|
okay...back from the camping trip, rested and refreshed. At least alledgely. Anyhow.
NT non-cannonical material, and concluding with Tecoyah's comment.
As soon as Christian communites began forming, they brought with them a commitment to the idea of scripture. And so as multiple Christian communities develop, so do multiple Christian scriptures. I think Mark, Matthew and John are clearly aimed at three ideologically distinct communities...and we can trace fissures in Christian community much farther. Galatians records a massive fight between the James branch of the church, Peter caught in the middle, and Paul on the other side. Now, i should caution...Paul does not record the event without bias. But it does clearly indicate that *something* happened. The importance of all this is that along with those factions that become mainstream, there are those which lose out. Declared heretical, dying off due to lack of support, whatever...these communities often die without record. But some of them do leave texts. Basically, the definition of a non-cannonical text is one which is not used continously, for whatever reason.
By Nicea, we start seeing fixed lists...with reccomended readings flying around much earlier. Many are in response to Marcion, who wants to trim the cannon down to Paul's letters, a chopped version of Luke/Acts, and no OT material. He of course loses, but this major fight provides great impetus to get a settled and sealed cannon. The preference tends to writings that are in use in a majority of churches at the time, attributed to Paul or Peter, or otherwise validated. Aphoristic material (Gospels of Thomas or Mary) tends to be quickly rejected. Narratives and letters are preferred.
Much gets made of the Gnostic writings, and so i'll address them separately. First, i think Gnostic is an empty term. I doubt that this is a self-imposed label or one that's very descriptive. A whole set of Platonist influenced Christianities existed in Hellenized regions...and the differences can be as compelling as the similarities.
In sum, i think the process of producing a cannon is a political one as well as spiritual. I don't feel completly bound to it by the letter. For instance, i rarely preach Timothy or the other duetero-Pauline letters. In form and message, they are not nearly as rich as Paul's own writings. Nor will you often find me in Revelation. But the reason i keep it is the binding of tradition. Millenia of Christians have struggled to find meaning with these books, and i can interact with their voices as i do the same. I can't do that with most of the non-cannonical material...and it feels like talking to myself in an empty room. I think of cannon as process, and not event. Material comes and goes...think of how influential Luther or Calvin's works are...they are now practically cannonized in mainstream protestant thought. Calvin for instance, wanted Revelation out, and for the Presbyterian Church and other strict calvinists...he pretty much got his wish.
Viewed as such, it becomes less imprortant if there were political or other arbitrary choices made...i trust that God is still speaking, drawing our eyes to texts we have known for a long time, to bring out new light, and also to texts just now being written for what they shed on long standing words.
__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.
-John 3:16
|