Prayer of Manasseh

A short penitential prayer attributed to King Manasseh, often an appendix or liturgical text.

The Prayer of Manasseh is a short penitential prayer attributed to King Manasseh of Judah. 2 Chronicles 33:12–13 and 18–19 record that Manasseh prayed in captivity and that his prayer was written down. It appears in some Greek collections and in the 1611 King James Apocrypha. It is not one of the deuterocanonical books named for the Catholic Church at Trent. Liturgical use and appendix printing explain why readers meet it in Bibles and prayer books. Those appearances are reception and edition facts. They are not the same as Westminster’s later refusal of Apocrypha books a place in the Protestant canon.

Appears in some Greek collections and in the 1611 KJV Apocrypha; not a Trent deuterocanonical book.

Date

Presented as Manasseh's prayer in captivity (7th century BCE)

Confidence

low

Languages

Greek

Traditional authorship

Manasseh of Judah

Authorship note

King Manasseh's prayer of repentance (2 Chronicles 33:12–13, 18–19)

• A · Codex Alexandrinus

  5th century CE · Greek · Among the Odes

  Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek parchment Bible, shelfmark Royal MS 1 D V–VIII in the British Library. Its Old Testament is Septuagint-shaped and includes books that later Western lists call deuterocanonical, among them Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, 1 Esdras, and 1–4 Maccabees, plus the Prayer of Manasseh among the Odes. The New Testament includes Jude. After the biblical books the codex copies 1 Clement. A fifth-century binding shows what one scriptorium copied. It is not the Council of Trent and not the Westminster Confession.

• mentions

  Hebrew canon / Greek-speaking Jews

  The Prayer of Manasseh is not a book of the Tanakh. Josephus, near the end of the first century, describes twenty-two Jewish books his people trust and sets later writings in a lower rank. The later rabbinic Bible, counted as twenty-four books, likewise leaves The Prayer of Manasseh outside Torah, Nevi'im, and Ketuvim. The prayer gives King Manasseh a penitential speech that 2 Chronicles only summarizes. It is a Jewish-style psalm. It is not part of the Hebrew book of Kings or Chronicles. Jewish copying or quotation, where it exists, is reception. It is not the same fact as a place in the Hebrew canon, and it is not a Christian council’s decision.

• uses liturgically

  Greek and Latin churches

  Greek-speaking churches met The Prayer of Manasseh in Septuagint Bibles. Fourth- and fifth-century pandects copy it beside other Old Testament books. Early lists do not all use the same boundary. Athanasius in 367 keeps a shorter Old Testament and still names some of these books as useful to read. Hippo in 393 is reported to have approved a wider list, and Carthage in 397 names several of them among books to be read in church. Alexandrinus copies it among the Odes after the Psalms. Early Christians used it in prayer. It is a short liturgical piece, not a narrative book in the Hebrew canon. Those are early Christian acts. Trent, Luther’s Apocrypha, and Westminster are later and stay on the councils list.

• ProtestantRelated literature

  Printed in the 1611 KJV Apocrypha; not one of the 66.

• CatholicLiturgical reading

  Used liturgically in some Western traditions; not a Trent deuterocanonical book like Tobit.

• OrthodoxLiturgical reading

  Often printed or used as a prayer text beside the Old Testament.

• EthiopianRelated literature

  Not highlighted as a separate 81-count unit in the published EOTC list used here.

• TanakhNot applicable

  Not a Tanakh book.

• LXXBroader canon

  Appears with some Greek collections as an Odes/prayer text.

• Early ChristianRelated literature

  A penitential prayer transmitted beside biblical books.

• Second TempleRelated literature

  Jewish or early Christian penitential composition.

• 1534 CE · Reformation · Wittenberg

  Luther Bible prints a separate Apocrypha

  Luther’s 1534 German Bible printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section and said they were useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.

  Martin Luther’s complete German Bible, printed at Wittenberg in 1534, gathered selected Old Testament writings into a section titled Apocrypha. The preface to that section says the books are useful and good to read, and that they are not held equal to Holy Scripture.

  Tobit is one book this dataset ties to that preface. The reception note says Luther printed Tobit in the Apocrypha section and ranked it below Holy Scripture. The 1534 edition is a decision about order and rank inside one vernacular Bible. The writings were already being copied and read: Tobit, for example, is already named on the Carthage list of 397.

  Catholic, Orthodox, and Ethiopian collections continued to receive their own overlapping sets. The Westminster Confession of 1646/1647 later states the sixty-six-book canon in English Reformed form and says the Apocrypha are not part of the canon of Scripture. Luther’s printing and Westminster’s confession are two dated steps on this tab.

  Why it matters. This is placement and ranking, not a claim that Luther uniquely invented the books or erased them from every Bible on earth.

  Follow-up questions

  What did Luther’s 1534 preface say about these books?

  They are useful and good to read, and they are not held equal to Holy Scripture. The reception note for Tobit uses that same preface: Tobit is printed in the Apocrypha section and ranked below Holy Scripture.

  Did these books first appear in the 1534 Bible?

  The 1534 Bible places and ranks writings already in circulation. In this dataset Tobit is already named among the books to be read in church at Carthage in 397, and Trent later lists Tobit among the Catholic canonical books.

  Which later entry states the Protestant sixty-six as a confession?

  The Westminster Confession of 1646/1647, also on this tab. It names the sixty-six books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  Source: Luther’s 1534 Bible printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section, calling them useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.

• 1611 CE · Bible edition · London

  King James Bible of 1611 includes an Apocrypha section

  The 1611 Authorized Version printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments, including Tobit and 2 Esdras among others.

  The 1611 Authorized Version, printed in London, placed an Apocrypha section between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The curated source names Tobit and 2 Esdras among the writings in that section.

  Printing a section inside the volume is an edition fact: contents and order in one London Bible. Canonical rank is a different kind of claim. About thirty-five years later, the Westminster Confession says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture. Many later Protestant printings leave the section out. The 1611 volume still contains it.

  Read the 1611 entry beside Luther’s 1534 Apocrypha section and beside Westminster. One prints the books in a separate section, one ranks them below Holy Scripture in German, and one refuses them a place in the Reformed canon. Edition placement and confessional status stay side by side on this tab.

  Why it matters. Edition placement is not the same as later Anglican or Reformed confessional statements that deny those books equal canonical status.

  Follow-up questions

  What is the Apocrypha section in the 1611 Bible?

  A printed block between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The source names Tobit and 2 Esdras among the writings included there, and it treats that placement as an edition fact.

  Does including those books give them the same status as the sixty-six?

  The 1611 fact on this page is edition placement. Equal canonical status is a separate claim. The Westminster Confession later says the Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  Why do many later King James Bibles omit that section?

  Later Protestant printing followed confessional statements such as Westminster, which refuse those books a place in the canon. The 1611 volume itself still prints the Apocrypha between the Testaments.

  Source: The 1611 King James Bible printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments. That placement is an edition fact, not a claim that those books were canonical for every later Anglican confession.

No direct quotation or literary dependence on another writing in this dataset is recorded for Prayer of Manasseh.

1. 1534 CE — Luther Bible prints a separate Apocrypha
2. 1611 CE — King James Bible of 1611 includes an Apocrypha section

• The 1611 King James Bible printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments. That placement is an edition fact, not a claim that those books were canonical for every later Anglican confession.
• Council of Trent, Session IV (8 April 1546), lists the Catholic canonical books including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.
• Brenton’s public-domain Septuagint translation includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Additions, and Maccabees as part of the Greek Old Testament corpus.
• The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church publishes an 81-book list that includes 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and the Meqabyan books.
• Josephus, Against Apion 1.8, speaks of 22 Jewish books and distinguishes later writings as not equally trusted.
• Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek Bible. It includes a Septuagint-shaped Old Testament, the New Testament, and 1 Clement.
• Luther’s 1534 Bible printed selected Old Testament books in a separate Apocrypha section, calling them useful to read but not equal to Holy Scripture.