I listened to this show today on Catholic Answers Live by the author of Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, Gary Michuta. (The author claims that it's the first book he's found on the subject in over one hundred years.)
The point of the program is that Catholics have larger canons than Protestants, and why. Gary got a call from an Eastern Christian (wasn't clear which type, though I suspect he was a Copt of one form or another) who pointed out that Eastern Christians have an even larger canon. I had to laugh at the call, both from a perspective of the thought of him getting a taste of his own medicine :-) and wanting to know how he'd handle it (having the same question myself).
His answer surprised me. He claimed that an argument can be made that the decree on the canon of the Council of Trent does not exclude other books! I suspect what he meant was that these books were not explicitly excluded. However I personally think they were implicitly excluded; what's the point in decreeing a canon if you don't mean to produce an exhaustive list of books? It's not a canon (which means "measuring rod") if it varies.
I think given that the Eastern churches (even just the Orthodox) don't have consistent canons, and have not to my knowledge infallibly defined their canons, they are the weak link, although it's hard to convince someone to exclude from Scripture texts they've been using in the liturgy for thousands of years. Well, ok, maybe around 1,500. But it's a (somewhat) appealing argument; there's a loophole such that we can accept the Eastern canons.
He made some interesting arguments in favor of the canon. One was a verse from Hebrews Hebrews 11:35, "Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection." Such a case does not exist in the protocanonical books. There is even a rare word that is used in both locations. He also refer to Matthew 27:43 where those mocking Jesus say "He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, 'I am the Son of God.' " This echoes Wisdom 2:18 which is a prophecy of the death of Jesus and says, "For if the just man be the son of God, he will help him, and deliver him from the hand of his enemies."
(I should hasten to add though that it is a bad idea to argue either way based on what books are cited and which are not. Not all the protocanonical, or regular/common books, are cited by New Testament authors, so lack of such a citation is not ipso facto proof that a book is not canonical. Books that are not canonical, such as the Assumption of Moses and Enoch, are cited, so such a citation is not proof that a book is canonical, either. But it's fun to mess with their minds anyway. :-))
It sounds like an interesting book though, so I've ordered it. (I have so many unread books I generally avoid ordering books nowadays.) I'll report on it if I get around to reading it.
