The canonical model of textual criticism

There is another significant element in the canonical model being proposed for New Testament textual criticism. The enterprise remains a continuing process. Although one cannot fault the preparation of critical editions of the Greek New Testament as a useful and necessary tool, the publication of such critical editions can result in seriously confusing the purpose of the enterprise by substituting a modern reconstructed text as a new form of textus receptus. Rather, the canonical model of textual criticism proposes a continuing search in discerning the best received text which moves from the outer parameters of the common church tradition found in the textus receptus to the inner judgement respecting its purity.

The emphasis of this model on the activity of text criticism as a continuing process derives from several important reasons which are constitutive to the nature of the canonical enterprise. First, the search for the best canonical text within the circle established by the church’s tradition takes place within the context of the multiple textual options which have actually been used in the church. These various traditions of interpretation provide the earliest commentary on the New Testament text and illustrate both the promise of understanding and also the threat of misunderstanding.

Secondly, the process of seeking to discern the truest witness to the gospel from within the church’s multiple traditions functions to remind the interpreter of the canonical corpus that the element of theological interpretation is not only constitutive of the church’s scriptures in general, but has also entered into the textual dimension of the tradition as well. This observation is not a defence of irrational subjectivity, but a further confirmation that the discipline of text criticism is not a strictly objective, or non-theological activity, but is an integral part of the same interpretive enterprise which comprises the church’s life with its scriptures.

Brevard Childs, The New Testament as Canon: An Introduction (p. 529)