M
mark_a
Guest
. . . . and 3rd and 4th Maccabees being in their bibles?
- Status
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
J
JohnL_Duncan
Guest
Could it be just that some of the books are named differently like the NA and DR versions?
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
M
mark_a
Guest
Gottle of Geer said:
Bump to the top of the list.
B
batteddy
Guest
Well, the Eastern Orthodox do…but I do not think, officially, the Eastern Catholics do.
A
Atreyu
Guest
Are you sure, Batteddy? It makes sense to me that they do. I can’t answer this question conclusively, but I can say that the canon of the Bible is a function of Sacred Tradition. It has been the Latin rite’s Tradition since the 4th century that the canon of the Bible is the same as it is today (ie without 3rd and 4th Maccabees). But I think the Eastern Rites have always had those books included in their canon, amongst others (although 4th Maccabees is usually only included as an appendix, or so I have heard). It is my guess that they include these books as they were a part of the Septuagint. But again I’m no scholar and I haven’t really looked into this matter all that much so I could be wrong. Oh and whether or not the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church would be allowed to continue to have a different canon would be dependent on whether or not the canon of the Bible is a matter of faith or morals, or so I would guess. I don’t think that it really is, therefore the Eastern Rites can have a different canon. Again, see my disclaimer above… 
J
jimmy
Guest
mark a:
The East and the west have always had different traditions about what is scripture. They all agree on what the west has, but some in the east add a few books to our list. It varies with where you go. I believe that Greek and Russian Orthodox have different canons from eachother.
B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
mark a:
I hope to have this question answered next week. However the one I can’t seem to reconcile is this. The Catholic Church is both Eastern and Western, it is described as a union of Churches. The Ecumenical Councils are Universal Church Councils. The Orthodox only accept the first seven or some of the first seven. However It would seem to me that those Eastern Churches united again to Catholic unity would be bound by ALL of the Ecumenical Councils. With Trent defining the Canon once and for all it would seem that Trents Canon would be binding on ALL Catholic Churches?
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Some of the Orthodox Churches have extra books in their OT Canon.
As for us Eastern Catholics, we are Catholics, we share the same Canon.
Please if it is a fact provide proof of it.
What’s the deal with reposting this? For some reason your original post asking this was removed, maybe you need to do some research before you jump to accusing us Eastern Catholics of something.
As for us Eastern Catholics, we are Catholics, we share the same Canon.
Please if it is a fact provide proof of it.
What’s the deal with reposting this? For some reason your original post asking this was removed, maybe you need to do some research before you jump to accusing us Eastern Catholics of something.
B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
ByzCath who are you responding to?
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Br. Rich SFO:
mark a:
As for us Eastern Catholics, we are Catholics, we share the same Canon.
Please if it is a fact provide proof of it.
What’s the deal with reposting this? For some reason your original post asking this was removed, maybe you need to do some research before you jump to accusing us Eastern Catholics of something.
That makes much more sense now doesn’t it?
I would like to add, I have yet to see an Eastern Catholic Bible. I have seen an edition of the Bible put out that says its a Catholic Bible that includes these extra books, by the way there are more than just these two that some Orthodox Churches have in their OT Canon, but it states that these books are in the OT Canon of certain Orthodox Churches (it acutally lists them).
Just to veryify, when I get home I will look into my Byzantine Catechism and see what it has to say.
Sorry about that, my reply should look like this.
mark a:
Some of the Orthodox Churches have extra books in their OT Canon.
As for us Eastern Catholics, we are Catholics, we share the same Canon.
Please if it is a fact provide proof of it.
What’s the deal with reposting this? For some reason your original post asking this was removed, maybe you need to do some research before you jump to accusing us Eastern Catholics of something.
That makes much more sense now doesn’t it?
I would like to add, I have yet to see an Eastern Catholic Bible. I have seen an edition of the Bible put out that says its a Catholic Bible that includes these extra books, by the way there are more than just these two that some Orthodox Churches have in their OT Canon, but it states that these books are in the OT Canon of certain Orthodox Churches (it acutally lists them).
Just to veryify, when I get home I will look into my Byzantine Catechism and see what it has to say.
S
Stephen_Korsman
Guest
3+4 Maccabees, Psalm 151, and Paul’s Epistle to the Laodiceans are included in the Vulgate edition I have, but not in the Canon - they are listed separately. Just FYI.
God bless,
Stephen
God bless,
Stephen
M
mark_a
Guest
No accusation intended. I thought the forum ate my original question, which was a little more thorough.
I come here only to ask questions and gain some understanding. Once in a while I provide sarcastic remarks to venomous anti-Catholics, and generally regret doing so just after my 30 minute grace period expires.
The link below is not proof, but comes from a source I presumed to be reliable.
crisismagazine.com/feature1.htm
The reference to Third and fourth Maccabees is at the end of the fifth paragraph under “One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic”.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
mark a:
The forum didn’t eat your first question as I saw it. It must have been removed by the powers that be for some reason.
You may not intended any accusation but the title of the thread is full of it.
I see it says that but it provides no source. I have yet to see an Eastern Catholic Bible or a list of the Canon that is different. I think you need to provide something more substantive before anyone can respond.
M
mark_a
Guest
Sorry about that.
If I had something more substantive, I wouldn’t have asked the question twice.
Once again, sorry for the inappropriate wording of the question.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
mark a:
As I said, as a Byzantine Catholic I have not heard that these books are part of our Canon.
It is interesting to note though, that we do use books that are not part of the Canon in our Liturgy. Such as the Gospel of Nicodemus is used during one of the Holy Week services.
Thats ok, now that we have cleared it up.
As I said, as a Byzantine Catholic I have not heard that these books are part of our Canon.
It is interesting to note though, that we do use books that are not part of the Canon in our Liturgy. Such as the Gospel of Nicodemus is used during one of the Holy Week services.
M
mark_a
Guest
That’s interesting, because I’ve heard (or read) theologians like Scott Hahn refer to non-canonicals such as the Protoevangelism of James in a positive way…meaning the opposite of how “Q” and the Gospel of Thomas are usually refered to.
- Status