Turning Jordan

The book under review is:
Seitz, Christopher R.  The Goodly Fellowship of the Prophets: The Achievement of Association in Canon Formation.  Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009.  136 pp.

Dr. Christopher Seitz is Professor of Biblical Interpretation at Wycliffe College of the University of Toronto, in Toronto, Canada.  For years he has been a leading scholar in areas of biblical hermeneutics and interpretation, especially in the prophetic literature of the Old Testament, and more particularly, the Book of Isaiah and the Twelve (or, Minor Prophets).  He is also a leading figure in the more recent subject of canon, following on the heels of great scholars such as Brevard Childs and Rolf Rendtorff.  This present book is no exception.  It builds off of the research done in Prophecy and Hermeneutics (Baker Academic, 2007), helping the author better define and develop the “great achievement of association” in the formation of both the New and Old Testaments.

The book is divided into four parts, plus a preface and introduction.  The meat of the book is in the final two chapters on “the achievement of association in the prophetic canon” and “the accomplishment of the writings,” where Seitz discusses how these sections (the Prophets and the Writings) of the tripartite Hebrew canon became part of the authoritative canon and help to provide the theological witness to the gospel, which is so important for the formation of the New Testament.  The book concludes with a discussion of the early church figure Papias, with whom he agrees, that “the scriptural witness from Israel is a foundational and irreplaceable testimony to Jesus Christ” (128).  This is the whole point of his book, and Seitz spends a great deal of time explaining how many current views on the formation of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament do not allow for such a statement to be made.

To get there, Seitz wants his readers to “understand the unique character of the prophetic division of the scriptures of Israel” (11).  More specifically, he understands that his book will fill a gap in speaking of the prophets in terms of canon formation, turning the conversation about the prophets in more of a theological and hermeneutical direction, where previously it had been about historical and social concerns.  To this end, he reflects fondly upon his friendship and dialogue with the late Brevard Childs, with whom he will frequently relate throughout the remaining sections of the book.  For Seitz, the great contribution of Childs was showing that the implications of the formation of the biblical canon are not extrinsic maneuvers belonging to the self-understanding of subsequent communities, but are “deeply imbedded in the processes of the Bible’s coming to be” (12).  We saw much of this in his Prophecy and Hermeneutics.

The final two chapters are far more original to this work, and primarily address the problem of the Old Testament canon at the time of the formation of the New Testament.  In several places, Seitz shows that popular explanations of canon formation are inadequate either methodologically (historical and social concerns, rather than theological and hermeneutical) or historically (misunderstanding the link between the Old Testament and the rule of faith).  His own proposal emphasizes a need for a canonical method which addresses theological and hermeneutical concerns, as well as suggesting a strong link between the Old Testament and the rule of faith.  He develops this proposal by first recognizing the differences in association between the Prophets (which have a stable association) and the Writings (which has a more loose association for various reasons).  Out of this, Seitz argues that the “central core,” or “grammar” of the Old Testament is not the Law, but “the Law and the Prophets.”  The Writings come along this core, not having associations within its own books (as Law and Prophets do), but with the core books themselves.  For Seitz, this is why the early church reference to “Law and Prophets” does not necessitate a closed, fixed third section of the Tanakh (the Writings); rather, the Law and Prophets contain the core message and grammar, with Writings merely commenting on that message.  To necessitate such a closed canon would be to misunderstand the very idea of canon in the first century.

In many ways, this book a great contribution to current studies on the formation of the biblical canon.  He takes the study in two different directions in this book, one which helps bring closure to his discussions of the Twelve from Prophecy and Hermeneutics, and another which helps develop his view of canon formation which will be further developed in a forthcoming book.

For those who have read the book, I’m going to follow this post up with another which will look more critically at Seitz argument, especially his proposal about association in the Writings.

Andy Witt