Excellent book, btw.
Don’t worry, Rebel Ace.
There’s no lack of ancient texts.
Given his background, we would expect St. John to be the literary expert of the disciples. And sure enough, he writes the most poetic, most literary of the gospels.
As a tax collector, St. Matthew would also have to be literate. And sure enough, we have the Gospel of Matthew.
As a fisherman, St. Peter would be less literate. But as first among the disciples (which refers to priority, not timeline), he authorized his secretary, St. Mark, to put to paper his gospel. And he also wrote a couple of letters himself.
St. James was the third of the trio of innermost disciples. We have his letter, too.
St. Paul was chosen to be representative among the Greeks. From him, we have twelve or perhaps 13 letters. Some set aside the tradition that Hebrews was written by Paul because its language was so different, but this would make sense, since he was writing in his native tongue to his native countrymen.
And then there’s St. Luke, whose education as a doctor made him as close to a scientist as could be found in Ancient Palestine. He wrote with the expressed purpose of a factual documentary, adding to his own witness that of St. Matthew and the Blessed Virgin Mary
But that’s not all we have.
St. James was the leader of the Christians in Jerusalem. While he only wrote one brief letter which survives, he was the original author of the Liturgy of Saint James, which survives to this day. Although skeptics insist certain portions are later additions, there’s little doubt that much remains of his Liturgy.
St. Mark also wrote a Liturgy. Again, it’s debated how much of the modern Liturgy of St. Mark was written by the disciple, himself, but the use of the Liturgy of St. Cyril by the Copts who lie outside of “Constantinian Christianity,” and which is a verbtum translation of the Liturgy of St. Mark into Coptic, must be read in the light that the Copts were militant against liturgical innovation — some even celebrate the Eucharist on Saturday! — and held the Liturgy of St. Mark to be authentic at least in the fifth century.
St. Ignatius of Antioch was the first chosen successor of the disciples after they began to die, and the remaining apostles left the first center of early Christianity after Jerusalem. Even while John was still alive within his see, Ignatius wrote commentaries on John’s work.
St. Clement of Rome was the first chosen successor of Peter to be able to speak openly in Rome. And we have his letters, a few of which are likely to be fakes (Google Pseudo-Clementine Literature), but many of which are well established to be authentic; the distinction is as sharp as that between the authentic letters of St. Peter and the apocryphal gospel of St. Peter.
The Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve) is a “liturgical guidebook” even more primitive than the Liturgy of St. James. The title may not mean to assert it was hand-written by any one of the Twelve, but it is likely to have been written during the first century and to have been regarded in that time as being “orthodox” to the first followers of the apostles.
Other writers who knew the apostles personally include Papias, Polycarp, St. Barnabas, Hermas, and the author of the Epistle to Diognetus.
We have hundreds of other antenicene works. The special status given to these few demonstrates that they were rare in their orthodoxy, and that the orthodox were very hesitant to usurp their forefathers in authority.
The absence of a written version of these liturgies stems from the admonition against revealing the faith to the uninitiated.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, etc etc
Do you think they called each other “Saint” all the time?
Excellent book, btw.