The Canon - for Eastern Orthodox

[SingleMomMonica]

I would hope that Christians would be giving their lives to defend the faith, not a set of books.

If you are not comfortable with local Churches having a certain amount of freedom to set their canons then you have little faith in the Life of the Holy Spirit in the Church. The Bible is not the faith my friend. I can certainly see why many Eastern Christians say that Catholics and Protestants are two sides of the same coin.

Also, perhaps one of our Eastern Catholic brethren can tell us if they follow the Latin canon or the Orthodox (or something else).

Yours in Christ
Joe

Great post Joe.

When I was attending the Eastern Catholic Churches (specifically the Melkite Greek Catholic and Ruthenian Catholic Churches) I was told to not use the “Catholic” Bible since it didn’t have all the books, but to obtain the New Oxford Bible with Apocrapha because it included books from the entire Septuagint. They used the same as what the Orthodox Church uses today. I remember this because it surprised me that although I was attending Catholic Churches, they didn’t use “Catholic” Bibles.

 

[crazzeto]

The Orthodox do believe the Bible is the Inspired Word of God.

I haven’t seen your response though, why did the Catholics remove a few of the books of the Old Testament Septuagint (LXX)?

No offence, but I really don’t see how your in a position to claim the CC removed any books from the bible based upon what is written here. Doesn’t every Church get to decide for them selves? Apparently the Russia Orthodox have still more books in the bible than your tradition has, so what’s the Greek Tradition’s excuse for removing books as compared to the Russian Tradition?

See the problem here? That’s why the Catholic Church (which your church was a part of at the time the decission was made) had several Councils to resolve the matter. Because it’s the inspried Word of God, all of us at one point anyway saw it as necessary to agree upon the canon for the reasons I’ve previously stated, and others.

Additionally I’m wondering what your view (since it feels different from Joseph’s) regarding doctrine and the bible. It has been claimed that the bible is not a source of doctrine, but in fact it is the very source material (in addition to tradition) from which doctrine is drawn. I’m glad that you (Monica) do view the bible as the inspired word of God, but do all Orthodox agree? Does Joseph agree? If the bible is just another book like any other, which also has been suggested then why are we basing doctrine upon the material found in it?

 

[SingleMomMonica]

Crazzeto,

The Russian Church and the Greek Church use the same English Translation of the Sacred Scriptures. I am Greek Orthodox and my spiritual father is Russian Orthodox. I attend his Church. Using the Russian Translation of the Scriptures as opposed to the original Greek, sure there are probably some differences…it doesn’t matter. We venerate the Bible as the Inspired Word of God.

Now you throw around what “the Catholic Church does”, but you don’t seem to realize the entire Catholic Church uses different books of the Bible. Listening to Catholic Radio this morning, Tim Staples recounted how there are 7 different Rites within the Catholic Church and among those Rites are 22 different Catholic Churches. Each with their own Traditions which differ from one another, each with variances in Sacred Scripture, each with the variances in Theology, each with their unique approach to Spirituality.

Have you ever met with a Melkite Greek Catholic priest to discuss what Bible they use? What about a Coptic Catholic priest? What about a Ruthenian Catholic priest? They use different books as part of Sacred Scripture than the Roman Catholic Church does…and they are *in union *with one another. That being the case, why is it such a big deal to you if Orthodox Churches use the same books that the Melkite Greek Catholics use (or visa versa)?

Get to know your own Church first before you begin attacking mine!

No offence, but I really don’t see how your in a position to claim the CC removed any books from the bible based upon what is written here. Doesn’t every Church get to decide for them selves? Apparently the Russia Orthodox have still more books in the bible than your tradition has, so what’s the Greek Tradition’s excuse for removing books as compared to the Russian Tradition?

See the problem here? That’s why the Catholic Church (which your church was a part of at the time the decission was made) had several Councils to resolve the matter. Because it’s the inspried Word of God, all of us at one point anyway saw it as necessary to agree upon the canon for the reasons I’ve previously stated, and others.

Additionally I’m wondering what your view (since it feels different from Joseph’s) regarding doctrine and the bible. It has been claimed that the bible is not a source of doctrine, but in fact it is the very source material (in addition to tradition) from which doctrine is drawn. I’m glad that you (Monica) do view the bible as the inspired word of God, but do all Orthodox agree? Does Joseph agree? If the bible is just another book like any other, which also has been suggested then why are we basing doctrine upon the material found in it?

 

[josephdaniel29]

Additionally I’m wondering what your view (since it feels different from Joseph’s) regarding doctrine and the bible. It has been claimed that the bible is not a source of doctrine, but in fact it is the very source material (in addition to tradition) from which doctrine is drawn. I’m glad that you (Monica) do view the bible as the inspired word of God, but do all Orthodox agree? Does Joseph agree? If the bible is just another book like any other, which also has been suggested then why are we basing doctrine upon the material found in it?

Where did you get the idea that the Bible is a source of doctrine? Is that really what the Catholic Church teaches?

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[SingleMomMonica]

Additionally I’m wondering what your view (since it feels different from Joseph’s) regarding doctrine and the bible. It has been claimed that the bible is not a source of doctrine, but in fact it is the very source material (in addition to tradition) from which doctrine is drawn. I’m glad that you (Monica) do view the bible as the inspired word of God, but do all Orthodox agree? Does Joseph agree? If the bible is just another book like any other, which also has been suggested then why are we basing doctrine upon the material found in it?

The New Testament of the Bible comes from Orthodox Christians and is a slice of the pie of Orthodox Christian Tradition just as the Old Testament came from the Orthodox Jews and was a slice of the pie of Orthodox Jewish Tradition.

**No Orthodox Tradition comes “FROM” the Bible; however, there are parts of the Orthodox Christian Tradition written down in the Bible. **

To understand the Bible, a person must know and understand Orthodox Christian Tradition.

Without knowing the Orthodox Christian Tradition, reading the Bible can confuse people because they will not understand what it is they are reading since it is just a part of the Whole.

 

[adstrinity]

So, if the Orthodox have more books than the Catholics, that means that Catholics, in theory, are missing inspired books.

Not necessarily. The Catholic Church decided what makes for a complete Bible. 73 Books are what a Bible needs. Other church’s may add to it, but, since they do not have the Holy Spirit and Infability, perhaps those books aren’t necessary.

One of the disputed books, the Prayer of Manasseh, has liturgical use in Great Compline, a service which is done on Weekdays in Great Lent and eves of Christmas and Theophany.

Psalm 151 is included in the Liturgical Psalter, but it is NEVER read in services.

Just passing along those two tidbits.

But, an extra Psalm does not an entire book make.

What are the books the Orthodox have that the West do not?

 

[crazzeto]

Where did you get the idea that the Bible is a source of doctrine? Is that really what the Catholic Church teaches?

Yours in Christ
Joe

Doctrine can not violate scripture, as it is at least half of the raw material from which doctrine is formed. The church leadership forms doctrine, but that formation had better be based upon a study of scripture and tradtion. Otherwise your doctrine will likely end up being invalid.

 

[crazzeto]

I wasn’t attacking your Church with this thread, though I do feel rather justified in pointing out that you’re not in a very good position to be claiming we “removed books from the bible”.

Crazzeto,

The Russian Church and the Greek Church use the same English Translation of the Sacred Scriptures. I am Greek Orthodox and my spiritual father is Russian Orthodox. I attend his Church. Using the Russian Translation of the Scriptures as opposed to the original Greek, sure there are probably some differences…it doesn’t matter. We venerate the Bible as the Inspired Word of God.

Now you throw around what “the Catholic Church does”, but you don’t seem to realize the entire Catholic Church uses different books of the Bible. Listening to Catholic Radio this morning, Tim Staples recounted how there are 7 different Rites within the Catholic Church and among those Rites are 22 different Catholic Churches. Each with their own Traditions which differ from one another, each with variances in Sacred Scripture, each with the variances in Theology, each with their unique approach to Spirituality.

Have you ever met with a Melkite Greek Catholic priest to discuss what Bible they use? What about a Coptic Catholic priest? What about a Ruthenian Catholic priest? They use different books as part of Sacred Scripture than the Roman Catholic Church does…and they are *in union *with one another. That being the case, why is it such a big deal to you if Orthodox Churches use the same books that the Melkite Greek Catholics use (or visa versa)?

Get to know your own Church first before you begin attacking mine!

 

[josephdaniel29]

Not necessarily. The Catholic Church decided what makes for a complete Bible. 73 Books are what a Bible needs. Other church’s may add to it, but, since they do not have the Holy Spirit and Infability, perhaps those books aren’t necessary.

Are the Eastern Catholic Churches infallible? Apparently they use the same canon as their Eastern and Oriental Orthodox counterparts. Does the Latin Church set the canon for the entire Catholic communion?

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[josephdaniel29]

Doctrine can not violate scripture, as it is at least half of the raw material from which doctrine is formed. The church leadership forms doctrine, but that formation had better be based upon a study of scripture and tradtion. Otherwise your doctrine will likely end up being invalid.

I fear you are putting the cart before the horse my friend. If Scripture is indeed the “raw material” for doctrine then what books are included in the canon would be of critical importance. That is not how the Orthodox Church approaches the faith. Apostolic Tradition is the only source for doctrine and Holy Scripture is the most honored and visible part of that Tradition. Slight variations in canon in no way affect the integrity of Tradition.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[crazzeto]

I fear you are putting the cart before the horse my friend. If Scripture is indeed the “raw material” for doctrine then what books are included in the canon would be of critical importance. That is not how the Orthodox Church approaches the faith. Apostolic Tradition is the only source for doctrine and Holy Scripture is the most honored and visible part of that Tradition. Slight variations in canon in no way affect the integrity of Tradition.

Yours in Christ
Joe

No offence, but you’re trying to use a slightly different technical definition to create an argument about anything other than the Canon of Scripture. Yes Scripture is a product of Tradition, but it is a clearly defined (at least in the Western Chruch), written product of Tradition. Further, it includes information drived prior to Apostilic tradition. So lets move on here shall we?

 

[josephdaniel29]

No offence, but you’re trying to use a slightly different technical definition to create an argument about anything other than the Canon of Scripture. Yes Scripture is a product of Tradition, but it is a clearly defined (at least in the Western Chruch), written product of Tradition. Further, it includes information drived prior to Apostilic tradition. So lets move on here shall we?

Move on to where?

 

[adstrinity]

Are the Eastern Catholic Churches infallible? Apparently they use the same canon as their Eastern and Oriental Orthodox counterparts. Does the Latin Church set the canon for the entire Catholic communion?

Yours in Christ
Joe

The Catholic Church is infallible.

Alright, so, what are those books?

Do you need a list of the 73 that are full cannon before you can verify what are the other books? Why is it so hard to get an answer on what the books are?

 

[josephdaniel29]

The Catholic Church is infallible.

Alright, so, what are those books?

Do you need a list of the 73 that are full cannon before you can verify what are the other books? Why is it so hard to get an answer on what the books are?

What list of what books? Do you want to know the Orthodox canon?

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[BrianH]

This is the largest canon I believe at 81 books.

ethiopianorthodox.org/english/canonical/books.html

I will add, as the rogue Protestant in the group, that Single Mom Monica has repeatedly pointed out that Hippo and Carthage were regional or local synods and may not have had the impact on the Eastern church that Western Catholics thought…

 

[mardukm]

The Latin and Eastern Churches lived in unity with different canons long before the schism. The Latin OT Canon was finalized in the 4th century, not the thirteenth, and the Eastern OT Canon has generally been the Septuagint, which has been in existence since before Christ.

The following by brother josephdaniel (from another thread) is noteworthy:
“…neither the Orthodox or Catholic Churches rely on Holy Scripture as the sole source of doctrine as the Protestants do. Since Scripture is a reflection of Tradition discrepancies in canons are not that important.”

Blessings

 

[adstrinity]

What list of what books? Do you want to know the Orthodox canon?

Yours in Christ
Joe

That is half what I was getting at. Not so much the Orthodox canon, but, the “extra” books in the Orthodox canon. If one may list all the books, though, I’m sure that would be of help, too. AND, if one can, list the contents therein (i.e., can they be linked up to online?)

 

[SingleMomMonica]

That is half what I was getting at. Not so much the Orthodox canon, but, the “extra” books in the Orthodox canon. If one may list all the books, though, I’m sure that would be of help, too. AND, if one can, list the contents therein (i.e., can they be linked up to online?)

There are no “extra books” in the Orthodox Canon. The Orthodox use for their Old Testament the Septuagint (LXX) which is the same Greek Translation that was used from 200 years before Christ’s birth until about 40 years after Christ’s Resurrection…it is the very same Greek Septuagint (LXX) which Jesus used. There is nothing added.

The Catholics did remove a few of the books for some reason though. I am still waiting to find out WHY Catholics felt it was necessary to remove books from the Bible! And why they thought it was OKAY to do so.

 

[josephdaniel29]

That is half what I was getting at. Not so much the Orthodox canon, but, the “extra” books in the Orthodox canon. If one may list all the books, though, I’m sure that would be of help, too. AND, if one can, list the contents therein (i.e., can they be linked up to online?)

Here is a link to a table on wikipedia.

Here

Not sure how accurate it is. Also, I know the Ethiopian canon is different. I’m not sure about the other Oriental Orthodox Churches (maybe mardukm can help?)

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[crazzeto]

That is half what I was getting at. Not so much the Orthodox canon, but, the “extra” books in the Orthodox canon. If one may list all the books, though, I’m sure that would be of help, too. AND, if one can, list the contents therein (i.e., can they be linked up to online?)

Do a search, the Greek Orthodox have a bible available for download though I will say that their webpage seems to indicate it is a work in progress. Perhaps they’re working on a new updated english translation? Anyway this could be useful to you.

Here is the list of the canon per Trent, which agrees with many previous councils and synods including Hippo and Carthage. This is the Canonical list for all Catholic Rites, though some may also make use of other books, which are not considered canoical (per all the information available to me) by the magisterium.

Full text of Council of Trent
history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html

List of books

They are as set down here below: of the Old Testament: the five books of Moses, to wit, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first book of Esdras, and the second which is entitled Nehemias; Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidical Psalter, consisting of a hundred and fifty psalms; the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch; Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, to wit, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of the Machabees, the first and the second. Of the New Testament: the four Gospels, according [Page 19] to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke the Evangelist; fourteen epistles of Paul the apostle, (one) to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, (one) to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, (one) to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two of Peter the apostle, three of John the apostle, one of the apostle James, one of Jude the apostle, and the Apocalypse of John the apostle.

I did more digging online, and stumbled upon a more complete history of the Canon available here:

catholicevangelism.org/h-canon1.shtml

I’ve also fired off an email to Fr. Mitch Pacwa who is an Eastern Rite Jesuit. God willing, he will decide to take on my question in tomorrows open line.