I suspect they don’t match our canon for the same reason that WITHIN Eastern Orthodoxy, their Bibles differ.I was wondering if anyone knew why the Greek Orthodox and Catholic Canon’s are not identical. Which do the rest of the Eastern Orthodox use? Any info is appreciated, I’m sure there’s been a thread on this before, excuse my laziness please.
Nick
See also this article from an Eastern Orthodox priest… (the weblink I have is no longer active)…Eastern Orthodox Churches - 1672 Synod of Jerusalem, accepted the Alexandrian Canon (Septuagint LXX), which consists of the Roman Catholic Canon, plus additional books depending upon which LXX translation is used. For example, the Russian Orthodox Tradition or the Slavonic Bible includes 2 Edras, whereas the Greek Orthodox Tradition of the Septuagint does not. This lack of uniform use continues to this day.
As does the Latin Catholic Church. There are parts of the apocryphal book of Esdras and the Prayer of Manaseh that remained in the Roman Missal to this day.First, the Eastern Catholic Churches also use books not in the Western Canon.
The Holy Synod of the Greek Orthodox Church recognizes, in addition to the Deuterocanonical books the following additional works:I was wondering if anyone knew why the Greek Orthodox and Catholic Canon’s are not identical. Which do the rest of the Eastern Orthodox use? Any info is appreciated, I’m sure there’s been a thread on this before, excuse my laziness please.
Nick
Can you please clarify? I’ve never heard this before. I’ve always understood that the Catholic Church (all Rites, eastern and western) adheres to the same Canon as defined by the Council of Trent. Are you saying that Catholics differ on what books are in the Bible?I am sorry, but I must make some additional comment.
First, the Eastern Catholic Churches also use books not in the Western Canon.
This is not clear to me. Catholics (as Trent defined) consider the Old Testament canon to include the books of the Septuagint. Most other Christians use the Hebrew canon, i.e. the books that the Jewish faith ultimately decided were Scripture, which has fewer books than the Septuagint does. Some Christians use books that are neither in the Jewish canon nor in the Catholic canon (as others on this thread have noted e.g. Esdras, Manasseh, and so on).Second, the most fundamental differences between the Eastern and Western churches is that the Eastern churches use the Septuagint while the Western churches use the Hebrew Bible (supplemented by the Deuterocanons from the Septuagint.)
When did they change the canon?The Eastern Orthodox are in schism. The Catholic Church has the correct canon of the Bible. The Eastern Orthodox changed the canon. A list of Bible canons can be found here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_bible
Yes, I am exactly saying that many Eastern Catholics differ with the Western Church on the definition of the books of the Bible.Can you please clarify? I’ve never heard this before. I’ve always understood that the Catholic Church (all Rites, eastern and western) adheres to the same Canon as defined by the Council of Trent. Are you saying that Catholics differ on what books are in the Bible?
This is not clear to me. Catholics (as Trent defined) consider the Old Testament canon to include the books of the Septuagint. Most other Christians use the Hebrew canon, i.e. the books that the Jewish faith ultimately decided were Scripture, which has fewer books than the Septuagint does. Some Christians use books that are neither in the Jewish canon nor in the Catholic canon (as others on this thread have noted e.g. Esdras, Manasseh, and so on).
Thanks. That is interesting. I’m familiar with the Eastern Catholic Churches of course (I’ve worshipped at some) but had no idea that the Council of Trent did not apply to all Catholics and that various Catholics had a different canon of Scripture. Are there other Ecumenical/General Councils that also don’t apply to all Catholics, do you know (just curious)?Yes, I am exactly saying that many Eastern Catholics differ with the Western Church on the definition of the books of the Bible.
Trent is not binding on the Eastern Catholic Churches. The Eastern Catholic Churches are autonomous from the Western Church but in communion with it. Eastern Catholics had autonomy granted by the Thirteenth Century. Eastern Catholics ***do ***accept the primacy of Rome and the Holy Father, but are allowed to preserve traditional forms of worship (including the traditional Eastern rites and traditional Eastern definitions of the Bible).
The independence of the Eastern Catholic Churches is guaranteed by Pope Benedict 14’s Demandatam and Pope Leo 13’s *Orientalium Dignitas. *Indeed, the Eastern Catholic Churches have their own Canon Law, called 1990 Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.
Furthermore it is not permitted for any Latin Catholic to attempt to impose the Latin rite (which would include the definition of the Bible) on the Melkite Catholic Church. If you read Latin, you can read the encyclical here. Orientalium Dignitas extended this to all Eastern Catholics.
Furthermore, there is no such thing as “the Septuagint”; there is a divergence of opinion as to what books it includes – thus, the Latin, Greek (Orthodox), and Slavonic Old Testaments all claim to include the books contained in the Septuagint, but each defines that contain different books.
I realize this sounds strange, but it the Eastern Catholic Churches are a fascinating part of the Roman communion.
Yes, they’re not part of the ROMAN Catholic Church but they are part of the CATHOLIC Church (just as the Roman Catholic Church is). One (holy, apostolic) catholic Church (with many Rites).That’s your error. The Eastern Catholic Churches are not part of the Roman Catholic Church. They are autonomous, independent churches, which accept the primacy of Rome. But they are sister churches, not simply dioceses or provinces, but full patriarchs, just like the Patriarch of the West. They all accept the jurisdicition of the pope, however.
While some Eastern Catholic priests and theologians would minimise the ecumenical councils of the Church since the Great Schism, this does not appear to be the actual position of the the Eastern Churches. The Melkite Eparchy of Newton posts the following response from Bishop John Elya regarding the status of the Council of Trent for Melkite Catholics:Yes, I am exactly saying that many Eastern Catholics differ with the Western Church on the definition of the books of the Bible.
Trent is not binding on the Eastern Catholic Churches. The Eastern Catholic Churches are autonomous from the Western Church but in communion with it. Eastern Catholics had autonomy granted by the Thirteenth Century. Eastern Catholics ***do ***accept the primacy of Rome and the Holy Father, but are allowed to preserve traditional forms of worship (including the traditional Eastern rites and traditional Eastern definitions of the Bible).
In any case, the Catechism of the Catholic Church contains the same deposit of faith for Latin Catholics as well as Eastern Catholics. The Canon of Scripture contained there would be the canon for Latin and Eastern Catholics.Although the Council of Trent was convened in order to meet the challenges of the Reformation in the west, the recapitulation of dogma concerning the sacraments that came from the Council has been an enriching source for the Churches of both east and west. Indeed, you will note that many Eastern theologians have reacted in various ways to the decrees of the Council of Trent. As Catholics, we are bound to all of the decrees of the councils that have been promulgated by the Holy Father. In some instances, the decrees of the Council have direct application to the discipline of the west only. Usually this can be discerned either by the decree itself or by its logical application to the discipline of the west. (Emphasis added)
While the Orthodox (and Byantine Catholic) liturgical Psalter has Psalm 151, there is also a rubric saying it is never read in services.The Holy Synod of the Greek Orthodox Church recognizes, in addition to the Deuterocanonical books the following additional works:
1st Esdras
Psalm 151
The Prayer of Manassah
3rd Maccabees, with 4th Maccabees in an appendix
Slavonic Bibles approved by the Russian Orthodox Church, in addition to the Deuterocanonical books includes:
1st Esdras
2nd Esdras
Psalm 151
3rd Maccabees
I am afraid that I cannot agree with you. Indeed, I commend the following statement, which you quoted, to you:In any case, the Catechism of the Catholic Church contains the same deposit of faith for Latin Catholics as well as Eastern Catholics. The Canon of Scripture contained there would be the canon for Latin and Eastern Catholics.
I cannot speak to the Melkite Church, but it is simply a fact that many Eastern Catholics preserve the larger canon.In some instances, the decrees of the Council have direct application to the discipline of the west only. Usually this can be discerned either by the decree itself or by its logical application to the discipline of the west.
Hmmm, you mean to say that the Catechism of the Catholic Church doesn’t apply to the Eastern Catholics? Last I checked, the Apostolic Constitution promulgating it made it definitive for both the Eastern and Latin Churches. And where there are “significant” differences, the Catechism does describe them briefly, e.g. filioque, clerical celibacy, minister of marriage. No distinction was made for the Canon of Scripture though, and it would have been quite easy to list the differences, if any. The evidence I know do not suggest that the Canon of Scripture is one of those matters that pertain to the Latin Church alone.I am afraid that I cannot agree with you. Indeed, I commend the following statement, which you quoted, to you:
I cannot speak to the Melkite Church, but it is simply a fact that many Eastern Catholics preserve the larger canon.