From: A monthly magazine of the
An International Association of Pontifical Right Vol. 7, No. 71, September 2013
How Did the Bible Come About?
A long and marvellous journey travelled by human reason
illuminated by faith, and aided by grace and the charisms of the Spirit, has
made it possible to define the “regula fidei” of Sacred Scripture with divine
authority.
Fr. Arnóbio Glavam, EP
Much is said of the
Bible, but how many people have a profound understanding of it? Do most
Catholics— even those considered practicing Catholics—know the origin of the
sacred books, the criteria used to select them and by what authority they were
adopted or rejected? Undoubtedly, the majority of the faithful would benefit
from some enlightenment on these points.
Old and New Testament
The Bible, as we know, is the assembled writings or books of the
Old and the New Testament, by which God revealed Himself to man. Also called
Sacred Scripture or Holy Writ, they constitute a single book containing the
Word of God. Although it is the work of human authors—hagiographers and sacred
authors—it was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and thus it is
truly the Word of God. Hence, it is often said that Sacred Scripture is the
combined work of hagiographers and the Divine Paraclete.
The Bible, then, is divided into two major parts: the Old and
New Testament.1 The first contains the Word of God addressed to the Chosen
People of the First Covenant and was recorded in various writings elaborated
over the course of approximately 900 years. The New Testament, recorded by the
Apostles and Evangelists, contains the teachings of Jesus Christ, by which He
completed and perfected the Old Revelation, and the testimony of His Death and
Resurrection—the Paschal Mystery—with which He triumphantly opened the Era of
Grace, thereby sealing the New and Everlasting Covenant.
The divine axis on which both Testaments turn is the Person of
Jesus Christ. In fact, He is pro- claimed in the Old Testament: “the Scriptures
[...] bear witness to Me” (Jn 5:39), said Our Lord; and the New is the
fulfillment of this proclamation. This truth is expressed by St. Augustine with
the brilliance and conciseness of his genius: “in Vetere Novum lateat, et in
Novo Vetus pateat — The New Testament is hidden in the Old, and the Old is
revealed in the New.”2
Before Christ and, above all, in the Christian era, innumerable
writings surfaced, allegedly containing the Word of God. But among these, only
a small number were eventually included on the list of the Sacred Books. Why
were some writings included and others not? Who made this selection, and with
what authority? These questions lead us to an awe-inspiring theme: the
formation of the Canon of sacred books.
Admirable unanimity forged over
the course of centuries
The Greek word for ‘canon’ has various meanings: standard of
measure, rule, norm, and, by extension, a list or registry. The Canon of Sacred
Scriptures is, then, the list of Sacred Books that compose the Bible: 46 in the
Old Testament and 27 in the New. Only these 73 books have the privilege of
being the Word of God.
The formation of the Canon has a long and luminous history. It
is the story of how Divine Providence, over the course of centuries, pre- pared
circumstances and souls so that the Holy Church would discern and identify,
among the diverse writings presented as authentic transmitters of the Word of
God, which of them were truly inspired and in- fallibly contained the truths of
the Faith.
But there was difficulty in the fact that, with the passage of
centuries, a number of writings had appeared within the Israelite religious
com- munities of the Old Testament, but not all of them were equally recognized
and respected. Some, from the beginning, reflected ancient and authentic
traditions with which the People of God fully identified. Others, however, did
not enjoy this general acceptance.
A marvellous action of God gradually led the Jewish communities
to an almost unanimous opinion on this subject. An admirable work in- deed, for
at that time they did not have infallible authority, such as was granted by
Jesus Christ to His Church, to recognize and declare the sacred and inspired
character of these books.
First, the Pentateuch, or Torah,
was acknowledged from earliest times as the Word of God. Next, the Prophets and
later the other texts gradually acquired formal acknowledgement until these
collections came to comprise essentially what is contained in the present set
of books called the Old Testament.3
Distinguishing the evangelical message from false
interpretations
The story surrounding the New Testament is even richer and more
complex, although, in a sense, clear- er and easier to follow. At a certain
moment of the early Church’s history, the Apostles and their followers
dedicated themselves to the task of registering in writing much of what they
preached orally, giving rise to the first books.
Nevertheless, heresies arose
among Christian communities from early on. Some came from erroneous doctrinal
interpretations conceived by Christian judaizers; others, it seems, originated
in paganism, such as the gnostic doctrines. Both led to distorted
interpretations of the Gospel message.
In the earliest times of Christianity, neo-testamentary writings
proliferated, mixing the authentic testimonies of the Apostles and their first
followers with others whose authenticity could be legitimately doubted, for
they did not have the guarantee of apostolic origin (from the time of the
Apostles), or because they were not the object of belief on the part of the
churches.
Heretical adaptations or interpolations were soon introduced in
some writings with the claim that they originated from the apostolic era, but
of dubious and suspect authorship.
Given that, by the Holy Spirit, the Church received the
Scriptures— of both the Old and the New Testament—as a legacy, it fell to her
to discern, acknowledge and declare, with the assistance of that same Spirit,
which of these many writings were in fact the Word of God.
The result of this slow and sure- footed work of the Church in
identifying the Sacred Books was the formation of the Canon.
At a certain moment
of the early Church’s
history, the Apostles
and their followers
dedicated themselves
to the task of registering
in writing much of
what they preached orally
The action of the Holy Spirit
A threefold action of the Holy Spirit can be observed in this
patient labour of the Church.
First, the Divine Paraclete acted over the communities that
received the Word of God, Who “spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but
in these last days He has spoken to us by a Son” (Heb 1:1- 2), forming and
inspiring traditions, allowing these to be conserved in the memory of the people,
and the Word to remain integral and unchangeable. Secondly, He inspired the
hagiographers to put in- to writing the content of the Word of God—transmitted
at first orally and recorded in traditions— and to write “everything and only
those things which He wanted.”4 The sacred authors thus committed themselves to this
mission. Finally, through the same Tradition, that is, those things that have
been, semper, ubique et ab omnibus,
objects of faith, He revealed to the Church the inspired writings.
The definition of the Canon, both of the Old and the New Testa-
ment is, therefore, a human and di- vine work of the Church. In other words, it
applies the logical criteria of human wisdom to discern the authenticity of
vetero and neo-testamentary writings, while being assisted by the Holy Spirit
in the interpretation of the information coming from these human resources. The
dedicated and intelligent work of an admirable constellation of men from early
Christianity— the Holy Fathers—led the Church to a sublime plane in the
knowledge of the Scriptures and helped her to discern, by the action of the
Holy Spirit, precious criteria for the selection and classification of the
Sacred Books.
The Old Testament Canon
Bearing in mind that the books of the Old Testament were writ-
ten over the course of approximately 900 years in Hebrew, Aramaic, and to a
much lesser extent, Greek, let us now go on to consider how these books became
known, without touching on the interesting topic of the probable dates of these
writings, and their authors, which would exceed the limits of this article
focusing on the formation of the Canon.
It is certain that partial collections of Old Testament writings
had been in circulation among the various Israelite communities, both those of
Palestine as well as those of the diaspora, in the post-exile period, notably
at the time of the Maccabees, but there is a lack of precise historical data in
this regard.
Around the year 200 BC, there appeared the
first ample collection of the Old Testament writings, in Greek, compiled, it is
said, by 70 wise Jews from Alexandria, and hence called “Septuagint” or “of the
Seventy,” or even “Alexandrian,” frequently designated by the symbol LXX.
Nevertheless,
there is no indication that a Canon of books had been elaborated before the
Christian era. Alongside some books acknowledged by all as sacred, there were
several other doubtful ones, some of which were outright disputed.
The various
versions of the Scriptures circulated peacefully among the Jews of Palestine
and outside, the Septuagint distinguishing it- self for its widespread
acceptance among both parties and for being the most disseminated in the
earliest times of Christianity.
“Most of the citations from the Old Testament attributed to
Jesus in the Gospels correspond to the text from the version of the Seventy.”5
The fact that
this version was the most widely cited in the Gospels gives it unmatched
authority. It was also the most used among the early Jewish Christians, and
enjoyed full credibility in these circles.
Over the
course of the first century, the majority of the books contained in the LXX
version were well accepted; they are the protocanonical books (from proto,
Greek for first). Nevertheless, others were subject to debate and were accepted
only at a later point: they are called deuterocanonical (from deutero, second).
It was only
at the beginning of the second century—when the Church already had its own
life, independent from Judaism, and had wide y accepted the list of books of
the LXX, called the long Canon—that the Jewish authorities, under the
initiative of the Pharisaic rabbis, decided to close their Canon, rejecting
seven books contained in the version of the LXX6 thus adopting a
reduced, short Canon.
It seems
reasonable to suggest that one of the motives of the Jews in implementing the
short Canon, among others, was the need to distinguish themselves from
Christianity.
The
historical information available indicates that, most likely, this collection
implemented by the rabbis—also known as the proto-Masoretic Text— was later, in
the Middle Ages, re- viewed and furnished with notes and vocalizing signs, in
the form of commentaries, by the Jewish Masoretes, teachers and representatives
of the Jewish Masorah (tradition), there- by constituting the Masoretic Text;
which is the present Hebraic Bible.
When the Jews
resolved to close their Canon, the Septuagint version had already been widely
accepted in the Church for over a century— the long Canon. Hence, the Canon of
the Pharisaic rabbis had a limited scope, restricted to the ambit of remaining
Jewish communities.
The early Church, from the beginning, had recognized the version
of the Seventy, which, among others, as was already stated, had circulated
freely among the Jews, for they still did not have a de- fined list of the
books considered sacred. The Church, then, did not inherit a defined Canon from
Judaism, but rather defined one herself, gathering all the books of the LXX
along with the so-called deuterocanonical books. Hence, the Septuagint version—the
long Canon—was adopted by Christianity, in its totality, from its very
beginnings, some minor difficulties7 be- coming clarified with time, and it enjoyed full
authority among Christians. The Council of Chalcedon (451 AD) did nothing but
acknowledge a reality already lived by Christianity until the fourth century.
For, while the Old Testament Canon had already been actively used in the
Church, and the books that composed it held great authority among the
faithful—with the exception of a few, isolated eastern communities without
great influence—one still did not speak of canonical books. It was only after
this Council that this collection acquired a fully canonical configuration,8 and so
remained for over a thousand years.
It was only
in the sixteenth century—a millennium and a half after the birth of Christianity!—that
this reality was contended. Martin Luther and his followers resolved to reject
almost 1,500 years of Christian Tradition and adopt the short Canon,
established by the Pharisaic rabbis for Jewish use, thus giving rise to the so-
called Protestant Bible.
In the
centuries leading up to that point, the Church, following the path of the
apostolic Tradition, had not felt the need to present a dogmatic definition on
the sacred Canon, and the pax Christi was never seriously threatened
in this regard. Luther’s negations in the sixteenth century, and the un- rest
they fomented in the heart of Christianity, prompted the Holy Church to
manifest, in this field, the power granted to her by her Divine Founder. Hence,
what had been accepted as common Church doctrine since the fourth century, and
lived by Christianity from its very beginnings, was the object of an explicit
formulation in the Council of Florence (1442) in the decree Pro Iacobitis,9 and of a
dogmatic definition in the Council of Trent (1564), reaffirmed in the First
Vatican Council (1870).
New Testament Canon
As we have seen, apostolic preaching was exclusively oral from
the beginning, for the Apostles went out into the world to preach, faithful to
the mandate of the Divine Master who said, “go into all the world and preach”
(Mk 16:15)—not, “go and write.” And let us not forget the great difficulty of
the time in obtaining books, which were all manuscripts, and thus of costly and
lengthy production.
Therefore, in
the Apostolic Period (until the year 70), the nascent Church did not have its
own writings, but only the “Law and the Prophets”; that is, the Old Testament
read in the light of the Christian message. However, two factors soon required
the Apostles and their first followers to resort to writing: first, the
multiplication of communities in distant regions— thanks, above all, to the
apostolate of St. Paul; and secondly, the emergence of heresies. Nevertheless,
for a long time and even until the Period of the Apostolic Fathers, the
evangelical traditions were more widely known through oral than through written
tradition.10 St. Luke provides testimony of this: “Many have undertaken to
compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just
as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses
and ministers of the word” (Lk 1:1-2).
Apostolic preaching
was in the beginning
exclusively oral and,
so, the nascent Church
did not have its
own writings, but only
the “Law and the Prophets”
This struggle
led to the consolidation within the Church of an idea that had already existed
latently since the Sub-Apostolic Period:11 the need for a closed
Canon.
In the time
of St. Justin Martyr (second century) in Rome, the New Testament already
contained two thirds of what would be- come the definitive Canon. In the
following period—that of St. Irenaeus, St. Clement of Alexandria, and
Origen—the essential part of the definitive Canon had already been included in
the Canon recognized by St. Irenaeus and by the church of Gaul: the four
Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, some letters and Revelation.
It was precisely St. Irenaeus—one of the great
figures of Patristics — who, in face of Gnosticism and, above all, of
Marcionism, developed Christian doctrine, magnificently establishing the
foundations for the comprehension of the Scriptures as one, coherent, and
harmonious ensemble.
St. Clement of Alexandria and Origen presented a list of 22
books, for them, devoid of doubt: the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles,
the 14 Pauline letters, the first epistles of Peter and John and Revelation.12
Some New
Testament writings, as was seen above, seem to have obtained canonical
recognition very early, expressed, above all, by the liturgical use made of
them. They are called the protocanonical books of the New Testament.
Others,
however, presented some obstacles for acceptance, and only after a relatively
long pro- cess did the Church’s authority include them in the Canon. They are
called the deuterocanonical books of the New Testament: the epistle to the
Hebrews, the second letter of Peter, the second and third of John, the epistles
of James and Jude and Revelation. This means they were included in the New
Testament Canon only after some hesitation being accepted, we repeat, solely on
the authority of the Church.
Divine wisdom surpasses all human foresight
Over the
course of roughly 300 years, a nucleus of books was de- fined as being of
certain and in- disputable canonicity, based on their acceptance by the
communities— animated by the Sensus Fidei (sense of the Faith), but, above all
by liturgical use, with the explicit recognition of ecclesiastical authorities,
gathered in synods and regional or ecumenical councils.
Luther also
rejected the deuterocanonical writings of the New Testament, but his followers
could not sustain this position and eventually admitted them. In this way, the
Reform fell into the incoherence of denying the authority of the Church
regarding the Old Testament and affirming it in relation to the New.
Thus, in a
divinely sapiential manner, the Holy Spirit governs the Church, without
rationalist or schematic strictures, unhurriedly defining marvels such as the
books of Sacred Scripture, in which “the and Father who is in Heaven meets His
children with great love and speaks with them.”13
This long and
marvelous journey travelled by human reason illuminated by the faith, and
assisted by grace and the charisms of the Holy Spirit, made it possible to
clearly discern and define the regula
fidei of the Sacred Scriptures, with divine authority. This process also
encourages us to contemplate the marvelous harmony between the two sources upon
which the entire Christian Faith is based: Sacred Tradition and Holy Writ.
1 Biblical term used in
the sense of Covenant.
2 ST. AUGUSTINE.
Quæstion- um in Heptateuchum, l.2, 73: ML 34, 623.
3 The terms “Old
Testament” and “New Testament” were put into use by Christianity: the first
comes from an expression of St. Paul (2 Cor 3:14), and the second extracted
from an oracle of Jeremiah (31:31).
4 SECOND VATICAN COUN-
CIL. Dei Verbum, n.11.
5 TREBOLLE BARRERA,
Júlio. A Bíblia Judaica e a Bíblia Cristã. 2.ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1999,
p.600.
6 Tobit, Judith, Baruch,
Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, Maccabees 1 and 2, in addition to some passages from
Esther and Daniel.
7 Some books, the
deuterocanonical, were the object of some debate between the churches, but at a
later time in the history of the Canon they were peacefully accepted by the
generality of the Christian world.
8 Cf. TREBOLLE BARRERA,
op.cit., p.273.
9 Cf. DZ 1334-1335;
1501-1504; 3029.
10 KÖSTER, Helmut.
Synoptis- che Überlieferung bei den Apostolischen Vätern. In: TREBOLLE BARRERA,
op. cit., p.277.
11 Period immediately
following the Apostles.
12 Note that while Revelation and the Letter to the Heb-
rews did not present any doubts as to their authenti- city for Origen and St.
Clem- ent of Alexandria, they were later considered deuterocan- onical by the
Church.
13 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL,
op. cit., n.21
