Apocrypha question?

[Sixtus]

ecn2b
Senior Member

Re: Apocrypha question?
I am not familiar with the Apocrypha that must be a protestant word. I am familiar with the deuterocanonical books?

Sorry couldn’t resist.

Oh come on, we Catholics call it the Deuterocanonical too!

But so as not to confuse our Protestant sisters and brothers, chose to use their preferred language

here are enough ‘man made’ differences between us, without creating any more

 

[mark_a]

Do you have a link to the article from This Rock?

Its burried in my favorites folder somewhere. I’ll keep looking.

I really got chewed up by one Eastern Catholic once when I asked the question about the books of the bible.

It seems that some of these books are in their bible but not considered canonical, maybe like how some protestant bibles contain our deuteros, considered useful but not canonical.

I’ll keep looking.

 

[rr1213]

Look, any way that you want to cut it, slice it, or dice it, the Catholic Church has a different canon from the Orthodox Churches. Considering the minor nature of the books (really chapters) at issue, this probably does not matter much in substance. Of course, you could say the exact same thing for the apocrypha/DC books which the Protestant Churches have rejected from the Catholic canon.

Still, turning to these “extra” Orthodox books, they are either the Word of God or they are not. If not, then the Orthodox should reject them (now or at the time of reunion). However, if they are the Word of God then the Catholic Church should accept them (now or at the time of reunion). If they are the Word of God and the Catholic Church does not accept them as canon, then the Catholic Church has an incomplete canon.

 

[mark_a]

Look, any way that you want to cut it, slice it, or dice it, the Catholic Church has a different canon from the Orthodox Churches. Considering the minor nature of the books (really chapters) at issue, this probably does not matter much in substance. Of course, you could say the exact same thing for the apocrypha/DC books which the Protestant Churches have rejected from the Catholic canon.

Still, turning to these “extra” Orthodox books, they are either the Word of God or they are not. If not, then the Orthodox should reject them (now or at the time of reunion). However, if they are the Word of God then the Catholic Church should accept them (now or at the time of reunion). If they are the Word of God and the Catholic Church does not accept them as canon, then the Catholic Church has an incomplete canon.

I would guess this subject would not be at the top of the list with Papal supremacy, filioque, Mariology, etc., etc.

Try as we may to force our black/white, day/night, yes/no theology on others, its the Church that decides.

However, if reunification efforts are successful, this could provide many a Protestant with another "aaaahhh Haaaaahhhhhh! moment.

 

[mark_a]

Do you have a link to the article from This Rock?

My bad. It was from Crisis magazine (also not infallible). Here you go:
crisismagazine.com/julaug2005/feature1.htm

 

[Wisdom]

Look, any way that you want to cut it, slice it, or dice it, the Catholic Church has a different canon from the Orthodox Churches. Considering the minor nature of the books (really chapters) at issue, this probably does not matter much in substance. Of course, you could say the exact same thing for the apocrypha/DC books which the Protestant Churches have rejected from the Catholic canon.

Still, turning to these “extra” Orthodox books, they are either the Word of God or they are not. If not, then the Orthodox should reject them (now or at the time of reunion). However, if they are the Word of God then the Catholic Church should accept them (now or at the time of reunion). If they are the Word of God and the Catholic Church does not accept them as canon, then the Catholic Church has an incomplete canon.

Actually no neither communion has made a big issue of this even when they were united it is you and a protestant mindset that makes it a big issue. The Catholic and Protestnat divide is more than just a few chapters but 7 books some of which are quite large like Sirach and wome of which has some key theological components such as Maccabees and Tobit which provide key text for prayting to dead, praying to saints and so forth. Like I said the canon is in large part a recieved tradition and the Catholic and Orthodox have a slightly different recieved septugient as the manuscripts in each area where slightly differnt and in the case of the Greeks all of one book 3 Maccabbees. ANyways even will you agree their are far bigger issue to deal with as we niether party is protestant and super obsessed with canon. IF they come together I think many will be suprised when they in my opinion simply have different canons as they did when they existed for 600 years after the African Councils.

 

[Nan_S]

Since none of our traditions are based on sola scriptura I don’t see a problem in agreeing to have some books in a non-declared category in the west and allowed to be in the canon for the East.

The people who are Sola Scriptura are the ones with the problem.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

The Holy Spirit has guided the Catholic Church into all truth as regards books that should be in the canon and also into books that shouldn’t be in the canon.

Where it nas not spoken either way the question is still open.

If you go back to some of the councils that approved the canon you will also see books that were specifically rejected. Those books cannot be admited.

But any books not specifically rejected do have the REMOTE POSSIBILITY of one day being accepted. I think "Jimmy Akin referred to them as the Tritocannonicals. They are 3d and 4th Esdras, 3d and 4th Maccabees, Prayer of Manasseh, and the 151st Psalm.

 

[Alexius]

What is their canon?

The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has the largest OT canon, because their canon is “open.” Their canon includes 52 books:

Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, [1]Enoch, Jubilees, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, 3rd Ezra, 4rth Ezra, Tobit, Judith, Esther (includes additions to Esther), 1 Macabees, 2 Macabees, 3 Macabees, Job, Psalms (+ Psalm 151), Proverbs (Proverbs 1-24), Täagsas (Proverbs 25-31), Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch (includes Letter of Jeremiah), Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zecariah, and Malachi.

If you have any other questions, please specify them…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[lak611]

I think "Jimmy Akin referred to them as the Tritocannonicals. They are 3d and 4th Esdras, 3d and 4th Maccabees, Prayer of Manasseh, and the 151st Psalm.

Do you have any links to Jimmy Akin’s article?

 

[Jerry-Jet]

I don’t know the specific link but if you search for Jimmy Akin Prayer of Manesseh you will find where he addresses the issue.

He basically says that it would be REMOTELY possible for those books to be admitted to the canon. First the Catholic and Orthodox Churches would have to unite with the provision that the Orthodox could keep the same canon they had but it wouldn’t have to be viewed as the canon in the Latin Church–after many years of common reading of those books the Catholic Church in full could choose to accept those books if the issue was forced by some sort of situation where the Catholic Church would have to make a definitive judgement.

Even after all of that took place it would still take the Holy Spirit moving in the Catholic Church to get it do recognize as divinely inspired only what the Holy Spirit would know was divinely inspired–

So yes it is a remote possibility and would probably take centuries but it is not a totally forbidden possibility.

It could only happen with these books because nowhere did the church ever definitively say that they were NOT to be included in the canon of scripture.

There are many books that the Catholic Church in Councils declared were NOT scripture–those books can never be admitted in the future because the Holy Spirit which guides the Catholic Church into all truth can not reverse what it has already taught the Catholic Church as TRUTH!

 

[Wisdom]

The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has the largest OT canon, because their canon is “open.” Their canon includes 52 books:

Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, [1]Enoch, Jubilees, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, 3rd Ezra, 4rth Ezra, Tobit, Judith, Esther (includes additions to Esther), 1 Macabees, 2 Macabees, 3 Macabees, Job, Psalms (+ Psalm 151), Proverbs (Proverbs 1-24), Täagsas (Proverbs 25-31), Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch (includes Letter of Jeremiah), Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zecariah, and Malachi.

If you have any other questions, please specify them…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

Yeah the Ethopian Orthodox canon would be a problem for either the other Orthodox canon or the Catholic canon. They were cut off from the church quite early and it got even worse after the advent of Islam so they really formed their canon without the influence of the other Orthodox bodies or Catholic bodies. I don’t think we have a big problem concerning the bridge between the other Orthodox canon and the Catholic canon as the brige is a pretty small one to cross in my opinion.

As far as the Ethopians they have lets say a unique situation here and would be problematic for any other church body to solve easily but since I am not an Ethopian christian I don’t know how high esteem they put these extra books and their lies the problem if they are willing to put it into an appendix or tricanon category their might be some room to work with but if they hold it to be be on the same level as the proto and dueteros you have divide you may not be able to solve. If anyone is more familiar with Ethopian Christianity please give the popular opinion of the Communion.

 

[lak611]

Yeah the Ethopian Orthodox canon would be a problem for either the other Orthodox canon or the Catholic canon. They were cut off from the church quite early and it got even worse after the advent of Islam so they really formed their canon without the influence of the other Orthodox bodies or Catholic bodies. I don’t think we have a big problem concerning the bridge between the other Orthodox canon and the Catholic canon as the brige is a pretty small one to cross in my opinion.

As far as the Ethopians they have lets say a unique situation here and would be problematic for any other church body to solve easily but since I am not an Ethopian christian I don’t know how high esteem they put these extra books and their lies the problem if they are willing to put it into an appendix or tricanon category their might be some room to work with but if they hold it to be be on the same level as the proto and dueteros you have divide you may not be able to solve. If anyone is more familiar with Ethopian Christianity please give the popular opinion of the Communion.

I think the part of the Ethiopian Orthodox canon that would be most troublesome would probably be Enoch and Jubilee because no other Church accepts those. Although, since Enoch is mentioned in the book of Jude, perhaps that could be worked out somehow.