Fr. Bar-Yuhanon Raban
(Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch)
1. *Introduction*
The formation of the New Testament canon was a prolonged and significant process in the early Christian church, which helped shape the theological and doctrinal foundations of Christianity. The early church fathers employed specific criteria to determine which books would be included in the NT canon, distinguishing them from other writings. This paper explores the criteria used by the early church fathers to authenticate books as canonical. Through an examination of certain patristic writings, canon related books, and relevant e-literatures, this study develops the research that the early church fathers’ criteria for canonicity were rooted in orthodoxy, apostolicity, consensus among the churches, and inspiration, ultimately yielding an organized and authoritative NT canon that has endured for centuries.
2. *Apostolic Fathers’ Period*
The Apostolic Fathers’ works do not discuss canonicity but provide occasional testimony to the existence of books that later became part of the New Testament. The authors’ attitudes toward the New Testament differ based on their background. Jewish-Christian fathers relied on the Old Testament and oral traditions of Jesus’ sayings, while Hellenistic-Christian fathers referenced New Testament writings more frequently but did not mention them as “Holy Scriptures.” For Hellenistic fathers, exact quotation from scriptures was not a priority, making it difficult to determine which New Testament books were known to early writers. However, by the end of the second century, the evidence became clearer. Despite these differences, both Jewish and Hellenistic Apostolic Fathers show knowledge of books that would comprise the New Testament and often express thoughts through quotes drawn from these writings, indicating an implicit authority. Jesus’ words were considered the supreme authority, though, there was a noticeable beginning of a drive to frame His words within specific books during the Apostolic Fathers’ period. Nevertheless, the authority of these writings was not exclusive, and the concept of canonicity developed over time after the Apostolic Fathers.
3. *Criteria of Early Church Fathers*
As F.F. Bruce aptly notes, “The historic Christian belief is that the Holy Spirit, who controlled the writing of the individual books, also controlled their selection and collection, thus continuing to fulfil our Lord’s promise that He would guide His disciples into all the truth.” However, to find out the early church fathers criteria of canon, we need to discern the historical process behind the formation of the New Testament canon, rather than solely relying on spiritual insight. Building on this perspective, our objective is to explore four criteria which are “orthodoxy, apostolicity, consensus among the churches, and inspiration”, that guided the early church in selecting and compiling the books of the New Testament, using historical research as our primary tool.
*3.1 Orthodoxy*
Orthodoxy played a crucial role in the early church’s criteria for canonicity. According to Bruce M. Metzger, “A basic prerequisite for canonicity was conformity to what was called the ‘rule of faith’, that is, the congruity of a given document with the basic Christian tradition recognized as normative by the Church.” This “rule of faith” served as a standard to test the authenticity and authority of a writing. The early church fathers rejected writings that deviated from this rule, and so they rejected the literary works of heretics. Metzger notes that terms like “the canon of truth” and “the rule of truth” were used by early church fathers like Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian to emphasize the importance of conformity to established doctrine. The ‘orthodoxy,’ which is the first criteria of canon by early church fathers ensured that only writings that aligned with the fundamental teachings of Christianity were considered authoritative. As Metzger explains, “A book that presents teachings deemed to be out of harmony with such tradition would exclude itself from consideration as authoritative Scripture.” This criterion helped the early church to discern which writings were worthy of inclusion in the New Testament canon.
Cyril of Jerusalem gives a list of Old Testament books in Catechetical Lecture 4.35-36. He tells his disciples, “Read the divine Scriptures… but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church.” He is talking about the Old Testament, but the same idea fits the New Testament too. Cyril’s point is clear that only the books accepted and read in the churches, which agree with the faith passed down from the apostles, should be treated as Holy Scripture. Any writing that teaches something different should not be part of the Holy Scriptures. This shows that for Cyril, orthodoxy which is the true teaching of the Church was an essential guide for choosing which books belong in the NT.
*3.2 Apostolicity*
Apostolicity was a crucial criterion for determining the canonicity of a book in the early Christian church. As Michael Kruger notes, the historical-critical model’s focus on the period after the writing of the New Testament books has led to a neglect of the critical time before and during the writing of these books, particularly the significance of the redemptive-historical epoch from which they came. According to Kruger, the apostolic character of the books reminds us that their authority “does not depend on the actions of the later church but is rooted in the foundational role played by the apostles as ‘ministers of the new covenant’ (2 Cor. 3:6).” This means that the church did not confer canonical status on these books arbitrarily, rather, they were recognized as canonical due to their inherent apostolic authority.
The Muratorian Fragment provides insight into how apostolicity was used as a test for canonicity. As Bruce M. Metzger notes, the writer of the Fragment rejects the Shepherd of Hermas from the canon because it is too recent and cannot be attributed to the apostles. Metzger explains that “the apostolic origin, real or putative, of a book provided a presumption of authority.” For example, the association of Mark and Luke with the apostles Peter and Paul, respectively, validated their writings and contributed to their acceptance into the canon.
Metzger further observes that the emphasis on apostolicity highlights the importance of eyewitness testimony and historical accuracy in the early church’s evaluation of canonical books. The authors of the New Testament writings were either eyewitnesses or careful historians, which further solidified their authority. As Metzger notes, “In all that the writer [of Muratorian Fragment] says about the historical books of the New Testament, he insists on the personal qualification of the authors either as eyewitnesses or as careful historians.”
By emphasizing apostolicity, the early church ensured that only writings with a direct connection to the apostles, and thus to Jesus Christ, were considered authoritative and worthy of inclusion in the New Testament canon. This criterion played a vital role in shaping the contours of the New Testament and guaranteeing its reliability as a witness to the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The early church father Tertullian clearly states that all the authority of Christian teaching is built in the apostolic foundation and arguing that only apostolic continuity is carry the mark of truth. In Prescription Against Heretics he writes, “If, then, these things are so, it is in the same degree manifest that all doctrine which agrees with the apostolic churches—those moulds and original sources of the faith must be reckoned for truth, as undoubtedly containing that which the (said) churches received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, Christ from God.” For Tertullian, the authentic canon of Christian faith rests upon the unbroken chain from God to Christ, Christ to the apostles, and the apostles to the churches through both oral and written transmission. Any teaching or writing lacking this apostolic continuity is to be rejected. This demonstrates that for the early Church, apostolicity was not simply one criterion among many but it is the central measure of canonicity.
*3.3 Consensus among the Churches*
One important reason the early Church accepted certain books into the New Testament was because all the churches agreed on them. For example, Athanasius of Alexandria, in his 39th Festal Letter (AD 367), gave the list of the 27 books of the New Testament and said, “Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are the four gospels according to Matthew…And besides, the Revelation of John…. In these alone is the teaching of godliness proclaimed. Let no one add to these nor take from them…. that there are other books beside these not indeed included in the canon” This shows that these books were not chosen by just one person or one place but were the same books read and believed by Christians everywhere. The agreement of all the churches helped make sure the books of the New Testament were the right ones.
Moreover, the early Church fathers like Jerome also emphasized the importance of a book’s continuous acceptance and usage by the Church at large. Jerome argued that a book’s authority was strengthened if it had been accepted by many churches over a long period of time. He accepted both the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse because they were quoted by ancient writers as canonical, despite some churches rejecting them. According to Jerome, “It does not matter who is the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, for in any case it is the work of a church-writer and is constantly read in the Churches.” This further highlights the significance of consensus and continuous usage in determining the authority of a book.
*3.4 Inspiration*
Gregory of Nyssa clearly teaches that the Bible comes from God Himself through the Holy Spirit. In Against Eunomius, he says, “The Scripture, ‘given by inspiration of God,’ as the Apostle calls it, is the Scripture of the Holy Spirit, and its intention is the profit of men. For ‘every Scripture,’ he says, ‘is given by inspiration of God and is profitable.’” Gregory explains that the Holy Spirit inspired the writers so that the teachings in Scripture come from God and lead people to the truth.
Because the Church believed the Holy Spirit guided the authors, inspiration became an essential test for whether a book belonged in the Bible. Gregory explains this clearly when he says, “Thus it is by the power of the Spirit that the holy men who are under Divine influence are inspired, and every Scripture is for this reason said to be ‘given by inspiration of God,’ because it is the teaching of the Divine afflatus.” This shows that the early Christians saw inspiration as a key reason to accept a book into the New Testament. If a writing was not believed to be Spirit-inspired, the Church would not recognize it as Scripture.
*Conclusion*
The early Church fathers used specific criteria to determine which books belonged in the New Testament. Four of these criteria included orthodoxy, apostolicity, consensus among the churches, and inspiration. By carefully evaluating writings based on these standards, the early Church fathers ensured that only books that were truly authoritative and in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles were included in the canon. As a result, the New Testament Canon has been widely accepted and revered by Christians throughout these centuries. The early Church fathers’ commitment to preserving the apostolic faith and maintaining the integrity of Christian doctrine is evident in their careful consideration of these criteria. This process ultimately produced a unified and authoritative New Testament canon that continues to shape Christian doctrines and practice today.
അഭിപ്രായങ്ങള്
ഒരു അഭിപ്രായം പോസ്റ്റ് ചെയ്യൂ