Why Ya'akov and not Romans?

I could've titled this topic as Someone Scrambled the Scriptures!

Most copies of the New Testament today follow this order:
Gospels
Acts
Pauline Epistles
Jewish Epistles
Revelation

However the original manuscript order of the books was:
Gospels
Acts
Jewish Epistles
Pauline Epistles
Revelation

This was testified to by the ancient fathers in the faith.

Athanasius (296-373 CE) Bishop of Alexandria gives the order of books as “the four Gospels; the Acts of the Apostles; the seven Catholic (universal) Epistles; the fourteen epistles of St. Paul; and the Revelation of John”. Leonitus of Byzantium gives this order as well.

Philastrius, a fourth century Church Father also argued that the Catholic (Universal) Epistles must precede the Pauline epistles because Gal. 1:17 has Paul referring to the Emissaries of the Jewish Epistles as coming before him.

Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem also maintained the original manuscript order as did the Council of Laodicea.

But, in the Latin Vulgate we see this order rearranged by Rome. The Pauline epistles dominate first place with the Jewish epistles following.

Why would they do that? What was wrong with the original that the church felt that had to change it? I don't know about you but I get suspicious when I discover that men have tinkered with things like this.

You may ask, "does it matter?"

Yes, the original manuscript order was significant. It was the natural outgrowth that the message was to go to the Jews first. Then it was to go to the Gentiles. It also aligns with the concepts that Ya'akov, Kefa (Peter), and Yochanan (John) were emissaries that came before Paul (Gal. 1:17), and who served as three pillars of authority upon which Paul's message was built (Gal. 2:9) - not the other way around.

The reader of the Brit Hadassah was intended to read the "Jewish" epistles first, then read the Pauline epistles - after understanding the Jewish epistles. This way the new believer would've read Ya'akov's admonition concerning faith and works. They would also be warned through Kefa (Peter) about Shaul's (Paul) teaching being hard to understand and often twisted (2Kefa 3:15-16). This would ground them in Scripture before ever attempting to understand the writings of Paul.

At the least this rearranging of the order of the Scriptures (actually it occurs in the Tanack as well) de-emphasizes the Jewish epistles. As a result Shaul's epistles are given an almost superior position of importance. Certainly it begs the question why the Roman church directly influenced this change.

Unfortunately, Shaul's teachings today seem to take center stage in theological disputes. It matters not your position on an issue whether it's predestination or free will, both sides tend to rely heavily on Shaul to prove their case.

Martin Luther almost eliminated the book of Ya'akov entirely. He claimed it was a 'book of straw.' Of course he also labeled the Jews as 'Christ killers' and wrote sermons against them. Hitler borrowed heavily from his thoughts. All of this makes Luther a prime example of how misunderstanding the Jewish nature of the Scripture can have disastrous effects.

Let's hope that by looking at Ya'akov ourselves we can regain a balance upon which to build a reliable understanding of Scripture.