Dear JP:

Well, first we must understand that whether or not Jonah or others actually existed does not ultimately matter. It is the religious truth and message of the stories that matters.

However, we are free to believe in the literal existence of these pre-Abrahamic Biblical characters and no teacher should be trying to dispel that faith with false declarative statements to the contrary. In fact, those teachers are lying, disingenuous, and disrespectful to the Holy Scripture who definitively say these Biblical characters did not exist. Such teachers are also disrespectful of science since science has no evidence to prove that the pre-Abrahamic Biblical characters did not exist.

A teacher may mentioned and discuss the theories of scientists and Biblical Scholars about whether to not a certain Biblical characters, such as Jonah, actually existed, but declarative statements cannot be honestly made.

We are free to believe in the literal existence of these Biblical characters and no teacher should be trying to dispel that faith with false declarative statements to the contrary. In fact, those teachers are lying who definitively say these Biblical characters did not exist.

Pope John Paul II, however, when talking to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences said that the job of discovering the mechanisms of our origins (i.e. evolution theory) belongs properly to science, but science cannot refute that 1) the soul does not evolve, but is individually created at the moment of conception; 2) we do have, in fact, an original parents (the Bible calls them Adam and Eve); and 3) God is the Creator.

In terms of this teacher the evidence that she has no respect is found in this statement that the Deuterocanonical books do not matter. They are not and never have been Apocrypha, they are part of the canon of Scripture which was dogmatically declared by the Council of Trent.

The reason those seven books in the Old Testament are called Deuterocanonical is because there was some debate about whether or not they were genuine Scripture. Because there was debate about validity of these books, the Church has to decide the matter (which is the job of the Church according to God). The Church retained seven books under question. Case closed.

The Deuterocanonical are:

• Tobit
• Judith
• Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4-16:24)[20]
• Wisdom
• Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus)
• Baruch, including the Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah in the Septuagint)[21]
• Additions to Daniel:
• Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24-90)
• Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13, Septuagint prologue)
• Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14, Septuagint epilogue)
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees

These books were included in the Septuagint. The Septuagint canon was what Jesus read and loved, and from which the Apostles quoted or referred to around 300 times in the New Testament.

The rabbis in around A.D. 100 ripped these seven books from the Jewish Bible, called the Palestinian Canon. They did this because these seven books were originally written in Greek and not Hebrew. Also, they had political motivations as the new sext call Christians were using texts from the Deuterocanonical books to support Christian doctrine.

The problem is that the rabbis did not have the authority to determine the canon as they were no longer the Magisterium. They belonged to the Mosaic period which came to a end with the death and Resurrection of Christ. The Chair of Moses was replaced with the Chair of Peter. Thus, they had no more authority to determine the canon of Scripture than does an atheist.

The New Testament also has Deuterocanonical books.

• Epistle to the Hebrews
• Second Epistle of Peter
• Second Epistle of John
• Third Epistle of John
• Epistle of James
• Epistle of Jude
• Apocalypse of John (also known as the Book of Revelation)

Martin Luther wanted to rip out some of these books, especially the Epistle of James, Hebrews, and Revelation.

All this was finally settled once and for all at the Council of Trent thus, anyone who dismisses these books is not in communion with the Church.

In my opinion, this nun should be fired.

Frankly, one must be very careful in accepting any nun or sister as a teacher since heresy and heterodoxy is pandemic among the female orders. Each one, on a case-by-case basis, should be evaluated as to their orthodoxy.

I have a nun friend who left her Franciscan convent because the sisters there were beginning to worship the goddess Sophia. She left and founded a new convent.

To get a handle on the pandemic problem among female orders and communities read the book, Ungodly Rage: The Hidden Face of Catholic Feminism. This book will knock your socks off in horror of what is going on.

As for your nun teacher, I would approach the paster first with a detailed list of the problematic or unorthodox teaching and comments she makes. Then, if the paster does not deal with the situation, contact the bishop. It is important to try to resolve the problem before contacting the bishop. As always, but very professional and business-like in presenting your concerns.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary