Orthodox Bible Canon vs. Catholic Bible Canon

[fisherman_carl]

Carl, I think Ink was hinting that Sacred Tradition was at the same level as Sacred Scripture. The thought that Sacred Scripture is all that Jesus left behind is a Protestant anomaly.

I could be wrong, but I think that’s the point he was trying to make.

That may be so. But, I wanted to show that Christians always thought of the scripture as the inspired word of God. Because there may be some (like myself) that may misinterpret what he said thinking he was saying that the idea of the scriptures being inspired was a Protestant thing.

 

[fisherman_carl]

Lets now look at Sacred Tradition, through the eyes of the CFs. All quotes are from “The Faith of the Early Fathers”, by William A. Jurgens.

"As I said before, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She likewise believes these things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but one mouth. For, while the languages of the world are diverse, nevertheless, the authority of the tradition is one and the same.

Neither do the Churches among the Germans believe otherwise or have another tradition, nor do these among the Iberians, nor among… But as the sun, that creature of God, is one and the same throughout the whole wold, so also the preaching of the truth shines everywhere and enlightens all men who desire to come to a knowledge of truth.

Nor will any of the rulers in the Churches, whatever his power of eloquence, teach otherwise, for no one is above the teacher; nor will he who is weak in speaking detract from the tradition. For the faith is one and the same, and cannot be amplified by one who is able to say much about it, nor can it be diminished by one who can say little."
(St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, [AD 180], [1,10,2])

“Creation itself reveals Him that created it; and the work made is itself suggestive of Him that made it; and the world manifests Him that arranged it. Every Church throughout the whole world has received this tradition from the Apostles.”
(ibid, [2,9,1])

“The true gnosis is the doctrine of the Apostles, and the ancient organization of the Church throughout the whole world, and the manifestation of the body of Christ according to the succession of the bishops, by which successions the bishops have handed down the Church which is found everywhere; and the very complete tradition of the Scriptures, which have come down to us by being guarded against falsification, and which are received without addition or deletion; and reading without falsification, and a legitimate and diligent exposition according to the Scriptures, without danger and without blasphemy; and the pre-eminent gift of love, which is more precious than knowledge, more glorious than prophecy, and more honored than all the other charismatic gifts.”
(ibid, [4,33,8])

 

[fisherman_carl]

“Wherever it shall be clear that the truth of the Christian discipline and faith are present, there also will be found the truth of the Scriptures and of their explanation, and of all the Christian tradition.”
(Tertullian, The Demurrer Against the Heretics, [AD 200], [19,3])

“Grant, then, that all have erred; that the Apostle was mistaken in bearing witness; that the Holy Spirit had no such consideration for any one Church as to lead it into truth, although He was sent for that purpose by Christ, who had asked the Father to make Him the Teacher of truth; that the Steward of God and Vicar of Christ neglected His office, and permitted the Churches for a time to understand otherwise and to believe otherwise than He Himself had preached through the Apostles: now, is it likely that so many and such great Churches should have gone astray into a unity of faith?”
(ibid, [28,1])

"Of the dogmas and kerygmas preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the Gospel in its vitals; or rather, we would reduce kerygma to a mere term. For instance, to take the first and most general example, who taught us in writing to sign with the sign of the cross those who have trusted in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ? What writing has taught us to turn to the East in prayer? Which of the saints left us in writing the words of the epiclesis at the consecration of the Bread of Eucharist and of the Cup of Benediction? For we are not content with those words the Apostle or the gospel has recorded, but we say other things also, both before and after; and we regard these other words, which we have received from unwritten teaching, as being of great importance to the mystery.

Where is it written that we are to bless the baptismal water, the oil of anointing, and even the one who is being baptized? Is it not from silent and mystical tradition? Indeed, in what written word is even the anointing with oil taught? Where does it say that in baptizing there is to be a triple immersion? And the rest of the things done at Baptism, - where is it written that we are to renounce Satan and his angels? Does this not come from that secret and arcane teaching which our Fathers guarded in a silence not too curiously meddled with and not idly investigated, when they had learned well that reverence for the mysteries is best preserved by silence. . . .

In the same way the Apostles and Fathers who, in the beginning, prescribed the Church’s rites, guarded in secrecy and silence the dignity of the mysteries; for that which is blabbed at random and in the public ear is no mystery at all. This is the reason for our handing on of unwritten precepts and practices: that the knowledge of our dogmas may not be neglected and held in contempt by the multitude through too great a familiarity. Dogma and kerygma are two distinct things. Dogma is observed in silence; kerygma is proclaimed to the world."
(St. Basil The Great, The Holy Spirit, [AD 375])

 

[inkaneer]

Carl, I think Ink was hinting that Sacred Tradition was at the same level as Sacred Scripture. The thought that Sacred Scripture is all that Jesus left behind is a Protestant anomaly.

I could be wrong, but I think that’s the point he was trying to make.

**EXACTAMUNDO!!! **Thank you!

The term"inspired word of God" has a different meaning to a protestant than what a Catholic may see in those same words. In fact many protestants have a different concept of what it means when we say scripture is inspired. So while Sacred scripture is revered in the Catholic Church it is not elevated above Sacred Tradition. That is hardly the case in protestantism which denies Sacred Tradition in favor of their traditions of men. St. Basil the Great wrote:

“Of the dogmas and messages preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety, both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the gospel in its vitals; or rather, we would reduce [Christian] message to a mere term” (The Holy Spirit 27:66 [A.D. 375]).

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Should Catholic apocrypha be in Catholic bibles as an appendix? I’m speaking of 3d and
4th Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh?

 

[fisherman_carl]

**

The term"inspired word of God" has a different meaning to a protestant than what a Catholic may see in those same words. In fact many protestants have a different concept of what it means when we say scripture is inspired. So while Sacred scripture is revered in the Catholic Church it is not elevated above Sacred Tradition. That is hardly the case in protestantism which denies Sacred Tradition…
.**

So what is the difference between the Catholic and Protestant view of Scripture being inspired?

 

[inkaneer]

So what is the difference between the Catholic and Protestant view of Scripture being inspired?

The same as the difference in Catholic view of scripture and the protestant sola scriptura.

 

[patrick457]

Should Catholic apocrypha be in Catholic bibles as an appendix? I’m speaking of 3d and
4th Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh?

Well, the Clementine Vulgate did so “lest it perish entirely,” so personally, I don’t see why not.

 

[fisherman_carl]

The same as the difference in Catholic view of scripture and the protestant sola scriptura.

Inspiration speaks of the Holy Spirit inspiring the authors of Scripture. Both Catholics and Protestants can agree on that. But, sola scriptura and its counterpart speak of authority. Is authority in the bible alone or is there a Church that Jesus started that also has authority, as indicated in Scripture itself like in Mt 18:7?

Scripture is inspired because the writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write them. Sacred Tradition is also inspired for the same reasons. For Catholics the inspired word of God comes to us through 2 ways, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. For Protestants, they only accept Sacred Scripture and accuse us of adding to the bible. While we accuse them of the opposite, removing part of God’s word from both Sacred Tradition and Scripture (deuterocanonicals).