The New Testament Text of Cyril of Jerusalem

This book is Number 7 in the Society of Biblical Literature series The New Testament in the Greek Fathers, which is devoted to exploring the “quotations of and allusions to the New Testament . . . in the writings of a significant church father” (ix) with a view to constructing a definitive history of the text of the New Testament. Originally the author’s dissertation at University of North Carolina, this work addresses the debate on whether or not Palestinian scribes created their own distinctive New Testament text comparable to what is found, for example, in Alexandria. The catechetical writings of the fourth century bishop, Cyril of Jerusalem, serve as an ideal resource for such a study: “. . . because he was a native of Roman Palestine, his writings can show how the New Testament was known and used in the region in the fourth century. It is with his role as a witness to the New Testament that the present study is concerned” (2).

According to the author the study addresses two needs and answers two questions. The first need is “for an accurate analysis of manuscripts of the group called “Caesarean” with an overview of Origen’s and Eusebius’s textual affinities so far as they are known.” Second is the need for “a careful presentation and analysis of Cyril’s text” (28). Finally, the author wishes to apply his findings to answer two broad questions: “First, given Cyril’s doctrinal interests, what was his understanding of the relationship between textual differences and doctrinal differences? Second, given the uneasy relations between the sees of Jerusalem and Caesarea, what was the ecclesio-political significance of Cyril’s textual preferences in relation to those of Origen and Eusebius at Caesarea” (28)?

After some useful introductory material on Cyril as bishop and author, Chapter 3 addresses the first need by critically surveying the history of the quest for a Palestinian New Testament text. Mullen concludes that while scholars have a broad picture of this text type, detailed knowledge of both the region and the text is for the most part restricted to the city of Caesarea and to the Gospels. Mullen seeks to “provide several ‘tiles’ needed to complete a mosaic” representing “how the Christians of fourth-century Palestine reproduced their New Testament” (58–59).

After a brief explanation of the method used to compile Cyril’s New Testament references (Chapter 4), the author presents the heart of the study: over two hundred pages listing every citation of the New Testament made by Cyril along with a critical apparatus for comparing them to other known editions of the time (Chapters 5–6). A chapter explaining the method of analysis follows (Chapter 7).

In Chapters 8–11 the author systematically uses the compiled data to identify what text type each of the books of the New Testament used by Cyril most closely resembles. Mullen’s overall conclusion is that “Cyril’s text had varied affinities” (387) to the different traditions to which he had access. Like other writers in the region he utilized a text of the New Testament that represented a broad stream of textual traditions undergoing a gradual transition from an Alexandrian to a Byzantine type. His findings further support his earlier judgment that there is “scant evidence for a distinct and independent text-type centered in the region” (58).

Finally, using his conclusions to address his two remaining questions, Mullen concludes first, that Cyril’s ecclesio-political differences with Caesarea were not such that they had any influence on his choice of texts compared to the choices of Origen and Eusebius in Caesarea. Second, “Cyril did not consider textual differences to be a major cause of doctrinal differences. . . . His focus was on the correct interpretation of the text at hand rather than on the differences that might be found within a given text” (400).

Mullen’s work is thorough and meticulous. The book reads well and is well...