From OrthodoxWiki
Revision as of 02:42, March 22, 2021 by Rakovsky (talk | contribs) (I added in an explanation of hose the Russian Church labels the different books labeled Deuterocanonical.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

What should this article be renamed? In doing the slightest research at wikipedia, there are separate articles on w:Deuterocanonical books, w:Biblical apocrypha, and w:Apocrypha. Currently we have extra-canonical writings in the Category:Apocrypha. Perhaps a disambiguation page is in order? I am unsure how to best organize (and label) these books from an Orthodox viewpoint. What are your thoughts? —magda (talk) 07:16, August 31, 2007 (PDT)

Hi Magda, I think I prefer the Catholic term over the Protestant one, but I'm not sure there is a special designation for them in Orthodoxy -- they're just part fo the Bible (maybe someone can correct me on this). I do think it's useful to distinguish them in some way, so "Deuterocanonical books" may be as good as it gets. I think the category should be renamed too. — FrJohn (talk)

The Russians seem to consider these books as Apocrypha. Philaret's Catechism appears to use the Protestant canon. Can anyone with more knowledge add some info on the official Russian view? --Nate (talk)

The Orthodox official canon is longer than the Protestant one. The Orthodox Canon includes the books that the Catholic church considers "Deuterocanonical." Further, the Russian and Greek Churches each have one book in their canon that the other does not have. One of those books is Tobit, and I forget the other book. However, it's important to note that 4 Esdras is included in Russian Bibles (being named "II Esdras" IIRC), yet is not actually part of the Russian Church's "canon". It's probably included because the Vulgate Bible included it. IIRC, Pope Gelasius said that he included 4 Esdras in the Vulgate so that people wouldn't lose 4 Esdras (probably due to how many texts have been lost over the years). One point that I want to make is that the terms "Deuterocanon" and "Apocrypha" are potentially misleading or confusing terms. In the Russian Church for example, 1 Maccabbees is not "apocryphal" (ie. hidden or non-canonical), nor is it "of secondary authority." 1 Maccabbees is fully canonical. However, 4 Esdras IS noncanonical, apocryphal, secondary, etc. despite it being physically printed historically in Russian Bibles. Rakovsky (talk) 02:42, March 22, 2021 (UTC)