( ) CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. The his tory of the New Testament canon is the history of the New Testament writings viewed as an au thoritative and closed collection. It inquires as to the estimation in which these writings were held by the Early Church; how and when they came to he collected, and the principles upon which and the date when the collection was closed.
(1) The New Testament Writings in the Apos tolic Agc.---During this period the New-Testa ment books came into existence. They were, in the majority of cases, produced independently, with no special reference to each other, by vari ous authors at different times, for the use of different communities of individuals. Each book began its career alone. The answer to the ques tion how they came to be collected, united, mid constituted. the canon or rule for universal Christian faith and practice, is to be sought first in certain characteristics of the Apostolic Age. Christianity was not, at first, a hook-religion. The teachings of Jesus were committed to His Apostles, to be reproduced and proclaimed and taught by them, orally, as the Gospel. The Gos pel was authoritative, for it was the Gospel of God. Therefore, the words of the Apostles, as the accredited teachers and expounders of the Gospel, were accorded the greatest weight. \That was true of their spoken words was also true of what they wrote. Hence, when the Gospel took on a written form, whether in an epistle or in a nar rative of Jesus's words and deeds written by au Apostle or an intimate companion and fellow worker with the Apostles, such writing was sure to be carefully preserved, often read, widely cir culated, and highly honored. It was a natural result, untrammeled by any theories whatsoever. The evidence for this is abundant throughout the New Testatment. 'Upon these two principles the supreme authority of the Gospel itself, and the preeminent right of the Apostles and their inti mate associates to teach it, the subsequent ca reer of the New-Testament books depended.
(2) The Age (to about A.D. 140) was an intensely practical period. It was a mis sionary age. The Christian documents that re main from it only incidentally reveal the state of opinion as to the New-Testament books. They do, however, afford us a glimpse into the condi tion of the Church in nearly all parts of the Ho man world then covered by Christian activity. Everywhere there was the same high opinion of the (now dead) Apostles, as the authorized ex ponents of the faith. There was general uni formity as to the recognition of the supreme au thority of our Lord's teachings. These were naturally placed alongside of the Old Testament, which, nevertheless. continued to be the only gen erally recognized 'Scripture.' From the canoni zation of our Lord's words contained in the Gos pel narratives, it was but a step to the canoniza tion of the Gospels themselves. But this step was not yet formally taken. Collections, more or less complete, of the Pauline Epistles were in the hands of the leading men in the Churches of Antioch, Asia Minor: Greece. Home, and other places. Quotations from the New-Testament writings are numerous, hut of a free, informal character. in but one instance introduced by the regular formula, "it is written." The Apocry phal Gospels from this period show large depend ence on our canonical Gospels.
(3) Prom A.D. I '0-225 the Church was engaged in a deadly struggle with foes within and with out. Gnosticism threatened to annihilate the primitive Christian faith, while the Homan Gov vrninent, put. Christianity itself under the ban. The Church was called upon to defend its faith and its position. Hence, the more important Christian literature of this period is controver sial. From we writings of Justin Martyr, in Route, alma A.D. 150, we learn that the mem oirs of the Apostles, also called 'Gospels,' were in common use in the public Sunday services of the Christians. and that these writings, as hav ing been written by the Apostles and their coin oim panions, were the main source of the Church's knowledge of Christ's deeds and teachings. Nev
ertheless. Justin held no strict theory as to the canonicity of the four Gospels. The progress of thought in this respect was such that Tremens, forty years later, speaks of the four Gospels as the four foundation pillars of the Church, de claring that the four creatures in Revelation iv. 7 symbolized the same Gospels. In tremens we also find the conception that the Gospels, though four in number, were of one Spirit. In writers between Justin and Irermis we see the same general high estimation of the Gospels and familiarity with their contents. In 'reference to the Epistles, especially those of Paul. we find that not only many collections were in existence, but that they were coiirdinated with the Gos pels as a second and essential element in the doe uments of the New Dispensation, which were now being placed alongside of the Old Testament as belonging to the Chureh's authoritative Scrip tures. The conflict with heresy simply aeeeler ated and sharpened the thought of the Church in these respects. At the outset both heretics and orthodox appealed to the same early documents and traditions. But when heresy began to ma nipulate these documents, or to forge others as of equal value, or to explain them by fanciful inter pretations, such men as Iremeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus protested, insisting that only those writings which the Church had always used and received as of Apostolic origin were to be ac cepted as standard and authoritative. By A.D. 225, the principle of a New Testament alongside of the Old was pretty firmly established and generally adopted throughout the Church. The two great divisions of this New Testament were de*ignated by the terms, almost universally used, 'the Gospel' and 'the Apostle,' corresponding to the Law- and the Prophets; • and each division was considered inspired. The main elements in 'the Apostle' part were the Epistles of Paul, I. Peter, and I. John. These were practically universally used. The Acts and the Apocalypse were also quite generally used. In respect to the other New-Testament books, though they belonged to the collection in some localities, their use had not yet become universal. On the other hand, in some localities, certain early Christian books, such as I. Clement, Ep. Barnabas. and the Di dache, were accorded canonical rank. In Rome, the principle of Apostolic origin was rigorously applied; in Alexandria, the spirit was morn lib eral.
(4) Period from A.D. 2.?5-601.—All that now remained was for the Church to come to some agreement as to the differences between the col lections in use. As to Alexandria, the writings of Clement and Origen show that doubts as to II. Peter and 11. and Ill. John were freely expressed. while James and Jude were, apparently, not used. A later Alexandrian bishop, Dionysius (e.250 A.n.), rejected the Apocalypse. There was much discussion, also, as to the authorship of He brews. Finally, however, Athanasius, the great Bishop of Alexandria, in A.D. :367, decreed that the canon consisted of the 27 books now included in the Xew Testament. In the West, the question of the disputed books, which there were Hebrews, James, Jude. and 11. Peter': was finally settled by the Council of Carthage in A.D. 397. which ac cepted them as canonical. Usage in Rome and Alexandria and Carthage thus became uniform.
In the East, dominated by AntiOeh and Constan tinople, it was long before the question was set tled. Eusebius, about A.D. 325, had pointed out that seven books were `Antilegomena,' i.e. spoken against (by some). Of these, Hebrews and James were generally used in the East. The others, II. Peter, IL and III. John, Jude, and Revelation, were often either unknown or unac knowledged. These were also probably wanting in the earlier Syriac Bibles. Gradually the practice in the East became conformed to that in the \Vest, until at the Council of A.D. 691, though not without some inconsistency, the canon of the West—i.e. our present New-Testament canon— was recognized. The controversies of the Refor mation times left the New-Testament canon un touched.