The Convenient Canon

In previous weeks, we have examined the different notions of a scriptural canon in early Christian times and before, but in this week’s reading from Frans van Liere, our perspective on the biblical canon is expanded to include traditions during the Middle Ages. Although other readings, such as Constantine’s Bible, discussed the creation of a canon in these early years, “The Medieval Canon” suggests that the idea of a closed canon held very little sway until after the Middle Ages.

The early discussions about which texts should be considered canonical did influence later views on the authority of different texts, but despite this movement toward canonization, apocryphal texts were not forbidden or removed from circulation even through the Middle Ages. Van Liere notes that though some religious theologians such as Jerome attempted to warn against the dubiousness of certain scriptural texts, they “could not (and probably did not intend to) stop their circulation; they were too much a part of the Christian scriptural tradition” (73). The integration of these texts into the widely read grouping of scripture and the mention of the futility of trying to prevent the reading of such texts demonstrates the relative openness of the canon in Medieval times. In fact, even these questionable apocryphal texts could have been considered authoritative in the Middle Ages, depending on the group who was using them. According to van Liere, the authority of different texts was ultimately decided by “the Church or Synagogue, not authorship” (75). The flexibility of what was considered authoritative scripture at this time shows how little influence the Church as a whole had on the canon in the Middle Ages, but the chapter also specifically points out “the absence of Church regulation” on what was considered canon (78). Thus, even through the thirteenth century, the Christian canon remained fairly flexible, with texts considered apocryphal still being widely read.

However, van Liere’s brief mention of the changes brought about by the printing press brings up a significant question to me. According to the chapter, “the canon of Scripture became permanently fixed by an ecclesiastical decision only after the Middle Ages ended” and the printing press was invented (78). This conclusion gave me the impression that the Church only finally committed to a canon because it was finally easy to enforce. It seems that the solidification of the canon led to the perception of the Apocrypha being “forbidden,” so was this change really only out of convenience? What caused the Church to view the closing of the canon as an important issue only after the adoption of the printing press?