[boatbums]

Let the following books be esteemed venerable and holy by all of you, both clergy and laity. Of the Old Testament: 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; 1 two of Paralipomena (the books of Chronicles); two of Ezra; 2 one of Esther; [one of Judith;] 3 three of the Maccabees; one of Job; the one hundred and fifty Psalms; three books of Solomon: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs; the sixteen of the Prophets. And see that those newly come to discipleship become acquainted with the Wisdom of the learned Sirach. 4 And ours, that is, of the New Testament, are the four Gospels, of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John; the fourteen epistles of Paul; two epistles of Peter; three of John; one of James; one of Jude; two epistles of Clement; and the Constitutions dedicated to you, the bishops, by me, Clement, in eight books, which it is not appropriate to make public before all, because of the mysteries contained in them; and the Acts of us, the Apostles.

So, according to this source, Clement considered HIS epistles as part of Holy Scripture, too? Does saying they were to be considered "esteemed venerable and holy" imply that they were also to be all part of the canon of Scripture, The Bible?

[rzman21]

Actually, they were read as scripture, but the consensus proved against them.

[rzman21]

Actually, it was read as scripture, but the consensus proved against it.

The ancient Ethiopian Church, which separated from Rome in 451 AD still reads them as part of their Bible.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

the epistle from Clement to the Corinthians was read in the Corinthian Church as Scripture for over 100 years.

why was a letter from the Bishop of Rome late in the first century considered binding on the Corinthians?

hmmmm.......