The Deuterocanon refers to books that Roman Catholic tradition receives as part of the Old Testament but that Protestants usually classify as the Apocrypha. The word comes from Greek roots meaning “second canon.” It does not necessarily mean “less inspired” in Catholic usage, but it does acknowledge that these books had a different and more disputed history of recognition than the books universally received as protocanonical Scripture.1
The books commonly called deuterocanonical include Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Baruch, 1–2 Maccabees, and additions to Esther and Daniel. The additions to Daniel include the Prayer of Azariah, the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon. These writings are included in Roman Catholic Old Testaments but are separated or omitted in Protestant Bibles.2
The term “Deuterocanon” is often contrasted with “protocanon.” The protocanonical books are those that were received more broadly and earlier as Scripture. The deuterocanonical books had a more complicated reception history. This distinction is important because debates over the Deuterocanon are not simply debates about whether ancient Christians read the books. They are debates about whether those books possess the same authority as the Law, Prophets, Writings, Gospels, and apostolic books.
The Jewish background is decisive for many Protestant arguments. The books now called deuterocanonical were not part of the Hebrew Bible received in mainstream Judaism. Josephus describes a fixed body of sacred books and distinguishes later writings from those granted equal authority. Later rabbinic Judaism likewise did not receive the deuterocanonical books into the Hebrew canon.3 This matters because the Old Testament was first entrusted to Israel, not to the later medieval Church.
The Septuagint is the main argument often used in favor of the Deuterocanon. Since many deuterocanonical books circulated in Greek and appear in major Christian manuscripts of the Greek Old Testament, some argue that the early Church received a larger Alexandrian canon. The evidence, however, is not simple. Large Christian codices such as Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus are centuries later than the apostles and do not contain identical collections. Their inclusion of books does not necessarily prove equal canonical status for every writing included.4
Early Christian testimony is also mixed. Some fathers cite deuterocanonical books in ways that sound authoritative, while others distinguish them from the Hebrew canon. Athanasius, for example, listed the books of the Old Testament and then distinguished other books appointed by the fathers to be read by those newly joining the Church. Jerome made the distinction even more sharply and argued that the Church reads these books for edification but does not use them to confirm doctrine.5
The Council of Trent became a turning point. In 1546, during the Reformation, Trent declared many of these disputed books canonical for the Roman Catholic Church. This decision established the Catholic canon in formal opposition to Protestant arguments. Protestants rejected this decision because they believed it elevated books that lacked the same Jewish reception, prophetic authority, and early universal recognition as the protocanonical Old Testament.6
The Orthodox churches add another layer of complexity. Eastern Orthodox biblical traditions often include books beyond the Roman Catholic Deuterocanon, such as 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, and sometimes 1 Esdras or other writings depending on the tradition. This diversity shows that “the Christian Old Testament” was not always a single fixed collection in every community and reinforces the need for careful canonical criteria.7
The Deuterocanon is historically valuable even if one rejects its canonical status. Sirach preserves important Jewish wisdom teaching. 1 Maccabees is one of the most important sources for the Maccabean revolt. Wisdom of Solomon gives insight into Hellenistic Jewish theology. These writings help explain the world of the New Testament and later Jewish-Christian thought.
At the same time, historical value is not the same as inspiration. A book can be ancient, orthodox in many places, and spiritually useful without being Scripture. Church history contains many valuable writings—such as the letters of Ignatius, the Didache, and the writings of Augustine—that are not canonical. The same principle applies to the Deuterocanon.
For Protestant readers, the best approach is to understand the Deuterocanon as a historically significant but noncanonical collection. These books should be studied as part of the broader world of Second Temple Judaism and early Christianity, but Christian doctrine should be grounded in the inspired books of the Hebrew Old Testament and apostolic New Testament.
In short, the Deuterocanon is the Roman Catholic name for the disputed Old Testament-era books that Protestants call the Apocrypha. The difference in terminology reflects a deeper difference in canon. The books are important, but their disputed reception means they should not be placed on the same level as the universally recognized Scriptures.
The label “deuterocanonical” is itself important because it admits a historical distinction. These books were not received with the same clarity and universality as Genesis, Isaiah, Psalms, Matthew, Romans, or Revelation. Catholic theology ultimately receives them as Scripture, but the term acknowledges that their canonical recognition followed a different path. Protestant theology argues that this different path is evidence against their full canonical status.
Several deuterocanonical books contain material of real historical and devotional value. Sirach gives a rich example of Jewish wisdom instruction. Wisdom of Solomon reflects Hellenistic Jewish reflection on righteousness, immortality, and idolatry. 1 Maccabees preserves crucial historical memory about Jewish resistance to Antiochus IV Epiphanes. These strengths explain why Christians valued the books, but they do not remove the canon problem.
The Reformation debate sharpened these older questions. Protestants did not deny that the books had been read in Christian history. They denied that ecclesiastical use was the same as divine inspiration. A sermon illustration, liturgical reading, or moral citation does not have the same status as a canonical proof text. That distinction lies at the heart of the Protestant rejection of the Deuterocanon as Scripture.
Modern readers should therefore avoid two extremes. One extreme dismisses the Deuterocanon as useless because it is not Scripture. The other treats the books as if their presence in some Christian traditions settles the question of canon. A better approach is to study them carefully as significant ancient writings while asking whether they meet the same standards as the universally recognized biblical books.
Related Reading
- What Is the Apocrypha?
- Is the Apocrypha Scripture?
- How Many Books Are Really in the Bible?
- How Many Apocryphal Books Are There?
- About Apocrypha.com
Frequently Asked Questions
What does Deuterocanon mean?
It means “second canon” and refers to books received by Catholics but classified as Apocrypha by Protestants.
Which books are deuterocanonical?
Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1–2 Maccabees, and additions to Esther and Daniel are the main Roman Catholic deuterocanonical books.
Is the Deuterocanon the same as the Apocrypha?
For many practical discussions, yes, though the terms reflect different theological positions.
Do Protestants accept the Deuterocanon?
Protestants generally value the books historically but do not receive them as Scripture.
Did the Jews accept the Deuterocanon?
Mainstream Judaism did not include these books in the Hebrew Bible.
Why did Trent matter?
The Council of Trent formally defined these books as canonical for Roman Catholicism.
Are deuterocanonical books useful?
Yes. They are valuable for studying Jewish history, wisdom, and theology before the New Testament.
Should doctrine be based on the Deuterocanon?
Protestants argue that doctrine should not be established from these disputed books.
Footnotes
1. Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha, 3–7.
2. deSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha, 21–35.
3. Josephus, Against Apion 1.37–43; Beckwith, Old Testament Canon, 276–320.
4. Sundberg, Old Testament of the Early Church, 50–69.
5. Athanasius, Festal Letter 39; Jerome, “Prologue to the Books of Solomon,” 492–93.
6. Council of Trent, Session 4, “Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures,” in Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 2:81–83.
7. McDonald, The Biblical Canon, 70–85.
