What if Q were to be found: in the canon or not?

[brumano]

Let’s assume that a) there was a document, Q, which was a source for the sayings quoted from Jesus by the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke; and b) that there was nothing in Q which contradicted the Gospels or tradition.

If Q were to be discovered in a buried jar in a cave, would it then be added to the canon accepted by the Church? If it were to be added, how would this be done?

My take is this, if a so called Q were discovered and it was understood by the church to be an earlier transcript or even the original of any of the cannonical gospels then it is already preserved in Sacred scripture as such, if it contains additional subject matter, that matter can only be viewed or examined in light of existing Scriptural truth and Doctrine; not as Sacred Scripture itself, the book of the Holy Scriptures is sealed.

 

[Erich]

we don’t know if more public revelation is coming.

The Bible doesn’t say that public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle.

But… Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. In fact, He is the fullness of Truth. If more public revelation were to be forthcoming, that – by definition – would mean that we do not now have the fullness of Truth.

So… we know that more public revelation is not coming.

 

[thistle]

He wasn’t giving me an opinion, he was speaking to educate.

First, the letters in the NT are not public revelations. Second,** we don’t know if more public revelation is coming.** Third, we don’t know if there is more evidence to be found that was created before the deaths of the Apostles.

Not that I’ve ever seen, in fact, it seems to have become the default belief. . Do you have some evidence to the contrary that comes from scholars and not just people like us opining online?

Yes we do know that because it is a Church teaching. Do you not accept the Church teaching??

From the CCC:

There will be no further Revelation

CCC 66 “The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

CCC 67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.

Christian faith cannot accept “revelations” that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such “revelations”.

 

[tafan]

He wasn’t giving me an opinion, he was speaking to educate.

First, the letters in the NT are not public revelations. Second, we don’t know if more public revelation is coming. Third, we don’t know if there is more evidence to be found that was created before the deaths of the Apostles.

Not that I’ve ever seen, in fact, it seems to have become the default belief. . Do you have some evidence to the contrary that comes from scholars and not just people like us opining online?

It is a teaching of the church that public revelation ended after the death of the apostles; I am almost certain of that.
The letters in the new testament are most certainly part of public revelation. I absolutely positive about this.

Q source, I could be wrong, which is why it was a question in my post. Our pastor gave a class on the origins of the bible and all the competing theories of the order and date they were written. I thought I remembered him saying that the date of writing of gospels gets moved earlier and earlier by scholars, the Q source is being called into question more and more. But no, I have no handy source, besides Caroll’s History of Christendom, which makes a case against it. It was a question.

 

[tafan]

Should not have doubted myself about the ending of public revelation. It is certainly a church teaching:

The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ (see 1 Tim. 6:14 and Tit. 2:13)

.

From the Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation

 

[Gorgias]

Julia Mae:

we don’t know if there is more evidence to be found that was created before the deaths of the Apostles.

Yes we do know that because it is a Church teaching.

… I remember the first time I heard someone tell me this. I was all beside myself – it’s not an obvious one, if you haven’t heard it before!

thistle:

From the CCC:

There will be no further Revelation

CCC 66 “The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

However, this seems to ask a question that’s very similar to one that’s been asked over in the thread about the canon of Scripture and the alleged “Q” source: Julia is asking a question that seems, on its face, different than what’s in the CCC. Can there be “public revelation” that took place prior to the death of the last apostle, that has gotten “lost” and might later pop up? Would that be “new revelation”, or just “old revelation, newly discovered”? What if we might be able to authenticate a “Revelation 2: The Return of The Return” as a work of John, that just appears out of nowhere, in a “Dead Sea scrolls” fashion?

 

[Julia_Mae]

Yes we do know that because it is a Church teaching.

No, it isn’t.

CCC 66 “The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

“TO BE EXPECTED”

“EVEN IF”

“NOT MADE FULLY EXPLICIT”

These are the operative phrases.

The Canon is not closed. There is no evidence that this has happened. The fact is, that explicating what has been given, would be further revelation. Not “new.” But also “not yet understood although inherent in what has been revealed.” And, that explication might be something God is waiting for the right time in history to reveal and that revelation can come from an ancient document or from a worldwide manifestation of His Presence or, I imagine, in ways we can’t imagine.

 

[Julia_Mae]

It is a teaching of the church that public revelation ended after the death of the apostles; I am almost certain of that.

I answered this in a post above to thistle

The letters in the new testament are most certainly part of public revelation. I absolutely positive about this.

They are now. But they weren’t all written for public consumption. A few were written from a person to another person. They were private communications.

Q source, I could be wrong, … It was a question.

Well, we could both be wrong. Or at least, I could be wrong instead. It’s not like we can go poll all the Bibilical scholars.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Should not have doubted myself about the ending of public revelation. It is certainly a church teaching:

No, it really isn’t. This…

*we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ *

… is like the CCC - not expected. It does not and never will the Church proclaim there will be no further Revelation.

 

[Gorgias]

The letters in the new testament are most certainly part of public revelation. I absolutely positive about this.

Romans 1:1,7 – “Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, … to all the beloved of God in Rome”.
1 Cor 1:1, 2 – “Paul, … to the church of God that is in Corinth”.
2 Cor 1:1 – “Paul… to the church of God that is in Corinth”.
Gal 1:1, 2 – “Paul, … to the churches of Galatia”.
Eph 1:1 – “Paul… to the holy ones who are [in Ephasus] faithful in Christ Jesus”.
Phil 1:1 – “Paul… to all the holy ones in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi”.
Col 1:1,2 – “Paul… to the holy ones and faithful brothers in Christ in Colossae”.
1 Thess 1:1 – “Paul… to the church of the Thessalonians”.
2 Thess 1:1 – “Paul… to the church of the Thessalonians”.
Phil 1:1-2 – “Paul… to Philemon… to Apphia, … to Archippus… and to the church at your house”.
Heb 3:1 – “Therefore, holy ‘brothers’”
James 1:1 – “James… to the twelve tribes in the dispersion”
1 Peter 1:1 – “Peter … to the chosen sojourners of the disperson in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia”.
2 Peter 1:1 – “Symeon Peter … to those who have received a faith of equal value to ours”.
1 John 2:1 – “My children, I am writing this to you”
2 John 1:1 – “The Presbyter to the chosen Lady and to her children”.
Jude 1:1 – “Jude … to those who are called”

1 Tim 1:1, 2 – “Paul… to Timothy, my true child in faith”
2 Tim 1:1, 2 – “Paul… to Timothy, my dear child”
Titus 1:1,4 – “Paul… to Titus, my true child”
3 John 1:1 – “The Presbyter to the beloved Gaius”

17 letters to multiple recipients; 4 to a single recipient. And these are characterized as “private communications”?

 

[thistle]

No, it isn’t.

CCC 66 “The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

“TO BE EXPECTED”

“EVEN IF”

“NOT MADE FULLY EXPLICIT”

These are the operative phrases.

The Canon is not closed. There is no evidence that this has happened. The fact is, that explicating what has been given, would be further revelation. Not “new.” But also “not yet understood although inherent in what has been revealed.” And, that explication might be something God is waiting for the right time in history to reveal and that revelation can come from an ancient document or from a worldwide manifestation of His Presence or, I imagine, in ways we can’t imagine.

You are wrong in trying to play around with these words and expressions. They mean there will be no further public revelation.
That is why the CCC states clearly (as I already posted):

"There will be no further Revelation" These are the words of the Church. What is unclear about these 6 words.

 

[Julia_Mae]

17 letters to multiple recipients; 4 to a single recipient. And these are characterized as “private communications”?

You tell me. The issue was, and it’s now bordering on off-topic, if all in the Canon was public revelation. Do you consider a letter from one person to another a public revelation or a private communication? And the number of them is not the issue, it’s why I said “few,” I believe.

 

[Julia_Mae]

You are wrong in trying to play around with these words and expressions.

There are probably no other institutions that are as careful with words as our Church. After this was originally promulgated in Latin, the translation was scrutinized and each word required to convey not more nor less than what the Church intended. Understanding what is written in the document by taking into account all of the words is a required to discern the meaning of writings. By simply ignoring parts, we can justify all sorts of beliefs the Church has not promugated. For instance:

"There will be no further Revelation" These are the words of the Church

Here is the paragraph I quoted:

CCC 66 “The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

Your six words aren’t included.

And while all revelation may indeed have been made, it cannot be discounted that the revelation, while it had been made, is as yet undiscovered. Something that may help us “grasp its full significance,” which the Church says we have not. In fact, the most concrete statement of fact in the paragraph, other than the reference to the new Covenant never passing away is “it has not been made completely explicit.” So, there is still much the Church does not know, even though Revelation appears to be complete. Again, we are going around the same circle, so, I’m moving on.

 

[thistle]

There are probably no other institutions that are as careful with words as our Church. After this was originally promulgated in Latin, the translation was scrutinized and each word required to convey not more nor less than what the Church intended. Understanding what is written in the document by taking into account all of the words is a required to discern the meaning of writings. By simply ignoring parts, we can justify all sorts of beliefs the Church has not promugated. For instance:

Here is the paragraph I quoted:

CCC 66 “The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

Your six words aren’t included.

And while all revelation may indeed have been made, it cannot be discounted that the revelation, while it had been made, is as yet undiscovered. Something that may help us “grasp its full significance,” which the Church says we have not. In fact, the most concrete statement of fact in the paragraph, other than the reference to the new Covenant never passing away is “it has not been made completely explicit.” So, there is still much the Church does not know, even though Revelation appears to be complete. Again, we are going around the same circle, so, I’m moving on.

That is the para directly linked to the 6 words and I quoted them both from the CCC. You simply choose to ignore them and make up your own interpretation.

I will repeat the entire quote from the CCC which you can independently look up.
The Church teaches (see its exact words below) that there will be no further revelation.

QUOTE

There will be no further Revelation

CCC 66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."

UNQUOTE

What do you not understand about the Church teaching “THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER REVELATION”.

 

[thistle]

Please also see

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON DIVINE REVELATION
DEI VERBUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED
BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 18, 1965

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html

 

[Jerry-Jet]

The only scripture that could POSSIBLY be included in the canon would be scripture used in the liturgy of the Orthodox Church and not the Western Church.

I say POSSIBLY but I think for all practical matters the Canon is closed.

Q will not be found–if God had wanted us to have additional public revelation the Church would have used it in its liturgy.

Which means that the only scriptures that COULD be in the future included would be 3d and 4th Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh.

I don’t think that will happen.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Q will not be found–if God had wanted us to have additional public revelation the Church would have used it in its liturgy.

Well, I think the point of the thread is that it hasn’t been found yet. So the Church couldn’t do anything with it.

Which means that the only scriptures that COULD be in the future included would be 3d and 4th Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh.

I have no idea why this would be true. John was pretty prolific, how about him writing letters to other Apostles we haven’t found yet? Or describing Mary’s passing? Or teachings to his own disciples that further explicate what we have? None of that would even be Q, but it would be new.

 

[Khalid]

No, it would not. The canon was infallibly closed at the Council of Trent, although it was de facto closed since the early 5th century.