CATHOLIC EPISTLES (ἐπιστολαὶ̀ καθολικαί). The description used of the group of seven NT epistles consisting of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2 and 3 John, and Jude. These epistles are generally treated as a group distinct from the other NT group of books. They share certain features, although they also show some marked differences. That they were regarded as a group at an early period is well attested. They are all epistles, although there are differences in their epistolary form. James seems to belong to the category of the Gr. diatribe. First John is more a homily than an epistle, since it has no opening address or closing salutation. First Peter is addressed to specified provincial areas, although 2 Peter has no such address. Second and 3 John are different in method of address. The Catholic epistles are also distinguishable from each other in their varied emphases on aspects of Christian truth. For instance, 1 Peter dwells on Christian patience under trial, 1 John on Christian love, and James on matters of essentially practical interest. They form a unity because of their distinctiveness from the Pauline epistles and Hebrews, rather than because of their own internal cohesion.

The order in which these epistles stand in the Eng. texts was not universally maintained in the early history of the canon. The variation of order was considerable, not only within the group, but also in the position of the group among the other NT books. Some lists place 1 Peter and 1 John at the head, presumably because these were the best authenticated. The position of James seems to have been particularly fluid. In many canonical lists and some ancient MSS these epistles are placed between the Acts and the Pauline epistles. In other lists they follow the Pauline epistles and precede Acts.

As for the use of the word “catholic” to describe these books, there have been various suggestions: (1) That the reference is to a collection of epistles expressing the opinion of all the apostles, to mark them off from the epistles of Paul which formed a group of their own. This view is discounted by the fact that early writers used the same term to describe non-canonical books (Epistle of Barnabas, Epistle of Dionysius) and heretical books (such as Epistle of Themison). Moreover, the word does not seem to have been used in the sense of common apostolic authorship. (2) That the word is used in the sense of ecclesiastical recognition, in which case the “catholic” epistles would denote those regarded as authentic by the “catholic” church. Whereas the adjective came to be used in an ecclesiastical sense, there is no evidence that this usage was early enough to account for its employment to describe the seven epistles. (3) That the word is intended to distinguish the epistles from heretical works, but this can be discounted because it is not used of the Pauline epistles, which are equally to be distinguished from heretical works, and because it is used of an heretical work like the Epistle of Themison. (4) That the word refers to the nature of the destination of these epistles, which is the most widely held view. It accords, as none of the other explanations do, with all the evidence. It distinguishes these epistles from the epistles of Paul addressed to individual churches or groups of churches, and it accounts for the use of the term for both canonical and non-canonical books among patristic writers. The word also may be synonymous with “encyclical.” The main problem with this view is that 2 and 3 John appear to be more specific than general in their address, one to the elect lady and the other to Gaius. Nevertheless this explanation, in spite of its difficulties, seems preferable to any other. In the Western Church, where there was more delay in the final acceptance of these epistles (except 1 Peter and 1 John) than in the E, the word “canonical” was preferred rather than “catholic,” but the eastern usage later became universal.

When the Catholic epistles are considered within the context of the NT as a whole, their value may be seen in various directions. They provide a cross section of early theological opinion. They show many points of contact with other NT books, as, for instance, 1 Peter with the Pauline epistles (esp. Romans and Ephesians), and 1 John with the fourth gospel. There is also much ethical instruction which provides, with the other NT books, a wide basis for the study of NT ethics.

Bibliography B. F. Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, 4th ed. (1875); S. D. F. Salmon, “Catholic Epistles,” HDB I, 359-362; A. Souter, The Text and Canon of the New Testament (1913). Standard commentaries on the separate epistles; D. Guthrie, Hebrews to Revelation (1962). Other NT Introductions, esp. McNeile-Williams, Feins-Behm-Kummel, Michaelis.