The Repeal of Net Neutrality and Its Impact on Churches

Please bear with me, this is a bit of a long post on the grave impacts of today's repeal of #NetNeutrality, but I think it's important (perhaps even vital to the health of our Republic):

The FCC's decision to repeal Net Neutrality unfortunately means the Internet will be divided up into "media packages", much like cable T.V. packages today (this is already the business model used in countries that don't have net neutrality enshrined in law). A place that was once a haven for the underdog, the marginalized, and new ideas will now be ruled by a handful of companies, who will function as gatekeepers, marketing the most profitable, corporate websites over less-profitable, independent websites.

This means that non-profits, religious organizations, small political campaigns, individual bloggers and podcasters will likely be forced out of the market; either because the costs of internet access for developing their sites will be too expensive, or because people will naturally spend their internet budgets on access to the biggest sites (Amazon, Netflix, Google products, Facebook, etc.).

The proponents of the repeal claim this will lead to more innovation and more competition, by deregulating the internet. The problem is that ISP's are already well established in almost all markets, and maintaining equal access to the Internet (which is what Net Neutrality is) did not restrict them before. Instead, it will have the opposite effect: stagnation and monopolization, as independent voices no longer have a place to express themselves and be heard.

And the consequences could be much darker than we realize. ISP's would now legally be able to restrict access to websites which promote Net Neutrality (or whatever ideological view which irks their corporate owners), so that people who want to organize in opposition to this (or any other) decision would have to do so without the powerful tool of the internet (while their political opponents would naturally have full, free access).

As a pastor, this directly affects my ministry. Websites will likely no longer be an effective tool for outreach, as people unacquainted with our faith will now have to pay an extra fee (or buy a different media package) through their ISP to visit these types of sites. And let's be honest, they would probably rather spend it on a Social Media package, or to have access to Hulu or Netflix.

Now this doesn't mean an end to the Church by any means, as churches have always been built through the expression of love for one another found in personal relationships. The Church doesn't survive because of marketing, it survives (and thrives) as people are transformed by the Gospel through the work of the Holy Spirit. But it does mean that people curious about what we believe will likely no longer have access to our sermons or blog posts, and people who may want to attend events, won't see our calendar unless they pay for access to these types of sites.

Most of the ideals I care about will suffer in one way or another: religious freedom, the free exchange of ideas, the cultivation of art, music, philosophy, and theology, and even democracy itself.

Kim Davis, the Courts, and Homosexuality

If you've been following the news lately, you'll see that Kim Davis, a county clerk in Kentucky, has been at the center of it. She has repeatedly refused to issue any marriage licenses in the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision which affirms the rights of same-sex couples to marry. She has cited her Christian beliefs, and stated that "God's law is higher than man's laws."

Now, if you've read my other posts, you'll see that I am a Christian too. But I completely disagree with her on this issue, both on theological and legal grounds. Below is a link to the New York Times article concerning her position, and my thoughts on the issue as a whole.

"Kentucky Clerk Denies Same-Sex Marriage Licenses, Defying Court" - via New York Times

Regardless of her personal convictions, she is an elected official of a secular government which has affirmed same-sex marriage. If she cannot in good conscience do her job, then she should resign. But by refusing to issue licenses, she is breaking the law, and therefore should be punished by the law.

She is claiming God's authority in this issue, while ignoring both Romans 13 (that we should obey earthly authority) and the fact that many Christians (including me) would disagree with her interpretation of what exactly God's law entails. The last time I checked, it entailed loving God with everything I am, and loving others as much as I love myself.

I don't know about her, but I'm pretty busy just trying to do those two things. Even if her interpretation of God's law were correct (and I don't think it is), she has no legal or biblical right to press her interpretation of that law on others.

The Question of Biblical Homosexuality

In response to the above NYT article and requests for clarification on my position, I am focusing more about the applicability of God's law than its substance. What I mean is that, we need to be careful when we apply Levitical laws to Christians (or to the rest of the world) today (in this case, Lev. 18:22 and Lev. 20:13). While many of the laws dealt with moral issues, which one can make a universal case for, many did not. Many were designed to separate Israel from its neighbors, others were designed to create a more liberating form of government (again, compared to Israel's neighbors), and still others were designed to establish Israel as God's chosen people.

While the people of Israel still exist, the theocratic state of Israel no longer does and neither do the institutions which support the kingship, temple priesthood, or state prophetic office. I would argue that this nullifies the laws which deal with these specific areas. Additionally, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah deal as much with hospitality and violence toward guests (cf. Judges 19) as sexual immorality (which, cited in Jude 1:7, is ill-defined).

To take it a step further, the Talmud states the only laws which apply to Non-Jews are the laws of Noah, based on his conduct and covenant in Genesis. Keep in mind, even that can be up for debate, since I believe the Christian community establishes its own understanding of this concept. But at least the basics of this understanding was upheld in the Jerusalem Council among the apostles, which is described in Acts 15. Their final decision on the issue (to which we are still bound, in my opinion) is best summarized in v. 29, and which includes “sexual immorality” or “fornication,” Whether this includes homosexual behavior or homosexual acts is debatable.

Now, in the NT, the relevant passages come from Rom. 1:26-27, 1 Cor. 6:-9-10, and 1 Tim. 1:10. I have heard many various interpretations of these. Some have related the same-sex acts between men to the ancient practice of adult men sleeping with boys, or in the context of temple prostitute (in which case, it's as much an issue of idolatry as anything). Whether this is really the author's intent, I'm not sure. I think it's open to interpretation, which is why we're having this discussion. My understanding is that these passages deal with the sex acts themselves, and not with a person's feelings. The whole idea of a person being either a homosexual or a heterosexual is a rather modern cultural invention. Most scientific research agrees that sexual orientation has a strong genetic factor. If this is true, then people cannot be judged for this predisposition.

And if God really does see homosexual acts as a sin, then this only finds relevance in the context of the grace of Christ. Obedience only comes through grace, and as an expression of our love for God and others. One cannot expect non-Christians to apply the Christian ethos outside of grace and love. In fact, to insist on such an approach undermines the Gospel.

Thoughts on Secular Government and the Falacy of a "Christian Nation"

A friend of mine recently tried to argue that this nation was started by Christians attempting to escape religious persecution and therefore start a Christian nation, that the founding fathers were Christian, and that at its heart this has always been a Christian nation. Below is my response to his claims:

Technically the Pilgrims, while escaping religious persecution, also came here to set up a British colony. They were loyal to the king and would probably have found the actions of their descendants 150 years later shocking, if not reprehensible.

Interestingly enough, the founding fathers envisioned our nation as a republic first, and a democracy second. This means that even if the people vote in a law which is in contradiction to the Constitution, it can be struck down. This doesn't stem from the LGBT community, but from Marbury v Madison in 1803, which was still during the time of our Founding Fathers.

And on a final note regarding the “Christian values” of the Founding Fathers. Perhaps the greatest philosophical foundation for democratic and secular government came from Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine. Both of whom were Deists, meaning they believed God created the world, but stepped back and hasn't intervened since.

In fact, Paine wrote a pamphlet called “The Age of Reason,” in which he vehemently attacked Christianity. Jefferson cut all the miracle stories of Jesus out of his New Testament, so that he could just focus on the teaching as he believed the rest was superstition and was generally against much organized religion. Benjamin Franklin and George Washington were also avowed Deists. There is also debate as to whether John Adams, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton held a middle ground between Christianity and Deism.

So to claim that this nation was founded as a Christian nation is highly debatable. But what is not debatable, is that Anglicans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Roman Catholics, and Deists all came together to found a nation where religious liberty is perhaps the most essential underlying principle. Christian ideals did indeed influence the Constitution, but that is a far cry from declaring the United States a Christian nation. Even in the “golden age” of the 1950's that so many desire to return to, we had the CIA working covert operations all around the globe which arguably directly contradicted these ideals. We still had drugs, prostitution, corrupt officials, betrayal, and hate in every city of the country. Simply tacking on the label, “Christian” doesn't undo that history.

Finally, Texas can vote whatever it likes into law. However, Article VI guarantees the Constitution as the law of the land, superseding any other law, whether among the states or by the federal government. This means that whatever Texas, or any other state, decides is law must conform to the Constitution, its articles, and its amendments (including those which establish the Judicial Review powers of the Supreme Court).

 Final Analysis and Additional Thoughts

To clarify my thoughts a bit more, I guess I'm not really sure if monogamous homosexual acts are in and of themselves, sin.

A straight forward reading of many translations of the NT seems to suggest this, as do traditional interpretations through the ages. However, the Greek is less clear than we'd like to admit, and the cultural assumptions surrounding these passages (which have arguably changed) are also less clear.

For me, this means I should err on the side of grace, after all I am nobody's judge in the end. I should show the love of Christ to everybody, try to live in a way that pleases Him, and trust that He's got me along the way. And that's the message I want to share with others.

But as far as Constitutional law goes, I think I have been clear, monogamous homosexual marriage is and should be legal for any and all citizens.

#KimDavis #ChurchandState #ConstitutionalLaw #homosexuality 

A House Divided: A Critique of Roman Claims to be the One True Church

A House Divided: A Critique of Roman Claims to be the One True Church
By Ian "Ivan" Hyde, June 01, 2009

Introduction

Below is the result of much personal wrestling over the problems that the modern Church must tackle in order to bring about true Ecumenical progress and hopefully, eventually exhibit full Communion. But this essay is really only the beginning of that process. In it, I don't focus on what brings us together, but what splits us apart. I think any real ecumenical dialogue has to begin in this place. It's a place of frustration, sometimes anger and sometimes resignation. As such, while this essay deals with theological and historical problems, it isn't written as a theological or historical essay. It is, instead, a personal (and in many ways internal) argument over whether a Protestant Baptist, such as I, should convert to another form of Christianity (to more fully commune with Christ and my brothers and sisters), or stay where I am.

We are all full of faults, and in this essay I really focus on the Roman Catholic Church, as this is the largest communion in Christendom, it is the communion around which most schisms originate and despite faithful believers being spread across many denominations it still resolutely refuses to recognize that the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church encompasses something much bigger than the Roman organization.
And so, I operate from this beginning point: if anyone can satisfactorally explain away all these theological problems I have with the Roman Church's claim to be the One True Church, then I can see no other obstacle to converting and I would encourage all others that I meet to do the same.

A Quick History Lesson

I've been musing quite a bit over the idea of the "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" and what that means today (specifically, whether it is necessary for me to convert to Roman Catholicism in order to be fully within the True Church). For those of ya'll who are unfamiliar with the term, it comes from the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (325 AD) which was formed during the First Ecumenical Council of 318 bishops representing Christendom, finalized during the Second Ecumenical Council (of Constantinople in 381 AD by 150 bishops) and confirmed by the Third Ecumenical Council (of Ephesus in 431 AD by about 250 bishops) as the only authoritative statement of Faith.

This creed was written to clearly define the sometimes ambiguous Scriptural doctrine that became known as the Trinity. In fact, by the beginning of the fourth century, Christianity faced its biggest controversy in Arianism (named for the priest Arius, who Jolly Ole Saint Nick slapped for bein' a goober - it's true!), the belief that Jesus was only human. It threatened to tear the Church apart, and for an Emperor who had just declared Christianity legal (Constantine), that was unacceptable. So he convened the first of many councils to deal with the problem.

But splits happened anyway. Of those factions that remain today, the Assyrian Church of the East split off after the Second Ecumenical Council, the Oriental Orthodox Church split after the Third Ecumenical Council and the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches divorced in 1054 after the Pope tried to tweak the above-mentioned Creed a little bit, and barely 500 years later the Roman Church, in an arguably corrupt and bloated state, pooped out its own child-out-of-wedlock in the Protestant Reformation which has since fragmented into thousands of pieces, all claiming to have more right teaching, doctrine, practice and polity than the others (most of which, except the crazy ones, still adhere to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed).

And that's where we are today. Of the Christians belonging to the thousands of denominations that either explicitly or implicitly agree with the above Creed (about 2.1 billion), 65% (or 1.4 billion) claim to belong to a denomination that describes itself as the ONLY communion which fits the Four Marks as the description "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic" has come to be called. By the way, the total of credal Christians above include Baptists, Pentecostals etc. who simultaniously claim to be "non-credal" and yet issue their own creeds (i.e. the Baptist Faith and Message), in the same way they believe in "Scripture alone" for their teaching and yet espouse doctrines like "age of accountability", "believer's baptism", and "congregationalist polity" to name a few that may be implied within Scripture, but are not explicitly stated.

Anyway, of the churches that claim to be the sole exhibitors of the Four Marks, one denomination sticks out to me: that of the Roman Catholic Church. As a Western Christian in a tradition (Baptist) which ultimately was birthed from the Church of England, which in turn came from the R.C. Church. As this denomination is the largest in the world, claims to exclusively be the One, True Church and actively seeks to convert those from other Christian communions (especially break-aways such as mine), I wanted to examine whether it really is necessary for me to join it, in order to fully be incorporated into the People of God. But as I examined this problem, I came across some major issues that must be resolved before I and my family are willing to join the R.C. Church. If anyone satisfactorily resolves these issues, as I said above, I will gladly convert and encourage all others to do likewise.

Theological Problem #1: Pope as Supreme, Infallible Vicar of Christ

Not only does this group claim to be THE (one-and-only!) One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church but this identity is deeply tied to submission to the Pope's supreme authority and infallible decisions as the Vicar of Christ (and His representative to the Faithful on Earth). This has caused a myriad of problems throughout Western Church history. First, it paved away for some of the most godless men of history to attain the Chair of St. Peter and systematically rape the Church raw. Here is a quick summary of lip-smacking depravity:

Steven VI (896-897): Convened the infamous "Cadaver Synod" where he mutilated the corpse of his predecessor, Fromosus.

John XII (937-964): An adulterer and mass murderer.

Benedict IX (1032-1044, 1045, 1047-1048): Guilty of Simony (sold the Papal office to the highest bidder).

Urban VI (1378-1389): Brutally tortured his cardinals and ushered in the advent of the Great Western Schism.

Alexander VI "the Borgia" (1492-1503): Had four children with his mistress, then elevated them to important positions (Nepotism). Arrested and murdered any rich person in sight to conviscate their properties, and yet still drove the church deep into debt.

Leo X (1513-1521): Nepotist who built the extravagant St. Peter's Basilica while the poor faithful were crushed under the burden of expensive indulgences. When Martin Luther and others rightfully called out for reformation Il Papa stubbornly refused and excommunicated them.

Clement VII (1523-1534): After trying to play all the political angles on the European scene, his scheming and machinations finally brought about the sack of Rome (though the church had already been sacked time and again by these "Holy Fathers").

The example of these men and others, to me at least, clearly nixes any claim to infallibility. In fact, I think a good argument could be made that Church infallibility doesn't exist either, based on the actions of the Crusades (against non-Christians and fellow brothers) and the burning of Protestant reformers - which were clearly driven by both political corruption and misconceived notions about the will of God. Roman Catholic teaching might make distinctions between action and doctrine, saying the latter is protected from the former, but the ink doctrines were written in during these times was still mingled with the blood of innocents.

But technically, the Papal claim to infallibility (as well as the R.C. claim to "Church infallibility") only applies to the dogmatic teaching of the Pope, ex cathedra, and not to his personal sins. And while the doctrine of P.I. was only recently fleshed out in the 20th "Ecumenical" Council (First Vatican, 1870 - in quotes because it is rejected by all other churches) as it is "Apostolic" it is also retrospective in scope. But wait! According to the Sixth Ecumenical Council (3rd Constantinople, 680) Pope Honorius I was declared a heretic and this decision was upheld by Leo II. These decisions predate - and contradict - the infallibility doctrine and are held up by the R.C. Church, the Eastern Orthodox and most Protestants. Added to this is the problematic papal bull by Leo X called Exsurge Domine which would more fittingly bear whatever Latin translation you can find for "A Pig's Gut Rot".

The title of "Vicar of Christ" is another major problem. While I would accept the apostolic tradition of the Pope as Vicar of Peter (though not exclusively, as we'll see below), to claim to solely represent the leadership and sovereignty of Christ to the Church is to usurp Christ's Holy Spirit, and to therefore set oneself up above God Himself. There is no greater Son of Perdition than the one who sets himself up above our Most Holy God.

Finally we must look to the Pope's claim of supremacy over the Church. This is what Orthodox, Anglican and Protestant Communions have most chafed under, when it comes to talks of unity: the idea that the title of Successor to the Apostle Peter solely lies with the Roman patriarch and no other. This is based on Matthew 16:17-19 when Jesus congratulates Peter's faith and tells him (or the Church, as many Protestant theologians believe) that he is the rock (a wordplay on Peter's name) on which Christ will build his church and to whom the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven are given, along with the power to bind and loose all things on Earth or in Heaven. I will not argue with the words of Christ and will work from the assumption that Peter's position over the other apostles is secure.

But here we run into a couple of problems. First, Peter was leader of the Antioch church before he was the leader of the Roman church. This means the bishop of Antioch has first claim to the chair of Peter, even before Rome. Also, at the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem described in Acts 15 and Galatians 2, it is James and not Peter that declares the final decision of the Apostles in regard to the issues associated with Gentiles joining the Church. Peter may still have outranked James (as Peter is always listed first in lists of the Apostles in Scripture), though he seems to show deference to the fact that James is the head of the Jerusalem church (which is older than both the Antiochan and Roman churches), which seems to lead credence to Protestant ideas about congregational sovereignty and Orthodox ideas about autocephalency - i.e. the sovereignty of each bishop. And we won't even get into the issue of Antipopes (some of whom were equally as orthodox as the "legitimate" popes they were competing with, especially during the Great Western Schism). In any case, due to the above problems, while Peter's decisions may have been supreme in the Church, the Roman Pope's clearly aren't.

Theological Problem #2: The Immaculate Conception of Mary

The R.C. Church states that Mary was immaculately conceived, free from the stain of original sin, and remained sinless throughout her life. This statement is based on the papal bull Ineffabilis Deus issued by Pope Pius IX in 1854 (though was a tradition since the days of St. Anselm) and the fact that the angel Gabriel addresses her as "full of grace" in Scripture. However, Gabriel's salutation in reality addressed her pious, righteous waiting for the Messiah in the tradition of those described in Hebrews 11 and the grace she received was the gift of bearing God's Son.

As for the idea that she was sinless in life, this is clearly refuted by Romans 3:23, "since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," and by Mark 10:17 where Jesus states that "no one is good, except God alone," whereby he, himself is included in that statement (attesting to his divinity).

Mary was a sinful woman who deserved eternal separation from God, just like every other human being, and just like me. After all, Sarah was a prototype for Mary and just as much a part of God's plan for our salvation. To elevate Mary above the sinful is to imply she could provide an equal sacrifice to that of Christ's, and to assign her a position retained for God alone is idolatry.

Theological Problem #3: Transubstantiation

This is more of a sticky issue, as it involves competing Scriptural views. The R.C. Church believes the bread and wine of the Eucharist actually become the body and blood of Christ (as do the Orthodox and some Protestants kinda do), based on the literal wording of Christ at his Last Supper and later tradition and councils clearly define the phenomenon. Many Protestants on the other hand hold Christ's words to be largely symbolic of His sacrifice at the Cross (as my denomination does). Both stances are dangerous: if it is not truly Body and Blood of Christ, then those who treat it as such are showing idolatrous devotion towards what is simply bread and wine. If it is truly Body and Blood, then Protestants aren't showing it the devotion it deserves which becomes its own type of idolatry.

In this case, I think it is folly to do any more than to faithfully and gratefully accept the mystery of God that is the Eucharist. We should happily contemplate the immense grace of being bound to generations of Christians inseparable by time or space and be still in the Presence of what we don't understand.

Theological Problem #4: Forced Celibacy of the Clergy

Ever since the churches began to enforce celibacy in the clergy in the 4th century, there have been massive problems. Popes and bishops throughout the middle ages were infamous for the widespread practice of concubinage, and many brought ironic meaning to the title of father and the art of husbandry. More recently, in the 20th and 21st centuries, R.C. clergy have been implicated in the sexual abuse of congregants (many of them underage boys) in the U.S., Ireland and Australia and in Ireland many have even tortured and raped the orphans they were charged to care for. God help us in the midst of this abominable corruption!

Those are just the practical problems. The practice of forced celebacy for the clergy falls apart on theological grounds as well. 1 Timothy 4:1-5 tells us, "Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will renounce the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared with a hot iron. They forbid marriage and abstinence from foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, provided it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by God's word and by prayer."

On top of this, Mark 1:30 shows that Peter was married and in 1 Corinthians 9:5 Paul tells us that some of the other apostles were married as well. Eusebius and Martin Luther also claimed Paul was married, though Paul's own words seem to contradict this (1 Cor. 7:8, 9:5). Finally, 1 Timothy 3:2-4 gives bishops permission to be marred and have children. In fact, the following orthodox and well-respected bishops in the 3rd century had wives: Passivus of Fermo, Cassius of Narni, Aetherius of Vienne, Aquilinus of Evreux, Faron of Meaux, Magnus of Avignon, Filibaud of Aire-sur-l'Adour and Sigilaicus of Tours (the last of whom also had sons).

Scripture and tradition are clear: the hypocracy of bishops espousing forced celibacy on the clergy is not to be suffered.

Theological Problem #5: The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church

This final problem is one of definitions. The R.C. Church can be described as "One" as it is a self-contained bowl of foul doctrines mixed in with good, rotted institutions mixed in with the edifying and corrupted clergy mixed in with the sains. The problem is that within that bowl, "a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough." [Galatians 5:9] The Church that can truly be described as One is that which spans across denominational or other dividing lines to reach those who truly believe they are sinners and that Christ's death on the Cross covers their sins and paves the way for their inclusion in the Kingdom of God.

Holy? Really? If the Church is holy, it is solely by the grace won at the Cross of Christ and not by the many traditions, dogmas and institutions of the churches.

The R.C. ceased being Catholic in a definite manner with the Great Schism of 1054, though many legitimate and apostolic churches (those that adhere to the Scriptures and the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed) split long before and many split after.

Finally, to be truly Apostolic a church must not only hold Apostolic Succession (through the laying on of hands from bishop to bishop, though Scripturally many can make the argument that those who are presbyteros are also episkopos, and therefore are able to perpetuate that line) but the church must also hold Doctrinal Apostolic Succession. Though a church retain lists of ordained bishops all the way back to the Apostles, if they don't preach the Gospel as stated in the Scriptures or hold dogmas that go against the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles as stated in Scripture, then they are not Apostolic. Many dogmatic issues are worth debating and are not clearly defined in Scripture, many others are simply a Mystery of God and should be treated as such, but many others (some of those listed above) so clearly contradict the plain meaning of Scripture that they can only be described as a perversion of Apostolic teaching.

Conclusion

Though the R.C. Church exhibits the problems above, so do many particular churches and ecclesial communities. It is my fervent hope and prayer that we as Christian brothers and sisters lovingly correct each other and build each other up. My words were harsh above only because they needed to be. So many have been and continue to be hurt by our corruptions and we need the Spirit and Grace of God to purge us of these. I pray that one day, even in my lifetime, the whole Church would finally recognize itself as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church - bridging denominational lines and living in full, true Communion.

Worthy Church Writings

The following list is part of an attempt on my part to distinguish worthy, substantial Church writings throughout the ages from those that are unworthy (at best heterodox, at worst heretical). These lists are meant to guide Christians who want to broaden their theological horizons and strengthen their understanding of Christian thought. The "Worthy" List contains those major writings which have met the standards I have described below.

I use three primary criteria in deciding what is worthy and what is unworthy. In descending order of precedence, they are as follows: first, the writing must conform to the plain words of Scripture. As scripture is not always plain (and as our God is by nature mysterious), where a debate may come up about the scriptural conformity of a writing, we look to the second and third criteria for guidance. The second criterion that I use is conformity to the Ecumenical Councils (in order of rank or precedence: 1 & 2, then 3 & 4, and finally 5 through 7). But as even these are debated from one group of Christians to the next, I primarily use the First Council of Nicaea (325 AD), the First Council of Constantinople (381 AD) and the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem (c. 50 AD). The final criterion I use is Church tradition. Those teachings generally held to be influential through the ages, written by the apostles or those who knew them (i.e. the Apostolic Fathers) or those attested by accepted orthodox historians are included in the Worthy Church Writings list (assuming they meet the first two criteria, of course).

Those teachings which meet all of the above criteria are generally considered worthy and should allowed for use in Christian discipleship. It is the Worthy List that I enumerate below.

I. Old Testament (39 Readings)

A. Pentateuch

1. Genesis (922 – 401) Read

2. Exodus (700 – 401) Read

3. Leviticus (550 – 401) Read

4. Numbers (550 – 401) Read

5. Deuteronomy (c. 621) Read

B. Historical Books

1. Joshua (640 – 600) Read

2. Judges (640 – 538) Read

3. Ruth (c. 900 – 500) Read

4. 1 Samuel (Gk 1 Kingdoms; Vulgate 1 Kings) (640 – 538) Read

5. 2 Samuel (Gk 2 Kingdoms; Vulgate 2 Kings) (640 – 538) Read

6. 1 Kings (Gk 3 Kingdoms; Vulgate 3 Kings) (621 – 586) Read

7. 2 Kings (Gk 4 Kingdoms; Vulgate 4 Kings) (621 – 586) Read

8. 1 Chronicles (Gk 1 Paralipomenon) (450 – 435) Read

9. 2 Chronicles (Gk 2 Paralipomenon) (450 – 435) Read

10. Ezra (Gk 2 Esdras; Vulgate App. 1 Esdras) (c. 459) Read

11. Nehemiah (Gk 2 Esdras; Vulgate App. 2 Esdras) (c. 459) Read

12. Esther (355 – 201) Read

C. Poetical and Wisdom Books

1. Job (400 – 301) Read

2. Psalms (1000 – 501)

3. Proverbs (970 – 201)

4. Ecclesiastes (400 – 150)

5. Song of Solomon (400 – 200)

D. Major Prophetic Books

1. Isaiah (785 – 500)

2. Jeremiah (c. 586)

3. Lamentations (c. 586)

4. Ezekiel (593 – 571) Read

5. Daniel (c. 167)

E. Minor Prophetic Books

1. Hosea (c. 780 – 710) Read

2. Joel (835 – 500) Read

3. Amos (750 – 749) Read

4. Obadiah (600 – 550) Read

5. Jonah (500 – 300) Read

6. Micah (735 – 700) Read

7. Nahum (740 – 700) Read

8. Habakkuk (609 – 598) Read

9. Zephaniah (640 – 622) Read

10. Haggai (520) Read

11. Zechariah (520 – 518) Read

12. Malachi (515 – 445) Read

II. Apocrypha/Deuterocanonon (28 Readings)

A. Roman Catholic

1. Tobit (c. 200 – 101 BC)

2. Judith (165 – 37 BC) Antilegomena

3. Additions to Esther (+ Gk Esther) (200 BC – 93 AD) Antilegomena

4. Wisdom of Solomon (c. 200 – 1 BC) Antilegomela

5. Ecclesiasticus/Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach (180 – 175 BC)

6. Baruch (164 – 63 BC)

7. Letter of Jeremiah (Baruch Ch. 6) (317 – 100 BC)

8. Additions to Gk Daniel

a. Prayer of Azariah & Song of the Three Jews (175 – 164 BC)

b. Susanna (c. 100 BC)

c. Bel and the Dragon (500 – 300 BC)

9. 1 Maccabees (c. 100 BC)

10. 2 Maccabees (c. 100 – 50 BC)

B. Greek and Slavonic

1. 1 Esdras (Slav. 2 Esdras; Vulgate App. 3 Esdras) (c. 200 BC – 100 BC)

2. Prayer of Manasseh (Vulgate App.) (200 – 1 BC)

3. Psalm 151 (Gk follows 150) by David King of Israel Read

4. 3 Maccabees (c. 50 – 1 BC)

C. Slavonic and Latin Vulgate Appendix

1. 2 Esdras (Slav. 3 Esdras; Vulgate App. 4 Esdras) (70 – 450/800 AD)

D. Greek Appendix

1. 4 Maccabees (c. 100 BC – 40 AD)

2. Book of Odes

E. Ethiopian Orthodox

1. Enoch (c. 160 BC) Antilegomena Read

2. Jubilees (135 – 105 BC)

3. 1 Meqabyan/Maccabees

4. 2 Meqabyan/Maccabees

5. 3 MeqabyanMaccabees

6. 4 Baruch (Paraleipomena of Jeremiah)

F. Syriac Peshitta

1. Psalms 152 – 155 Read

2. 2 Baruch (Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch) (70 – 150 AD)

G. Old Church Slavonic

1. 3 Baruch (Greek Apocalypse of Baruch) (70 – 150 AD)

III. Dead Sea Scrolls (13 Readings – only those not included elsewhere)

A. Phylactery (200 BC – 100 AD)

B. Rule of the Congregation (200 BC – 100 AD)

C. Community Rule/Discipline Scroll/Manual of Discipline (200 BC – 100 AD)

D. Rule of the Blessing (200 BC – 100 AD)

E. Calendrical Document (200 BC – 100 AD)

F. Torah Precepts (200 BC – 100 AD)

G. Hosea Commentary (200 BC – 100 AD)

H. Prayer for King Jonathan (200 BC – 100 AD)

I. Sabbath Sacrifice Scroll (200 BC – 100 AD)

J. Damascus Document (200 BC – 100 AD)

K. War Rule Scroll/War of the Sons of Levi Against the Sons of Darkness (200 BC – 100 AD)

L. Testament of Levi (200 BC – 100 AD)

M. Copper Scroll (200 BC – 100 AD)

IV. New Testament (27 Readings)

A. Gospels

1. Matthew (c. 70 – 100) Apostle, Martyr Read

2. Mark (c. 65 – 75) Pope of Alexandria, Martyr Read

3. Luke (c. 70 – 100) Read

4. John by St. John the Evangelist (c. 90 – 100) Apostle, Pillar of the Church Read

B. Acts of the Apostles by St. Luke (c. 70 – 100) Read

C. Pauline & Pastoral Epistles

1. Romans by St. Paul (58) Apostle, Martyr Read

2. 1 Corinthians by St. Paul (57) Apostle, Martyr Read

3. 2 Corinthians by St. Paul (58) Apostle, Martyr Read

4. Galatians by St. Paul (57 – 58) Apostle, Martyr Read

5. Ephesians by Disputed (c. 62 – 170) Read

6. Philippians by St. Paul Apostle, Martyr Read

7. Colossians by St. Paul/Disputed (57 – 62) Read

8. 1 Thessalonians by St. Paul (52) Apostle, Martyr Read

9. 2 Thessalonians by Disputed Read

10. 1 Timothy by Disputed (62 – 140) Read

11. 2 Timothy by Disputed Read

12. Titus by Disputed (66 – 67) Read

13. Philemon by St. Paul Apostle, Martyr Read

14. Hebrews by Disputed (60 – 100) Antilegomena Read

D. Catholic Epistles

1. Epistle of James By St. James the Just/Disputed (c. 54 – 62) Desposyni, Pillar of the Church, Patriarch of Jerusalem, Martyr Read

2. 1 Peter by St. Peter/Disputed (c. 60 – 64/70 – 90) Apostle, Pillar of the Church, Pope of Rome, Martyr Read

3. 2 Peter by Disputed (c. 150) Antilegomena Read

4. 1 John by St. John the Evangelist (90 – 110) Apostle, Pillar of the Church Read

5. 2 John by St. John the Presbyter (90 – 110) Priest Read

6. 3 John by St. John the Presbyter (90 – 110) Priest Read

7. Jude by Disputed (c. 66 – 125) Antilegomena Read

E. Revelation/Apocalypse of John by St. John of Patmos (68 – 96) Apostle, Pillar of the Church, Antilegomena Read

V. Apostolic Fathers (16 Readings)

A. The Didache (c. 50 – 120) Read

B. Epistle of St. Barnabas by St. Barnabas/Disputed (c. 70 – 120) Apostle, Martyr Read

C. First Epistle to the Corinthians by St. Clement I (96) Pope of Rome, Martyr, Eth.O. NT Read

D. Seven Epistles of St. Ignatius (107) Patriarch of Antioch, Martyr

1. Ephesians Read

2. Magnesians Read

3. Trallians Read

4. Romans Read

5. Philadelphians Read

6. Smyrnaeans Read

7. Polycarp Read

E. The Shepherd of Hermas (88 - 155) Eth.O. NT

F. Epistle to the Philippians by St. Polycarp (c. 107 – 140) Bishop of Smyrna, Martyr Read

G. Interpretations of the Sayings of the Lord (Fragment) by St. Papias (c. 115 – 140) Bishop of Hierapolis, Martyr Read

I. Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus (c. late 100s) Read

J. Second (Clementine) Epistle to the Corinthians by Disputed (140 – 160) Antilegomena Read

K. Martyrdom of St. Polycarp (150 – 160) Read

VI. Ante-Nicene Fathers (39 Readings)

A. St. Justin Martyr Martyr

1. First Apology (c. 155)

2. Dialogue with Trypho (c. 100 – 165)

3. Second Apology (c. 161)

B. Acts of Paul (c. 160) Apocryphal, Antilegomena, Eth.O. NT

1. Acts of Paul and Thecla Read

2. Third Epistle to the Corinthians Read

3. Epistle of the Corinthians to Paul Read

4. Martyrdom of Paul Read

C. St. Clement of Alexandria * (c. 150 – 216)

1. Protrepticus/Exhortation to the Greeks

2. Paedagogus/Instructor

3. Stromata/Miscellanies

4. The Rich Man’s Salvation Read

D. Octavius by Marcus Minucius Felix (c. 150 – 260)

E. Apologia ad Autolycum by Theophilus (c. 169 – 183) Patriarch of Jerusalem

F. The Muratorian Fragment (c. 170) Read

G. Tatian

1. Diatessaron (c. 175)

2. Oratio ad Graecos

H. Athenagoras of Athens (c. 177 – 190)

1. On the Resurrection of the Dead

2. A Plea for the Christians Read

I. Against Heresies by St. Irenaeus (c. 185) Bishop of Lugdunum

J. St. Serapion (190 – 211) Patriarch of Antioch

1. Epistle to Caricus and Ponticus Fragment Read

2. Concerning the Gospel of Peter Fragment Read

K. Tertullian (197) Priest

1. Apologeticum (197)

2. Prescription Against Heretics

3. The Chaplet

L. Refutation of All Heresies – Philosophoumena I, IV – X by St. Hippolytus of Rome (c. 200 – 250) Priest, Doctor of the Church, Anti-Pope of Rome **

M. St. Cyprian of Carthage (c. 245 – 258) Bishop of Carthage, Martyr

1. De Unitate Ecclesiae

2. Treatise VIII – On Works and Alms (254) Read

N. Origen (248) Priest ***

1. Against Celsus

2. De Principiis

O. Epistles of St. Dionysius the Great of Alexandria (c. 248 – 264) Pope of Alexandria

1. Pope Stephen

2. Pope Xystus

P. Commodianus (c. 250)

1. Instructiones

2. Carmen Apologeticum

Q. Ekthesis tis Pesteos/Exposition of the Faith by St. Gregory Thaumaturgus the Wonder Worker (260 – 270) Bishop of Neocaesarea ‡

R. Preparation for the Gospel by Eusebius (c. 275 – 339) Bishop of Caesarea

S. St. Methodius (c. 300) Bishop of Olympus, Martyr

1. Peri tou Autexousiou/On Free Will

2. Aglaophon he peri tes Anastaseos/On the Resurrection

T. Adversus Nationes by Arnobius of Sicca (c. 303)

U. De Opificio Dei/The Works of God by Lactantius (303 – 304)

VII. Desert Fathers (8 Readings)

A. St. Anthony the Great (c. 251 – 356) Monk

1. Discourse on Demons

2. Letter to Theodore Read

B. The Paradise of the Desert Fathers (c. 300 – 450) translated and compiled by Benedicta Ward SLG, D.Phil.

1. The Sayings of the Desert Fathers Read

2. The Lives of the Desert Fathers Read

3. The Wisdom of the Desert Fathers

C. St. John Cassian (360 – 433) Monk

3. The Institutes

4. The Conferences

D. Historia Eremitica by Tyrannius Rufinus of Aquileia (390 – 410) Priest, Monk

VIII. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (71 Readings)

A. Four Great Western Doctors

1. St. Ambrose (c. 340 – 397) Archbishop of Milan

a. De incarnationis Dominicae sacramento

b. Hymns

(1) Deus creator omnium/God that all Things Didst Create Read

(2) Aeterne rerum conditor/Maker of all, Creator King Read

(3) Jam (or Iam) surgit hora tertia

(4) Veni, redemptor gentium/O Come, Redeemer of the Earth Read

2. Against Jovinianus by St. Jerome (393) Priest, Monk

3. St. Augustine of Hippo Bishop of Hippo, Monk, Doctor Gratiae

a. Confessions (397 – 398)

b. On Christian Doctrine (397 – 426)

c. The City of God (410 – 430)

d. On Free Choice of the Will

4. St. Gregory the Great Pope of Rome

a. The Rule for Pastors (c. 590)

b. Dialogues: 2^nd Book – The Life of Saint Benedict Read

B. Four Great Eastern Doctors

1. St. Athanasius (c. 298 – 373) Pope of Alexandria

a. On the Holy Spirit

b. Life of Antony

c. Nicene Creed (325) Read

d. On the Incarnation Read

e. Letter to Marcellinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms

2. St. Basil the Great (c. 330 – 379) Bishop of Caesarea, Hierarch, Monk ‡

a. De Spiritu Sancto/On The Holy Spirit

b. Against Eunomius

c. Lesser Asketikon

d. Letters

(1) II – To Gregory

(2) XIV – To His Friend

3. St. Gregory of Nazianzus the Theologian (c. 329 – 389) Patriarch of Constantinople, Hierarch ‡

a. Five Theological Orations

b. First Letter to Cledonius the Presbyter

c. Second Letter to Cledonius the Presbyter

4. St. John Chrysostom Patriarch of Constantinople, Monk, Hierarch

a. Homilies on Matthew: LXIII Read

b. Against Those Who Oppose the Monastic Life (before 386)

c. On the Priesthood

C. Hymns Against Heresies by St. Ephrem the Syrian (310 – 373) Deacon, Monk

D. Canons of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325) †

E. Apostles’ Creed (c. 340 – 750) Read

F. The Demonstrations by Aphrahat of Persia (344)

G. Katecheseis by St. Cyril of Jerusalem (347 – 348) Patriarch of Jerusalem, Doctor of the Church

H. Philokalia compiled by St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain (c. 350 – 1450) Monk

H. De Synodis/ De Fide Orientalum by St. Hilary of Poitiers (358) Bishop of Poitiers, Doctor of the Church

I. St. Gregory of Nyssa (372 – 394) Bishop of Nyssa ‡

1. Why There are not Three Gods

2. Catechesis

J. Canons of the First Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (381) †

K. St. Cyril of Alexandria (412 – 444) Pope of Alexandria

1. De Incarnatione Unigeniti

2. Quod unus sit Christus

L. Theodoret (423 – 457) Bishop of Cyrrhus

1. De Providential

2. Eranistes etoi Polymorphos/Beggars or Multiform

M. Athanasian Creed (428 – 542) Read

N. The Commonitory by St. Vincent of Lérins (434)

O. Historia Ecclesiastica by Soctrates of Constantinople (c. 439)

P. The Tome by St. Leo I the Great (449) Pope of Rome

Q. De Viris Illustribus by Gennadius Scholasticus of Massilia (c. 495) Priest

R. Rule of St. Benedict by St. Benedict of Nursia (c. 530) O.S.B.

S. Book of the Union by Babai the Great (d. 628)

T. Fountain Head of Knowledge by St. John of Damascus (c. 660 – 750) Priest, Monk, Doctor of the Church

U. Collected Works: Part I (82 Homilies) by Isaac of Nineveh (c. 676 – 700) Bishop of Nineveh, Monk

V. Proslogion by St. Anselm of Canterbury (1077 – 1078) Archbishop of Canterbury

W. Sententiarum Libri Quatuor by Peter Lombard (1155 – 1158) Bishop of Paris

X. Summa Theologiae by St. Thomas Aquinas (c. 1265 – 1274) Priest, O.P., Doctor Angelicus, Doctor Universalis

Y. The Imitation of Christ by Thomas a Kempis (c. 1418) Priest, Monk

Z. St. Teresa of Avila O.C.D., Doctor of the Church

1. El Camino de Perfeccion (The Way of Perfection) (1535 – 1567)

2. El Castillo Interior (The Interior Castle) (1577)

AA. St. John of the Cross (c. 1577 – 1591) Priest, O.C.D., Doctor of the Church

1. Collected Works

a. Poems Read

b. Sayings of Light and Love Read

c. Ascent of Mount Carmel

d. Dark Night of the Soul

e. Spiritual Canticle (1577 – 1578)

f. Living Flame of Love

g. Special Counsels

(1) Precautions

(2) Counsels to a Religious

(3) Censure and Opinion

h. Letters

BB. The Practice of the Presence of God by Brother Lawrence (c. 1610 – 1691) Monk

CC. Pensées by Blaise Pascal (c. 1662)

DD. Thomas Merton Priest, O.C.S.O.

1. Thirty Poems (1944)

2. The Seven Storey Mountain (1948)

3. Seeds of Contemplation (1949)

IX. Protestant Fathers (69 Readings)

A. Summa Theologiae by John Wycliffe (c. 1320 – 1384) D.D.

B. De Ecclesia by Jan Hus (c. 1370 – 1415) Priest, M.Th., Martyr

C. Petr Chelčický

1. On Spiritual Warfare (1421)

2. On the Triple Division of Society

3. Net of Faith (c. 1443)

D. Martin Luther Priest, Monk, Th.D.

1. 95 Theses on the Power of Indulgences (1517) Read

2. Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation (1520)

3. On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church (1520)

4. On the Freedom of a Christian (1520) Read

5. Open Letter to Pope Leo X (1520) Read

E. Huldrych Zwingli Priest, M.Div., Martyr

1. On the True & False Religion (1525)

2. Vom Erkiesen und Fryheit der Spysen

3. Archeteles

F. William Tyndale Martyr

1. Parable of the Wicked Mammon (1528)

2. Obedience of a Christian Man (1528)

G. Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin (1536) LL.D

H. Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury, Martyr

1. First Book of Homilies (1547)

2. 42 Articles

3. Book of Common Prayer

I. First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women by John Knox (1558) Priest

J. The Book of Martyrs (abridged) by John Foxe (1563) Priest, M.A.

K. The Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan (1660 – 1684) Pastor

L. Jonathan Edwards Pastor

1. Treatise Concerning Religious Affections (1746)

2. Freedom of the Will (1754)

3. Original Sin

4. Nature of True Virtue

5. Sermons

a. Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God (1741) Read

b. Pardon for the Greatest Sinners Read

c. The Excellency of Christ

d. Wicked Men Useful in Their Destruction Only

M. John Wesley Priest, M.A. (c. 1720 – 1791)

1. Earnest Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion

2. Farther Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion

3. A Plain Account of Christian Perfection (1766)

4. Sermons

a. Salvation by Faith

b. The Almost Christian

c. Catholic Spirit

N. Charles Haddon Spurgeon Pastor

1. The Saint and his Saviour (1857)

2. Commenting and Commentaries (1876)

3. Sermons

a. The Immutability of God (1855) Read

b. The Remembrance of Christ (1855)

c. The Sin of Unbelief (1855)

d. The Personality of the Holy Ghost (1855)

e. The Comforter (1855)

O. Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton (1908)

P. Dietrich Bonhoeffer Pastor, Martyr

1. The Cost of Discipleship (1937)

2. Letters and Papers from Prison

Q. Clive Staples Lewis M.A.

1. The Problem of Pain (1940)

2. The Screwtape Letters (1942) Read

3. Mere Christianity (1943)

4. The Great Divorce (1946) Read

5. Miracles (1947)

6. A Grief Observed (1961) Read

R. Aiden Wilson Tozer Pastor

1. The Pursuit of God (1957)

2. The Knowledge of the Holy (1961)

S. The Politics of Jesus by John Howard Yoder (1972)

T. God of the Oppressed by James H. Cone (1975)

U. John Piper Pastor, Th.D.

1. Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist (1986)

2. Don’t Waste Your Life (2003)

3. The Passion of Jesus Christ (2004)

V. Daughters of the Church by Ruth A Tucker Ph.D. and Walter Liefeld Ph.D. (1987)

W. Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem (1994) Ph.D.

X. Rob Bell Pastor, Mdiv.

1. NOOMA Videos: I – XXIV (2002 – 2008) I – III, VII – IX

2. Velvet Elvis (2005)

3. Sex God (2007)

4. Sermons

i. Everything is Spiritual (2006) Seen

ii. The Gods aren’t Angry (2007) Seen

Y. Donald Miller

1. Blue Like Jazz (2003)

2. Searching for God Knows What (2004)

3. Through Painted Deserts (2005)

310 Readings Total

112 Readings Read

Note: This list is only a shallow reflection of the diversity of Christian thought that can still be considered orthodox (right teaching), but which vary greatly both in geography and sectarian affiliation. It is an attempt at providing a guide to orthodox Christian thought through the ages in its many forms. Within this list are included prophets, saints, and martyrs, but also some who have been considered heretics and even one anti-pope. Even with all the politics, claims, and counter claims, to the best of my understanding, all these men and women sought to bring glory to God in their writing. This list is by no means comprehensive and is only a sampling of what each author wrote. Many wrote huge volumes, but I’m pretty sure nobody has the time to get through them all (at least I don’t, anyway). I did try to get a pretty good mix in; the list includes creeds, canons, poems, treatises, biographies, martyrologies, and sermons. I also tried to include writings from both the East and the West, spanning the continents of Africa, Asia, Europe, and North America. Representatives from the Five traditional Great Sees, or the Pentarchy of Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria are included as well.

Occasionally, written in blue italics, an abbreviation appears that designates where a current Christian community considers an apocryphal work as New Testament scripture. In this case, the community name may be abbreviated (ex. Eth.O. for Ethiopian Orthodox) and New Testament is abbreviated NT. These books aren’t given their own subsection because they are very few and usually isolated to one or two communities/Communions.

Also, where the designation “Martyr” is present, this refers only to the manner of death for defending their faith in Christ, without recanting at the end, or for retracting an earlier recant. However, there are many noteworthy examples among these writers of men who died of illness brought on by over exhertion in their ministry, asceticism, or during exile, or otherwise experienced torture, woundings, or suffering in their lifetime. Those who were arrested, and because of their Christian confession were thrown into prison, usually facing torture, but who weren’t killed for the Gospel, are deemed Confessors. Also, I don’t include any that died in battle and if they fought and killed others over their theology or beliefs, I didn’t include them anywhere in the list.

Finally, the designation “Saint” only reflects the distinction given by those Christian traditions who ascribe a methodology of giving the title to distinguish certain members of the Church. This distinction is therefore separate from the general term “Saints of the Church” given to all believers.

* Clement of Alexandria’s Sainthood was revoked by P. Clement VIII (1592 – 1605) due to unpaid parking tickets & the decision was upheld by P. Benedict XIV (1748), but was honored in martyrologies for well over a thousand years. So, while no longer honored as a saint, I include the title in this list anyway, as the decision to revoke his sainthood was made on the advice of his confessor C. Baronius and not on solid theological grounds.

** Hippolytus (c. 170 – 236) is often confused with a Bishop of Portus who shared his name and was a martyr. This Hippolytus, however, at one point was ordained as a rival Pope of Rome but in later records is always given the title of priest.

*** Origen was ordained priest in Palestine in 230, but later was recalled and deposed by Demetrius, Pope of Alexandria, not necessarily on doctrinal grounds but because of its irregularity with Alexandrian ecclesiastical discipline.

† Only the first two Ecumenical Councils are included, as the rest are contested by some form of the orthodox Church today. The Assyrian Church of the East considers only #1 and #2 valid; the Oriental Orthodox consider #1 through #4 valid; the Eastern Orthodox and Protestants (generally) consider #1 through #7 valid; and the Roman Catholics consider #1 through #21 valid. Also, the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics each have their own version of #8.

‡ These theologians and saints were nicknamed the Cappadocian Fathers due to their bond of blood and friendship and their complementary works dealing with the Trinity and monasticism. St. Macrina, while not designated a Cappadocian Father can certainly be deemed a Cappadocian Mother since she inspired her two younger brothers, Basil and Gregory, into the ministry. Gregory Thaumaturgos, while not a Cappadocian Father in the sense that the others are so called, was still instrumental in bringing Christianity to the region (and therefore greatly influencing the others). It was said by Jerome that before he arrived there were only 7 Christians in Cappadocia and by the time he died there were hardly any pagans left.

Definitions: Antilegomena: Disputed authenticity, authorship, or value (according to early Church Fathers, although I still recognize their scripturalnessality, since that’s a real word); Desposyni: Blood relation to Christ.

Key: Authors, Dates, and Works in Black, Ordinations, Monastic Orders, Degrees, & Honors in Blue Italicised, Works I Have Read in Red.

See also Theodore of Mopsuestia, The Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas, St. Macrina the Teacher‡, Menno Simmons, Lavius Hyde.