unimpeachable, sympathizing as He does from the exceeding greatness of His love with the nature of each man. ‘For there is nothing which the Lord hates'[Wisdom 11:24]. For assuredly He does not hate anything, and yet wish that which He hates to exist Nor does He wish anything not to exist, and yet become the cause of existence to that which He wishes not to exist. Nor does He wish anything not to exist which yet exists. If, then, the Word hates anything, He does not wish it to exist. But nothing exists, the cause of whose existence is not supplied by God. Nothing, then, is hated by God, nor yet by the Word. For both are one–that is, God. For He has said, ‘In the beginning the Word was in God, and the Word was God'[John 1:1].’” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, I:8 (A.D. 202).

“And again He says, ‘Come all to Me, who labour, and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest'[Matt 11:28]; and that which is added the Lord speaks in His own person. And very clearly He calls to goodness by Solomon, when He says, ‘Blessed is the man who hath found wisdom, and the mortal who hath found understanding'[Prov 3:13]. ‘For the good is found by him who seeks it, and is wont to be seen by him who has found it'[Prov 2:4,5;3:15]. By Jeremiah, too, He sets forth prudence, when he says, ‘Blessed are we, Israel; for what is pleasing to God is known by us'[Baruch 4:4]–and it is known by the Word, by whom we are blessed and wise. For wisdom and knowledge are mentioned by the same prophet, when he says, ‘Hear, O Israel, the commandments of life, and give ear to know understanding.'[Baruch 3:9] By Moses, too, by reason of the love He has to man, He promises a gift to those who hasten to salvation. For He says, ‘And I will bring you into the good land, which the Lord sware to your fathers’ [Deut 31:20].” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor ,I:8 (A.D. 202).

“[H]aving heard the Scripture which says, ‘Fasting with prayer is a good thing'[Tobit 12:8].” Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, 6:12 (A.D. 202).

“But they said, ‘We will not come forth: neither will we do the king’s commandment; we will die in our innocency: and he slew of them a thousand souls'[1 Macc 2:33]. The things, therefore, which were spoken to the blessed Daniel are fulfilled: ‘And my servants shall be afflicted, and shall fall by famine, and by sword, and by captivity'[Dan. 11:33]. Daniel, however, adds: ‘And they shall be holpen with a little help.’ For at that time Matthias arose, and Judas Maccabaeus, and helped them, and delivered them from the hand of the Greeks.” Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, 2:32 (A.D. 204).

“What is narrated here, happened at a later time, although it is placed before the first book at the beginning of the book [of Daniel]. For it was a custom with the writers to narrate many things in an inverted order in their writings…To all these things, therefore, we ought to give heed, beloved, fearing lest any one be overtaken in any transgression, and risk the loss of his soul, knowing as we do that God is the Judge of all; and the Word Himself is the Eye which nothing that is done in the world escapes. Therefore, always watchful in heart and pure in life, let us imitate Susannah.” Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, 6:1,61 (A.D. 204).

“‘For even now the angel of God.’ He shows also, that when Susannah prayed to God, and was heard, the angel was sent then to help her, just as was the case in the instance of Tobias [Tobit 3:17] and Sara. For when they prayed, the supplication of both of them was heard in the same day and the same hour, and the angel Raphael was sent to heal them both.” Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, 6:55 (A.D. 204).

“‘[T]he prophet says, “The ungodly said, reasoning with themselves, but not aright,” that is, about Christ, “Let us lie in wait for the righteous, because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings and words, and upbraideth us with our offending the law, and professeth to have knowledge of God; and he calleth himself the Child of God'[Wisdom 2:1,12,13]. And then he says, ‘He is grievous to us even to behold; for his life is not like other men’s, and his ways are of another fashion. We are esteemed of him as counterfeits, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed [Wisdom 2:15,16].” Hippolytus, Against the Jews ,65 (ante A.D. 235).

“But the case stands not thus; for the Scriptures do not set forth the matter in this manner. But they make use also of other testimonies, and say, Thus it is written: ‘This is our God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of Him. He hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob His servant (son), and to Israel His beloved. Afterward did He show Himself upon earth, and conversed with men'[Baruch 3:25-38].” Hippolytus, Against the Noetus, 2 (A.D. 210).

“But that we may believe on the authority of holy Scripture that such is the case, hear how in the book of Maccabees, where the mother of seven martyrs exhorts her son to endure torture, this truth is confirmed; for she says, ‘ ask of thee, my son, to look at the heaven and the earth, and at all things which are in them, and beholding these, to know that God made all these things when they did not exist'[2 Maccabees 7:28].” Origen, Fundamental Principles, 2:2 (A.D. 230).

“[T]he Wisdom of Solomon, a work which is certainly not esteemed authoritative by all. In that book, however, we find written as follows: “For thy almighty hand, that made the world out of shapeless matter, wanted not means to send among them a multitude of bears and fierce lions'[Wisdom 11:17].” Origen, Fundamental Principles, 2:2 (A.D. 230).

“‘It should be stated that the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them down, are twenty-two; corresponding with the number of their letters.’ Farther on he says: ‘The twenty-two books of the Hebrews are the following: That which is called by us Genesis, but by the Hebrews, from the beginning of the book, Bresith, which means, ‘In the beginning’; Exodus, Welesmoth, that is, ‘These are the names’; Leviticus, Wikra, ‘And he called’; Numbers, Ammesphekodeim; Deuteronomy, Eleaddebareim, ‘ These are the words’; Jesus, the son of Nave, Josoue ben Noun; Judges and Ruth, among them in one book, Saphateim; the First and Second of Kings, among them one, Samouel, that is, ‘The called of God’; the Third and Fourth of Kings in one, Wammelch David, that is, ‘The kingdom of David’; of the Chronicles, the First and Second in one, Dabreiamein, that is, ‘Records of days’; Esdras, First and Second in one, Ezra, that is, ‘An assistant’; the book of Psalms, Spharthelleim; the Proverbs of Solomon, Me-loth; Ecclesiastes, Koelth; the Song of Songs (not, as some suppose, Songs of Songs), Sir Hassirim; Isaiah, Jessia; Jeremiah, with Lamentations and the epistle in one, Jeremiah[Baruch 6]; Daniel, Daniel; Ezekiel, Jezekiel; Job, Job; Esther, Esther. And besides these there are the Maccabees, which are entitled Sarbeth Sabanaiel.” Origen, Canon of the Hebrews, Fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, 6:25 (A.D. 244).

“[A]s is written in the book of Tobit: ‘It is good to keep close the secret of a king, but honourable to reveal the works of God'[Tobit 12:7],–in a way consistent with truth and God’s glory, and so as to be to the advantage of the multitude.” Origen, Against Celsus, 5:19 (A.D. 248).

“But he ought tp know that those who wish to live according to the teaching of Sacred Scripture understand the saying, ‘The knowledge of the unwise is as talk without sense'[Sirach 21:18], and have learnt ‘to be ready always to give an answer to everyone that asketh us a reason for the hope that is in us'[1 Pt 3:15].” Origen, Against Celsus, 7:12 (A.D. 248).

“In the Gospel according to John: ‘No one can receive anything, except it were given him from heaven'[John 3:27]. Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: ‘For what hast thou that thou hast not received? But if thou hast received it, why boastest thou, as if thou hadst not received it?'[1 Cor 4:7]. Also in the first of Kings: ‘Boast not, neither speak lofty things, and let not great speeches proceed out of your mouth, for the Lord is a God of knowledge.'[1 Sam 2:4] Also in the same place: ‘The bow of the mighty men has been made weak, and the weak are girt about with strength'[1 Sam 2:5]. Of this same thing in the Maccabees: ‘It is just to be subjected to God, and that a mortal should not think things equal to God'[2 Macc 9:12]. Also in the same place: ‘And fear not the words of a man that is a sinner, because his glory shall be filth and worms. Today he shall be lifted up, and to-morrow he shall not be found; because he is turned into his earth, and his thought has perished'[1 Macc 2:62,63].” Cyprian, Treatises, 12:3:4 (A.D. 248).

“In Genesis: ‘And God, tempted Abraham, and said to him, Take thy only son whom thou lovest, Isaac, and go into the high land, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell thee'[Gen 22:1,2]. Of this same thing in Deuteronomy: ‘The Lord your God proveth you, that He may know if ye love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul’[Deut 13:3]. Of this same thing in the Wisdom of Solomon: ‘Although in the sight of men they suffered torments, their hope is full of immortality; and having been in few things distressed, yet in many things they shall be happily ordered, because God tried them, and found them worthy of Himself. As gold in the furnace He proved them, and as a burnt-offering He received them. And in their time there shall be respect of them; they shall judge the nations, and shall rule over the people; and their Lord shall reign for ever'[Wisdom 3:4-8]. Of this same thing in the Maccabees: ‘Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness?'[1 Macc 2:52].” Cyprian, Treatises, 12:3:15 (A.D. 248).

“For since it is written, ‘God did not make death, neither hath He pleasure in the destruction of the living'[Wisdom 1:13].” Cyprian, Epistle 51/55:22 (A.D. 252).

“[T]his the faith of the sacred Scripture assures us, and in telling us how such as these prayed, gives an example which we ought to follow in our prayers, in order that we may be such as they were: ‘Then these three,’ it says, ‘as if from one mouth sang an hymn, and blessed the Lord'[3 Youths-Daniel 3:51].” Cyprian, Treatise 4,8 (A.D. 252).

“And thus Holy Scripture instructs us, saying, ‘Prayer is good with fasting and almsgiving'[Tobit 12:8].” Cyprian, Treatise 4,32 (A.D. 252).

“Holy Scripture teaches and forewarns, saying, ‘My son, when thou comest to the service of God, stand in righteousness and fear, and prepare thy soul for temptation'[Sirach 2:1,4]. And again: ‘In pain endure, and in thy humility have patience; for gold and silver is tried in the fire, but acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation.[Sirach 2:5].” Cyprian, Treatise 7,9 (A.D. 252).

“In all these cases consider whether it would not be well to remember the words, ‘Thou shalt not remove the ancient landmarks which thy fathers have set.’ Nor do I say this because I shun the labour of investigating the Jewish Scriptures, and comparing them with ours, and noticing their various readings. This, if it be not arrogant to say it, I have already to a great extent done to the best of my ability, labouring hard to get at the meaning in all the editions and various readings; while I paid particular attention to the interpretation of the Seventy, lest I might to be found to accredit any forgery to the Churches which are under heaven, and give an occasion to those who seek such a starting-point for gratifying their desire to slander the common brethren, and to bring some accusation against those who shine forth in our community.” Origen, To Africanus, 5 (defending the canonicity of Susanna [Daniel 13], Bel and the Dragon[Daniel 14], the prayers of Azarias[Daniel 3], and the hymn of praise of the three youths in the fiery furnace[Daniel 3]) (ante A.D. 254).

“And I make it my endeavour not to be ignorant of their various readings, lest in my controversies with the Jews I should quote to them what is not found in their copies, and that I may make some use of what is found there, even although it should not be in our Scriptures. For if we are so prepared for them in our discussions, they will not, as is their manner, scornfully laugh at Gentile believers for their ignorance of the true reading as they have them.” Origen, To Africanus, 5 (defending the canonicity of Susanna [Daniel 13], Bel and the Dragon[Daniel 14], the prayers of Azarias[Daniel 3], and the hymn of praise of the three youths in the fiery furnace[Daniel 3]) (ante A.D. 254).

“And, forsooth, when we notice such things, we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery! Are we to suppose that that Providence which in the sacred Scriptures has ministered to the edification of all the Churches of Christ, had no thought for those bought with a price, for whom Christ died.” Origen, To Africanus, 4 (defending the canonicity of Susanna [Daniel 13], Bel and the Dragon [Daniel 14], the prayers of Azarias[Daniel 3], and the hymn of praise of the three youths in the fiery furnace[Daniel 3]) (ante A.D. 254).

“[T]hat they worship Him alone, saying: ‘O king Nebuchodonosor, there is no need for us to answer thee in this matter. For the God whom we serve is able to deliver us out of the furnace of burning fire; and He will deliver us from thy hands, O king. And if not, be it known unto thee, that we do not serve thy gods, and we do not adore the golden image which thou hast set up'[Dan 3:16-18]. And Daniel, devoted to God, and filled with the Holy Spirit, exclaims and says: ‘I worship nothing but the Lord my God, who founded the heaven and the earth'[Dan 14:5 Bel & Dragon]. Tobias also, although under a royal and tyrannical slavery, yet in feeling and spirit free, maintains his confession to God, and sublimely announces both the divine power and majesty, saying: ‘In the land of my captivity I confess to Him, and I show forth His power in a sinful nation'[Tobit 13:6].” Cyprian, Treatises, 11:11 (A.D. 257).

“Also in Daniel: ‘There was a man dwelling in Babylon whose name was Joachim; and he took a wife by name Susanna, the daughter of Helchias, a very beautiful woman, and one that feared the Lord. And her parents were righteous, and taught their daughter according to the law of Moses'[Susanna-Daniel 13:1-3]. Moreover, in Daniel: ‘And we are lowly this day in all the earth because of our sins, and there is not at this time any prince, or prophet, or leader, or burnt-offering, or oblation, or sacrifice, or incense, or place to sacrifice before Thee, and to find mercy from Thee. And yet in the soul and spirit of lowliness let us be accepted as the burnt-offerings of rams and bulls, and as it were many thousands of lambs which are fattest. If our offering may be made in Thy presence this day, their power shall be consumed, for they shall not be ashamed who put their trust in Thee. And now we follow with our whole heart, and we fear and seek Thy face. Give us not over unto reproach, but do with us according to Thy tranquility, and according to the multitude of Thy mercy deliver us'[3 Youths-Daniel 3:37-43].” Cyprian, Testimonies, 20 (ante A.D. 258).

“But listen to the divine oracles: ‘The works of the Lord are in judgment; from the beginning, and from His making of them, He disposed the parts thereof. He garnished His works for ever, and their principles unto their generations'[Sirach 16:24-25].” Dionysius the Great, On Nature, 3 (ante A.D. 265).

“He is a Spirit–for says He, ‘God is a Spirit'[John 4:24]–fittingly again is Christ called Breath; for ‘He,’ saith He, ‘is the breath of God’s power'[Wisdom 7:25].” Dionysius the Great, To Dionsyius of Rome, 4 (ante A.D. 265).

“Solomon also shows that it is the Word of God, and no other, by whose hands these works of the world were made. ‘I,’ He says, ‘came forth out of the mouth of the Most High before all creatures: I caused the light that faileth not to arise in the heavens, and covered the whole earth with a cloud. I have dwelt in the height, and my throne is in the pillar of the cloud'[Sirach 24:3-5].” Lactanius, Institutions, 4:8 (A.D. 310).

“Therefore, I do not think men ought to be considered pious who presume to investigate this subject, in disobedience to the injunction, ‘Seek not what is too difficult for thee, neither enquire into what is too high for thee'[Sirach 3:21]. For if the knowledge of many other things incomparably inferior is beyond the capacity of the human mind, and cannot therefore be attained, as has been said by Paul, ‘Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared far them that lave Him'[1 Cor 2:9], and as God also said to Abraham, that the stars could not be numbered by him; and it is likewise said,’ Who shall number the grains of sand by the sea-shore, or the drops of rain?'[Sirach 1:2].” Alexander of Alexandria, To brother Alexander, fragment in Theodoret of Cyrus’ Ecclesiastical History, 1:3 (A.D. 324).

“For this was accomplished at that time, when the venerable and aged Eleazar was slain, and the sons of the blessed Samuna, seven in number [2 Maccabees 6:18-31], and when Judas (Maccabeus) and his brethren were struggling on behalf of their people [2 Maccabees 5:27].” Aphraates the Persian Sage, Demonstrations, 5:19 (A.D. 345).

“He leads away to himself the wealthy, the sons of luxury; And ‘they leave their possessions as the waves of the sea'[Sirach 29:17].” Aphraates the Persian Sage, Demonstrations, 22:7 (A.D. 345).

“Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than thyself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which, if thou art desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them. For of the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave, and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the Historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch [1-5] and Lamentations and the Epistle[of Jeremiah-Baruch 6]; then Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament.” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4:33 (A.D. 350).

“The Divine Nature then it is impossible to see with eyes of flesh: but from the works, which are Divine, it is possible to attain to some conception of His power, according to Solomon, who says, ‘For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably the Maker of them is seen'[Wisdom 13:5]. He said not that from the creatures the Maker is seen, but added proportionably. For God appears the greater to every man in proportion as he has grasped a larger survey of the creatures: and when his heart is uplifted by that larger survey, he gains withal a greater conception of God. Wouldest thou learn that to comprehend the nature of God is impossible? The Three Children in the furnace of fire, as they hymn the praises of God, say ‘Blessed art thou that beholdest the depths, and sittest upon the Cherubim'[Daniel 3:55-Three Youths].” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 9:2,3 (A.D. 350).

“[L]earn from this instance the mightiness of God: for ‘He hath numbered the drops of rain'[Job 26:27], which have been poured down on all the earth, not only now but in all time. The sun is a work of God, which, great though it be, is but a spot in comparison with the whole heaven; first gaze steadfastly upon the sun, and then curiously scan the Lord of the sun. ‘Seek not the things that are too deep for thee, neither search out the things that are above thy strength: what is commanded thee, think thereupon'[Sirach 3:20,21].” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 6:4 (A.D. 350).

“Hear the Prophet saying, ‘This is our God, none other shall be accounted of in comparison with Him. He hath found out every way of knowledge, and given it to Jacob His servant, and to Israel His beloved. Afterwards He[she] was seen on earth, and conversed among men'[Baruch 3:36-38].” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 9:15 (A.D. 350).

“He says to Daniel; young though thou be, convict old men infected with the sins of youth; for it is written, ‘God raised up the Holy Spirit upon a young stripling'[Daniel 13:45-Susanna].” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 16:31 (A.D. 350).

“For when they speak against the ascension of the Saviour, as being impossible, remember the account of the carrying away of Habakkuk: for if Habakkuk was transported by an Angel, being carried by the hair of his head[Daniel 14-Bel & the Dragon], much rather was the Lord of both Prophets and Angels, able by His own power to make His ascent into the Heavens on a cloud from the Mount of Olives.” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 14:25 (A.D. 350).

“[T]he sacred writers to whom the Son has revealed Him, have given us a certain image from things visible, saying, ‘Who is the brightness of His glory, and the Expression of His Person;'[Heb 1:3] and again, ‘For with Thee is the well of life, and in Thy light shall we see lights;'[Ps 36:9] and when the Word chides lsrael, He says, ‘Thou hast forsaken the Fountain of wisdom'[Baruch 3:12]; and this Fountain it is which says, ‘They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living waters'[Jer 2:13].” Athanasius, Defense of the Nicene Faith, 2:12 (A.D. 351).

“[F]or it is written of the other, ‘The foolish person will speak foolishness’ [Is 32:6 LXX]; but of these, ‘Ask counsel of all that are wise'[Tobit 4:18].” Athanasius, Defense before Constantius, 17 (A.D. 357).

“The Lord is now making trial of your love for Him. Now there is an opportunity for you, through your patience, to take the martyr’s lot. The mother of the Maccabees [2 Maccabees 7] saw the death of seven sons without a sigh, without even shedding one unworthy tear.” Basil, To the Wife of Nectarius, Epistle 6:2 (A.D. 358).

“They say that the Father has prescience of all things, as the blessed Susanna says, ‘O eternal God, that knowest secrets, and knowest all things before they be'[Daniel 13:42-Susanna].” Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, 4:8 (A.D. 359).

“As you have listened already to Moses and Isaiah, so listen now to Jeremiah inculcating the same truth as they:–‘This is our God, and there shall be none other likened unto Him, Who hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved. Afterward did He shew Himself upon earth and dwelt among men'[Baruch 3:36-38]. Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, 4:42 (A.D. 359).

“Such suggestions are inconsistent with the clear sense of Scripture. For all things, as the Prophet says[2 Maccabees 7:28], were made out of nothing; it was no transformation of existing things, but the creation into a perfect form of the non-existent.” Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, 4:16 (A.D. 359).

“Then, while the devout soul was baffled and astray through its own feebleness, it caught from the prophet’s voice this scale of comparison for God, admirably expressed, ‘By the greatness of His works and the beauty of the things that He hath made the Creator of worlds is rightly discerned'[Wisdom 13:5].” Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, 1:7 (A.D. 359).

” And where the sacred writers say, Who exists before the ages,’ and ‘By whom He made the ages,'[Heb 1:2] they thereby as clearly preach the eternal and everlasting being of the Son, even while they are designating God Himself. Thus, if Isaiah says, ‘The Everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth ‘[Is 40:28]; and Susanna said, ‘O Everlasting God'[Daniel 13:42-Susanna]; and Baruch wrote, ‘I will cry unto the Everlasting in my days,’ and shortly after, ‘My hope is in the Everlasting, that He will save you, and joy is come unto me from the Holy One'[Baruch 4:20,22;].” Athanasius, Discourses Against the Arians, 1:4 (A.D. 362).

“[I]t is written that ‘all things were made through the Word,’ and ‘without Him was not made one thing,'[John 1:3] and again, ‘One Lord Jesus, through whom are all things'[1 Cor 8:9], and ‘in Him all things consist'[Col 1:17], it is very plain that the Son cannot be a work, but He is the Hand of God and the Wisdom. 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'[Daniel 3:57-Three Youths].” Athanasius, Discourses Against the Arians, 2:71 (A.D. 362).

“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;'[Daniel 14:5-Bel & the Dragon].” Athanasius, Discourses Against the Arians, 3:30 (A.D. 362).

“Passing by the elders in the book of Daniel [Daniel 13:5-Susanna]; for it is better to pass them by, together with the Lord’s righteous sentence and declaration concerning them…” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 2, Flight to Pontus 64 (A.D. 362).

“But if this too fails to persuade them, let them tell us themselves, whether there is any wisdom in the creatures or not? If not how is it that the Apostle complains, ‘For after that in the Wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God?'[1 Cor 1:21] or how is it if there is no wisdom, that a ‘multitude of wise men'[Wisdom 6:24] are found in Scripture? for ‘a wise man feareth and departeth from evil'[Prov 14:16]; and ‘through wisdom is a house builded'[Prov 24]; and the Preacher says, ‘A man’s wisdom maketh his face to shine;’ and he blames those who are headstrong thus, ‘Say not thou, what is the cause that the former days were better than these? for thou dost not inquire in wisdom concerning this'[Eccl 8:1,7:10]. But if, as the Son of Sirach says, ‘He poured her out upon all His works; she is with all flesh according to His gift, and He hath given her to them that love Him,'[Sirach 1:8,9].” Athanasius, Discourses Against the Arians, 2:79 (A.D. 362).

“[T]he Old Testament is reckoned as consisting of twenty-two books…so that of Moses there be five books…with the Lamentations and the Letter[Baruch 6-Epistle of Jeremiah], and Daniel…bringing the number of the books to twenty-two. It is to be noted also that by adding to these Tobias and Judith, there are twenty-four books, corresponding to the number of letters used by the Greeks.” Hilary of Poitiers, Prologue to the Psalms, 15 (A.D. 365).

“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…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. Athanasius, Festal Letters, 39:4,7 (A.D. 367).

“What Scripture says is very true, ‘As for a fool he changeth as the moon'[Sirach 27:11]. Basil, Hexaemeron, 6:10 (A.D. 370).

“[T]he Scripture tells us, ‘into the malicious soul Wisdom cannot come'[Wisdom 1:4].” Gregory of Nyssa, On Virginity, 15 (A.D. 371).

“Not by raining down manna, as for Israel of old[Ex 16:14] or opening the rock, in order to give drink to His thirsting people,[ Ps 78:24] or feasting her by means of ravens, as Elijah,[1 Kings 17:6] or feeding her by a prophet carried through the air, as He did to Daniel when a-hungered in the den.[Daniel 14:33,34-Bel & Dragon].” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 18, On the Death of his Father 30 (A.D. 374).

“So as Judith says, ‘Thou hast thought, and what things thou didst determine were ready at hand’[Judith 9:5,6].” Basil, On the Holy Spirit, 8:19 (A.D. 375).

“The Lord ordereth ‘all things in measure and weight'[Wisdom 11:20].” Basil, To Clergy of Samosata, Epistle 219:1 (A.D. 375).

“Standing and sitting, I apprehend, indicate the fixity and entire stability of the nature, as Baruch, when he wishes to exhibit the immutability and immobility of the Divine mode of existence, says, ‘For thou sittest for ever and we perish utterly'[Baruch 3:3].” Basil, On the Holy Spirit, 6:15 (A.D. 375).

“But the Spirit is believed to have been operating at the saint time in Habakkuk and in Daniel at Babylon,[Daniel 14:35-Bel & the Dragon] and to have been at the prison with Jeremiah,[Jer 20:2] and with Ezekiel at the Chebar[Ez 1:1].” Basil, On the Holy Spirit, 23:54 (A.D. 375).

“Nor do I allege any opinion of my own, but I repeat that which the Holy Spirit spake by the prophet: ‘Blessed is the barren that is undefiled'[Wisdom 3:13].” Ambrose, Concerning Virginity, 7:35 (A.D. 378).

“So then, holy Judith,[Judith 10:3ff] strengthened by lengthened mourning and by daily fasting, sought not the enjoyments of the world regardless of danger, and strong in her contempt for death.” Ambrose, Concerning Widows, 7:38 (A.D. 378).

“[T]he prophetical writing says, ‘knoweth all things before they be'[Daniel 3:42-Susanna].” Gregory of Nyssa, Against Making of Man, 16 (A.D. 379).

“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?” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 28, 2nd Theological 8 (A.D. 380).

“[T]he just man in the den, restraining the lions’ rage,[ref Daniel 6:22] and the struggle of the seven Maccabees,[2 Maccabees 7:1] who were perfected with their father and mother in blood, and in all kinds of tortures.” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 43, Panegyric on Basil 74 (A.D. 381).

“Daniel also, unless he had received the Spirit of God, would never have been able to discover that lustful adultery, that fraudulent lie. For when Susanna, assailed by the conspiracy of the elders, saw that the mind of the people was moved by consideration for the old men, and destitute of all help, alone amongst men, conscious of her chastity she prayed God to judge; it is written: ‘The Lord heard her voice, when she was being led to be put to death, and the Lord raised up the Holy Spirit of a young youth, whose name was Daniel'[Daniel 13:44,45-Susanna].” Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit, 3:6:39 (A.D. 381).

“The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [ie., 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus [Sirach], one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,…lamentations, Ezechiel one book, Daniel one book, Osee … Nahum … Habacuc … Sophonias … Aggeus … Zacharias … Malachias … Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books.” Council of Rome, Decree of Pope Damasus (A.D. 382).

“[I]n the Scripture the ‘Seed of the Chaldeans'[Judith 5:6] removed, and the children of Babylon dashed against the Rocks and destroyed.” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 45, 2nd Oration on Easter 15 (A.D. 383).

“[T]he prophet says, ‘was seen upon earth and conversed with men'[3:38].” Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius, 6:4 (A.D. 384).

“And the Lord bids them lay aside the garments of mourning, and to cease the groanings of repentance, saying: ‘Put off, O Jerusalem, the garment of thy mourning and affliction. and clothe thyself in beauty, the glory which God hath given thee for ever'[Baruch 5:1].” Ambrose, Concerning Repentance, I:9:43 (A.D. 384).

“And again; ‘Do not to another what thou hatest'[Tobit 4:15].” John Chrysostom, Concerning Statues, 7 (A.D. 387).

“Wherefore we must cast out all wickedness from our souls, and never more contrive any deceit; for, saith one, ‘To the perverse God sendeth crooked paths [Prov 21:8 LXX]; and, ‘The holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit, and remove from thoughts that are without understanding'[Wis. 1:5].” John Chrysostom, Homilies on John, 41 (A.D. 391).

“Let us then repeat to ourselves soothing charms drawn from the holy Scripture, and say, ‘Thou art earth and ashes.’ ‘Why is earth and ashes proud?’ [Sirach 10:9], and, ‘The sway of his fury shall be his destruction’ [Sirach 1:19] and, ‘The wrathful man is not comely’ [Prov. 11:25 LXX].” John Chrysostom, Homilies on John, 48 (A.D. 391).

“Wherefore the Scripture says well: ‘A wise man will keep silence until there is opportunity'[Sirach 20:6].” Ambrose, Duties of the Clergy, I:2:5 (A.D. 391).

“When Jeremiah understood what they wanted he said: ‘The spot will remain unknown until God shall gather His people together and be gracious to them. Then God shall reveal these things and the majesty of the Lord shall appear'[2 Maccabees 2:7].” Ambrose, Duties of the Clergy, III:17:101 (A.D. 391).

“This preface to the Scriptures may serve as a ‘helmeted’ introduction to all the books which we now turn from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be assured that what is not found in our list must be placed amongst the Apocryphal writings. Wisdom… the book of …Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and the Shepherd are not in the canon. The first book of Maccabees I have found to be in Hebrew, the second in Greek, as can be proved from the very style.” Jerome, Preface to Samuel and Kings [Prologus Galeatus] (A.D. 391).

“Elsewhere the Scripture takes the term “old” in the sense of blame; for seeing that the things are of various aspect as being composed of many parts, it uses the same words both in a good and an evil import, not according to the same shade of meaning. Of which you may see an instance in the blame cast elsewhere on the old: [Ps. 17:46 LXX] ‘They waxed old, and they halted from their paths.’ And again, [Ps. 6:7 LXX] ‘I have become old in the midst of all mine enemies.’ And again, [Daniel 13:52-Susanna] ‘O thou that art become old in evil days.’ So also the ‘Leaven’ is often taken for the kingdom of Heaven, although here found fault with. But in that place it is used with one aspect, and in this with another.” John Chrysostom, Homilies on 1st Corinthians, 15 (A.D. 392).

“And to prove that I say not this upon conjecture; when they fell into the furnace, they bewailed themselves after this sort, saying [Daniel 3:29,33-Three Youths], ‘We have sinned, we have done iniquity, we cannot open our mouth.’ John Chrysostom, Homilies on 1st Corinthians, 18 (A.D. 392).

“That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture. 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, four books. The Chronicles, two books. Job. The Psalter. The Five books of Solomon. The Twelve Books of the Prophets. Isaiah. Jeremiah. Ezechiel. Daniel. Tobit. Judith. Esther. Ezra, two books. Macchabees, two books.” Council of Hippo, Canon 36 (A.D. 393).

“At least that is what Solomon says: “wisdom is the gray hair unto men'[Wisdom 4:9].” Jerome, To Paulinus, Epistle 58 (A.D. 395).

“And what safety can there be for us unless we wash away our sins by fasting, since Scripture says that fasting and alms do away sin? [Tobit 12:8,9]” Ambrose, Epistle 63:16 (A.D. 396).

“[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures. But the canonical Scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach], twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees.” Council of Carthage III, Canon 397 (A.D. 397).

“We have the authentic book of Jesus son of Sirach, and another pseudepigraphic work, entitled the Wisdom of Solomon. I found the first in Hebrew, with the title, ‘Parables’, not Ecclesiasticus, as in Latin versions…The second finds no place in Hebrew texts, and its style is redolent of Greek eloquence: a number of ancient writers assert that it is a work of Philo Judaeus. Therefore, just as the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not admit them to the canon of Scripture; so let the Church read these two volumes, for the edification of the people, but not to support the authority of ecclesiastical doctrines.” Jerome, Preface to Proverbs (A.D. 398).

“I would cite the words of the psalmist: ‘the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit'[Ps 51:17], and those of Ezekiel ‘I prefer the repentance of a sinner rather than his death'[Ez 18:23], and those of Baruch, ‘Arise, arise, O Jerusalem'[Baruch 5:5], and many other proclamations made by the trumpets of the prophets.” Jerome, To Oceanus, Epistle 77:4 (A.D. 399).

“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.” Apostolic Constitutions, 47:85 (A.D. 400).

“What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches? But when I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us.”
Jerome, Against Rufinus, 11:33 (A.D. 402).

“And Baruch in the book of Jeremiah says ‘this is our God: no other shall be reckoned by the side of Him: He found out every path of knowledge and gave it to Jacob His servant, and lsrael his beloved. After these things also He appeared upon the earth, and held converse with men'[Baruch 3:35-37]. And David signifying His incarnate presence said ‘He shall come down like the rain into a fleece of wool, and like the drop which distills upon the earth'[Ps 72:6] because He noiselessly and gently entered into the Virgin’s womb.” John Chrysostom, Against Marcionist & Manicheans (ante A.D. 403).

“[D]oes not the scripture say: ‘Burden not thyself above thy power'[Sirach 13:2]?” Jerome, To Eustochium, Epistle 108 (A.D. 404).

“Which also the Prophet fore told when he said, ‘This is our God: no other shall be accounted of in comparison of Him. He hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved. Afterward He showed Himself upon the earth, and conversed with men'[Baruch 3:36-38].” Rufinus of Aquileia, The Apostles Creed, 37-38 (A.D. 404).

“Of the Old Testament, therefore, first of all there have been handed down five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Then Jesus Nave, (Joshua the son of Nun), The Book of Judges together with Ruth; then four books of Kings (Reigns), which the Hebrews reckon two; the Book of Omissions, which is entitled the Book of Days (Chronicles), and two books of Ezra (Ezra and Nehemiah), which the Hebrews reckon one, and Esther; of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; moreover of the twelve (minor) Prophets, one book; Job also and the Psalms of David, each one book. Solomon gave three books to the Churches, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles. These comprise the books of the Old Testament…But it should be known that there are also other books which our fathers call not ‘Canonical’ but ‘Ecclesiastical:’ that is to say, Wisdom, called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom, called the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach, which last-mentioned the Latins called by the general title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book, but the character of the writing. To the same class belong the Book of Tobit, and the Book of Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees…These are the traditions which the Fathers have handed down to us, which, as I said, I have thought it opportune to set forth in this place, for the instruction of those who are being taught the first elements of the Church and of the Faith, that they may know from what fountains of the Word of God their draughts must be taken.” Rufinus of Aquileia, The Apostles Creed,3 7-38 (A.D. 404).

“A brief addition shows what books really are received in the canon. These are…of Moses five books…and Josue, of Judges one book, of Kings four books, and also Ruth, of the Prophets sixteen books, of Solomon five books, the Psalms. Likewise of the histories, Job one book, of Tobias one book, Esther one, Judith one, of the Machabees two, of Esdra two, Paralipomenon two books…” Pope Innocent [regn. A.D. 401-417], To Exsuperius, Epistle 6 (A.D. 405).

“The words of 2 Maccabees v. 17, which say that Antiochus Epiphanes had power to overthrow the Temple, ‘because of the multitude of sins'[2 Macc 5:17], are quoted in connection with the confessions of Daniel.” Jerome, Against the Pelagians, II:30 (A.D. 415).

“Wherefore, as Scripture says, ‘when you go forth to serve the Lord stand in the fear of the Lord, and prepare your mind'[Sirach 2:1].” John Cassian, The Institutes, 4:37 (A.D. 426).

“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,(ie. Ezra & Nehemiah) 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.” Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, II:8 (A.D. 426).

“[A]s Scripture itself testifies: ‘For God made not death, neither rejoiceth in the destruction of the living’[Wisdom 1:13].” John Cassian, Third Conference of Abbot Chaermon, 7 (A.D. 428).

“[T]he Prophet says, ‘the Lord Himself is God, who found out all the way of knowledge; who was seen upon earth and conversed with men’[Baruch 3:37,38].” John Cassian, The Incarnation of Christ, 4:13 (A.D. 430).

“[T]he divine Oracles cry aloud, ‘Remove not the landmarks, which thy fathers have set,'[Prov 22:28] and ‘Go not to law with a Judge'[Sirach 8:14,] and ‘Whoso breaketh through a fence a serpent shall bite him'[Eccles 10:8].” Vincent of Lerins, Commonitory for the Authenticity and Universality of the Catholic Faith, 21:51 (A.D. 434).

“Two officers in the army, who were shield bearers in the imperial suite, at a certain banquet lamented in somewhat warm language the abomination of what was being done, and employed the admirable language of the glorious youths at Babylon, ‘Thou hast given us over to an impious Prince an apostate beyond all the nations on the earth'[Daniel 3:32-Three Youths].” Theodoret of Cyrus, Ecclesiastical History, 3:11 (A.D. 440).

“And hence Tobias also, while instructing his son in the precepts of godliness, says, ‘Give alms of thy substance, and turn not thy face from any poor man: so shall it come to pass that the face of GOD shall not be turned from thee'[Tobit 4:7].” Pope Leo the Great [regn. A.D. 440-461], Sermon 10:4 (ante A.D. 461).

“[T]he sins which are washed away either by the waters of baptism, or the tears of repentance, may be also blotted out by alms-giving; for the Scripture says, ‘As water extinguisheth fire, so alms extinguisheth sin'[Sirach 3:29]. Through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Pope Leo the Great [regn. A.D. 440-461], Sermon 49:6 (ante A.D. 461).

“But O ungodliest of men [Judas Iscariot], “thou seed of Chanaan and not of Juda'[Daniel 13:56-Susanna].” Pope Leo the Great [regn. A.D. 440-461], Sermon 67 (ante A.D. 461).

“Who[ie the Son] is equal with God the Father, have assumed the form of a slave and the likeness of sinful flesh. But because ‘by the devil’s malice death entered into the world'[Wisdom 2:24].” Pope Leo the Great [regn. A.D. 440-461], Sermon 78:2 (ante A.D. 461).

“A wise man who knew all this full well reasons about deaths of this kind and says, ‘Yea; speedily was he taken away, lest that wickedness should alter his understanding’[Wisdom 4:11].” Theodoret of Cyrus, To Cyrus Magistrianus, Epistle 136 (ante A.D. 466).

“For of him it is written, But by envy of the devil death entered into the world'[Wisdom 2:24].” Pope Gregory the Great [regn. A.D. 590-604], Pastoral Care, 10 (ante A.D. 604).

“[L]et them hear what is written, ‘Give to every man that asketh of thee'[Luke 6:30]. Lest they should give something, however little to those on whom they ought to bestow nothing at all, let them hear what is written. ‘Give to the good man, and receive not a sinner: do well to him that is lowly, and give not to the ungodly'[Sirach 12:4]. And again, ‘Set out thy bread and wine on the burial of the just, but eat and drink not thereof with sinners’ [Tobit 4:17].” Pope Gregory the Great [regn. A.D. 590-604], Pastoral Care, 20 (ante A.D. 604).

“The divine Scripture likewise saith that ‘the souls of the just are in God’s hand'[Wisdom 3:1] and death cannot lay hold of them.” John Damascene, Orthodox Faith, 4:15 (A.D. 743).

“But others, though future, are put in the past tense, as, for instance, This is our God: ‘Therefore He[she] was seen upon the earth and dwell among men'[Baruch 3:38].” John Damascene, Orthodox Faith, 4:18 (A.D. 743).

“[S]o that in them was fulfilled that which is written, ‘The service of God is abominable to the sinner'[Sirach 1:22].” 7th Ecumenical Council, Nicea II, Canon 6 (A.D. 787).

The post Did the Early Church accept the “extra” Deuterocanonical Books in their Bibles? Yes they did! appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Reserve your spot for my Lent Webinar by CLICKING HERE

The post What am I giving up for Lent in 2025? Invite to 2025 Lent Challenge appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Catholicism argues for a hierarchy of duty with regard to the love of neighbor. Christ our Lord taught the parable of the Good Samaritan to reveal that our duty to love our neighbor extends to all. Nevertheless, the order of love is not flattened out completely and redistributed to all persons without distinction. For example, as a married man, I have the obligation of love to make sure that my wife’s medical care is being met before I do the other 50 women on the same hospital floor. There is a higher love for my wife that is not wrong or selfish. Likewise, I have a higher obligation of love to make sure that my own children are properly nourished and clothed–above my duty to to feed and clothe children in France.

The principle is set down by Saint Paul:

But if any man have not care of his own, and especially of those of his house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. 1 Timothy 5:8

As a Christian, I must have a concern for the well-being of all people made in the image of God, but I have a rightful prior concern for “those of his house.”

Saint Thomas Aquinas discusses the hierarchy or ordo caritatis (order of charity) at Summa theologiae II, q. 26 and orders love in this way:

1. God
2. Myself (“a man ought to love himself more than his neighbor.”)
3. Neighbor
4. My body (:”we ought to love our neighbor more than our own body.”)

Regarding our neighbor, Thomas teaches we love all universally but practically we must love unequally

On this respect we love all men equally out of charity: because we wish them all one same generic good, namely everlasting happiness. Secondly love is said to be greater through its action being more intense: and in this way we ought not to love all equally. STh q. 26, a. 6.

The degree of care we have for our various neighbors is related to proximity levels of kinship, friendship, and nationality:

Moreover there is yet another reason for which, out of charity, we love more those who are more nearly connected with us, since we love them in more ways. For, towards those who are not connected with us we have no other friendship than charity, whereas for those who are connected with us, we have certain other friendships, according to the way in which they are connected. STh q. 26, a. 6.

A proper ordo amoris may look like this:

1. God
2. myself
3. my spouse
4. my family, children and parents
5. my godchildren and extended family
6. my friends and coworkers
7. my neighborhood (I pay HOA for this one, not all neighborhoods)
8. my county
9. my state
10. my nation
11. my nation’s allies

The Christian may at any time extend charity, love and care to someone outside this levels of proximate and remote relationships. An American traveling for business can give alms to a stranger in Argentina. The act is perfectly Christian if done with the proper intention to honor God. The alms would immoral, however, if that money prevented him from paying the mortgage on his family home or prevented him from paying for a taxi to make his airplane flight back to his family. The ordo amoris establishes the what is and is not allowed in the quest for charity toward God and neighbor.

Consequently, we use our goods and time to execute a positive effect in the world so that “thy kingdom come, by will be done.” There is however a rational order, hierarchy and prevention mechanism in the pursuit of love or charity.

The post JD Vance and Thomas Aquinas on Ordo Amoris appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Do you find benefit from my videos and podcasts? If so, please help me make more by becoming a Patron via Patreon (and I’ll send you some signed books as a Thank You. Click here to become a Patron.

Watch the Youtube video by clicking here.

Or listen to the audio mp3 here:

The Taylor Marshall Show Podcast is now also available on Spotify: Play “Taylor Marshall Show” inside Spotify.

Check out Patreon Patron Benefits!

All these video discussions are free. Do you want to recommend a show, get signed books, and show support? Here’s how: click on Patreon Patron link:

Become a Patron of this Podcast: I am hoping to produce more free weekly podcast Videos. Please help me launch these videos by working with me on Patreon to produce more free content. In gratitude, I’ll send you some signed books or even stream a theology event for you and your friends. Please become one of my patrons and check out the various tier benefits at: https://www.patreon.com/drtaylormarshall

If the audio player does not show up in your email or browser, please click here to listen.

If you find this podcast episode helpful, please share this podcast on Facebook.

• Announcements:
  • The podcast is now on my channel on Youtube.com
  • The complete Sword and Serpent Trilogy is now published, including the third Book: Storm of Fire and Blood.
  • Download the Study Guide at: http://swordandserpent.com
  • New classes at New Saint Thomas Institute. We have just begun our New Testament Studies curriculum. Please visit: newsaintthomas.com for more details.

I’d love to read your feedback: While you listen to today’s podcast, would you please take 30 seconds to write a review? Please click here to Rate this Podcast!

Please Share Your Feedback:

• iTunes: 2,457,319 downloads on iTunes as of today.
• Youtube: Leave a comment on Youtube here.
• SHOUT OUTS: A huge “shout out” to all 1,181 (!) of you who wrote amazing 5-star reviews at iTunes. Please rate this podcast by clicking here. From there you can leave a review. I appreciate you for this! Thank you!

Subscribe to This Weekly Podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, Spotify, or Youtube:

• Apple/Mac Users: Please subscribe via iTunes by clicking here and then clicking on “View in iTunes.”

• Android Users: For listening to The Taylor Marshall Show on Android devices (free) using the Stitcher app.

• Spotify Users: For listening to The Taylor Marshall Show on Spotify, search in Spotify for “Taylor Marshall.”

• Android Users can also listen to the show with:
  • Android Beyond Pod app from the Google Play Store.
  • Android Pocketcasts app.
• Our you can listen/watch to the Taylor Marshall Show via Youtube:

• SURVEY: Please view our Podcast Listener Poll by clicking here.

You can leave a comment by clicking here.

If you like this podcast, please leave a review.

The post 247: Is Easter Pagan? Pagan Astarte or the Lord Jesus Christ? [Podcast] appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Cardinal Daneels refers to his membership to a certain St Gallen club or “mafia” (his term) that met together to forge support for the election of Pope Francis (and perhaps for the pre-mature resignation of Pope Benedict). Dr Taylor Marshall discusses the origin of the St Gallen Mafia, who were members, and the role especially of Cardinal Daneels and Cardinal Martini in the theological agenda of their self-labeled “mafia.”The election, support, and theology of Pope Francis make sense as we come to understand this St Gallen Mafia.

The Taylor Marshall Show Podcast is now also available on Spotify: Play “Taylor Marshall Show” inside Spotify.

Listen to audio or watch the Youtube video interview by clicking here.

If the audio player does not show up in your email or browser, please click here to listen.

If you find this podcast episode helpful, please share this podcast on Facebook.

• Announcements:
  • The podcast is now on my channel on Youtube.com
  • The complete Sword and Serpent Trilogy is now published, including the the third Book: Storm of Fire and Blood.
  • Download the Study Guide at: http://swordandserpent.com
  • New classes at New Saint Thomas Institute. We have just begun our New Testament Studies curriculum. Please visit: newsaintthomas.com for more details.

I’d love to read your feedback: While you listen to today’s podcast, would you please take 30 seconds to write a review? Please click here to Rate this Podcast!

Please Share Your Feedback:

• POPULARITY: 1,691,375 downloads on iTunes as of today.
• SHOUT OUTS: A huge “shout out” to all 736 (!) of you who wrote amazing 5-star reviews at iTunes. Please rate this podcast by clicking here. From there you can leave a review. I appreciate you for this! Thank you!

Subscribe to This Weekly Podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, Spotify, or Youtube:

• Apple/Mac Users: Please subscribe via iTunes by clicking here and then clicking on “View in iTunes.”

• Android Users: For listening to The Taylor Marshall Show on Android devices (free) using the Stitcher app.

• Spotify Users: For listening to The Taylor Marshall Show on Spotify, search in Spotify for “Taylor Marshall.”

• Android Users can also listen to the show with:
  • Android Beyond Pod app from the Google Play Store.
  • Android Pocketcasts app.
• Our you can listen/watch to the Taylor Marshall Show via Youtube:

• SURVEY: Please view our Podcast Listener Poll by clicking here.

[reminder]

If you like this podcast, please leave a review.

The post 154: St Gallen Mafia & Pope Francis: What is it? [Podcast] appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

In the video I explain how the invention of the Catholic “Mega-Diocese” has led to sexual scandals, corrupt clergy, and runs contrary to the principle of subsidiarity. I also lay out the case in light of Moses and Jethro in Exodus 18 and makes recommendations on how to fix this problem that originated with Pope Leo X and the advent of “auxiliary bishops.”

What the video below or watch it directly inside Youtube by clicking here.

Audio Podcast version is here:

Godspeed,
Dr Marshall

Please share the video and subscribe to my Youtube channel to get more info and updates.

The post 147: Against the Catholic Mega-Diocese: Scandal and Subsidiarity [Podcast] appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Before 1964, the Rituale Romanum includes an exorcism of the water and the adding of exorcized salt to the making of holy water. Here is the pre-1964 exorcism of the water:

O water, creature of God, I exorcise you in the name of God the Father almighty, and in the name of Jesus Christ His Son, our Lord, and in the power of the Holy Spirit. I exorcise you so that you may put to flight all the power of the Enemy, and be able to root out and supplant that Enemy with his apostate angels: through the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who will come to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire. Amen.

Almighty and everlasting God, we humbly implore Thee, in Thy immeasurable kindness and love, to bless + and sanctify + this salt which Thou did create and give over to the use of mankind, so that it may become a source of health for the minds and bodies of all who make use of it, and may rid whatever it touches or sprinkles of all uncleanness and protect it from every assault of evil spirits. Through our Lord, Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Who lives and reigns with Thee in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever. R. Amen.

After 1964, the new Rituale Romanum excludes both the exorcism and the salt. (Not a fantastic development in my non-magisterial layman’s opinion.)

Providentially, Summorum Pontificum by Pope Benedict XVI allows all priests to use the pre-1964 formula for making holy water – and many priests quietly do this.

So why salt?

The Levitical priesthood under Moses identifies salt with “covenant”:

“Every offering of your grain offering you shall season with salt; you shall not allow the salt of the covenant of your God to be lacking from your grain offering. With all your offerings you shall offer salt.” (Lev 2:13)

We find it again in Numbers:

All the holy offerings which the people of Israel present to the Lord I give to you, and to your sons and daughters with you, as a perpetual due; it is a covenant of salt for ever before the Lord for you and for your offspring with you.” (Num 18:19)

And the Davidic Messianic Covenant is a “covenant of salt” (2 Chronicles 13:5).

Since all Catholic liturgical forms come from Israelite liturgical forms, we can expect salt to play an important role in our sacramental life.

Moreover, the waters over which the Spirit hovered in Genesis 1 were salty (Covenant of Creation). The Flood of Noah was salty (Covenant of Noah). The Red Sea was salty (Covenant of Moses).It also refers to the action of Elishah the Prophet:

19 Now the men of the city said to Elisha, “Behold, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord sees; but the water is bad, and the land is unfruitful.” 20 He said, “Bring me a new bowl, and put salt in it.” So they brought it to him. 21 Then he went to the spring of water and threw salt in it, and said, “Thus says the Lord, I have made this water wholesome; henceforth neither death nor miscarriage shall come from it.” 22 So the water has been wholesome to this day, according to the word which Elisha spoke.

Elisha uses something sterile (salt) to make other things unsterile (women’s wombs). This is polarity miracle. We see the same with Elijah before him. Elijah pours water on a sacrifice and it burns anyway. The effect of a thing is opposite its purpose and creates a miraculous outcome.

Salt placed in the mouth of the Baptized:

The fifth canon of the Third Council of Carthage (AD 397) states that Catechumens should repeatedly consumed holy salt as they prepared for baptism. Saint Augustine refers to himself having been made a “catechumen” at birth (Patristic baby dedication) but not having been baptized:

Even as a boy I had heard of eternal life promised to us through the humility of the Lord our God condescending to our pride, and I was signed with the sign of the cross, and was seasoned with His salt even from the womb of my mother, who greatly trusted in You. Confessions 1, 14.

Prior to Vatican II, the priest placed a touch of holy salt into the mouth of all the newly baptized (including infants).

Priest: N., Receive the salt of wisdom; let it be propitiation for you unto eternal life.

Sponsor/Catechumen: Amen.

Priest: Peace be with you.

Sponsor/Catechumen: And with your spirit.

Priest: Let us pray: O God of our fathers, O God the Author of all truth, vouchsafe, we humbly beseech Thee, to look graciously down upon this Thy servant, N., and as he (she) tastes this first nutriment of salt, allow him (her) no longer to hunger for lack of heavenly food, to the end that he (she) may be always fervent in spirit, rejoicing in hope, always serving Thy name. Lead him (her), O Lord, we beseech Thee, to the laver of the new regeneration, that, together with Thy faithful, he may deserve to attain the everlasting rewards of Thy promises. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Here’s a video of one of my children being baptized with the 1962 ritual of baptism. You can see the blessing and administration of holy salt at about 0:50:

This salt is given to whet the catechumens appetite for the Eucharist. It further demonstrates that everyone in the Roman Rite received the Eucharist after baptism – including infants well into the 5th century. Saint Cyprian and Saint Augustine refer matter-of-factly to infants receiving the Eucharist. Christian parents should fight for this Apostolic practice to be returned to the Roman Rite.

[bctt tweet=”Saint Cyprian and Saint Augustine refer matter-of-factly to infants receiving the Eucharist. Christian parents should fight for this Apostolic practice to be returned to the Roman Rite.” username=”@taylorrmarshall”]

If a Catholic altar is disturbed or desecrated (as this one was desecrated in Ireland), it must be reconsecrated but this time with holy salt to purify and cleanse it from the demonic.

Theology of Salt from the words of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Our Lord Jesus Christ also states: “For every one will be salted with fire.” (Mark 9:49) Why is this? We are all to be holocaust sacrifices to the Father through Jesus Christ. In the next verse, he states: “Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace one with another” (Mark 9:50). (Which is why the subtitle of this blog is “Stay salty my friends.”)

Christ says that all will be salted with fire. Every human will experience this salt as we pass through death. It is the judgment of Christ over our lives. Note that this means that Jesus the High Priest will treat everyone person as an animal sacrifice as in the Old Testament. Blood also is salty. Jewish texts also state that the one of the jobs of the Levites was to cast salt everywhere on the ground of the altar area so that the priests would not slip on all the sacrificial blood.

We have two models of salt and final judgment:

• The first is that of the salt of damnation. Salt is sterile. Lot’s wife “turned back” and turned into a pillar (statue) of salt. She is grouped with the valley of Sodom and Gomorrah (sterile sexual immorality), which now lies condemned beneath the Dead Sea (a salty body of water).
  
• The second is that of the salt of salvation. Salt preserves. The fisherman Apostles daily dealt in salt. There was no refrigeration and fish were always transported in salt. Fishermen needed boats, nets, and lots and lots of salt to be successful merchants.
  As Apostles (and their successors) are “fishers of men” it’s not enough to merely catch men. The fish of Jesus must be confirmed in grace and preserved by the “salt of the covenant.” Hence, salt becomes a sign against contagion and corruption. It’s a sign of orthodox preaching, teaching, and sacramental integrity within the Catholic Church.

[bctt tweet=”As Apostles (and their successors) are fishers of men it’s not enough to merely catch men. The fish of Jesus must be confirmed in grace and preserved by the salt of the covenant.Hence, salt becomes a sign against contagion and corruption.” username=”@taylorrmarshall”]

[reminder]If you found this helpful, please share it on Facebook.[/reminder]

PS: If you want to discover more about Old Testament rites and their relationship to Catholic liturgy, check out this book: The Crucified Rabbi.

The post Why does Holy Water have salt in it? Elisha, Jesus, and Salted Fish appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

You might be surprised to learn that Catholic iconography, saints, Eastern liturgy, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and even Pope Pius XII taught that she first died and then her body was assumed into Heaven. But her “death” was different. Let’s discover the distinction. Here’s a video I produced on the topic:

Click here to begin watching the video: Did Mary Die?

[reminder]

Our Immaculate Mother of the Christ, pray for us,
Dr Taylor Marshall

The post Video: Did Mary Die BEFORE she was Assumed into Heaven? Yes appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Our Catholic feast of Pentecost derives from the Jewish feast of Pentecost or Shavuot (Feast of Weeks). Pentecost (πεντηκοστή) is Greek for the “50th [day]” since Passover/Easter (7 weeks x 7 days = 49 days).

For the Israelites, Pentecost was important because:

1. It is the day on which the rainbow appeared to Noah.
2. It is the day on which Moses received the 613 Laws from God.
3. It is the day on which King David was born and died.
4. It is also the “Feast of Firstfruits,” the first harvest of the spring wheat crops.
   (Barley was harvested at Passover; Wheat was harvested at Pentecost.)

The Holy Spirit at the First Christian Pentecost

Saint Luke describes the coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:

When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly a sound came from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The Holy Spirit manifests as “tongues of fire” so as to give the Apostles the power to speak in other tongues/languages. In the Roman West, the Catholic mitre signifies the “tongue of fire” resting on the head of an Apostle. Bishops are successors of the the Pentecost Apostles and thus they wear a “tongue” on their head. You get the idea. I used our holy Bishop Fulton Sheen as a mockup:

These tongues of fire allowed the 12 Apostles to proclaim the New Law to the Church. Saint Thomas Aquinas states that the “New Law” is the Person of the Holy Spirit: “What else are the Divine laws written by God Himself on our hearts, but the very presence of His Holy Spirit?” (STh I-II, q. 106, a. 1).

Why “Tongues” of Fire? A Hint in 1 Enoch:

Why are there tongues of fire? Why not lips of fire or words of fire? Why not a fiery dove to conform to the baptism of Christ at the Jordan?

The tongues likely evoke the Hebrew concept of “tongues” praising God. As such, there is a Jewish mystical tradition that God’s heavenly temple above is surrounded by praising “tongues of fire.” Enoch is entering the Temple of Heaven and seeing God there amidst the tongues of fire:

“Behold, in the vision clouds invited me and a mist summoned me, and the course of the stars and the lightnings sped and hastened me, and the winds in 9 the vision caused me to fly and lifted me upward, and bore me into heaven. And I went in till I drew nigh to a wall which is built of crystals and surrounded by tongues of fire: and it began to affright 10 me. And I went into the tongues of fire and drew nigh to a large house which was built of crystals: and the walls of the house were like a tesselated floor (made) of crystals, and its groundwork was 11 of crystal. Its ceiling was like the path of the stars and the lightnings, and between them were 12 fiery cherubim, and their heaven was (clear as) water. A flaming fire surrounded the walls, and its 13 portals blazed with fire. And I entered into that house, and it was hot as fire and cold as ice: there 14 were no delights of life therein: fear covered me, and trembling got hold upon me. And as I quaked 15 and trembled, I fell upon my face. And I beheld a vision, And lo! there was a second house, greater 16 than the former, and the entire portal stood open before me, and it was built of flames of fire. And in every respect it so excelled in splendour and magnificence and extent that I cannot describe to 17 you its splendour and its extent. And its floor was of fire, and above it were lightnings and the path 18 of the stars, and its ceiling also was flaming fire. And I looked and saw therein a lofty throne: its appearance was as crystal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun, and there was the vision of 19 cherubim. And from underneath the throne came streams of flaming fire so that I could not look 20 thereon. And the Great Glory sat thereon, and His raiment shone more brightly than the sun and 21 was whiter than any snow. (1 Enoch 14:8-22)

The tongues of fire surround the Temple of Heaven. In Pentecost we see the the New Temple which is the Body of Christ and the Catholic Church. The Apostles are now anointed with tongues of fire to be the foundation and walls of this heavenly Temple on earth.

As I explain in The Crucified Rabbi, the temple is the incarnate Body of Christ. As I repeat over and over: “Catholicism is Third Temple Judaism. Why? Because Jesus replaced the Second Temple with His own Eucharistic Body.” [bctt tweet=”Catholicism is Third Temple Judaism. Why? Because Jesus replaced the Second Temple with His own Eucharistic Body. So Catholics pray toward this new Temple. – Dr Taylor Marshall” username=”@taylorrmarshall”]

I’ve spent the last week reading 1 Enoch and comparing it to Luke-Acts and finding lots of amazing connections. So stay tuned for me. Till then check out my recent post on 1 Enoch and Jude/2 Peter.

It’s especially interesting that the solar calendar described by Enoch in 1 Enoch always places Pentecost Sunday (and Passover) on a Sunday (New Testament) and not a Saturday (Old Testament). This further informs what we know about Pentecost Sunday as always a Sunday in the New Covenant. More on that later.

I also have a podcast on the tongue of fire and how it relates to the old Latin liturgy which you can listen to here: Podcast: 1 Enoch, Tongues of Fire and Pre-Vatican II Liturgy. I’ve created a new category on this blog called “Enoch Studies” so you can follow more research on this topic. I think I’ll do a book on it shortly.

[reminder]

The post Tongues of Fire and Bishops in Pointy Hats (Acts and 1 Enoch) appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Sometime around the 200s BC a Jewish document called “Book of Enoch” or 1 Enoch was produced. It gives all the details on how angelic beings copulated with human women and created a cosmic mess before the Flood. And here’s the interesting problem we have:

Saint Jude (Jude 1:14-15) directly quotes this non-biblical document known as “Book of Enoch” or 1 Enoch:

It’s not only this direct quotation of 1 Enoch by Jude, but Jude (and 2 Peter) allude to the fantastical events of 1 Enoch, namely the sexual encounters of fallen angels with human women, which gives birth to the nephilim or “giants.” The birth of the giants, according to 1 Enoch, is the reason for the Noah’s Flood.

And this belief is also found in the canonical book of Wisdom:

“And from the beginning also when the proud giants (γιγάντων) perished, the hope of the world fleeing to a vessel, which was governed by thy hand, left to the world seed of generation.” (Wisdom 14:6)

The author of Wisdom clearly associates the flood to a divine genocide of the race of the giants (γιγάντων) to leave the world a “seed of generation.” (Saint Paul quotes from Wisdom about 7 times – so Saint Paul also likely hold this belief.)

Let me tell you the story of Angels and Giants that 1 Enoch tells:

In 1 Enoch, Yahweh sends 200 angels to guide and instruct humanity. These 200 angels are called “Irin” in Aramaic and “Egregoroi” in Greek. Both words mean “Watchers.” These Watchers corrupt humanity by teaching them evil arts such as cosmetology (sorry ladies), sorcery, astrology, and the arts of war.

These angels also seduce human women and copulate with them. The women give birth to nephilim or giants. God causes these giants to fight and die. Then the souls of the giants turn into demons that haunt and tempt humans for the rest of time.

• So Yahweh binds these 200 evil angelic Watchers into “Tartarus.”
• What is Tartarus? In the Homer’s Iliad, Zeus teaches that Tartarus is “as far beneath Hades as heaven is above earth.” Tartarus is the deepest part of the underworld, far below Hades.
• It’s noteworthy that the term “tartarus” is used by Enoch and 2 Peter. This signals the blending of Hebrew history with Greek mythology since Greek myth depict Zeus (after 10 years of battle or titanomachy) sending the older primordial deities called Titans into the deep dungeon abyss of “tartarus.”

Notably 2 Peter explicitly uses Enoch’s word “Tartarus” for the condemnation of fallen “angels.” Jude and 2 Peter use almost the same words, but 2 Peter uses “Tartarus”:

It seems that 1 Enoch (and maybe Jude and 2 Peter) have assimilated the titanomachy legend of Zeus condemning the Titans into Tartaus into a legend about Yahweh condemning the 200 angelic Watchers into the chains of Tartarus. But in the 1 Enoch legend the crime is that of angels procreating mutant giants with human women.

“And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamored of them, saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.” (1 Enoch 7:2)

The resulting children are called nephilim in Hebrew or gigantes (giants) in Latin and Greek. In 1 Enoch, the historical Enoch goes to God and seeks to make intercession for the forgiveness of the giants. God refuses and the giants are condemned. This part of the story is referred to in Sirach:

“He was not propitiated for the ancient giants who revolted in their might.” (Sirach 16:7)

The Dead Sea Scrolls contain 10 copies (!) of the Book of Giants – a work that describes in detail the conception of giants in Genesis 6 from the union of women and angelic watchers. The giants were warriors and cannibals. This theology was an important part of the theology of Second Temple Judaism.

Church Fathers who explicitly teach that angels copulated with women and bred giants in Genesis 6:

Justin Martyr, Tatian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, Commodianus, Ambrose of Milan.

In the City of God, Saint Augustine taught that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 were simply human ancestors of Seth and that they bred with the evil daughters of men/Cain. This became the received tradition in the post Augustinian Christian West. It’s notable, however, that his mentor Saint Ambrose believed that the “sons of God” were in fact angels that copulated with humans.

What’s going on here in the Hebrew tradition?

The “Legend of the Watchers” in 1 Enoch was written in the Maccabean period before Christ. It’s could be a Jewish appropriation of a Greek myth but it’s likely explaining how the Hellenistic invaders are:

1. The Gentile invaders of the Holy Land (312-63 BC)
2. Greeks teaching and requiring Jews to follow pagan customs
3. Greeks marrying and copulating with Jewish women
4. The production of “hybrid” Greek/Jewish children that are considered “monstrous”
5. The need to destroy and drive out the Greeks by means of the Maccabean Revolt (167-160 BC)

The titanomachy of Enoch is not historically “Zeus vs. Titans” or “Yahweh vs. Watchers,” but Judah Maccabeus vs. Greeks.

How does Catholic Christianity understand the “angels and tartarus” sections?

Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas (both had not read 1 Enoch) interpretted the passages in Jude and 2 Peter in this way:

1. Before the flood, the “sons of God” were the righteous humans and the “daughters of men” were the female daughters of evil humans from Cain. These women were evil and and they seduced the noble and righteous sons of Seth.
2. They interbred and this lead to the moral corruption of humanity.
3. God sent a flood to kill everyone since they were all now a mixture of sons of Seth and daughters of Cain.

The solution here is to read “sons of God” not as “angelic beings” but as holy humans. It’s plausible and it has become the accepted tradition in Catholicism. However, ever since the Flood, good people have been interbreeding with evil people. And we know that the child of a holy mother and an evil father can turn out either good or bad. There are not “evil genetics.”

We can see here that the problem of intermarrying between the righteous and the wicked didn’t suddenly stop because water covered the land.

So it seems that Genesis describes a “water genocide” of a corrupted angel-human species. And certainly 1 Enoch is following the idea. If Jude (and 2 Peter) considered 1 Enoch as theological true, this would mean that at least one (or two) Apostle(s) believed the Enochic legend of the Watcher angels being sent to “Tartarus” because they had deceived humans and copulated with them.

The Enochic Legend as a theological device in Jude and 2 Peter:

Regardless of whether Jude and 2 Peter believed the Enochic “Watcher-Angel legend,” we know for a fact that they applied it as a teaching paradigm for their contemporary Apostolic Church:

1. There are false heretical teachers that were once part of the Apostolic Church
2. These have fallen away from Christ and are teaching Christians false doctrine and sin
3. These heretics are having illicit sex with Christians (their lust here and in Revelation is highlighted)
4. These heretics will be judged in the same way as the Watchers: they will be locked up in the dark tartarus forever.

If Jude and 2 Peter did not quote and/or reference 1 Enoch, we could cast off 1 Enoch forever as a Jewish oddity. But since there is a theological reference of 1 Enoch within Jude and 2 Peter, it provides a challenge.

I’m curious, how do you read the canonical passages of Genesis 6, Jude, 2 Peter (as well as Wisdom, Sirach and several Dead Sea Scrolls that promote the idea of giants as children of human women and demonic angels) in light of 1 Enoch? Secondly, do you think Jude and 2 Peter take the Enochic Watcher-Legend literally or are they simply using it to make an contemporary application against lustful heretics?

[reminder]

Godspeed,
Dr Taylor Marshall

PS: I recorded a podcast on the role of 1 Enoch in the Noah film that came out a few years ago starring Russell Crowe as Noah. You can listen to it by clicking here: Podcast on Noah (2014 Film) and 1 Enoch.

The post Angels having Relations with Humans within Jude and 2 Peter and 1 Enoch appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

Saint Ephrem died on June 9, 373 AD in Edessa so he gives us a unique perspective on early Christology and Mariology. Here’s a short video with me reading a passage from him with a brief reflection:

Please leave a comment and don’t forget to subscribe to my Youtube channel for more Catholic videos.

[reminder]

ad Jesum per Mariam,

Dr Taylor Marshall

The post Is Blessed Mary the Mother, Sister, Spouse, or Daughter to God? St Ephrem the Syrian appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

How was he martyred and why do Catholic and Orthodox images of Saint George have him fighting a mythical dragon?

Best-selling author and scholar Dr Taylor Marshall explains the authentic history of Saint George and the meaning of the “George and Dragon legend.”

Watch the New Saint Thomas Institute Catholic video on Saint George and the Dragon Icon here:

If you’d like to sign up for a Catholic course in Catholic Church History featuring Church Fathers and early Catholic Saints, please click here: New Saint Thomas Institute Course on Church History and Church Fathers.

For more information about online courses and Certificates in Theology through the New Saint Thomas Institute, please visit newsaintthomas.com.

Sword and Serpent: My Best-Selling Novel about Saint George is on sale this weekend

Looking for a Catholic fiction page-turner? I published a #1 best-selling historical fiction novel about Saint George and the Dragon (plus St Christopher, Emperor Constantine, Diocletian, et al.) titled Sword and Serpent. 

Father Dwight Longenecker wrote a glowing review of Sword and Serpent here.

Here’s the book trailer for Sword and Serpent on YouTube:

The novel is now on sale for this April 23 week on Kindle and in paperback. Click here to get a copy.

Get a copy of this novel about Saint George on sale here.

The post Did St George really fight a Dragon? Byzantine Icon Analysis and History appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

If the audio player does not show up in your email or browser, please click here to listen.

If you find this podcast episode helpful, please share this podcast on Facebook.

• Announcements:
  • The podcast is now on my channel on Youtube.com
  • The complete Sword and Serpent Trilogy is now published, including the the third Book: Storm of Fire and Blood.
  • Download the Study Guide at: http://swordandserpent.com
  • New classes at New Saint Thomas Institute. We have just begun our New Testament Studies curriculum. Please visit: newsaintthomas.com for more details.

I’d love to read your feedback: While you listen to today’s podcast, would you please take 30 seconds to write a review? Please click here to Rate this Podcast!

Please Share Your Feedback:

• POPULARITY: 1,448,642 downloads on iTunes as of today.
• SHOUT OUTS: A huge “shout out” to all 520 (!) of you who wrote amazing 5-star reviews at iTunes. Please rate this podcast by clicking here. From there you can leave a review. I appreciate you for this! Thank you!

Subscribe to This Weekly Podcast:

• Apple/Mac Users: Please subscribe via iTunes by clicking here and then clicking on “View in iTunes.”

• Android Users: For listening to The Taylor Marshall Show on Android devices (free) using the Stitcher app.

• Android Users can also listen to the show with:
  • Android Beyond Pod app from the Google Play Store.
  • Android Pocketcasts app.
• Our you can listen/watch to the Taylor Marshall Show via Youtube:

• SURVEY: Please view our Podcast Listener Poll by clicking here.

[reminder]

If you like this podcast, please leave a review.

The post 134: Saint Veronica in 9 Points: Was She Berenike? [Podcast] appeared first on Taylor Marshall.

[callout]PARENTAL WARNING: I discuss a strange episode in Patrick’s life where sailors ask him to “suck their breasts” and explain what that meant in ancient Ireland (Hint: it symbolized as oath of coming under another person’s protection.)[/callout]

If the audio player does not show up in your email or browser, please click here to listen.

If you find this podcast episode helpful, please share this podcast on Facebook.

• Announcements:
  • The podcast is now on my channel on Youtube.com
  • The complete Sword and Serpent Trilogy is now published, including the the third Book: Storm of Fire and Blood.
  • Download the Study Guide at: http://swordandserpent.com
  • New classes at New Saint Thomas Institute. We have just begun our New Testament Studies curriculum. Please visit: newsaintthomas.com for more details.

I’d love to read your feedback: While you listen to today’s podcast, would you please take 30 seconds to write a review? Please click here to Rate this Podcast!

Please Share Your Feedback:

• POPULARITY: 1,448,642 downloads on iTunes as of today.
• SHOUT OUTS: A huge “shout out” to all 520 (!) of you who wrote amazing 5-star reviews at iTunes. Please rate this podcast by clicking here. From there you can leave a review. I appreciate you for this! Thank you!

Subscribe to This Weekly Podcast:

• Apple/Mac Users: Please subscribe via iTunes by clicking here and then clicking on “View in iTunes.”

• Android Users: For listening to The Taylor Marshall Show on Android devices (free) using the Stitcher app.

• Android Users can also listen to the show with:
  • Android Beyond Pod app from the Google Play Store.
  • Android Pocketcasts app.
• Our you can listen/watch to the Taylor Marshall Show via Youtube:

• SURVEY: Please view our Podcast Listener Poll by clicking here.

[reminder]

If you like this podcast, please leave a review.

The post 132: St Patrick in 9 Bullet Points and the “Two Patrick Theory” [Podcast] appeared first on Taylor Marshall.