Even though the Catholic Canon is traceable to the local synods of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage, they were not ecumenical at the time. But history has shown them to be the point of origin of a certified Catholic canon. By the time ecumenical councils of Florence (15th century) and Trent (16th century) affirmed those ancient canons, the Orthodox weren’t recognizing ecumenical councils.
Also, let it be noted, that according even to some Orthodox, the Orthodox themselves do not have an agreed upon canon. For example,
Orthodox priest Fr. Stergiou writes: “there are also inconsistencies in the different Traditions of Orthodoxy on which books are to be included in the greater Canon.”
At the heart of it, if you think about it, since there are Orthodox traditions that have more contents in their canons than the Catholic Bibles, they really are not disunited with the Catholic claim of the 73 books.
Orthodox agree those 73 books are divinely inspired. On that point, the Orthodox and Catholics are in agreement before and after 1054. It should also be noted that the Orthodox do not point to an ecumenical council that determined the canon.
And although this may be slightly controversial, I think it’s worth pointing out. The language of the Council of Trent said this:*And it has thought it meet that a list of the sacred books be inserted in this decree, lest a doubt may arise in any one’s mind, which are the books that are received by this Synod. They are as set down here below … [lists the books] … But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts…let him be anathema.*To me that does not refer to a closed canon, but identifies what has been received. It is an affirmation of X, not a denial of Y, per se. Some may argue that the Ordinary Magisterium has closed the canon by its actions, and that is a valid argument. On the other hand, the Council of Trent, when considering the issue of the canonicity of a few other books, the Council elected not to explicitly reject those books. Catholic canon historian Gary Michuta writes:*This is a matter of record, not of interpretation. On March 29, 1546 the Council Fathers took up the fourth of fourteen questions (Capita Dubitationum) on Scripture and Tradition. At issue was whether those books that were not included in the official list, but were included in the Latin Vulgate (e.g. The Book of Esdras, Fourth Ezra, and Third Maccabees), should be rejected by a Conciliar decree, or be passed over in silence. Only three Fathers voted for an explicit rejection. Forty-two voted that the status of these books should be passed over in silence. *Now, all that being said, I don’t foresee any sign of the Catholic canon adding books. I think those arguing for a closed canon via the Ordinary Magisterium could make a decent argument. However, I think it’s also a viable argument to say the Catholic decrees on the canon do not
contradict the Orthodox canons. It’s one thing to say A is true, and B is not true and another thing to just say A is true without commenting on B. Anyway, maybe the Spirit will eventually sort that out more clearly, at least to foggy people like me.
