Eastern Catholic Canon of Scripture

  • Thread starter Thread starter rfournier103
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rfournier103

Guest
I am interested in how the Eastern Catholics arrived at their current Canon of Scripture. Where it came from, and possibly why books like 3 & 4 Maccabees were not included in the Latin Canon.

Please note that in no way whatsoever am I, or will I, assert that one Canon is superior to the other, or that the Eastern Canon’s “other books” are not inspired. I am just inquiring about content, and where these books came from.

Many blessings to you all! :signofcross: :byzsoc:
 
I can’t speak as to the “why,” but I’ll point out that Eastern Christians have very varied canons. They aren’t even close to universal.

For example, 4 Maccabees is in “an appendix to the Greek Bible, and in the canon of the Georgian Bible.” I believe it’s not included in most other church’s canons.

This shows more of the variation, with the most notable example being the Ethiopians having 80+ books.
 
There aren’t major differences between the canons, but there are slight ones.

The books come from the same place as the rest of the deuterocanon. They were books in circulation at the time of Christ, and some Churches, seeing spiritual benefit in them, decided to use them.
 
Not including the Ethiopian Canon (I haven’t read it all), there isn’t anything that is doctrinally incorrect inside of the EO Canon. I have read the few extra books. 🙂
 
rfournier103 said:
I am interested in how the Eastern Catholics arrived at their current Canon of Scripture. Where it came from, and possibly why books like 3 & 4 Maccabees were not included in the Latin Canon.

Please note that in no way whatsoever am I, or will I, assert that one Canon is superior to the other, or that the Eastern Canon’s “other books” are not inspired. I am just inquiring about content, and where these books came from.

Many blessings to you all! :signofcross: :byzsoc:
Click to expand...
Just want to point out that many Eastern Catholics use the same Scripture translation as Western Catholics - in our Ruthenian church we use the 1976 New American Bible, same one that’s used in the RC.

It’s the Eastern Orthodox who have the “extra” books in their Scripture translation.
 
theistgal said:
Just want to point out that many Eastern Catholics use the same Scripture translation as Western Catholics - in our Ruthenian church we use the 1976 New American Bible, same one that’s used in the RC.

It’s the Eastern Orthodox who have the “extra” books in their Scripture translation.
Click to expand...
This can be attributed more to the use of pre-existing Western translations. My parish, and my previous parish were the same as what you describe. The distinction is the recognized canon of scriptures vs. what portion of that canon is accessible through available translations.

It may very well be that Eastern Catholics have limited themselves to the Latin canon, but the bibles in a North American parish don’t really demonstrate that.
 
i had NO idea that there were different canons of scripture inside the Catholic Church!!!
 
neokarny said:
What about the Prayer of Manasseh? It’s “chanted during the Orthodox Christian and Byzantine Catholic service of Great Compline.”

So wouldn’t that be tacitly canon?
Click to expand...
It would mean that, at the very least, the prayer holds an important place in the life of the Church as part of her liturgy - the very prayer of Christ spoken through the Church…but not every liturgical prayer is necessarily Scripture. In the Roman Rite, for example, we read from various Fathers and Councils during the daily Office of Readings (the contemporary incarnation of Vigils)…or for that matter, all Rites recite the Nicene Creed as part of the liturgy. Everything in the liturgy expresses the mind of the Church and has great spiritual value - but it isn’t all, strictly speaking, Scripture.
 
theistgal said:
There aren’t. 😉
Click to expand...
Some hundreds year old Latin Bible I saw months ago had Esdras 3, 4 and the Prayer of Manasseh :confused:
And all the catholic apologists I know say that Trent’s Canon just applies to the Latin Church.
 
Hasire said:
Some hundreds year old Latin Bible I saw months ago had Esdras 3, 4 and the Prayer of Manasseh :confused:
And all the catholic apologists I know say that Trent’s Canon just applies to the Latin Church.
Click to expand...
The council only stated that the list of books it gave (Bible used in the west) were inspired. It did not comment on any books outside the list. For all eastern biblical lists include the entire list used at Trent.
But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately condemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema. Let all, therefore, understand, in what order, and in what manner, the said Synod, after having laid the foundation of the Confession of faith, will proceed, and what testimonies and authorities it will mainly use in confirming dogmas, and in restoring morals in the Church.
Click to expand...
 
I should have said Eastern Orthodox :ouch: That’s really what I meant…
 
rfournier103 said:
I should have said Eastern Orthodox :ouch: That’s really what I meant…
Click to expand...
You did, but it had been modified after the fact. Perhaps by a mod since you asked in the Eastern Catholic board instead of the Non-Catholic Religion board.
 
theistgal said:
Just want to point out that many Eastern Catholics use the same Scripture translation as Western Catholics - in our Ruthenian church we use the 1976 New American Bible, same one that’s used in the RC.

It’s the Eastern Orthodox who have the “extra” books in their Scripture translation.
Click to expand...
I beleive Alexander Roman, a former Ukrainian contributor here, has said that Ukrainian Catholic Bibles from Ukraine are identical to their Ukrainian Orthodox counterparts and include the “extra” OT books found in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
 
Formosus said:
I beleive Alexander Roman, a former Ukrainian contributor here, has said that Ukrainian Catholic Bibles from Ukraine are identical to their Ukrainian Orthodox counterparts and include the “extra” OT books found in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Click to expand...
1 Esdras is Ezra. 2 Esdras is Nehemiah. The Greek Canon of Scriptures has 3 Esdras. The Slavonic Canon of Scripture matches the Greek with the addition of 4 Esdras. The Georgian Canon of Scripture matches the Slavonic Canon with the addition of 4 Maccabees. 🙂
 
Zekariya said:
1 Esdras is Ezra. 2 Esdras is Nehemiah. The Greek Canon of Scriptures has 3 Esdras. The Slavonic Canon of Scripture matches the Greek with the addition of 4 Esdras. The Georgian Canon of Scripture matches the Slavonic Canon with the addition of 4 Maccabees. 🙂
Click to expand...
My russian bibles include 4 Mac as well, but in an appendix.

Several books have alternate names.

1-2 Samuel and 1-2 kings are instead 1-4 kings.
Baruch is divided into two books; the latter part of Baruch is the Letter of Jeremiah in one, and 2 Baruch in another.
Chronicles is Paralipomen.
Song of Solomon is instead Song of Songs in one of them. (and subtitled with the other name in both cases.)
 
Aramis said:
My russian bibles include 4 Mac as well, but in an appendix.

Several books have alternate names.

1-2 Samuel and 1-2 kings are instead 1-4 kings.
Baruch is divided into two books; the latter part of Baruch is the Letter of Jeremiah in one, and 2 Baruch in another.
Chronicles is Paralipomen.
Song of Solomon is instead Song of Songs in one of them. (and subtitled with the other name in both cases.)
Click to expand...
In the Douay Rheims we have 1 and 2 Paralipomen, 1-4 Kings, and Canticle of Canticles (aka Song of Songs). 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top