Canon of Sacred Scripture

  • Thread starter Thread starter Erik1978
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Erik1978

Guest
I put this question on AAC but got no response so I hope someone out there might help me. I’m trying to find out when the canon of Sacred Scripture was actually established. I get different dates and councils e.g. 363 or 367 then Council of Trent. It goes on and on. When and who decided this is Sacred Scripture?🤷
 
The Church’s understanding of which books are inspired and so are canonical developed within the Living Tradition over many centuries, and was finally infallibly taught by a solemn definition at the Council of Trent in 1546.
 
As Ron mentioned, the development of the canon occurred over time within the living tradition of the Church. Here are some dates of note:
  • By the middle of the 2nd century, Matthew, Mark, Luke-Acts and Romans was being used liturgically in the Roman Christian community.
  • Also by the middle of the 2nd century, the Gospel of John, Revelation and the Pauline epistles were used by Christians in Asia Minor.
  • In response to Marcion and other heretics, in the middle of the 2nd century, the Church began to develop a canon, combining the Old Testament with the “New Testament.” Polycarp, a bishop in Asia Minor, met with the Roman bishop (Anicetus), and this brought together the three synoptic Gospels with the Gospel of John. Further, during this time, Luke-Acts was split and the Pauline corpus was added to the Gospels/Acts in the “canon” used by churches in their liturgy.
  • By the end of the 2nd century, most churches accepted the 4 Gospels, Acts, and the Pauline epistles as part of the canon. Furthermore, other books, such as the letters of John, begin to be included as well.
  • During the 3rd century, there was still no established canon, but most churches accepted the major parts of the canon (Gospels/Acts/Pauline Corpus) and then there were differences on what other books should be accepted. Hebrews, Revelation, Shepherd of Hermes and the Epistle of Barnabas were examples of disputed books.
  • Around 330-340, Eusebius lists the following books as part of the canon:
“Undisputed”
Four Gospels and Acts
Epistles of Paul (including Hebrews)
1 John
1 Peter
Revelation of John (by some)

“Disputed”
James
Jude
2 Peter
2 & 3 John

“Inauthentic”
Acts of Paul
Shepherd of Hermas
Revelation of Peter
Epistle of Barnabas
Didache
Revelation of John (by some)
“other” Gospels: to the Hebrews, Peter, Thomas, Matthias
  • In 367, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, writes his annual Easter letter to his flock. In it, he lists the books of the NT canon, and his list is exactly the same as our modern 27-book canon. This is the first recorded instance of this exact canon.
  • In 382, a synod in Rome approves the 27-book canon.
  • In 393, a synod in Hippo also approves the 27-book canon.
  • In 397, a synod in Carthage approves the 27-book canon.
By the 5th century, the canon was, for all intents and purposes, closed. There was no debate about it until the 16th century, when Martin Luther questioned some of the books, such as James and Revelation (although in the end he did accept them all as canonical). In response, the Council of Trent authoritatively closed the canon.

(Note: Much of this information comes from “The Formation of the New Testament Canon” by William Farmer and Denis M. Farkasfalvy and “The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance” by Bruce Metzger).
 
eric_sammons said:
As Ron mentioned, the development of the canon occurred over time within the living tradition of the Church. Here are some dates of note:
  • By the middle of the 2nd century, Matthew, Mark, Luke-Acts and Romans was being used liturgically in the Roman Christian community.
  • Also by the middle of the 2nd century, the Gospel of John, Revelation and the Pauline epistles were used by Christians in Asia Minor.
  • In response to Marcion and other heretics, in the middle of the 2nd century, the Church began to develop a canon, combining the Old Testament with the “New Testament.” Polycarp, a bishop in Asia Minor, met with the Roman bishop (Anicetus), and this brought together the three synoptic Gospels with the Gospel of John. Further, during this time, Luke-Acts was split and the Pauline corpus was added to the Gospels/Acts in the “canon” used by churches in their liturgy.
  • By the end of the 2nd century, most churches accepted the 4 Gospels, Acts, and the Pauline epistles as part of the canon. Furthermore, other books, such as the letters of John, begin to be included as well.
  • During the 3rd century, there was still no established canon, but most churches accepted the major parts of the canon (Gospels/Acts/Pauline Corpus) and then there were differences on what other books should be accepted. Hebrews, Revelation, Shepherd of Hermes and the Epistle of Barnabas were examples of disputed books.
  • Around 330-340, Eusebius lists the following books as part of the canon:
“Undisputed”
Four Gospels and Acts
Epistles of Paul (including Hebrews)
1 John
1 Peter
Revelation of John (by some)

“Disputed”
James
Jude
2 Peter
2 & 3 John

“Inauthentic”
Acts of Paul
Shepherd of Hermas
Revelation of Peter
Epistle of Barnabas
Didache
Revelation of John (by some)
“other” Gospels: to the Hebrews, Peter, Thomas, Matthias
  • In 367, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, writes his annual Easter letter to his flock. In it, he lists the books of the NT canon, and his list is exactly the same as our modern 27-book canon. This is the first recorded instance of this exact canon.
  • In 382, a synod in Rome approves the 27-book canon.
  • In 393, a synod in Hippo also approves the 27-book canon.
  • In 397, a synod in Carthage approves the 27-book canon.
By the 5th century, the canon was, for all intents and purposes, closed. There was no debate about it until the 16th century, when Martin Luther questioned some of the books, such as James and Revelation (although in the end he did accept them all as canonical). In response, the Council of Trent authoritatively closed the canon.

(Note: Much of this information comes from “The Formation of the New Testament Canon” by William Farmer and Denis M. Farkasfalvy and “The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance” by Bruce Metzger).
Click to expand...
Great post - i’ll add that significantly, these late 4th century counsels also included within the cannon the Old Testatement books (including the deuterocannonical books). That is critical as it is those books that are now disputed by Protestants.

Blessings,

Brian
 
Others have answered well. It is important to understand there is no single “date” in which the canon was once and final.
 
Erik1978 said:
When and who decided this is Sacred Scripture?
Click to expand...
Canon of Scripture
The Authoritative declaration by The Church of the Canon of Holy Scripture of the New Testament resulted from the Decree of Pope St. Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D.

Here is the decree of Pope St. Damasus I which established the Canon of the New Testament:

The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I, Council of Rome. 382 A.D…

ST. DAMASUS 1, POPE, THE DECREE OF DAMASUS:
***It is decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. ***
***The list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews. Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament. ***
Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

The Council of Hippo in 393 reaffirmed the canon put forth by Pope Damasus I…

AD 393:
Council of Hippo. "It has been decided that besides the canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. (canon 36 A.D. 393).

The Third Council of Carthage reaffirmed anew, the Canon put forth by Pope Damasus I…

***AD 397: ***
Council of Carthage III. "It has been decided that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures. (canon 47 A.D. 397).
 
MarcoPolo said:
Others have answered well. It is important to understand there is no single “date” in which the canon was once and final.
Click to expand...
// so, for example, no other book (like the book of enoch) can’t be added?
 
Jehuty_X said:
// so, for example, no other book (like the book of enoch) can’t be added?
Click to expand...
The language of the Council of Trent reads thusly:

*But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema. *Perhaps someone could point out another conciliar document, or another part of Trent that gives more detail, but I do not understand the Council to have declared the canon “closed”. But rather it said that the books in the list provided were definitively “canonical.”

Nevertheless, it seems highly unlikely that another book would be added, since there has been no sign of other books used in authentic Liturgies for centuries and centuries.
 
MarcoPolo said:
The language of the Council of Trent reads thusly:

*But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema. *Perhaps someone could point out another conciliar document, or another part of Trent that gives more detail, but I do not understand the Council to have declared the canon “closed”. But rather it said that the books in the list provided were definitively “canonical.”

Nevertheless, it seems highly unlikely that another book would be added, since there has been no sign of other books used in authentic Liturgies for centuries and centuries.
Click to expand...
// :eek: … i’m confused…they mention what is contained in the latin vulgate (76 books), yet we only have 73 books… what about the other books that the latin vulgate has??? :confused:
 
Thanks for all your help. Your posts have helped me understand a little history of the development of Sacred Scripture. I believe it is important to know how we got to where we are now. We must keep our faith linked to the past where it began. Not to mention it helps to refute error and misunderstanding in todays world. All the best and may God Bless.
 
Jehuty_X said:
// :eek: … i’m confused…they mention what is contained in the latin vulgate (76 books), yet we only have 73 books… what about the other books that the latin vulgate has??? :confused:
Click to expand...
I think those would be the three books put in the appendix of the Clementine Vulgate revision. See:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Latin_Vulgate
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha (Scroll to “The Clementine Vulgate”. Then click on “The Latin Vulgate” link at the end of that chapter.

For more lengthier reading:
newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm (Vulgate Canon)

newadvent.org/cathen/05535a.htm ( 4 books of Esdras/Ezra)
 
Nita said:
I think those would be the three books put in the appendix of the Clementine Vulgate revision. See:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Latin_Vulgate
Click to expand...
Well done, Nita. This link, and every other link I’ve found on the subject says those 3 books were listed as “Apocrypha” even then. In other words, the old Latin vulgate contained 73 canonical books, the same 73 Trent declared canonical again.

Also Trent simply mentioned “as contained” in the Vulgate. So in theory, if Trent had only said, “The book of Matthew is canonical as contained in the old Latin vulgate” I don’t necessarily think it means that’s all there was in the Vulgate.

Also at the time, even “parts” of some books were still being removed (like parts of Daniel, for instance) so when it says “as contained” in the vulgate, it would also mean that the books are to include the canonical books of the Vulgate and have all the parts of those books that were in the Vulgate.
 
Ignatius said:
Canon of Scripture
The Authoritative declaration by The Church of the Canon of Holy Scripture of the New Testament resulted from the Decree of Pope St. Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D.

Here is the decree of Pope St. Damasus I which established the Canon of the New Testament:

The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I, Council of Rome. 382 A.D…

ST. DAMASUS 1, POPE, THE DECREE OF DAMASUS:
***It is decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. ***
***The list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews. Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament. ***
Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

The Council of Hippo in 393 reaffirmed the canon put forth by Pope Damasus I…

AD 393:
Council of Hippo. "It has been decided that besides the canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. (canon 36 A.D. 393).

The Third Council of Carthage reaffirmed anew, the Canon put forth by Pope Damasus I…

***AD 397: ***
Council of Carthage III. "It has been decided that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures. (canon 47 A.D. 397).
Click to expand...
Why are people still bringing out the Damasine List?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome
Thus these famous Lists represent no Papal ordinance, but are the production of an anonymous scholar of the sixth century
Click to expand...
tertullian.org/articles/burkitt_gelasianum.htm
 
Rightlydivide said:
40.png
Ignatius:
Canon of Scripture
Click to expand...
*The Authoritative declaration by The Church of the Canon of *Holy Scripture of the New Testament resulted from the Decree of Pope St. Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D.

Here is the decree of Pope St. Damasus I which established the Canon of the New Testament:

The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I, Council of Rome. 382 A.D…

ST. DAMASUS 1, POPE, THE DECREE OF DAMASUS:
***It is decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. ***
***The list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews. Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament. ***
Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

The Council of Hippo in 393 reaffirmed the canon put forth by Pope Damasus I…

AD 393:
Council of Hippo. "It has been decided that besides the canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. (canon 36 A.D. 393).

The Third Council of Carthage reaffirmed anew, the Canon put forth by Pope Damasus I…

***AD 397: ***
Council of Carthage III. "It has been decided that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures. (canon 47 A.D. 397).

Why are people still bringing out the Damasine List?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome
Click to expand...
Thus these famous Lists represent no Papal ordinance, but are the production of an anonymous scholar of the sixth century
Click to expand...
That is false and is not stated in the wiki article. We have the writings of a number of those who attended. No serious scholar doubts the declarations of the Council of Rome. The people who attended do not seem to have had any doubt.

Only a few 19th century polemicists such as Ernst vod DobschutzI have been so contemptuous of the facts as to have contrived such story.

The declaration of Pope St. Damasus is quite clear:
**"It is decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. **
The list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives"
Sounds pretty official to me.
 
Nope.
It is a fraud and no serious scholar takes this list seriously:
“What is commonly called the Gelasian decree on books which are to be received and not received takes its name from Pope Gelasius (492-496). It gives a list of biblical books as they appeared in the Vulgate, with the Apocrypha interspersed among the others. In some manuscripts, indeed, it is attributed to Pope Damasus, as though it had been promulgated by him at the Council of Rome in 382. But actually it appears to have been a private compilation drawn up somewhere in Italy in the early sixth century. (Source: F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture [Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1988], p. 97)
Click to expand...
 
Rightlydivide,

BTW, the legitimacy of the “Gelasian decree” does not impact the Church’s claim in this area. It was the Church, by the power of the Holy Spirit and through councils, that determined the canon. It was initially set at local synods and accepted by the universal Church for centuries. It was definitively set at Trent, and this was needed since it had come up for question again.
 
Rightlydivide;4572885“What is commonly called the Gelasian decree on books which are to be received and not received takes its name from Pope Gelasius (492-496). It gives a list of biblical books as they appeared in the Vulgate:
, p. 97)
Click to expand...
Nowhere in this quotation by Bruce does it deny that Damasus made the decree Ignatius quoted. It rather asserts the Gelasian decree is not attributed to Damasus. Bruce cannot even say so definitively, because he says “it appears to have been…”. But the decree of Damasus itself can be argued another day.

Sticking with what is not in dispute, it may also be worthy to note, that Bruce also acknowledges the same canon repeated at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397):

One thing must be emphatically stated. The New Testament books did not become authoritative for the Church because they were formally included in a canonical list; on the contrary, the Church included them in her canon because she already regarded them as divinely inspired, recognising their innate worth and general apostolic authority, direct or indirect. The first ecclesiastical councils to classify the canonical books were both held in North Africa — at Hippo Regius in 393 and at Carthage in 397 — but what these councils did was not to impose something new upon the Christian communities but to codify what was already the general practice of those communities. (Bruce, F.F. Canon of the New Testament, p. 97Of course, Carthage and Hippo maintained the same canon the Church today. And that means, according to Bruce, that the early Christian community had already long since been using what remains today’s Catholic canon.
 
eric_sammons said:
Rightlydivide,

BTW, the legitimacy of the “Gelasian decree” does not impact the Church’s claim in this area. It was the Church, by the power of the Holy Spirit and through councils, that determined the canon. It was initially set at local synods and accepted by the universal Church for centuries. It was definitively set at Trent, and this was needed since it had come up for question again.
Click to expand...
I agree that it does not. I just think we need to be accurate. In my readings for one of my papers, including many from a range of scholars, no one treated this seriously. You are accurately described a reasonable conclusion. No need to go the route of a known forgery contrary to what anyone else is saying.
The contents of any decree are not known.
 
Rightlydivide said:
Nope.
It is a fraud and no serious scholar takes this list seriously:
Click to expand...
The Gelasian decree has no impact on the issue at hand. The Canon that we have was revealed through The Catholic Church. Whether it was in the third, fourth or fifth century is not the relevant issue, it was still The Catholic Church which was guided by The Holy Spirit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top