1.D 00. The Final Test

THE FINAL TEST

THERE is ONE last question to ask What is it that makes a book sacred and holy Scripture? What is it that makes a book part of the word of God? What is it that entitles a book to a place among the canonical books of the Church? More than one answer has been and still is given to that question.

Authority of the Books

L The answer of the Roman Catholic Church is clear and unequivocal. A book becomes a canonical book by the tradition, the authority and the decision of the Church. In 1546 the Council of Trent listed the books which for the Roman Catholic Church form the Old and the New Testaments, and then said that if any man did not accept the list whole and entire, each book whole and entire, he was anathema. In the Roman Catholic Church there is nothing more to be said; these books are canonical, and there can be no demur and no dispute. ii. For the Reformers the case was different. To base anything on the tradition and the authority of the Church was precisely and exactly what they could not do. It has often been said that the Protestant Church did no more than substitute an infallible book for aa infallible Church; but it must be remembered that the Reformers were well aware of the critical history of die books of the New Testament, and were fully prepared to give that critical history its full place in the evaluation of a book. When Oecolampadius die Swiss reformer was consulted by the Waldensians about the constitution of the canon of the New Testament, he named the twenty-seven of them, but at the same time he pointed out that six of them he did not include Hebrews were antilegomena, disputed books, and that they held inferior rank within the New Testament. "The Apocalypse together with the letters of James and Jude and the second letter of Peter and the two letters of John we do not compare with the rest of the books." The Reformers were not in the least fundamentalists, if that word be taken to describe those who insist that every word of Scripture is equally inspired, equally sacred, and equally infallible. iii. Curiously enough, the one reformer who wrote on the canon in particular took up a position which is very closely connected with the Roman Catholic position. That reformer was Andreas Bodenstein of Karlstadt. He applied one test the test of attestation. The earlier and the greater the attestation to any book, the higher the rank he gave that book within the canon. On this basis he divided all the biblical books into three classes. The first class contained die five books of Moses and the four Gospels, which are in a class by themselves and which are "die most brilliant lamps of divine truth" (totius veritatis divinae darissima lamina). The second class contained the Prophets Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Lamentations, Ezekiel and the Twelve, together with the fifteen undoubted New Testament letters thirteen of Paul, one of Peter, and one of John. The third class contained the Writings of the Old Testament, and the seven disputed books of the New Testament he included Hebrews which occupy the very lowest rank in the canon. If we apply this test, then the Revelation and Hebrews rank below James, Jude, and John, because they were later in gaining a settled and secure and final place in the canon. The one test is How early did a book gain admission to the canon, and how fully is it attested? The odd fact about this is that to all intents and purposes it settles canonicity by the tradition of the Church, which is precisely what the Roman Catholic Church does, iv. There is the test of Calvin. Calvin’s test may be defined as the witness of the Holy Spirit within a mail answering to the witness of die Holy Spirit within the book. Calvin was no obscurantist. He is quite certain that Hebrews is not the work of Paul, yet he has no hesitation in using Hebrews magnificently for commenting on, for preaching on, and for doctrine. He declares that it is by no means clear who wrote James, and that the author may well not have been the Apostle, but he gladly and willingly accepts the book as Scripture. In regard to 2 Peter Calvin is critically ready to agree that it is not the work of Peter, but that position does not in the least detract for him from the religious value of the letter. He does not comment at all on the Revelation, but that does not mean that he gave it an inferior place. For Calvin the test of canonicity is certainly not ecclesiastical tradition; it is equally certainly not apostolic authorship; it is in the last analysis " religious intuition". For Calvin the ultimate test of canonicity was no tiling odier than the witness of the Spirit.