Assyrian Church of the East and the Canon

In 2006 (apparently), "The Rev’d C H Klutz, B.A., B.Th., M.Th." and "The Rev’d George Toma, B.A., M.A., D.Min," released a "Catechism," which their forward describes in these words: "We had laid before us a work which would involve many long hours and serious thought. It is the teaching (dogma) embraced within The Holy Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East. These are the Orthodox, Sacred Traditions and teachings."

The catechism offers the following definition of "Holy Scriptures":

4) What is that which you call “Holy Scriptures”?

The Holy Scriptures is a collection of books written under the inspiration of the Spirit of God, through men who were sanctified by God, these men are known as Prophets and Apostles. These books of Sacred Scriptures are collected, canonized, and are entitled “The Holy Bible.” It is written: “. . . all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”(II Timothy 3:16)

I bring this up in case someone might question what canon they have in mind, such as suggesting that they are merely reproducing a Jewish canon.

When it comes to discussing the Old Testament, they write:

7) We number how many books for the Old Testament?

According to the earliest records of The Church, we have a system of numbering which may confuse the faithful; however let us state that there are a total of 46 books of the Old Testament. The early Church Fathers number a total of 22 Old Testament books, having arrived at that particular, number agreeing with the Jerusalem Jewish community, who had so reckoned them with the ancient original “Hebrew” tongue.

8) Why do we need to assent to the Jewish Jerusalem reckoning of these books?

We refer you to the writings of St Paul the Treasurer of the Church, where he states in the Epistle to the Roman Church, “. . . much every way: chiefly, because that, unto them was committed the oracles of God.” (3:2), which is by interpretation, meaning simply, that The Holy Writings of the Old Testament had been received from the Hebrew Church (in Jerusalem) by the Christian Church of the New Testament of Jerusalem.

Notice that this reasoning is similar to our view.  The church is not authorized to add to the Old Testament: we just receive what was handed down.  They then go on to provide the 

9) How do the Church Fathers of the early Church enumerate The Books of the Old Testament?

 1. The Book of Genesis;

 2. The Book of Exodus;

3. The Book of Leviticus;

4. The Book of Numbers;

5. The Book of Deuteronomy;

6. The Book of Joshua, son of Nun;

7. The Book of Judges, and with it as an appendix

 The Book of Ruth;

8. The I & II Books of Kings, as two parts of one

9. The III and IV Books of Kings;

10. The I and II Paralipomenon (I & II Chronicles);

11. The I Book of Esdras, and the II or, as it is

 Named in Nehemiah;

12. The Book of Esther;

13. The Book of Job;

14. The Psalms;

15. The Proverbs of Solomon;

16. The Ecclesiastes, also by Solomon;

17, The Song of Songs, also by Solomon;

18. The Book of the Prophet Isaiah;

19. The Book of Jeremiah;

20. The Book of the Prophet Ezekiel;

21. The Book of the Prophet Daniel;

22. The Book of the Twelve Prophets.

Notice that this is is simply the same canon as the Protestant Old Testament canon.  However, for the ACE folks, this raises a natural next question:

10) We have other Old Testament Books, but they are not noted here, such as The Wisdom of the son of Sirach, and of others, why?

These books do not exist in the Hebrew language, but they are in the Greek texts.

11) How does the Church of the East regard these other books which are not included in the original Hebrew?

St Athanasis, as a Church Father, had declared that these books were included in the reading requirements of the proselytes who are preparing for admission into the Holy Church through Holy Baptism.

Now, unfortunately for them, they go on also to have twenty-two book New Testament canon, by excluding II Peter, II John, III John, Jude, and Revelation.  They also make other errors, such as affirming the perpetual virginity of Mary and insisting on including an Icon of Christ as one part of the liturgical environment of the "Holy Qurbana" ("Holy Offering").

My reason for citing this catechism is, of course, not for endorsement of that catechism. Instead, I point it out as being of interest to folks who try to suggest that there is something "Protestant" about the 22 book Old Testament canon.  For those have the same question as I do, as to why "Lamentations" is not separately listed from Jeremiah, I have no good answer - perhaps it is just a typographic error in the Catechism.

The "46" number seems to be the 39 of the protocanon plus the seven deuterocanonical books, although they do not enumerate the deuterocanonical books.  Moreover, when discussing prayers for the dead, they write:

18) Can we substantiate through the Sacred Writing that the prayer intentions offered in behalf of the righteous deceased will benefit the soul departed?

Consider the book of Maccabees (II Maccabees 12:43) at the time of Judah who had sent to Jerusalem an offering to be presented for forgiveness at the Temple for one who had died. ...

They do go on to use actual Scripture, and it seems clear that they do not accept the Western invention of Purgatory.  To wit:

9) Where or in what state are the souls of the deceased kept until the Day of the General Resurrection?

They are kept in a place called Sheol or Abraham’s Bosom. This place is also called Paradise, the Land of the Light or the land of The Rest. Those righteous souls are kept in that land of Perpetual Light or in the Presence of Jesus our Lord; it is only a foretaste of the glorious promises of our Lord and God. Whereas the wicked and ungodly will be kept in the lower regions of Sheol which is the region of darkness and torments, and is only a foretaste of eternal damnation. The Church Fathers have written for us: “. . . as to the wicked, they shall remain upon the earth in darkness, in which none can walk, and shall be consumed with the flames of remorse; for those which denied Him, their sinfulness betrayed everlasting bliss for the temporal and deceptive enjoyments and a real possession for the dung of the Earth. This is the true Hell,’ whose fire will not quench and the worm will not die’... ” (Matthew 25:30-41, see also, Luke 16:19-26)

So, they are not Roman Catholics (even though they make some errors in common with Roman Catholics), and they are not Protestants (even though they agree with us on a number of important issues).