Apocryphicity
A Blog Devoted to the Study of Christian Apocrypha
John Dart, a writer for the Christian Century and author of several CA-related books (Decoding Mark, Unearthing the Lost Words of Jesus, and The Jesus of Heresy and History), posted on the publication’s “Theolog” a response to the recent NY Times article on Secret Mark (mentioned previously HERE). You can read it HERE. Thanks to Scott Brown for passing this along.
The Infancy Gospel of James is featured prominently in a new book by Frederica Mathewes-Green, The Lost Gospel of Mary: The Mother of Jesus in Three Ancient Texts from Paraclete Press. An interview with the author is available here. The title is somewhat misleading (Infancy James has never really been “lost,” and calling it the Gospel of Mary leads to confusion with the Gnostic text of the same name). The following excerpt from the interview reveals which texts Mathewes-Green examines:
…The first text, the “Gospel of Mary,” shows us Mary as an adorable little girl, and then as a teenager coping with a “crisis pregnancy” that could cause her execution as a suspected adultress. This was an extremely popular work among Eastern Christians (that is, Asian, African, and Middle Eastern) in the second century. Many of the stories here made it to Europe, but the intact text did not. A 16th-century scholar who translated it into Latin named it “the Protevangelium of James;” this is how scholars know it today, but it’s not the original title (no one title stuck, actually). In this work, Mary is steadfast under this trial, and teaches us much about courage.The other two texts illuminate other aspects of Mary’s role. The second is a very short prayer that was found on a scrap of papyrus in Egypt in 1917, and dated 250 AD; it is the earliest prayer to Mary. It begins, “Under your compassion we take refuge…”, and it’s
The Times On-line reports that the scene in which Veronica wipes the face of Jesus has been removed from the Via Dolorosa. The move is a response to the popularity of apocryphal gospels (see a previous post on the Vatican and the CA here). Here is an excerpt:
The Pope will risk upsetting many of the Roman Catholic faithful tonight after recasting a central ritual of the Easter ceremonies.
Benedict XVI has revised radically the traditional Good Friday Stations of the Cross procession that marks Christ’s progress from prison to the Crucifixion. A reference to St Veronica, who wiped Christ’s face with a veil, has been dropped and Judas and Pontius Pilate have been introduced.
The new itinerary for the route, also known as the Via Dolorosa, or Way of Sorrows, has been drawn up to give more weight to authentic Gospels, Vatican officials said.
Veronica was an apocryphal figure and the Vatican is conducting a campaign against the trend in popular literature, such as The Da Vinci Code, and among some theologians, to bring apocryphal writings into the mainstream.
What’s next? Will Mary’s parents Anna and Joachim (first named in the Infancy Gospel of James) be written out of Catholic dogma? What about traditions of Jesus’ descent into Hell from the Gospel of Nicodemus? And the lives of the Saints which are principally drawn from the Apocryphal Acts? Perhaps the Vatican should stop before they realize how many of their cherished traditions are based on …
The apocryphal gospels used as sources for popular books and films were not new discoveries but well-known books written a century or two after the original gospels, he said.
Authors who try to sow confusion between these two different sources profit from religious ignorance," he said.
April DeConick’s The Forbidden Gospels blog features a preview of her new book The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says.
The text occupies two pages in a 15th-century manuscript of miscellaneous texts. It has no title and in its current form appears fragmentary—i.e., the beginning and perhaps the ending are missing. The story essentially is as follows:
Joseph of Arimathea is given the body of Jesus for burial. Nicodemus hears of this and comes to Joseph and offers his assistance in the burial. The two bring a burial cloth and ointments and take the body down from the cross. Joseph tells Nicodemus that Jesus appeared to him (the following few sentences are unclear). Joseph reports that the priests of the temple commented on how strange that Jesus’ kin had not come to prepare Jesus for burial. Nicodemus goes to the temple to request Jesus’ body (next several sentences unclear). Nicodemus comes from the temple and places the body of Jesus in the tomb …
It has been several weeks now since the release of Jacobovici and Pellegrino’s The Jesus Family Tomb and the airing of the companion documentary. Several scholars have weighed in on the evidence and several bloggers have devoted much time and energy to challenging or supporting J & P’s claims (see particularly Mark Goodacre’s NT Gateway, Darrell Bock’s Bock’s Blog, James Tabor’s Jesus Dynasty Blog, and the inappropriately named Jesus Tomb Hoax).
My aim here is not to address the likelihood or unlikelihood that the Talpiot tomb is indeed the last resting place of Jesus and his family but to look specifically at how various CA texts (and related issues) have been used to make arguments for its authenticity. The topic was raised here in brief before the release of the book and the documentary; I have since had the opportunity to read the book and find it interesting how much apocryphal texts figure in the argument.
The book begins with a foreword by James Cameron. Cameron’s role in this investigation has been a source of criticism and mockery, and his comments in the foreword certainly indicate that his knowledge of the CA and Early Christianity has been unduly influenced by a certain Mr. Brown. Cameron writes: “The Gospels as we know them today have been retranscribed and rewritten many times and translated from one language to another—from Aramaic to Greek to Coptic to Latin to various forms of English—with corresponding losses in nuanced meaning. They have …
Andrew Bernhard, administrator of the site Jesus of Nazareth in Early Christian Gospels, has moved into print publishing with Other Early Christian Gospels: A Critical Edition of the Surviving Greek Manuscripts. A short review of the book is available HERE (subscription required). The publisher’s description reads:
Other Early Christian Gospels is a sourcebook containing new editions and translations of all the extant Greek manuscripts of extracanonical gospels written during the first hundred years of the Christian movement (ca. 30-130 C.E.) The completely new translations are in contemporary idiomatic English so that readers will not have to struggle with antiquated language, as they must with many of the English editions presently available.
The collection focuses on texts describing Jesus' adult exploits (so no Infancy Gospel of Thomas or James) and avoids the vast majority of the Nag Hammadi texts. The texts are presented in Greek and English.
The argument for the identification of the Mariamne e Mara of the Jesus Tomb with Mary Magdalene based on the Acts of Philip is clarified by Simcha Jacobovici in a short video on Youtube and an article in the Jerusalem Post. Perhaps “clarified” is too strong. Jacobovici appeals to the 1970 edition of Acts of Philip by Francois Bovon in which, Jacobovici claims, Mary is referred to as “Mariamne” and is characterized as an apostle, a healer, and a leader. The Post article also mentions Bovon’s edition:
Francois Bovon, professor of the history of religion at Harvard University, says that "Mariamene, or Mariamne, probably was the actual name given to Mary Magdalene," and that this is the name given to Mary Magdalene in a non-canonical text called the "Acts of Philip," which mentions the apostles and Mariamne, sister of the apostle Philip.
The excerpt from the Acts I posted (HERE), in which the only Mariamne identified is Mary of Bethany and sister of Philip, is from M. R. James’ edition. I do not have Bovon’s at hand but can anyone clarify this? Are both the Post and Jacobovici misrepresenting the text?
94 It came to pass when the Saviour divided the apostles and each went forth according to his lot, that it fell to Philip to go to the country of the Greeks: and he thought it hard, and wept. And Mariamne his sister (it was she that made ready the bread and salt at the breaking of bread, but Martha was she that ministered to the multitudes and laboured much) seeing it, went to Jesus and said: Lord, seest thou not how my brother is vexed?
Tomorrow in New York there will be a press conference for the release of the book The Jesus Tomb by Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino. I have known about this book and its claims for some time now (James Tabor’s The Jesus Dynasty provides hints to its contents) but I did not think it appropriate to mention on a blog dedicated to apocryphal literature. And then I read Amazon’s synopsis of the book (emphasis mine):
Were the remains of Jesus's body found over 25 years ago and the truth hidden? Now, The Jesus Tomb tells the shattering story of what may very well be the greatest archaeological find of all time — the discovery of the Jesus family tomb. The Jesus Tomb is the most exciting real-life archaeological detective story ever told. In 1980 a crypt was accidentally discovered in Jerusalem. Inside were ossuaries (bone boxes) with inscriptions bearing the names of Jesus of Nazareth, the Virgin Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Judah, the son of Jesus. The artefacts were recorded and catalogued and then locked away for over a quarter of a century. But the tomb itself wasn't destroyed — it's under the foundations of a modern apartment. In 2005, documentary filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici gained permission to break the floor and re-enter the tomb. Together with top forensic archaeologist Charles Pellegrino and the team involved in the original discovery, he started an earth-shattering investigation that will shock the Judeo-Christian world. In a rollercoaster narrative combining history, archaeology and cutting-edge science,
Stephen Carlson of Hypotyposeis has provided a helpful update on the Oxyrhynchus story. He provides a link to Daniel B. Wallace at the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts who has this to say:
…The sensational report in the school newspaper of Bighham Young University about a new ending for Mark 16 in an early papyrus has circulated the Internet rather rapidly. Other publications have picked it up and the news has continued to spread, with scholarly speculation over what the ending might be.
All of this is premature, however, and in fact is based on faulty reporting. The scholars involved in the “discovery” have written a disclaimer and have asked me to post it. The three professors working on multi-spectral imaging of ancient manuscripts at BYU are Thomas Wayment, Roger Macfarlane, and Stephen Bay. I contacted Professor Macfarlane because of my interest in the discovery. He told me that it was a journalistic mistake. I would simply ask that the scholarly community recognize that not only is there no such manuscript to speculate about, but that the reputations of these professors should not in any way be impugned by this unintentionally false report of their findings. Please read their retraction for yourselves to see what has actually transpired. As all of us who teach know, our students don’t always hear exactly what we are saying. This is simply just another classic case of that, but the ramifications for the reputation of these gentlemen could have been unfortunate