I think Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History is a pretty good source for the view of the early Church, at least in his day.
Here is what he had to say:
"This appears to be the proper place to give a summary statement of the books of the New Testament already mentioned. And here among the first must be placed the holy quaternion of the Gospels; these are followed by The Book of the Acts of the Apostles; after this must be mentioned the epistles of Paul, which are followed by the acknowledged First Epistle of John, as also the first of Peter, to be admitted in like manner. After these are to be placed, if proper, the Revelation of John, concerning which we shall offer the different opinions in due time. These, then, are acknowledged as genuine.
Among the disputed books, although they are known and approved by many, is reputed, that called the Epistle of James and Jude. Also the Second Epistle of Peter and those called the Second and Third of John, whether they are of the evangelist or of some other of the same name. Among the spurious must be numbered both the books called the Acts of Paul and that called Pastor, and the Revelation of Peter. Beside these, the books called the Epistle of Barnabas and what are called the Institutions of the Apostles. Moreover, as I said before, if it should appear right, the Revelation of John, which some, as before said, reject but others rank among the genuine. There are also some who number among these the gospel according to the Hebrews, with which those of the Hebrews who have received Christ are particularly delighted" (Ecclesiastical History, Book 25:1-5).