Eastern Rite: OT Cannon


#1

I’m a little confused about this topic, so forgive me if I stumple through this question. Its my understanding that some of the Eastern Rites have a few more books in their OT Cannon. Is this correct? Does this apply to all Eastern Rites or just the churches that left communion and returned? If it applies to only the churches that have returned, does that mean that the churches that have always remained in communion with rome agree with the Latin Rite on OT Cannon?

Also, if my understanding is correct, how come when the eastern Rite churches returned they did not have to change their cannon?

Thanks in advance


#2

I may be wrong, but I believe that the same books are used for the Divine Liturgy in both the Eastern and Western Churches. That is what can properly be called the “canon” of Scripture. The Eastern Churches DO recognize as authentic a few more books in certain cases, but they are not part of the Liturgy.

It’s not unlike how the Church considers the letters of Clement of Rome to be authentic papal documents from the time of the Apostles (IIRC), but does not include them in the Liturgy.

This is all just going off the top of my head, however, and I’m very likely to be wrong.


#3

I wasnt able to edit my post, but I should clarify one thing…

Part of my understanding was that some or all of the Eastern Rite Churches have the same OT Cannon as the Eastern Orthodox, which wouldnt be that surprising, but all the questions I have about the topic are in the first post.


#4

From what Byzcath has said on a previous thread all Eastern Rites have the same canons as the Latine Rite. The Churches with a different canon, such as 3rd and 4th Maccabees, are the Eastern Orthodox Churches


#5

[quote=Hegesippus]From what Byzcath has said on a previous thread all Eastern Rites have the same canons as the Latine Rite. The Churches with a different canon, such as 3rd and 4th Maccabees, are the Eastern Orthodox Churches
[/quote]

Yes this is my understanding. Just as we recognize all the Councils after the frist seven even though the Orthodox do not.

I would like to add that there is no OT readings in the Divine Liturgy and there are some parts of non-canonical books that are used in some Liturgies, for example a part of the Gospel of Nicodemus that is in one of the Holy Week Liturgies.

Bottom line, we are Catholics.


#6

[quote=ByzCath]Yes this is my understanding. Just as we recognize all the Councils after the frist seven even though the Orthodox do not.

I would like to add that there is no OT readings in the Divine Liturgy and there are some parts of non-canonical books that are used in some Liturgies, for example a part of the Gospel of Nicodemus that is in one of the Holy Week Liturgies.

Bottom line, we are Catholics.
[/quote]

Do you think Dave, that the question that started this thread may have to do with the fact that the 7 books in the OT are the ones that the Protestant Churches do not have in their Bibles?

That’s what came to my mind as I read this thread.


#7

I completly agree. With issues like this, sometimes information is hard to come by or not clear. Thats usually when I end up having to go to a forum. I wasnt sure if this was going to be explained by tradition, but thanks for clearing everything up.


#8

[quote=Edwin1961]Do you think Dave, that the question that started this thread may have to do with the fact that the 7 books in the OT are the ones that the Protestant Churches do not have in their Bibles?

That’s what came to my mind as I read this thread.
[/quote]

No, the Orthodox have Maccabees 3 and 4 in their Canon, and I wasnt able to find a clear answer on if these books were in the Eastern Rite canon as well.

Edit: Specifically when I read of an Eastern Rite Catholic using an Orthdox study bible, which had Mac. 3 &4. So that was what sparked my curiousity.


#9

Ack, edit time limit expired on me…

This was the link that got me confused. Granted, he said Eastern Christian Churches, but that phrase could very easily apply to the Eastern Rites as well.

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=404165&Forums=25&Experts=0&Days=2004&Author=&Keyword=maccabees&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=1&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=


#10

[quote=SleepyGuy]No, the Orthodox have Maccabees 3 and 4 in their Canon, and I wasnt able to find a clear answer on if these books were in the Eastern Rite canon as well.

Edit: Specifically when I read of an Eastern Rite Catholic using an Orthdox study bible, which had Mac. 3 &4. So that was what sparked my curiousity.
[/quote]

Not all Eastern Orthdox churches have the same books in the Bible. It is my understanding that 4th Maccabees is in the appendix and is not considered scripture by any of the Orthodox Churches. In addition to the Deuterocanonicals, I have seen in their Old Testament: 3rd Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Psalm 151, and The Prayer of Manessah. Canonical does not always mean inspired writings or not, as was stated in other threads. Sometimes it just means writings that are read and/or are part of the Divine Liturgy. The book of Revelation is inspired, but it is not read at all in the Divine Liturgy, although the Liturgy reflects what is written in that book. So the writings I mentioned may just be read and/or are prayers at the liturgy, not necassarily considered inspired.

For instance, I am a Latin Rite Catholic who prays the brievary daily. One day one of the responses for the daily scripture lesson was from the Prayer of Manessah. Although it is not an inspired writing it is still liturgical.

In the Latin Rite, “canonical” has come to mean the inspired writings, it does not have the same definition in the East. Hope this helps, if I’m wrong, let me know please.

Since the East did not have to combat Sola Scriptura, they never really were concerned with defining the canon.


#11

[quote=ByzCath]Yes this is my understanding. Just as we recognize all the Councils after the frist seven even though the Orthodox do not.

I would like to add that there is no OT readings in the Divine Liturgy and there are some parts of non-canonical books that are used in some Liturgies, for example a part of the Gospel of Nicodemus that is in one of the Holy Week Liturgies.

Bottom line, we are Catholics.
[/quote]

Do the Eastern Catholic Churches differ in faith from the Roman Church in any way *at all. *Not wanting to hijack the thread, but this seems a good opportunity to ask.

That is - are there any differences between them, in what is recognised as being divinely revealed ?

TY in advance :slight_smile: ##


#12

Do the Eastern Catholic Churches differ in faith from the Roman Church in any way *at all. *Not wanting to hijack the thread, but this seems a good opportunity to ask.

This would be a qualified “yes and no”, but…

That is - are there any differences between them, in what is recognised as being divinely revealed ?

This would make it a “no”. Yes, there are differences in how certain beliefs are approached and regarded. Purgatory is a perfect example of this, as is the “Filioque”. The bottom line is that there are no fundamental differences in what is believed, though there are some considerable differences in how those beliefs are expressed.

The problem comes from when people take the expression (the filioque, for example), for the fundamental truth in total.

That’s my plugged nickel!


#13

[quote=Gottle of Geer]## Do the Eastern Catholic Churches differ in faith from the Roman Church in any way at all.

[/quote]

A lot of times I find it to be a matter of emphasis, not so much in basic beliefs. Like the Assumption of Mary / Dormation of Mary is a good one. The emphasis in the west is that she went to heaven, where the emphasis in the east is that she fell asleep and went to heaven. No real difference. Mostly emphasis. Thats been my experiance anyways.


#14

The bottom line is that there are no fundamental differences in what is believed, though there are some considerable differences in how those beliefs are expressed.

Well, we Catholics like to believe this…but the Orthodox really don’t.

We all like to pretend that re-uniting with the Orthodox is right around the corner…but it isn’t.

The Orthodox are quite stubborn and bitter, and do in fact believe there are fundamental differences in our beliefs…read some of their literature…its very elitist and stubborn…


#15

[quote=batteddy]Well, we Catholics like to believe this…but the Orthodox really don’t.

We all like to pretend that re-uniting with the Orthodox is right around the corner…but it isn’t.

The Orthodox are quite stubborn and bitter, and do in fact believe there are fundamental differences in our beliefs…read some of their literature…its very elitist and stubborn…
[/quote]

We’re talking about Eastern Rite Catholics, not the Orthodox.


#16

We’re talking about Eastern Rite Catholics, not the Orthodox.

Indeed, I was refering to our Eastern Catholic brothers and sisters, who are united with us in spite of the “vast and insurmountable” differences that so plainly keep us seperated from the Orthodox East. :slight_smile:


#17

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.