The Foundation of Orthodoxy and the Canon - Research Paper Example

? THE FOUNDATION OF ORTHODOXY AND THE CANON Religion and Theology November 12, Introduction This paper deals with the early stage of development of the Christian canon, from the beginning of the 2nd century and to 325 CE. The diversity of early Christian writings is taken into account, and the relation between heretical movements and the earliest attempts of defining the prescribed readings about Christ and apostles is described. The first section describes some of the heretic movements that challenged Orthodoxy and their subtle influence on the formation of canon. The second section is dedicated to the Orthodox attempts of the formulation of the New Testament canon. Heretical Doctrines and the Formation of Canon One of the earliest Christological traditions was connected with Judaism and is referred to as “Jewish Christianity”, an umbrella term that encompasses different groups which adhered to both Christian rites and Jewish prescriptions1. Bauer, one of the most remarkable scholars of early Christianity, refutes the view that Jewish tendency in the formation of Christian canon was limited to the activities of Ebionites. He turns attention to the Syrian Jewish communities and the writings like Kerigmata Petrou and Didascalia that interpret Jesus as a “true prophet” and rely on the Peter’s Gospel while dismissing Paul’s views2. Jewish writings in general tended to favor Matthew and disregard Paul, as Paul was one of the most active proponents on the independence of Christian doctrine from the Old Testament code of conduct (the diet, circumcision, and a holiday once a week prescribed by it)3. Matthew’s Gospel openly demands the acceptance of Jewish Law; that is why it was largely supported by different early Jewish Christian movements4. The most influential of the latter were Ebionites (one of the possible etymological explanations of this name is its connection with the ideal of humble, poor living), the supporters of the “adoptionist” doctrine: to them, Jesus was a human being “adopted” by God, an ideal sacrifice after which other sacrificial rituals were not needed any more5. From this followed that Ebionites excluded the first chapters of Gospels that told the story of Christ’s birth to Virgin and that they did not consume meat6. Their doctrine in oral form was based on Matthew’s Gospel in Aramaic; later, the Gospel of Ebionites in Greek appeared for the generation unfamiliar with Aramaic7. The first attempt of the canonization of writing about Christ was actually made by a heretic who opposed the Jewish doctrine, the one named Marcion. His rationale was to challenge the view of God in the Old Testament and to comment the New Testament as the rejection of the older doctrine, “a Gospel of Love to the exclusion of Law”8. Like many Orthodox theologians of the time, he accepted the Gospel according to Luke and the epistles by Paul with slight changes and modifications by Marcion himself; some of his changes remained in the later Pauline and Lukan texts9. The first time Marcion declared his ideas was 144 CE, on the Christian Congregation in Rome10. Marcion rejected the entire Old Testament and the epistles of all apostles but Paul; he saw Jesus Christ as the son of Supreme God of love and grace, not punishment and justice, and claimed that this son only looked like a human being, so that the first chapters of Luke were viewed as misleading about His coming to the human world (not embodiment)11. He also deleted some parts of the text of the Gospel and epistles (like Gal.iii. i6 – iv.6 and 2 Thess. i. 6-8) on the ground that they supported the older Jewish tradition of Law12. Marcion produced his own polemic text and, as some of the Christian historians have proved, the introductory paragraphs to some of the epistles in Vulgata13. Marcion’s vision was very attractive because of the emphasis on mercy; it was very popular among Gentiles who were not native Jews14. Ehrman speculates about the possible prospects of Christianity influenced by either Marcionism or the Ebionite teaching to place them on two different poles of the scale of the old Testement treatment: either Christians would not recognize the Jewish tradition at all or they would be not separated from the latter15. Evidently, the contemporary canonical New Testament is far from both of these perspectives. The most moderate and significant comment on Marcion is the statement that he introduced the necessity for strict canon of writings to begin the new stage in early orthodoxy, “the expansion phase of the New Testament”16. Besides the “Western text” of the 2nd century, the tendency for “balanced relation” between Gospel and Apostle is also attributed to Marcion17. Gnostics, one more group that had a separate understanding of Christ and since was opposed by the Orthodox theologians, gained considerable popularity in the middle of 2nd century18. There have been problems in dealing with it for both Orthodox opponents and contemporary researchers. The first is poor evidence: in the times of early Christianity, Gnostic writings were kept in secret, being available only for the enlightened “elite” or for those who wanted to become such; this was one of the reasons why the first documents written by Gnosticism by its proponents (not the fathers of church) were not found until 1945 in Nag Hammadi (Egypt)19. The same elitism was true for the place of Gnostics in the society: the movement did not have any separate religious institution but rather was represented by some individuals inside the existing Christian church20 . In the library of Nag Hammada, 20 of the 39 writings use Christian symbols and narratives for the expression of the worldview more close to the Greek Platonism21. Those books represent different, often opposing systems. To sum them up roughly, the idea of suffering was central to Gnostic worldview. The Creator (Demiurg), Gnostics claimed, was never good, and the world created by this entity is vicious and evil, mainly for the fact that it is material; but the real, entirely supernatural, God gives human beings an opportunity to open themselves up for new existence (in some doctrines, he does this with the help of Christ)22. Christ was seen by Gnostics either as a human-looking spirit (like in Marcion’s doctrine) or as a spirit (Pneuma) temporally embodied to bring salvation to those who understand His teaching correctly23. Gnosticism was vigorously criticized by Lyons and Tertullian24; however, some of the Gnostics (Valentinus) are mentioned as influential figures in the formation of the canon25. Still, Metzger argues (in line with the pre-Orthodox tradition) that the canonical texts used by Gnostic have never formed any entity influential for the contemporary canon26. The Expansion of the New Testament One of the first issues that emerged in the light of existence of numerous heretical documents was the status of Gospels inside the Biblical canon. The first author that proceeded with Marcion’s idea of the canon of Scripture was St. Irenaeus (120/140 - 200/203 CE) who expressed the idea of the unity of four Gospels on the ground of their symbolism27. As Luke’s Gospel was one of them, he was also for adding the Acts of Apostles to the canon28. He was influential in the rejection of Gnostic doctrines on the ground that they affirmed the dual nature of God and the separation of the Old and New Testaments (if not the claim that there were 2 separate Christs)29. Metzger suggests that St Irenaeus was the first to refer to the New Testament as a divine revelation and a part of unity with the Old Testament; he was also the first to quote the New Testament more frequently that previous writings30. Justin Martyr (100-165 CE), his predecessor and a famous Christian apologist, had also included in this list the Revelation of St. John31. However, he did not see the Evangelic writings as valuable for themselves: unlike the writings of the prophets, they were considered reliable only “in so far as they are authorized witnesses to Jesus’s life and teaching”32. Clement of Alexandria developed the idea of four Gospels and placed them in the following chronologic order: Matthew and Luke about Jesus’s genealogy, Mark’s Gospel, and John’s Gospel33. He supported the view of the openness of canon and was the first to include I Peter, I and II John, and Jude in the Scripture34. Another issue at stake between the emergent Orthodoxy and the widespread heretical movement was the divine nature of Christ. Jewish doctrines treated Christ as a human being, while Marcion and Gnostic refused to relate Him to the God of the Old Testament. Such thinkers as Hippolytus and Tertullian, often dealing with this opposition between Godfather and Christ in heretical writings, tended to see Jesus as a part of the triple unity of God, his Son, and the Holy Spirit (Tertullian was the first to use the word Trinity)35. Thus, Christ was regarded as neither pure Spirit nor a human being any more. Thus, Tertullian with his apologetic work was a predecessor to Origen’s systematic thinking about the nature of Christ36. Origen refers to the Gospels and the Apostles (‘the New Testament’) as to “divine Scriptures” “written by evangelists and apostles through the same Spirit” as the Old Testament37. Thus, the God of the Old Testament and Christ of the New Testament become linked by Spirit, the Son being the “transference of God’s being”38 – a foundational belief in the contemporary Orthodoxy. Origen approved of the four Gospels, the Revelation of St. John, Acts of Apostles, and the epistles but James, II Peter, II John, and III John; like Clement of Alexandria, he also quoted miscellaneous alternative writings as useful for sane spirit39. Lieuwen cites the Muratorian canon (200 CE) as the end of the expansion phase. The canon included “the four gospels (…), Acts, the thirteen Pauline epistles, two letters of John (probably I and II John), Jude, and Revelation-as well as the Revelation of Peter (…) and the Wisdom of Solomon”40. This was one of the first attempts of a codification of the New Testament and in a sense a historical introduction to the call for ultimate codification of the canon in 325 CE by Eusebius, largely under the influence of Montanist heresy41. The Muratorian canon was actually not insistent in tone: it was introduced by its anonymous author as a reading that should shape the understanding of Christ’s teaching with the classification of literature related to the New Testament: 1. The universally accepted books (the four of Gospels, Acts, Epistles of Paul (13), Jude, Epistles of John (2 or 3), and the Revelation of John 2. A disputed book (the Revelation of Peter) 3. A rejected book recommended for private reading (the Shepherd of Hermas) 4. Totally rejected books by Heretics (including a remark about Montanists)42. Actually, two tendencies opposing the heretical claims were lying in the foundation of the canon. Firstly, the author’s treatment of the fourth of Gospels opposes the views of Asian heretics that it had the Gnostic author43; and secondly, there is a list of plainly heretic (prohibited) writings. It is possible he latter appeared as a reaction to the authoritarianism of the Montanists doctrine44. This was the end of the era of prescriptive writings. Later, “Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nazianzus, Amphilochius of Iconium, Didymus the Blind, and Epiphanius de Salamis” issued their strictly limiting canons45 Conclusion In sum, the early Christian era, when the attempts to formulate the canonical writings were not taken in the form of demands, was characterized by blurred boundaries between heretical and non-heretical writings, as well as by relatively free exchange of thoughts. The beliefs in Trinity and in the divine nature of the New Testament have become foundational for Orthodoxy as opposed to the heretical movements of the time. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bauer, Walter. Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity.Updated electronic English edition by Robert A. Kraft, 1993. ebionite.org/member2/bauer_prelim.pdf (accessed Nov 12, 2012). Davis, Glenn. “The Development of the Canon of the New Testament”. The Development of the Canon of the New Testament. 1997-2010. http://www.ntcanon.org/index.shtml (accessed Nov 12, 2012). Ehrman, Bart D. The Lost Christianities. New York and Oxford: Oxford university Press, 2003. Lieuwen, Daniel F. “The Emergence of the New Testament Canon”, Conciliar Press, 1996, http://www.orthodox.net/faq/canon.htm (accessed Nov 12, 2012). Metzger, Bruce M. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989. Read More