In this section we wish to study how the Sacred Books of the New Testament came to form a collection and how they were accepted by all Christians. In this study we will be helped by the ancient historical documents, which almost in their entirety belong to ecclesiastical writers of the primitive Church.

a) We have already seen that Jesus Christ, the apostles, and the Christian Church received the writings of the Old Testament as sacred and inspired. But, in addition, a short time after the death of Christ a new religious literature began to appear, that is, Christian literature, which dealt with the Life and doctrine of Christ and of the apostles. This literature was in part historical (the four Gospels and the Acts) and in part epistolary (letters of Saint Paul and of other apostles). The literary activity of the authors of the New Testament extends over a period of about sixty years: between the years A.D. 40 and 100.

b) The first Christians very soon began to venerate as sacred writings the books and the letters written by the apostles and by their collaborators. This fact should not surprise us if we keep in mind that Christ had promised them the Holy Spirit (Cf. Jn 14,26; 16,13 ff.) and had constituted them dispensers of the mysteries of God (1 Cor 4,1). And, indeed, the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, beginning from then the sublime mission -for which they had been prepared by Jesus himself- of preaching the doctrine of Christ to the whole world. In this mission they were effectively helped by their own writings addressed to various Churches and Christian communities.

The veneration with which the first Christians received everything that came from the true apostles readily explains that the faithful felt moved to preserve those precious writings and to communicate them to other communities. This same thing must have led the Christians to make various copies of those apostolic writings and to gradually form small collections of that new literature. Saint Paul expressly orders the Colossians to read the epistle addressed to those of Laodicea, and to the Laodiceans he in turn commands that they read the letter sent to the Colossians[1].

In the New Testament we already find certain indications that seem to demonstrate that a divine authority was attributed to the writings of the apostles. In 1 Tim 5,18 we have the first example of a citation of the words of Jesus as sacred Scripture[2]. 2 Pet 3,15-16 attributes the same authority to the epistles of Saint Paul as to the prophetic writings.

The Christian literature of the end of the first century and of the second century attests the same. According to the Didache 8,2, it is the Lord himself who speaks and commands in the Gospel. Saint Clement of Rome affirms that Saint Paul, divinely inspired, wrote to the Corinthians[3]. The Epistle of Barnabas also cites Mt 22,14 with the formula ordinarily employed to cite the Old Testament: “gégraptai” = “it is written”[4]. The writings of the apostolic Fathers Saint Ignatius Martyr and Saint Polycarp are full of citations and of allusions taken from the Gospels and from the Pauline epistles, which indicates the great veneration and reverence they had for these writings.

c) If the letters of Saint Clement of Rome to the Corinthians and of Saint Ignatius Martyr to the Philippians were held in such esteem by their recipients that they made copies to transmit them to other Churches, still more esteemed must have been the writings of the apostles. Thus it is easily explained that from the very beginning the apostolic writings were collected to be read publicly in divine worship. From 2 Pet 3,15-16, in which mention is made of all the letters (“en pásais epistoláis”) of Saint Paul, it can be deduced that already in that time some collection of the epistles of the Apostle must have existed. Saint Ignatius Martyr, in his epistle to the Ephesians, also seems to suppose the existence of a collection of Pauline epistles.

The process of collecting and forming the canon of the New Testament must have been quite brief for the majority of the books, owing to the fact that the Tradition was very clear and well known to all. Thus it happened with the four Gospels and with almost all the epistles of Saint Paul (excepting the epistle to the Hebrews). On the contrary, with respect to other books of the New Testament, the process of “canonization” was slower, and their canonicity was disputed for a considerable time, because the apostolic tradition was not equally clear and evident in all the Churches. Toward the end of the fourth century the Catholic Church arrived at unanimity concerning the canon of the New Testament.

d) Three were the principal causes that accelerated the formation of the canon of the New Testament: 1) The spread of many apocrypha, which were rejected by the Church on account of the dangerous doctrines they contained; 2) the heresy of Marcion, which followed a canon of its own. It rejected the whole Old Testament, and of the New admitted only the Gospel of Saint Luke and ten epistles of Saint Paul; 3) the heresy of the Montanists, which added new books to the canon of the Church and affirmed that it had received new revelations from the Holy Spirit.

 

1. Formation of the canon of the New Testament up to the year 150.- The books of the New Testament, having been for the most part writings addressed to particular communities, were not immediately known by the whole Christian Church. Nevertheless, from the earliest times of the Church we already have testimonies of great value that demonstrate the existence of these sacred writings. The citations that the apostolic Fathers have transmitted to us are not usually made literally, on account of which it is at times difficult to determine from which book of the New Testament they have been taken. Toward the end of the second century we already find explicit testimonies, and even a catalogue of Sacred Books of the New Testament, as we shall see later.

a) In the New Testament itself we find indications that allow us to deduce the existence of some collection of Saint Paul: 2 Pet 3,15-16. And, as we have already said, 1 Tim 5,18 very possibly cites the Gospel of Saint Luke (10,7), considering it as sacred Scripture.

b) The apostolic Fathers do not usually cite the Sacred Books of the New Testament by the names of their authors. But their writings are riddled with citations of and allusions to the New Testament, in such a way that their testimonies are considered most certain. In the writings of the said Fathers citations of almost all the Books of the N.T. are found, if we except the epistles of Philemon and 3 Jn 14[5].

The Didache (around the year A.D. 90) frequently cites Mt, and seems to know Lk, 1 Thess, 1 Pet, Jude, and perhaps Jn and Acts 15.

Saint Clement of Rome (around 96) employs Mt, 1-2 Tim, Tit, Heb, and probably Lk, Acts, 1 Cor, Rom, 1-2 Pet, Jas.

Epistle of Barnabas (around 98) cites Mt, Rom, Col, 2 Tim, Tit, 1 Pet, and probably also knew Jn.

Saint Ignatius of Antioch (year 107) employs in his writings Mt, Lk, Jn, Acts, 1 Thess, Gal, 1 Cor, Rom, Col, Eph, Heb.

Saint Polycarp (around the year 108) alludes in his letter to Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn, Acts, 2 Thess, Gal, 1-2 Cor, Rom, Col, Eph, Phil, 1-2 Tim, Heb, Jas, 1 Pet, 1 Jn.

Papias (around 110) is the first who gives the names of the authors of Mt, Mk, Jn, and reports something about the origin of the Gospels. He also knew 1 Pet, 1 Jn, Rev.

The Martyrium Polycarpi (around 150) makes use of Mt, Jn, Acts, Rev, and perhaps Jude.

The Shepherd of Hermas (around 140-155) makes use of Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn, Acts, 1 Thess, 2 Cor, Rom, Eph, Phil, Heb, Jas, 1-2 Pet, Rev.

c) The apologists have transmitted to us testimonies still much clearer about the books of the New Testament. Having to defend the Christian doctrines against the attacks of the unbelievers and of the heretics, they frequently resort to citations of the sacred writings.

Aristides of Athens (around 140), in his Apology c. 15, narrates the Life of Jesus, and affirms that the coming of Jesus Christ can be known from the evangelical writings. He also cites Mt, Jn, Acts, Rom, 1 Tim, Heb, 1 Pet.

Saint Justin (year 150-160) is the first ancient writer who speaks to us of the liturgical use of the New Testament in the assemblies of the Christians. “And on the day called Sunday -he says-, all who live in the cities or in the country gather together in one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read before them as long as time permits”[6]. The “memoirs of the apostles” are the Gospels, according to the other writings of Saint Justin. He frequently cites the Gospels of Mt and Jn. He also speaks explicitly of the Apocalypse, attributing it to Saint John the Apostle. He likewise knows Acts and all the epistles of Saint Paul, Jas, 1-2 Pet, 1 Jn.

 

2. The canon of the New Testament from the second century to the fourth century.- The testimonies that we possess from this period in favor of the Sacred Books of the New Testament are very clear and of great importance.

Tatian the Syrian (around the year 172), making use of the four Gospels, composed a work called Diatessaron. It was a Gospel harmony that became widely known. The Churches of Syria used it until the fifth century. Tatian also knows Acts, 1 Cor, Rom, Heb, Tit, Rev.

Marcion (year 140-170) is the principal witness of the second century concerning the history of the canon. In his work Antitheses he rejects the whole Old Testament, as coming from the God of fear, distinct from the God of love of the New Testament. Of the writings of the New Testament he admits the Gospel of Saint Luke, but abridged. He rejects the first two chapters of Lk as having a certain Hebrew flavor. And he also recognizes as canonical ten Pauline epistles, excepting the pastorals and that to the Hebrews. The other books of the New Testament are not considered canonical by Marcion.

Marcion was not the first to form the canon of the New Testament, as some authors affirm. Before him there already existed collections of sacred writings that were considered by all as inspired. This is deduced from the testimonies we possess from that time. Moreover, the mutilated canon of Marcion himself supposes that a canon already existed in the Church, of which he made use in his own way. Nevertheless, the Church, on the occasion of Marcion’s canon and in order to oppose his erroneous doctrines, must have applied greater effort and diligence in determining the true canon.

Epistle of the churches of Lyons and Vienne (around 177), which shows us that in Gaul the following were known: Lk, Jn, Acts, Rom, Eph, Phil, 1 Tim, 1 Pet, 1 Jn, and most probably Heb, 2 Pet, 2 Jn. The Apocalypse is cited as “Scripture”.

Saint Theophilus of Antioch (around the year 180) considers the evangelists as inspired, and cites Mt and Lk. He also affirms that John, the “Pneumatophoros”, was the author of the fourth Gospel. He makes use of almost all the epistles of Saint Paul, and in some places cites the epistle to the Rom and 1 Tim with the formula: “the divine word” (Gr. “ho theios logos”).

Saint Irenaeus (year 175-195) teaches that the writings of the New Testament are of apostolic origin[7]. The Gospels were written by Saint Matthew in Hebrew, by Saint Mark, the interpreter of Saint Peter; by Saint Luke, the traveling companion of Saint Paul, and by Saint John, the beloved disciple of the Lord[8]. In his writings, Saint Irenaeus cites or alludes to all the books of the New Testament, with the exception of the epistle to Philemon, 2 Pet, 3 Jn, and that of Jude.

Tertullian (year 160-240) combats Marcion, reproaching him that, not being a Christian, he had no right whatever to make use of the Christian scriptures[9]. He affirms that there are four Gospels, which he calls the “evangelical instrument”. Two were written by apostles, Saint Matthew and Saint John, and the other two by apostolic men, Saint Mark and Saint Luke[10]. He also directly cites Acts and thirteen Pauline epistles[11]. He attributes the epistle to the Hebrews to Barnabas[12]. He further adduces 1 Pet, 1 Jn, Jude, and the Apocalypse[13]. It is doubtful whether he refers to the epistle of Jas[14]. He does not allude to 2 Pet nor to 2 and 3 Jn.

Muratorian Fragment (from the end of the 2nd c.). It was found in the Ambrosian Library of Milan by L. A. Muratori (d. 1750) and edited by him in the year 1740[15]. It contains the most ancient catalogue, known up to today, of the books of the New Testament. At the beginning it is mutilated, on account of which the reference it made to the Gospels of Mt and Mk has been lost. In its present form it speaks of Lk, Jn, Acts, 1-2 Cor, Gal, Rom, Eph, Phil, Col, 1-2 Thess, Phlm, Tit, 1-2 Tim, Jude, 1-2 Jn, Rev, 1 Pet. The epistles to the Hebrews, that of Jas, and 2 Pet are not named. Private reading of the Shepherd, of Hermas, is permitted[16]. Hermas, the author of the Shepherd, is called the brother of the bishop of Rome Pius (year 140-155), and since it is also affirmed that the Shepherd of Hermas was written “nuperrime temporibus nostris” (“in our days”, “quite recently”), it is deduced that the composition of the Muratorian Fragment must be placed toward the middle of the second century, in Rome or in the vicinity of the City. Its author is not known; but it is quite probable that it was Saint Hippolytus of Rome.

From the beginning of the third century up to the first half of the fourth century, the testimonies of Tradition, concerning the canon of the New Testament, are very clear and of great value. The greater part of the doubts previously existing disappear. The writers of this period, both of the East and of the West, show themselves in general in agreement about the canon of Sacred Books of the New Testament.

Clement of Alexandria (around the year 180-202). Eusebius affirms, speaking of Clement of Alexandria, that “in the books of the Hypotyposes he weaves a compendious narration of all the Scriptures of both Testaments”[17]. From which it can be deduced that he knew all the books of the New Testament, including the Apocalypse. It is doubted whether he knew the epistles 2-3 Jn and 2 Pet. It must be noted, however, that, together with the canonical books, he cites others that are not. Which seems to suppose that he did not know how to distinguish well the canonical books from the apocryphal ones.

Origen (d. 254) was a man very versed in biblical sciences and had traveled through all the principal Churches of that time: those of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, Asia Minor, Athens, Arabia. For all which he constitutes a testimony of the highest importance and authority. He admits all 27 books of the New Testament, considering them as canonical[18]. Although he knows the doubts of some writers of that time about the canonicity of 2 Pet, of 2-3 Jn, and of Jude, nevertheless, he pays no heed to them and admits into his canon all the epistles. On the contrary, likewise knowing the apocrypha, he does not receive them into the canon of the Sacred Books[19].

Saint Hippolytus of Rome (d. around 258-260). His testimony is of much importance because he was an exceptional interpreter of the Roman Church. In his writings, Saint Hippolytus cites all the books of the New Testament, excepting the epistles Phlm, 2 and 3 Jn. The Muratorian Fragment, which various authors attribute to Saint Hippolytus[20], contains all the canonical books of the New Testament, except the epistle to the Heb, Jas, and 2 Pet.

Novatian (around the year 250) was a presbyter of the Church of Rome who later fell into heresy. In his writings he makes use of all the books of the New Testament, with the exception of the epistle to the Hebrews. 

Saint Cyprian (d. 258), bishop of Carthage, cites ten Pauline epistles, 1 Pet, 1 Jn, and the Apocalypse. He does not mention the epistle to Phlm and doubts the origin of the epistle to the Heb.

Mommsen Canon, (from around the year 259) comes from the Church of Africa, and mentions twenty-four books of the New Testament. It omits the epistles to the Heb, that of Jas, and Jude.

Saint Dionysius of Alexandria (d. 264) admits all the books of the New Testament, although he does not cite 2 Pet and that of Jude. And in order to oppose the millenarian error, which relied on Rev 20, he denied that the author of the Apocalypse was the apostle Saint John. He denied, consequently, the authenticity, but not the canonicity, of the Apocalypse.

From the testimonies we have just cited, it is not difficult to observe that in the third century almost all the books of the New Testament were received into the canon. In the West the canonicity of the epistles of Jas, 2 Pet, and Heb is doubted, and for that reason they are at times omitted. In the East there are still quite a few writers who doubt the five minor Catholic epistles: Jas, 2 Pet, 2-3 Jn, and Jude.

3. The canon of the New Testament in the 4th-6th centuries. In the fourth and fifth centuries a still greater unanimity is noted among ecclesiastical writers concerning the canonical books of the New Testament. The doubts are of lesser importance. In contrast, however, with this, we find the hesitations that begin to arise in the East about the authenticity and canonicity of the Apocalypse, initiated by Saint Dionysius of Alexandria, as we have already seen. But, in spite of all, unanimity becomes complete in the West at the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth; and in the East this unanimity is achieved during the sixth century.

a) The Syrian writers manifest doubts about the minor Catholic epistles. The work called Doctrina Addai (4th c.) and Aphraates (around the year 340) omit all the Catholic epistles and the Apocalypse. Saint Ephraem (d. 373) cites 1 Pet and 1 Jn, and probably the epistle of Jas. He does not seem to have used 2 and 3 Jn and that of Jude, because these epistles had not yet been translated from the Greek in his time, and Saint Ephraem did not know Greek. There is also known to us a stichometric Catalogue from around the year 400, which does not contain the Catholic epistles and the Apocalypse. The Peshitta version, so widespread among the Syrians, contains 1 Pet, 1 Jn, and Jas, but it lacks 2 Pet, 2-3 Jn, Jude, Rev. Nevertheless, the later versions: Philoxenian (year 508) and Harclean (615-616) contain the twenty-seven books of the New Testament.

b) Greek Fathers: Eusebius (d. 340) divides the books of the New Testament into three classes: 1) homologoumena, or that is, the books “which, according to ecclesiastical tradition, are true and genuine and have been received by all without opposition”. These are the four Gospels, Acts, 14 epistles of Saint Paul, 1 Jn, 1 Pet, and the Apocalypse, with the reservation: “if it be considered true”; 2) antilegomena, whose genuineness is disputed by some: Jas, 2 Pet, 2-3 Jn, Jude; 3) spurious, or “adulterated”: the Acts of Paul, the Shepherd, the Apocalypse of Peter, the epistle of Barnabas, the Didache, and, “if it so please, the Apocalypse of John”[21]. Eusebius, under the influence of Saint Dionysius, shows himself undecided about the placement of the Apocalypse. He distinguishes between John the apostle, to whom he attributes the Gospel and the first epistle, and John the presbyter, who would be the author of the Apocalypse and of 2-3 Jn.

Saint Cyril of Jerusalem (d. 386), in his Catechesis 4,33-36, written around the year 348, offers us the complete canon of the New Testament, with the single omission of the Apocalypse of Saint John.

Saint Athanasius (year 367) admits the 27 books of the New Testament as sacred and canonical[22]. And the same is done by Saint Epiphanius (d. 403)[23].

Saint Basil (d. 379) accepts all the books of the New Testament, although he does not explicitly cite the epistles 2-3 Jn and Jude[24].

Saint Gregory Nazianzen (328-389), in his poem entitled De veris libris Scripturae divinitus inspiratae, gives the list of all the books of the New Testament, except the Apocalypse. Fr. Lagrange thinks that his not mentioning the Apocalypse is due to the fact that Saint Gregory was constrained on account of the poetic meter. And for that reason, instead of mentioning it, he makes a general allusion to it, saying: “John, the universal and great herald, who traverses the heavens”. Nevertheless, in other places of his works he expressly cites the Apocalypse, as when he writes: “John in the Apocalypse teaches me”[25]. Moreover, he cites it in conjunction with several texts of the Gospel of Saint John.

Saint Gregory of Nyssa (335-394), brother of Saint Basil, cites the epistle to the Heb and the Apocalypse. Of the others he does not speak to us.

Saint Amphilochius (340-403) offers a complete canon of the New Testament, although with regard to the Apocalypse it is seen that he suffered the influence of the Antiochene Fathers, for he affirms that many reject it. Some also doubt, according to him, 2 Pet, 2-3 Jn, and Jude.

To these testimonies we can add the principal uncial codices: the Sinaiticus, from the beginning of the fourth century, which contains the whole New Testament; the Vaticanus (B), likewise from the beginning of the fourth century, which has all the books of the New Testament, up to the epistle to the Heb; and the Alexandrinus, from the beginning of the fifth century, which presents all the New Testament books[26].

c) Antiochene Fathers.- Among these, worthy of mention are Saint John Chrysostom (d. 407), who very frequently cites the epistle to the Heb and that of Jas, but never adduces 2 Pet, 2-3 Jn, and the Apocalypse, which seems to indicate that he excluded them from the canon. We can say as much of Theodoret of Cyrus (d. 458), who likewise does not cite the minor Catholic epistles and the Apocalypse. Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428) goes still further, for he even rejects the major Catholic epistles: Jas, 1 Pet, 1 Jn.

d) Latin Fathers.- Almost all the Latin ecclesiastical writers of this period admit the entire canon of the New Testament. The discussion and the doubts center above all on the epistle to the Hebrews, which in the West, until the middle of the fourth century, is passed over in silence by many authors. In the East, on the other hand, its canonicity was never doubted. In the fourth century there was much dispute in the West about its authenticity. Possibly for this reason it is not found in the Claromontanus canon (4th c.), where Phil and 1-2 Thess are also lacking, probably on account of a copyist’s oversight.

In the last decades of the fourth century almost all the Latin Fathers unanimously admit the authenticity of the epistle to the Hebrews. In this way complete unanimity is reached, with the admission of the 27 books of the New Testament. This is seen clearly by surveying the works of the principal Fathers of this period.

Saint Jerome (d. 410), who spent a great part of his Life in the East, admits all the books of the New Testament. As regards the deuterocanonicals of the Old Testament, he was hostile and did not consider them as canonical; on the other hand, with respect to the deuterocanonicals of the New Testament, he adopts the “veterum auctoritas” (“authority of the ancient -fathers-”) and receives them as canonical, even while knowing the doubts that existed about some of them both in the East and in the West[27]. Referring to the epistles of James and Jude he affirms that they obtained canonical “authority” “paulatim procedente tempore” (“little by little, with the passing of time”)[28]. But he places them without any hesitation among the canonical books[29].

Rufinus (d. 410) also admits the 27 books of the New Testament as inspired and canonical.

Saint Augustine (d. 430), in his book De doctrina christiana (year 397), offers us a complete list of all the books of the New Testament, identical to the one that the Council of Trent will later accept. It was under his influence that the provincial council of Hippo, that is, the plenary council of all Africa, held at Hippo on the 8th of October 393, and the councils III and IV of Carthage, of the years 397 and 419, received this same canon[30].

Saint Ambrose (d. 397) made use of all the books of the New Testament. The only ones about which there is some doubt are the epistles 2-3 Jn. The epistle to the Hebrews he attributes to Saint Paul and the Apocalypse to Saint John.

Saint Hilary of Poitiers (d. 368) does not give us a list of the books of the New Testament, but he undoubtedly admitted the protocanonicals. Of the deuterocanonicals of the N.T. he received the epistle to the Hebrews, which he considered to be by Saint Paul, and he used the epistle of James, 2 Pet, and the Apocalypse. For Saint Hilary, the author of the Apocalypse was Saint John. He has no references to the epistles 2-3 Jn and Jude.

Priscillian (around the year 380), bishop of Ávila in Spain, recognizes as inspired and canonical all the books of the New Testament. The only one he does not mention is the epistle 3 Jn.

Manuel de Tuya – José Salguero, Introducción a la Biblia, Vol. I, BAC, Madrid 1967, pp. 361-381

Source: Apologetica.org

NOTES

  1. Cf. Col 4,16. There are quite a few authors who hold that the epistle to the Laodiceans is the one that, from the end of the second century, has been called the epistle to the Ephesians. ↩
  2. Saint Paul cites as sacred Scripture Deut 25,4 and the words of Jesus, which we read in Lk 10,7. The authors dispute whether the Apostle cites the written Gospel or the words of the Lord received by tradition. Since 1 Tim is later than the Gospel of Saint Luke, it is very possible that he is referring to that Gospel. ↩
  3. Cf. Epist. 1 ad Cor 47,3. ↩
  4. Epist. Barnabae 4,14; cf. F. Funk, Patres Apostolici I (Tübingen 1901) p. 49. ↩
  5. All the citations and allusions to the books of the N.T. that are found in the apostolic Fathers have been collected by F. X. Funk, Patres apostolici (Tübingen 1901). Cf. J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers (London 1890, first part; 1889, second part); B. Steidle, Patrologia seu historia antiquae litteraturae ecclesiasticae (Freiburg 1937); B. Altaner, Patrologie (Freiburg 1950). One may also consult the work The N.T. in the Apostolic Fathers, edited by a committee of the Oxford Society of Historical Theology (Oxford 1905). ↩
  6. Cf. Apologia I 67,3 f.: MG 6,429. In this Apol. I 66 he notes that by the expression “memoirs” he means to designate the Gospels and affirms that these “memoirs” were written by the apostles and by the disciples of the same (Dial. cum Tryph. 103: MG 6,717). ↩
  7. Cf. Adv. Haer. 3, Praef. ↩
  8. Cf. Adv. Haer. 3,1; 3,11,8; W. Sanday – C. H. Turner – A. Souter, Novum Testamentum s. Irenaei episcopi lugdunensis: Old-Latin Biblical Texts 7 (Oxford 1923); W. L. Dulière, Le Canon néotestamentaire et les écrits chrétiens approuvés par Irénée: La Nouvelle Clio 9 (1954) 199-229. ↩
  9. Cf. De praescr. 37. ↩
  10. Cf. Contra Marcionem 4,2 and 5. ↩
  11. Cf. De ieiunio 2 and 10; Contra Marc. 4,5; 5,19. ↩
  12. Cf. De pudic. 20. ↩
  13. Cf. De oratione 20; De pudic. 19.20; De cultu fem. 1,3; De praescr. 33. ↩
  14. Cf. Scorpiace 12. ↩
  15. Cf. L. A. Muratori, Antiquitates Italicae Medii Aevi III (Milan 1740) 851-854; H. Lietzmann, Das muratorische Fragment und die Monarchianischen Prologe zu den Evangelien (Bonn 1908) p. 3-11; T. Zahn, Miscellanea II. Hippolytus der Verfasser des Muratorischen Kanons: Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift 33 (1922) 417-436. ↩
  16. The text of the Muratorian Fragment may be seen in the Enchiridion Biblicum (Rome 1961) n. 1-7. Cf. J. Campos, Epoca del fragmento Muratoriano: Helmántica II (1960) 485-96. ↩
  17. Hist. Ecc. 6,14. ↩
  18. Cf. A. Merk, Origenes und der Kanon des A. T.: Bi 6 (1925) 200-205. ↩
  19. Cf. Comm. in Mt t. 17,30: MG 13, 1569-1572; In Lc hom. 1, MG 13, 1802 f. ↩
  20. Cf. J. B. Lightfoot, in The Academy 2 (1889) 186-188.205; TH. H. Robinson, The Authorship of the Muratorian Canon: The Expositor 7,1 (1906) 481-495; Th. Zahn, Hippolitus der Verfasser des Muratorischen Kanons: Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift 33 (1922) 417-436; S. Ritter, Il frammento Muratoriano: Rivista de Archeologia Cristiana 3 (1926) 215-263; M. J. Lagrange, Histoire ancienne du Canon du N. T. p.66-84. ↩
  21. Cf. Hist. Eccl. 3,25. ↩
  22. Epist. Festalis 39. ↩
  23. Haer. 30,25. ↩
  24. Adv. Eunom. 4,5. ↩
  25. Cf. Or. 42,9; 29,17. ↩
  26. Also important for the canon of the N.T. are the papyri found principally in Egypt. The Chester Beatty collection contains P45 from the beginning of the third century, which has fragments of the four Gospels and of Acts; P46, also from the beginning of the third century, which originally contained the epistle to the Rom, 1-2 Cor, Eph, Gal, Phil, Col, 1-2 Thess; P47, from the third century, with fragments of the Apocalypse. P20, also from the third century, and P23 contain the epistle of Jas; P13 and P17, from the fourth century, have the epistle to the Heb; P18, from the third-fourth century, and P24, from the fourth century, which present the Apocalypse. ↩
  27. Cf. Epist. 129 ad Dardanum, 3. ↩
  28. Cf. De Viris illustr. 2,4. ↩
  29. Cf. Epist. 53 ad Paulinum, 8. ↩
  30. Cf. De doctr. christ. 2,8,13. ↩