In this section, I will provide annotated bibliographies on three topics that are central to Christian religious authority (and thus authentic Christianity): (1) Holy Scripture (as a Canonical Witness Sources); (2) Apostolic Tradition & Its Relationship to the Church; and (3) the Living Vine of the Divine Magisterium. 

The three major branches of Christianity are divided over the relevance and relationship of all three of these sources: where Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants agree is primarily on the authority of Holy Scripture, but they differ on the authority of one or the other two sources.  Protestants typically reject the authority of both Tradition and the Magisterium, whereas the Orthodox accept Tradition but reject the Magisterium (or, the privileged right of the bishops and those in communion with the chair of Peter to interpret both Scripture and Tradition).

This section isn't intended for apologetics primarily so as to defend the Catholic perspective (even if that is the perspective presented here), so much as to provide a list of scholarly resources on these issues that continue to divide many baptized Christians. 

Rather than assume the Protestant view that everything "builds from" Scripture and thus stands or falls upon that foundation (and to mistakenly take that view as common ground of Apostolic Christians), the true metaphor for Divine Communication is that of a living tree (which is more than just the dead medium of its inner bark upon which thoughts and memories are written is something that both develops and preserves itself so as to bear fruit in the end): Interestingly enough, the word book in the evangelical term "Good Book", according to an etymological dictionary, derives from "the Proto-Germanic *bōk(ō)-, from *bokiz "beech" (source also of German Buch "book" Buche "beech), the notion being of beechwood tablets on which runes were inscribed; but it may be from the tree itself (people still carve initials in them)."  Similarly, Latin and Sanskrit also have words for "writing" that are based on tree names ("birch" and "ash," respectively). And compare French livre "book," from Latin librum, originally "the inner bark of trees" (see library)."  It appears that Scripture is bound to the idea of trees as the physical mediums through which the Divine is conveyed.  That is not an irrelevant insight for we too are embodied creatures who have a physical presence in this world as affirmed by the Incarnation whereby the Second Person of the Trinity became man.  The Gospel, therefore, is not so much "timeless", meaning that it somehow floats through posterity independently of the goings-on of history (after all, Bibles have to be physically translated and published!), so much as a message implanted in the social fabric of the Church and fully immersed in time through the Divine Liturgy.

To prioritize the textual over the oral is a modern phenomenon.  The witnesses to the Resurrection did not immediately write down their testimony so as to ratify it and thus lend it authenticity to it.  This is because they operated in a world where oral tradition dominated the scene.  Writing therefore served an ancillary function of setting the story straight in the face of competing (and false) stories about Jesus Christ.  This is why the Gospels were written decades after the events in question.  If the Apostles were moderns, they may have written it down right after Pentecost so as to get every detail right!  But they didn't because they primarily, if not exclusively (I mean did Bartholomew write anything down?), taught through speech to a mostly illiterate audience.  That is how the Church emerged-- not through letter writing or history books.

And besides, there is something more compelling about the spoken vs. written word: You are more likely to trust a witness in person than a document that may have been forged in their name!  This is why there is more to the eye in the Gospels than just the texts themselves.  The texts themselves have stories of their own which take place within something that Jesus Himself gave to the World: namely, His Church.

Admittedly, this compilation is obviously done from the standpoint of Catholicism but the point of elaborating this three-fold presentation is to present the case for Catholic ecclesiology as a rational demonstration that takes for granted only two things: (1) Classical Theism is true (especially from a philosophical/natural point of view); (2) The Bible is supernaturally inspired (and thus has depth beyond ordinary Human understanding; thereby, requiring extraordinary aid in sorting truths from errors.).   

This pairing means that certain superficial interpretations of the Bible (such as God having a body, etc.) are necessarily false not because Scripture says otherwise-- in fact, utilizing figures of speech and tropes, the Bible can give the impression to the literally minded that God is actually walking the Garden of Eden, etc.--- but because Reason dictates that God as infinite Spirit cannot have extension (or, a body) as we do.  Thus, we already see that Faith (sourced in Revelation) and Reason (manifest in the rightly ordered natural use of the Mind) do not say contrary things and, more strongly put, cannot say contrary things lest God deceive us.  Why is that?  Well, Classical Theism, most of which predates Christianity, also posits that God is perfectly Good and the source of Truth itself.  A safe inference then is that God will not lie either in what He directly reveals or through the proper use of His creature's intellect.  Lying is a sin, and it would be a fundamental error to infer that God can sin.

Again, what I have listed below are resources intended to demonstrate how these two assumptions above allow a clear path through the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  Apart from this end, it is also best to understand our history as baptized Christians first and foremost.  Know what it is that matters to you and what is truly at stake rather than add salt to old wounds that you scarcely understand!  Let us first understand what the distinctions are before litigating over the past of church history itself!

On the Concept of Religious Authority: Dogma, Doctrine, & Truth

Biblical Studies: Annotated Bibliography

Sacred Tradition, Appeals to Apostolic Tradition, & Ecclesiology: An Annotated Bibliography

Divine Magisterium & the Ecumenical Church: An Annotated Bibliography

Annotated Bibliograph (2024-5) --- Theme: The Bible as "Canon" (Standard of Rule)

Biblical Canonization:

• Armstrong, Karen (2007) The Bible: A Biography. 
• Barnstone, Willis (ed.) (1984). The Other Bible: Ancient Alternative Scriptures. 
• Childs, Brevard S. (1984). The New Testament as Canon: An Introduction.
• Meade, John D. (2017). The biblical canon lists from early Christianity: texts and analysis.
• Schneemelcher Wilhelm (ed). Hennecke Edgard, New Testament Apocrypha, 2 vol.
• McDonald, Lee Martin (2009). Forgotten Scriptures. The Selection and Rejection of Early Religious Writings. 
• McDonald, Lee Martin (2000). Early Christianity and Its Sacred Literature. 
• McDonald, Lee Martin (2007). The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority. 
• Pentiuc, Eugen J., ed. (2022). The Oxford Handbook of the Bible in Orthodox Christianity. 
• Souter, Alexander (1954). The Text and Canon of the New Testament. 
• Stonehouse, Ned Bernhard (1929). The Apocalypse in the Ancient Church: A Study in the History of the New Testament Canon. 
• Wall, Robert W.; Lemcio, Eugene E. (1992). The New Testament as Canon: A Reader in Canonical Criticism. 
• Westcott, Brooke Foss. (1875). A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament.
• Francis Bruce Vawter's Biblical Inspiration
• Histoire critique du Vieux Testament (1678) 
• Roland Edmund Murphy's The New Jerome Biblical Commentary 

FOR 2025-26, the SHIFT will be towards "Tradition" (2025) and "Magisterium" (2026) (as the triple source of ecclesiastical authority of the Holy Catholic Church)