ESDRA, 3RD BOOK OF. - An apocryphal book whose material is almost entirely found in the canonical books: 2 Chr 35:1–36:21 = ch. 1; Ezra 1:1–11 = 2:1–14; Ezra 4:7–24 = 2:15–25; Ezra 2:1–4:5 = 5:7–79; Ezra 5–6 = 6–7; Ezra 7–10 = 8:1–9:36; Neh 7:37–8:13 = 9:37–55. It has its own material only in 3:1–5:6.
In 3 Esd. 3:1–5:6, it is the rule that three of Darius I’s personal guards (521–458 BC) debate before the king to determine what is strongest: wine, the king, woman, or truth. The Jew Zerubbabel takes the side of truth: “To Him belongs dominion, strength, and glory, for all eternity. Praised be the God of truth” (4:40). At these words the king, amazed, rewards Zerubbabel by promising to restore to the Jews the sacred vessels of the “temple” and to rebuild the sanctuary. The style of this passage differs from the rest and indeed contradicts it, since according to 5:8, 66–67, Zerubbabel returns to Judah under Cyrus. It is unknown whence the redactor of the work drew this passage; it is probable that it was added later (C. C. Torrey).
The remainder of the book contains the history of the celebration of the Passover in the temple of Josiah (d. 609 BC) up to the rebuilding of the Temple after the exile and the restoration of divine worship with Ezra. The lack of chronological order is evident: it speaks successively of the Persian Cyrus (538–529), of Artaxerxes (465–425), of Darius (521–485), and a second time of Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes. This book, like Ezra A or 1 Esdras, is included in the Septuagint and in dependent versions such as the Old Latin, among the canonical books, and precedes Ezra-Nehemiah, which are combined into a single book (v. ESDRA. B or II).
As to its origin, many hold that 3 Esdras is the Septuagint version of the Hebrew book of Chronicles after the exile, while Ezra B would be the version of the Targum. Others think of a later compilation of Greek canonical texts. Most probably, according to E. Schürer, St. Székely, M.-J. Lagrange, and J.-B. Frey, the text corresponding to canonical passages is a version of the original Hebrew-Aramaic text, which differed in several places from the Masoretic text. Indeed, according to some recent critics, such as H. H. Howorth, C. C. Torrey, and P. Riessler, this Semitic work would be the original text of the canonical book of Ezra, older than the Masoretic. But J. B. Frey and S. Fischer consider Howorth’s opinion paradoxical.
The gravest question concerns the canonicity of the book. Already Calmet wrote: “It can be considered certain that before the version of St. Jerome the whole Church admitted 3 Esdras as authentic.” Corneley also holds: “It can scarcely be denied that in the Greek and Latin Church up to the 5th century divine authority was attributed to Greek Ezra.” Protestants such as Howorth and Charles have accused St. Jerome and the Councils of Florence and Trent of having unjustly omitted this book. The decision of the Church, however, corresponds to the true traditional data. For one cannot speak of a truly unanimous ancient tradition favorable to the canonicity of the book. Certainly, in the ten lists that Fathers and ecclesiastical writers (from St. Melito of the 2nd century and Origen to Leontius of Byzantium and Junilius Africanus [c. 550]) have handed down almost ex officio, it is not found. It is true that up to the 5th century some Fathers, such as Dionysius of Alexandria, Athanasius, Basil, Cyprian, and Augustine, cite as inspired some phrases from 3 Esdras, but this fact is not decisive. The Fathers often in practice show themselves more lenient than they were in theory; and while fixing the canon of sacred books according to the teaching of the Church, they cite as sacred some apocryphal passages. The fact that 3 Esdras is found in many biblical manuscripts and its great affinity with the truly canonical books will have led them also to recognize it in practice as authoritative. “Could they not cite it as a document of indisputable historical authority, even attribute to it a certain prophetic value, without however classifying it among the canonical books?” (J. B. Frey). The common doctrine from the 5th century onward, according to which it is to be considered apocryphal, is certainly the true one.
This book was composed before the Christian era, between the mid-2nd century and the beginning of the 1st. Josephus makes extensive use of II. Fischer places it around 124 BC. The legend of Zerubbabel seems to have been written for apologetic purposes.
The Roman Catholic liturgy uses 3 Esdras 5:40 in the Mass “pro eligendo Summo Pontifice.”