.
Continues from the post above…
Third Century:
At the beginning, we seem to have a rather solid canonical list of 20 of the 27 books. They are the Pauline letters (13), the 4 Gospels, Acts, 1 Peter and 1 John. The great majority of the Canon is in place. But a few books - including those eventually being dismissed - were still not embraces with a solid consensus.
Cpyrian of Carthage (d. 258) says that Christians accept 21 books: Paul’s 13 (in all these lists, nearly always mentioned first), the 4 Gospels, Acts, First Peter, First John and revelation. They are referenced as normative and canonical.
Origin (d. 255) also reports on the status of the books as regarded by Christians. He places them into two groups: Homologoumena (all embrace) as 21 books - the same as Cyprian’s list. Antilegomena (challenged) as 10 - they are Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, James, Jude (all which would eventually be accepted) and also Barnabas, Hermas, Didache and the Gospel of the Hebrews (all of which would soon be rejected).
The NT Canon is now seems solid for 21 of the 27 books. And obviously, The Catholic Church has had nothing whatsoever to do with any of this. It hasn’t done ANYTHING about any of this. The referenced meetings at Hippo and Carthage are FAR in the future.
Fourth Century:
By this time, there is an embrace of 21 books - and has been for a long time. the only “debate” centers around 5- 6 that eventually were embraced, and a handful soon to be dropped. The core of 21 is now very solid and unquestioned.
Eusebius (d. 340) wrote that Christians all accept 21 books. He lists 4 as ones accepted by most but not by all: James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John (all eventually embraced). And he lists some as “spurious” - Acts of Paul, Shepherd of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, the Didache. Most historians fully agree on this situation, although one of that solid 21 (Revelation) some historians think was more debated than Eusebius seems to indicate.
Cyril of Jerusalem (d. 350) does the same for us, listing the books that all Christians embrace as Holy Scripture. His list is the final Canon, except that Revelation was left out, giving us 26 (Matthew - Jude)
There now seems to be little debate at all, a consensus seem pretty solid - God’s people settling on a pretty solid list. Although some historians believe that Revelation was still more disputed in the East.
Athanasius of Alexandria (d. 373) Once again, we have someone telling us what we want to know: What books were Christians embracing as Holy Scripture - the NT Canon? He lists them: It’s our 27. He does mention the Didache and Hermas as “associated with” but clearly as inferior and below the 27.
Christians have a canonical list of 27. And The Catholic Church has had nothing whatsoever to do with any of this. It hasn’t done ANYTHING.
Early Meetings
Early meetings were usually not focused on stating a canon (such seems to have already been in place, with no need to state) but more with practical issues of the lectionary - what would be the Sunday readings.
The Council of Laodicea (363) Really just a regional synod and in no sense an ecumenical council says that “uncanonical books are not to be read in the churches.” While it mentions none by name, clearly all knew what was and was not a “canonical book” since there was no need whatsoever to specify which were so regarded. The canon already existed - clearly - in everyone’s mind. There’s no indication that this is an exclusive meeting of The Catholic Church. In any case, it’s too late to have any bearing and didn’t officially address the issue.
The Council of Hippo (393) Again just a regional meeting, this is the first official meeting that can be regarded as a denomination action, and since the bishops attending appear to have SOME special relationship to the bishop in Rome, Catholics like to claim this as a meeting of The Catholic Church. It specifically listing exactly what that canon of books is. It’s our 27, the 27 that had been clearly embraced as such for several decades (and in most cases, since the First Century). It AFFIRMS or ACKNOWLEDGES what already is the case. It “gives” or “creates” or “forms” NOTHING. It affirms and acknowledges and embraces. And it had no bearing at all on anything - except perhaps for the book of Revelation - which did not have a solid consensus, but Hippo resolved nothing in that regard, it continued to be debated for centuries after Hippo and often was not included in Sunday lectionaries even after Hippo
The Third Council of Carthage (397) This again listed the by now very well established NT Canon, already agreed upon by consensus by Christians. It’s the now familiar 27. Catholic often point to this one since it’s the first action vis-a-vis this topic that has any authority. But note the date! By then, Scirpture has existed for 300 to 1800 years!!! It didn’t write or give or create a single word of it! And by then, the issue of what is and is not Scripture had largely been resolved (partly for 1800 years!). Again, it is an ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, not a formation.
Since then, hundreds upon hundreds of gatherings of various types have confirmed this consensus that Christians developed and which later these councils acknowledged.
Augustine (352-430): “…the canon has been established *for *the church. This is the function of the Holy Spirit.” John E. Rotelle, O.S.A., ed., The Works of Saint Augustine, Newly Discovered Sermons, Part 3, Vol. 11, trans. Edmund Hill, O.P., Sermon 162C.15 (Hyde Park: New City Press, 1997), p. 176.
.
