mountainman

The oldest greek codices of the new testament contain "The Shepherd of Hermas" as a separate book. Sometime later in the fourth century the Shepherd was axed from the canon. I have not yet looked at the reasons and the parties responsible (or the dates) for this alteration. Can anyone provide a synopsis, or point to some good references available online which covers these issues?

Best wishes,


Pete

Ben C Smith

Muratorian canon, lines 73-80:

Pastorem vero
nuperrime temporibus nostris in urbe
Roma Hermas conscripsit, sedente cathe-
dra urbis Romae ecclesiae Pio ep{i}s{copo} frater
eius. et ideo legi eum quidem oportet, se pu-
blicare vero in ecclesia populo, neque inter
prophetas, completum numero, neque inter
apostolos, in finem temporum potest.

However, Hermas composed the Shepherd recently, in our own times, in the city of Rome, while his brother Pius the bishop was sitting in the chair of the city of Rome. And therefore it is fitting that it be read, but it cannot be published for the people in the church, neither among the prophets, since their number is complete, nor among the apostles, since it is the end of their times.

Which Greek codices do you mean? Sinaiticus and what else? (I have the manuscripts listed on my Shepherd of Hermas page for your reading pleasure.)

Ben.

Roger Pearse

In medieval Latin manuscripts, the leaves between a pair of boards could vary. The volumes were made so that they could be unbound, and quires added or removed -- remember we are not in the era of mass book production. In some ways, therefore, it can be a mistake to treat these as books; they're more like folders.

I don't know if the same was true of parchment codices of the 4-5th century, but I suspect it might be. As such, I have some doubts about any argument on the subject of canon that relies on the presence of additional material at the back.

gentleexit

Athanasius stressed that the Shepherd was important to Arius. Given how heated the Jesus debate became, its relegation was understandable. Arius relied on psalms too but they could hardly be shunted off.

(and man, the shepherd's a dreary read. Almost as bad as today's "The Shack").

mountainman

Dear Ben,

I was inadvertently including the codex Claromontanus (wrongly, since it is not the fourth century) in the plural "codices" above. Thanks for this resource - its great - I am still working through it.

Best wishes,


Pete

mountainman

Dear Roger,

The same may not have been true in the fourth century if the Nag Hammadi Codices C14 dated to 348 CE (+/- 60 years) --- which look to be fixed and bound reasonably securely --- are any indication.



Are you aware of any good picture of the Codex Sinaiticus? How is it bound?

Best wishes,


Pete

mountainman

Dear gentleexit,

In your opinion, at that time in history (and also now) did (does) "The Shepherd" add any credibility (or otherwise) to the tradition of the ("christian") Apostolic Church?

Best wishes,


Pete

gentleexit

Apostolic, I don't remember. But Catholic, yes. Join now, 'fore the tower is built or ... oh, it'll be bad. In it, you see the importance of "Church" to early Christianity vs the much later Protestant "personal relationship" with Jesus.

As a read, it's dreary but illuminating.