Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Gospels and Apocrypha

  1. #1

    Post Gospels and Apocrypha

    Gospels and apocrypha

    by Robert Charroux



    A considerable number of GOSPELS appeared in the first few centuries
    after Christ. The church regards as canonical(in conformity with the
    rules of the Church) only those of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The
    oldest of these is matthew, which was directly inspired by the Gospel
    of the Hebrews.
    One point must be stressed: the Apocrypha and the fifty or so
    Gospels that still exist, or existed before being destroyed by
    conspiracies, are unanimous in acknowledging that Jesus lived in the
    time of Pontius Pilate and Tiberius, but there is no known historical
    document attesting to his real existence. It has been said to be
    proved
    by the "Acts of Pilate", a series of reports supposedly sent to
    emperor
    Tiberius by Pontius Plate, procurator of Judea, containing an account
    of Jesus's life and death, the crimes imputed to him by the jews, his
    crucifixion, and even his resurrection. If these acts ever existed
    they
    must have been made out of whole cloth by Christians; in any case
    there
    is now no trace of them. Many false reports, allegedly by pilate,
    have
    been written with the same fraudulent intent, but none of them has
    been
    accredited by the church. Although the Gospels are consistent with
    one
    another concerning the time when Jesus lived, there is less agreement
    on his acts and personality. Some Gospels attribute to him a doctrine
    and a frame of mind that are diametrical opposed to the accounts of
    matthew, mark, luke and John. Matthew and luke are often in sharp dis-
    agreement with Mark and John,and some times contradict themselves.
    The vagueness and inconsistency of the four canonical Gospels
    explains why it once forbidden for any one but churchman to read them.
    Authentic documents have existed; there may still be some left in
    the vatican library. Dr. Spencer lewis, imperator of the rosicrucians,
    has written that we know that the fathers of the church had access to
    secret documents because in the councils of the early church there
    were
    references to parts of manuscripts and official documents dealing with
    the crucifixion and other events of Jesus life. These documents, says
    Dr. Lewis, are now either hidden or destroyed, and one of the main
    concerns of the Church Fathers between the 7th and twelfth centuries
    was to obtain manuscripts from collections in eastern countries which
    might contain information different from the version of the facts that
    had been officially accepted by the Church. John the apostle,who
    became
    bishop of Ephesus, is said to be the author of the 4th Gospel, but now
    it is acknowledged that this puseudo-Gospel was written later by smart
    theologians. It is certainly not by John, and moreover we have
    no
    historical proof he ever existed. Somewhere between 50 and a hundred
    Gospels appeared in the second and third centuries. Among the better
    known ones are the gospels of the Jews, the ebonites, Matthew, Mark,
    Luke, and John, Thomas the israelite, James the minor, Nicodemus,
    the nativity of mary and the Childhood of the savior, The childhood,
    the people, the 12 apostles, Bartholomew, Barnabas, Cerinthus, Peter,
    Basilides, Truth, Eve, Perfection, Phillip, The egyptians, The
    Gnostics
    of Egypt, Judas, Paul. For the sake of unity,the christian
    communities
    adopted the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, and considered
    them
    as equally sacred and truthful, despite their gaps and contradictions.
    The Gospels being books inspired by the holy spirit, must not, in
    theory, be criticized,suspected,or disputed, but in our time this
    rule
    has been greatly softened. Theologians readily admit that the
    gospels
    must be interpreted and even corrected, "in the right direction". To
    bring the different stories into agreement, the church often modified
    or even rewrote the scriptures. Tatian, a disciple of Justin, tried
    to
    solve the problem by writing the "Diatessaron", a composite of the
    stories of matthew, mark, luke and john. But how are we not to be
    disconcerted by the different genealogies of Jesus according to
    whether
    we read matthew or luke? Matthew says that Jesus was the son of
    Joseph
    and descended from Jacob, Matthan, Eleazar, Eliud, Achim, Zadok, Azor,
    and so on back to david and Abraham. (Matthew 1:1-16). Luke also says
    that Jesus was the son of Joseph but he descended from Heli, Levi,
    Melchi, Jannai, Joseph, Mattathiah, and so on back to Abraham, Shem,
    Noah, and Adam. (Luke 3:23-38). Strangely enough, considering their
    basic divergences, Matthew, Mark, And Luke are called the "Synoptic
    Gospels" because of their supposedly close agreement with one another.
    We read in Saint Augustine, "It is not permissible to say or even
    think that any of the evangelists might have lied. "Furthermore,
    says the good Saint, if we encounter seemingly contradictory state-
    ments(such as the two genealogies of Jesus). We must believe that
    they are actually in agreement, even if we do not see how this can
    be true. John, whose story must be suspected, is in total disagreement
    with Matthew, Mark and Luke concerning The chronology of passion week,
    and all four of them give different dates for Easter. According to
    John, Jesus was crucified not on friday, but on Saturday, the day
    before easter. The divergences are even greater with regard to the
    resurrection, or, more exactly, the reappearance of Jesus. Matthew
    says that both mary and mary magdalene were present: Luke and John
    say that only Mary Magdalene was there. There is no acceptable
    evidence from the authenticity of the Gospels. The Church prudently
    presents them as the Gospels "according" to Matthew, Mark, Luke and
    John. In the second and third centuries, scholars and doctors of
    the Church, such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and the ardent
    tertullian, believed that the Gospels had been written by the
    Apostles and that they were eye-witness accounts as well as being
    divinely inspired. Polycarp, said to have been ordained Bishop of
    Smyrna by John the Evangelist in about the year 80, was the
    worthiest and most estimable of all the saints. uNLIKE THE Apostles
    who denied Jesus, he preferred death to the shame of denial. He was
    burned at the stake, but he was so effectively armored by his faith
    that he died with out uttering a sound and with out suffering as
    Jesus
    did Polycarp is the author of a letter to the philippians concerning
    contested writings of Ignatius Theophorus(the first Saint Ignatius),
    who was falsely said to have been ordained by the Apostle peter.
    (there was a rash of alleged ordinations by Apostles. There were no
    historical documents to support these claims; if there were, they
    would establish the authenticity of the Apostles and Jesus.)
    Polycarp speaks of the first three Gospels. but not the fourth
    because "the Gospel of John did not exist at the beginning of the
    second century". It is mentioned "for the first time" by theophilus
    of Antioch in about the year "180." The Gospel of John is the
    most highly regarded. the most "initiatic," according to the
    ignorant, the one that was written by "the eagle John", who slept
    in the arms of Jesus and later, at gethsemane, between peter and
    James. Yet this Gospel is a notorious fraud perpetrated in the
    second century to make up for the lack of proper theological
    content in the other three. It is said to be a gospel "not of facts,
    but of Ideas."
    If we are to find our way through this imbroglio, we must have some
    Idea of the climate of opinion that prevailed two thousand years ago
    in Egypt and Asia Minor. Gnosticism was the basis of all religions
    and sects as it is today with spiritualists, Theosophists, and
    believers in divine revelations. Cerinthus was the head of a
    christian
    sect, but he did not recognize the divine origin of Christ. The
    following passage from the "Grand Dictionnaire du XIXe siecle" will
    help us to understand the outlook of men in the first century:
    "Cerinthus accepted the existence of two opposing principles,
    not good and evil, but an essentially active principle, existing
    by itself: God and a passive principle, the imperfect and not
    existing by itself: matter. The author of the world was not God,
    who could not enter into a relation with matter; the creator
    belonged to one of the lowest classes of inferior spirits, called
    "forces " and " Angels" by theodore, but he nevertheless bore
    within himself something of the divine being. The same was true
    of the "aeon" creator of the mosaic legislation. Jesus was not
    the son of God: an aeon named Christ had united with him at the
    time of his baptism in the waters of the Jordan river, and had
    abandoned him on the day of the crucifixion. "Cerinth, a Jew by
    birth believed in the obligatory mosaic law and in the future
    domination of the world by the Jewish people... The Cerinthians
    used the Gospel of the Hebrews". Some exegetists believe that
    the so called Revelation of John the last book of the New Testment
    was written by Cerinthus. As my friend the writer Kronos reports
    in "Essaide meditations immaterielles", under Popes Gregory VII
    and Innocent III, the church judged it wise to publish, for the
    use of priests, a highly modified summary of the Gospels, with
    reminders of daily rites and prayers. It was and still is the
    breviary. It must be stressed that translations of the gospels
    were formerly forbidden, supposedly for fear of misinterpretations
    or mistranslations. It is hard tonforgive these pious misgivings
    in view of the fact that councils, popes, and christian sovereigns
    shamelessly altered the "HOLY SCRIPTURES", including the translation
    done by saint Jerome in the fourth century, that is the vulgate,
    which is the only one accredited by the Roman Catholic Church.
    "the most radical alterations", writes Kronos, "date from the
    nicene Council and were motivated by the understanding between
    Pope Damasus I and Emperor Constantine. It was on this occasion
    that the oldest Gospels, Notably the Gospel of the Hebrews(the
    original Gospel of Mathew) were declared to be hidden (apokruphos
    == Apocryphal). Furthermore additions, ommissions, and alterations
    were made in the four remaining Gospels. St Jerome, who had been
    commissioned to translate them into latin, was surprised by this.
    he was all the more suprised because he had just translated the
    Gospel of the Hebrews into Latin, and he was now instructed to
    disregard it. "Saint Victor, Bishop of Tumones (africia) reports
    that at the end of the fifth century Pope Anastasius II again had
    the holy Scriptures examined, Criticized, Expurgated, and amended.
    Charlemagne did the same, a few years before his death( Duchesne,
    Historiae Francor Scriptores), and he was initated by Pope Sixtus V
    (1585-1590), who completed the work done by his predcessors, to
    please Emperor Charles V> In this period the Church fabricated an
    epistle of Saint Peter, later rejected by theologians.
    "Several thousand alterations were made. The Pope threatened
    terrible anathemas against any one who might dare to tamper with
    the texts in the future, then he made a new revision which
    modified more than two hundred passages! a few years later,
    Pope Clement VIII(1592-1605) made more alterations, which fortunately
    were the last, for printing had been invented.*
    Why all those alterations? it was quite simple: since most dogmas
    were inconsistant with the holy books, the holy books had to be made
    consistent with the dogmas. Between God and man there had to be a
    church to which man must submitt before hand, for otherwise he would
    not be allowed to have any contact with GOD. Christ had said, "God
    is every where," but this was dangerous pantheism! the church could
    not risk having man worship God in his creation. Only the church
    transmitted Gods will. And Will in this sense is contrary to the
    free will that the creator gave to us: The early Gospels spoke
    only of Gods wishes, and held that he counted on all his creatures,
    particularly man, to help him in realizing them.

    * Each Bishop and each college had Gospels copied with varing
    degrees of accuracy, arranged to suit the copists ideas, then
    revised by the Bishop or the head of the college. It was easy to
    forget or falsify a text! but when printing with a movable type
    was invented ( in 1436), fraudulent changes became impossible
    and the Gospels had to be reproduced in conformity with an original.

    excerpted from "Forgotten Worlds"

  2. #2
    Sideways to the Sun
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Milesian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 18th, 2008 @ 04:55 PM
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Aileach
    Gender
    Occupation
    Rebel
    Politics
    Anti-Neophilia
    Religion
    Traditional Catholicism
    Posts
    2,711
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    19
    Thanked in
    19 Posts

    Post Re: Gospels and apocrypha

    It always pays to get true and accurate information first

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01601a.htm#III



    (1) APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS

    The term apocryphal in connection with special Gospels must be understood as bearing no more unfavourable an import than "uncanonical". This applies to the Gospel of the Hebrews and in a less degree to that of the Egyptians, which in the main seem to have been either embodiments of primitive tradition, or a mere recasting of canonical Gospels with a few variations and amplifications. It is true, all the extant specimens of the apocryphal Gospels take the inspired evangelical documents as their starting-point. But the genuine Gospels are silent about long stretches of the life of Our Lord, the Blessed Virgin, and St. Joseph. Frequently they give but a tantalizing glimpse of some episode on which we would fain be more fully informed. This reserve of the Evangelists did not satisfy the pardonable curiosity of many Christians eager for details, and the severe and dignified simplicity of their narrative left unappeased imaginations seeking the sensational and the marvellous. When, therefore, enterprising spirits responded to this natural craving by pretended Gospels full of romantic fables and fantastic and striking details, their fabrications were eagerly read and largely accepted as true by common folk who were devoid of any critical faculty and who were predisposed to believe what so luxuriously fed their pious curiosity. Both Catholics and Gnostics were concerned in writing these fictions. The former had no other motive than that of a pious fraud, being sometimes moved by a real though misguided zeal, as witness the author of the Pseudo-Matthew: Amor Christi est cui satisfecimus. But the heretical apocryphists, while gratifying curiosity, composed spurious Gospels in order to trace backward their beliefs and peculiarities to Christ Himself. The Church and the Fathers were hostile even towards the narratives of orthodox authorship. It was not until the Middle Ages, when their true origin was forgotten even by most of the learned, that these apocryphal stories began to enter largely into sacred legends, such as the "Aurea Sacra", into miracle plays, Christian art, and poetry. A comparison of the least extravagant of these productions with the real Gospels reveals the chasm separating them. Though worthless historically, the apocryphal Gospels help us to better understand the religious conditions of the second and third centuries, and they are also of no little value as early witnesses of the canonicity of the writings of the four Evangelists. The quasi-evangelistic compositions concerning Christ which make no pretensions to be Gospels will be treated elsewhere. They are all of orthodox origin. (See AGRAPHA.)

    (a) Apocryphal Gospels of Catholic Origin

    The Protoevangelium Jacobi, or Infancy Gospel of James


    It purports to have been written by "James the brother of the Lord", i.e. the Apostle James the Less. It is based on the canonical Gospels which it expands with legendary and imaginative elements, which are sometimes puerile or fantastic. The birth, education, and marriage of the Blessed Virgin are described in the first eleven chapters and these are the source of various traditions current among the faithful. They are of value in indicating the veneration paid to Mary at a very early age. For instance it is the "Protoevangelium" which first tells that Mary was the miraculous offspring of Joachim and Anna, previously childless; that when three years old the child was taken to the Temple and dedicated to its service, in fulfilment of her parents' vow. When Mary was twelve Joseph is chosen by the high-priest as her spouse in obedience to a miraculous sign -- a dove coming out of his rod and resting on his head. The nativity is embellished in an unrestrained manner. Critics find that the "Protoevangelium" is a composite into which two or three documents enter. It was known to Origen under the name of the "Book of James". There are signs in St. Justin's works that he was acquainted with it, or at least with a parallel tradition. The work, therefore, has been ascribed to the second century. Portions of it show a familiarity with Jewish customs, and critics have surmised that the groundwork was composed by a Jewish-Christian. The "Protoevangelium" exists in ancient Greek and Syriac recensions. There are also Armenian and Latin translations.

    Gospel of St. Matthew

    This is a Latin composition of the fourth or fifth century. It pretends to have been written by St. Matthew and translated by St. Jerome. Pseudo-Matthew is in large part parallel to the "Protoevangelium Jacobi", being based on the latter or its sources. It differs in some particulars always in the direction of the more marvellous. Some of its data have replaced in popular belief parallel ones of the older pseudograph. Such is the age of fourteen in which Mary was betrothed to Joseph. A narrative of the flight into Egypt is adorned with poetic wonders. The dragons, lions, and other wild beasts of the desert adore the infant Jesus. At His word the palm-trees bow their heads that the Holy Family may pluck their fruit. The idols of Egypt are shattered when the Divine Child enters the land. The "Gospel of the Nativity of Mary" is a recast of the Pseudo-Matthew, but reaches only to the birth of Jesus. It is extant in a Latin manuscript of the tenth century.

    Arabic Gospel of the Infancy

    The Arabic is a translation of a lost Syriac original. The work is a compilation and refers expressly to the "Book of Joseph Caiphas, the High-Priest", the "Gospel of the Infancy", and the "Perfect Gospel". Some of its stories are derived from the Thomas Gospel, and others from a recension of the apocryphal Matthew. However there are miracles, said to have occurred in Egypt, not found related in any other Gospel, spurious or genuine, among them the healings of leprosy through the water in which Jesus had been washed, and the cures effected through the garments He had worn. These have become familiar in pious legend. So also has the episode of the robbers Titus and Dumachus, into whose hands the Holy Family fell. Titus bribes Dumachus not to molest them; the Infant foretells that thirty years thence the thieves will be crucified with Him, Titus on His right and Dumachus on His left and that the former will accompany Him into paradise. The apocryphon abounds in allusions to characters in the real Gospels. Lipsius opines that the work as we have it is a Catholic retouching of a Gnostic compilation. It is impossible to ascertain its date, but it was probably composed before the Mohammedan era. It is very popular with the Syrian Nestorians. An originally Arabic "History of Joseph the Carpenter" is published in Tischendorf's collection of apocrypha. It describes St. Joseph's death, related by Our Lord to His disciples. It is a tasteless and bombastic effort, and seems to date from about the fourth century.

    Gospel of Gamaliel

    Dr. A. Baumstark in the Revue Biblique (April, 1906, 253 sqq.), has given this name to a collection of Coptic fragments of a homogeneous character, which were supposed by another Coptic scholar, Reveillout, to form a portion of the "Gospel of the Twelve Apostles" (q.v. inf.). These fragments have been referred to a single Gospel also by Lacau, in "Fragments d'apocryphes coptes de la bibliothèque nationale" (Cairo, 1904). The narrative is in close dependence on St. John's Gospel. The author did not pose seriously as an evangelist, since he explicitly quotes from the fourth canonical Gospel. He places the relation in the mouth of Gamaliel of Acts, v, 34. Baumstark assigns it to the fifth century. The writer was evidently influenced by the "Acta Pilati".

    The Transitus Mariæ or Evangelium Joannis

    The Transitus Mariæ or Evangelium Joannis, which is written in the name of St. John the Apostle, and describes the death of Mary, enjoyed a wide popularity, as is attested by the various recensions in different languages which exist. The Greek has the superscription: "The Account of St. John the Theologian of the Falling Asleep of the Holy Mother of God". One of the Latin versions is prefaced by a spurious letter of Melito, Bishop of Sardis, explaining that the object of the work was to counteract a heretical composition of the same title and subject. There is a basis of truth in this statement as our apocryphon betrays tokens of being a Gnostic writing worked over in an orthodox interest. A "Transitus Mariæ" is numbered among the apocrypha by the official list of the "Decretum of Gelasius" of the fifth or sixth century. It is problematic, however, whether this is to be identified with our recast Transitus or not. Critics assign the latter to the end of the fourth or the beginning of the fifth century. The relation of the Transitus to the tradition of Mary's Assumption has not yet been adequately examined. However, there is warrant for saying that while the tradition existed substantially in portions of the Church at an early period, and thus prepared the way for the acceptance of mythical amplifications, still its later form and details were considerably influenced by the Transitus and kindred writings. Certainly the homilies of St. John Damascene, "In Dormitionem Mariæ", reveal evidence of this influence, e.g. the second homily, xii, xiii, xiv. Going further back, the "Encomium" of Modestus, Bishop of Jerusalem, in the seventh century (P.G., LXXXVI, 3311), and the Pseudo-Dionysius of the fifth (De divinis nominibus, iii), probably suppose an acquaintance with apocryphal narratives of the Death and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. These narratives have a common groundwork, though varying considerably in minor circumstances. The Apostles are preternaturally transported from different quarters of the globe to the Virgin's deathbed, those who had died being resuscitated for the purpose. The "Departure" takes place at Jerusalem, though the Greek version places Mary first at Bethlehem. A Jew who ventures to touch the sacred body instantly loses both hands, which are restored through the mediation of the Apostles. Christ accompanied by a train of angels comes down to receive His mother's soul. The Apostles bear the body to Gethsemani and deposit it in a tomb, whence it is taken up alive to Heaven. (See ASSUMPTION; MARY.)

    (b) Judaistic and Heretical Gospels

    Gospel according to the Hebrews

    Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius, and St. Epiphanius speak of a "Gospel according to the Hebrews" which was the sole one in use among the Palestinian Judeo-Christians, otherwise known as the Nazarenes. Jerome translated it from the Aramaic into Greek. It was evidently very ancient, and several of the above mentioned writers associate it with St. Matthew's Gospel, which it seems to have replaced in the Jewish-Christian community at an early date. The relation between the Gospel according to the Hebrews and our canonical Matthew Gospel is a matter of controversy. The surviving fragments prove that there were close literal resemblances. Harnack asserts that the Hebrew Gospel was entirely independent, the tradition it contained being parallel to that of Matthew. Zahn, while excluding any dependence on our Greek canonical Matthew, maintains one on the primitive Matthew, according to which its general contents were derived from the latter. This Gospel seems to have been read as canonical in some non-Palestinian churches; the Fathers who are acquainted with it refer to it with a certain amount of respect. Twenty-four fragments have been preserved by ecclesiastical writers. These indicate that it had a number of sections in common with the Synoptics, but also various narratives and sayings of Jesus, not found in the canonical Gospels. The surviving specimens lack the simplicity and dignity of the inspired writings; some even savour of the grotesque. We are warranted in saying that while this extra-canonical material probably has as its starting-point primitive tradition, it has been disfigured in the interests of a Judaizing Church. (See AGRAPHA.)

    Gospel According to the Egyptians

    It is by this title that Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Hippolytus, and Epiphanius describe an uncanonical work, which evidently was circulated in Egypt. All agree that it was employed by heretical sects -- for the most part Gnostics. The scanty citations which have been preserved in the Fathers indicate a tendency towards the Encratite condemnation of marriage, and a pantheistic Gnosticism. The Gospel according to the Egyptians did not replace the canonical records in the Alexandrian Church, as Harnack would have us believe, but it seems to have enjoyed a certain popularity in the country districts among the Coptic natives. It could scarcely have been composed later than the middle of the second century and it is not at all impossible that it retouched some primitive material not represented in the canonical Gospels.

    Gospel of St. Peter

    The existence of an apocryphal composition bearing this name in Christian antiquity had long been known by references to it in certain early patristic writers who intimate that it originated or was current among Christians of Docetic views. Much additional light has been thrown on this document by the discovery of a long fragment of it at Akhmîn in Upper Egypt, in the winter of 1886-87, by the French Archæological Mission. It is in Greek and written on a parchment codex at a date somewhere between the sixth and ninth century. The fragment narrates part of the Passion, the Burial, and Resurrection. It betrays a dependence, in some instances literal, on the four inspired Gospels, and is therefore a valuable additional testimony to their early acceptance. While the apocryphon has many points of contact with the genuine Gospels, it diverges curiously from them in details, and bears evidence of having treated them with much freedom. No marked heretical notes are found in the recovered fragment, but there are passages which are easily susceptible of a heterodox meaning. One of the few extra-canonical passages which may contain an authentic tradition is that which describes Christ as placed in mockery upon a throne by His tormentors. Pseudo-Peter is intermediate in character between the genuine Evangels and the purely legendary apocrypha. Its composition must be assigned to the first quarter or the middle of the second century of the Christian era. C. Schmidt thinks he has found traces of what is perhaps a second Gospel of Peter in some ancient papyri (Schmidt, Sitzungsberichte der königlichen preuss. Akademie zu Berlin, 1895; cf. Bardenhewer, Geschichte, I, 397, 399).

    Gospel of St. Philip

    Only one or two quotations remain of the Gospel of St. Philip mentioned by Epiphanius and Leontius of Byzantium; but these are enough to prove its Gnostic colouring.

    pel of St. Thomas

    There are two Greek and two Latin redactions of it, differing much from one another. A Syriac translation is also found. A Gospel of Thomas was known to many Fathers. The earliest to mention it is St. Hippolytus (155-235), who informs us that it was in use among the Naasenes, a sect of Syrian Gnostics, and cites a sentence which does not appear in our extant text. Origen relegates it to the heretical writings. St. Cyril of Jerusalem says it was employed by the Manichæans; Eusebius rejects it as heretical and spurious. It is clear that the original Pseudo-Thomas was of heterodox origin, and that it dates from the second century; the citations of Hippolytus establish that it was palpably Gnostic in tenor. But in the extant Thomas Gospel there is no formal or manifest Gnosticism. The prototype was evidently expurgated by a Catholic hand, who, however, did not succeed in eradicating all traces of its original taint. The apocryphon in all its present forms extravagantly magnifies the Divine aspect of the boy Jesus. In bold contrast to the Infancy narrative of St. Luke, where the Divinity is almost effaced, the author makes the Child a miracle-worker and intellectual prodigy, and in harmony with Docetism, leaves scarcely more than the appearance of humanity in Him. This pseudo-Gospel is unique among the apocrypha, inasmuch as it describes a part of the hidden life of Our Lord between the ages of five and twelve. But there is much that is fantastic and offensive in the pictures of the exploits of the boy Jesus. His youthful miracles are worked at times out of mere childish fancy, as when He formed clay pigeons, and at a clap of His hands they flew away as living birds; sometimes, from beneficence; but again from a kind of harsh retribution.

    Gospel of St. Bartholomew

    The so-called Decretum of Gelasius classes the Gospel of St. Bartholomew among the apocrypha. The earliest allusion to it is in St. Jerome's works. Recently scholars have brought to light fragments of it in old Coptic manuscripts. One of these Orientalists, Baumstark, would place its composition in the first part of the fourth century. A Gospel of Matthias is mentioned by Origen and Eusebius among the heretical literature along with the Peter and Thomas Gospels. Hippolytus states that the Basilidean Gnostics appealed to a "secret discourse" communicated to them by the Apostle Matthias who had received instruction privately from the Lord. Clement of Alexandria, who was credulous concerning apocryphal literature, quotes with respect several times the "Tradition of Matthias".

    Gospel of the Twelve Apostles

    A Gospel of the Twelve Apostles was known to Origen (third century). Other patristic notices give rise to some uncertainty whether the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles of antiquity was really distinct from that of the Hebrews. The greater probabilities oppose their identity. Recently the claim has been made by M. Reveillout, a Coptic scholar, that the lost Gospel has been in a considerable measure recovered in several Coptic fragments, all of which, he asserts, belong to the same document. But this position has been successfully combated by Dr. Baumstark in the in the "Revue Biblique" (April, 1906, 245 sqq.), who will allow at most a probability that certain brief sections appertain to a Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, written originally in Greek and current among Gnostic Ebionites as early as the second century. There exists a late and entirely orthodox Syriac "Gospel of the Twelve Apostles", published by J. Rendel Harris (Cambridge, 1900).

    Other Gospels

    It is enough to note the existence of other pseudo-Gospels, of which very little is known beside the names. There was a Gospel of St. Andrew, probably identical with the Gnostic "Acts of Andrew" (q.v., inf.); a Gospel of Barnabas, a Gospel of Thaddeus, a Gospel of Eve, and even one of Judas Iscariot, the last in use among the Gnostic sect of Cainites, and which glorified the traitor.

    (2) PILATE LITERATURE AND OTHER APOCRYPHA CONCERNING CHRIST

    While Christianity was struggling against the forces of Roman paganism, there was a natural tendency to dwell upon the part which a representative of the Roman Empire played in the supreme events of Our Lord's life, and to shape the testimony of Pontius Pilate, the procurator of Judea, even at the cost of exaggeration and amplification, into a weapon of apologetic defence, making that official bear witness to the miracles, Crucifixion, and Resurrection of Christ. Hence arose a considerable apocryphal Pilate literature, of which the Gospel of Gamaliel really forms a part, and like this latter apocryphon, it is characterized by exaggerating Pilate's weak defence of Jesus into strong sympathy and practical belief in His divinity.

    Report of Pilate to the Emperor.

    In the apocryphal Acts of Peter and Paul there is embodied a letter purporting to have been sent by Pontius Pilate to the Emperor Claudius. This briefly relates the fatuous crime of the Jews in persecuting the Holy One promised to them by their God; enumerates His miracles and states that the Jews accused Jesus of being a magician. Pilate at the time believing this, delivered Him to them. After the Resurrection the soldiers whom the governor had placed at the tomb were bribed by the leaders to be silent, but nevertheless divulged the fact. The missive concludes with a warning against the mendacity of the Jews. This composition is clearly apocryphal though unexpectedly brief and restrained. It is natural, to attempt to trace a resemblance between this pseudograph and certain references of ecclesiastical writers to Acta or Gesta of Pilate. Tertullian (Apologia, xxi) after giving a sketch of the miracles and Passion of Christ, subjoins: "All these things Pilate . . . announced to Tiberius Cæsar." A comparison between this pericope and the Pseudo-Pilate report reveals a literary dependence between them, though the critics differ as to the priority of these documents. In chapters 35, 38, and 48 of Justin's Apologia, that Father appeals confidently as a proof of the miracles and Passion of Jesus to "Acts" or records of Pontius Pilate existing in the imperial archives. While it is possible that St. Justin may have heard of such a report, and even probable that the procurator transmitted some account of the events at Jerusalem to Rome, it is on the other hand admissible that Justin's assertion was based on nothing more than hypothesis. This is the opinion of the majority of the experts. During the persecutions under Maximin in the fourth century spurious anti-Christian Acts of Pilate were composed in Syria, as we learn from Eusebius. It is probable that the pseudographic letter was forged as an offset to these.

    Acta Pilati (Gospel of Nicodemus)

    See the separate article under this title.

    The Minor Pilate Apocrypha

    The minor Pilate apocrypha, the Anaphora Pilati, or "Relation of Pilate", is frequently found appended to the texts of the Acta. It presupposes the latter work, and could not have been composed before the middle of the fifth century. It is found in manuscripts combined with the Paradoseis or "Giving up of Pilate", which represents the oldest form of the legend dealing with Pilate's subsequent life. A still later fabrication is found in the Latin Epistola Pilati ad Tiberium. There exists a puerile correspondence consisting of a pretended Letter of Herod to Pilate and Letter of Pilate to Herod. They are found in Greek and Syriac in a manuscript of the sixth or seventh century. These pseudographs may be as old as the fifth century.

    The Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea

    The Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea -- furnishing imaginary details of the two thieves crucified with Christ, and the begging of the body from Pilate -- seems to have enjoyed popularity in the Middle Ages in the Byzantine East, judging from the number of Greek manuscripts which remain. The oldest of those published belongs to the twelfth century. The relation is appended to some Latin texts of the Acta Pilati, under the title "Historia Josephi". It may be read in English in Walker's and the Ante-Nicene Fathers' collection of the apocrypha.

    The Legend of Abgar

    The oldest form of the Pseudo-Correspondence of Jesus and Abgar, King of Edessa, is found in Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, I, xiii), who vouches that he himself translated it from the Syriac documents in the archives of Edessa, the metropolis of Eastern Syria. The two letters are accompanied by an introduction which probably is an excerpt from the same source. According to this, Abgar V, Toparch or King of Edessa, suffering from an incurable disease, and having heard the fame of Christ's miracles sends a courier to Jerusalem, bearing a letter to Jesus, in which he declared Him to be a god, or the son of a god, and invites Him to Edessa, justifying the request partly by his desire to be cured, partly by his wish to offer to Jesus an asylum against the malignant Jews. Our Lord replied as follows:

    Blessed are you because you have believed in Me without seeing Me. For it is written that those who have seen Me, will not believe Me; and that those who have not seen Me will believe and love Me. But as to your prayer that I come to you, it is necessary that I fulfil here all that for which I have been sent, and that after I have fulfilled it, that I be taken up to Him who has sent Me. But after my taking up I shall send you one of My disciples, who will heal your pains, and keep life for you and yours.
    Accordingly, after the Ascension, "Judas Thomas" an Apostle, despatches to Edessa Thaddeus, one of the seventy Disciples, who cures the King of his disease, and preaches Christ to the assembled people. This, adds Eusebius, happened in the year 340, i.e. of the Seleucid era; corresponding to A.D. 28-29. The pleasing story is repeated with variations in later sources. The "Teaching of Addai", a Syrian apocryphon (q.v. infra), reproduces the correspondence with additions.
    The authenticity of the alleged letter of Christ has always been strongly suspected when not absolutely denied. As early as the sixth century the Gelasian Decretum brands this correspondence as spurious. Its legendary environment and the fact that the Church at large did not hand down the pretended epistle from Our Lord as a sacred document is conclusive against it. As for the letter of Abgar, its genuineness was formerly favoured by many skilled in this literature, but since the discovery of the "Teaching of Addai", published in 1876, the presumption against the authentic character of Abgar's epistle, owing to the close resemblance of a portion to passages in the Gospels, has become an established certainty. Lipsius, a high authority, is of the opinion that the Abgar correspondence goes back to the reign of the first Christian ruler of Edessa, Abgar IX (179-216), and that it was elicited by a desire to force a link uniting that epoch with the time of Christ.

    Letter of Lentulus

    A brief letter professing to be from Lentulus, or Publius Lentulus, as in some manuscripts, "President of the People of Jerusalem", addressed to "the Roman Senate and People", describes Our Lord's personal appearance. It is evidently spurious, both the office and name of the president of Jerusalem being grossly unhistorical. No ancient writer alludes to this production, which is found only in Latin manuscripts. It has been conjectured that it may have been composed in order to authenticate a pretended portrait of Jesus, during the Middle Ages. An English version is given in Cowper's Apocryphal Gospels and Other Doeuments Relating to Christ (New York, 6th ed., 1897).

    (3) APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

    The motive which first prompted the fabrication of spurious Acts of the Apostles was, in general, to give Apostolic support to heretical systems, especially those of the many sects which are comprised under the term Gnosticism. The darkness in which the New Testament leaves the missionary careers, and the ends of the greater number of the Apostles, and the meagre details handed down by ecclesiastical tradition, left an inviting field for the exercise of inventive imaginations, and offered an apt means for the insidious propagation of heresy. The Jewish-Christian Church, which early developed un-Catholic tendencies in the form of Ebionitism, seems first to have produced apocryphal histories of the Apostles, though of these we have very few remains outside the material in the voluminous Pseudo-Clement. The Gnostic Acts of Peter, Andrew, John, Thomas, and perhaps Matthew, date from the early portion of the third century or perhaps a little earlier. They abound in extravagant and highly coloured marvels, and were interspersed by long pretended discourses of the Apostles which served as vehicles for the Gnostic predications. Though the pastors of the Church and the learned repudiated these as patently heretical writings, they appealed to the fancy and satisfied the curiosity of the common people. Not only were they utilized by Manichæans in the East and Priscillianists in the West, but they found favour with many unenlightened Catholics. Since it was impossible to suppress their circulation entirely, they were rendered comparatively harmless by orthodox editing which expunged the palpable errors, especially in the discourses, leaving the miracle element to stand in its riotous exuberance. Hence most of the Gnostic Acts have come down to us with more or less of a Catholic purification, which, however, was in many cases so superficial as to leave unmistakable traces of their heterodox origin. The originally Gnostic apocryphal Acts were gathered into collections which bore the name of the periodoi (Circuits) or praxeis (Acts) of the Apostles, and to which was attached the name of a Leucius Charinus, who may have formed the compilation. The Gnostic Acts were of various authorship. Another collection was formed in the Frankish Church in the sixth century, probably by a monk. In this the Catholic Acts have been preserved; it is by no means uniform in its various manuscript representatives. By a misunderstanding, the authorship of the whole, under the title "Historia Certaminis Apostolorum", was ascribed to an Abdias, said to have been the first Bishop of Babylon and a disciple of the Apostles. The nucleus of this collection was formed by the Latin Passiones, or Martyrdoms, of those Apostles who had been neglected by the Gnostic Acts, viz., the two Jameses, Philip (Matthew?), Bartholomew, Simon, and Jude. The literature grew by accretions from heretical sources and eventually took in all the Apostles, including St. Paul. The motive of these non-heretical apocrypha was primarily to gratify the pious curiosity of the faithful regarding the Apostolic founders of the Church; sometimes local interests instigated their composition. After the model of the Gnostic Acts, which were of Oriental derivation, they abound in prodigies, and like those again, they take as their starting-point the traditional dispersion of the Twelve from Jerusalem. Regarding the historical value of these apocryphal narratives, it requires the most careful criticism to extricate from the mass of fable and legend any grains of historical truth. Even respecting the fields of the Apostolic missions, they are self-contradictory or confused. In general their details are scientifically worthless, unless confirmed by independent authorities, which rarely happens. Much of their apocryphal matter was taken up by the offices of the Apostles in the Latin breviaries and lectionaries, composed in the seventh and eighth centuries at an extremely uncritical period.

    (a) Gnostic Acts of the Apostles

    Acts of St. Peter


    There exist a Greek and a Latin Martyrdom of Peter, the latter attributed to Pope Linus, which from patristic citations are recognized as the conclusion of an ancient Greek narrative entitled "Acts, or Circuits of St. Peter". Another manuscript, bearing the name "Actus Petri cum Simone", contains a superior translation with several passages from the original narrative preceding the Martyrdom. The work betrays certain tokens of Gnosticism, although it has been purged of its grossest features by a Catholic reviser. It describes the triumph of St. Peter over Simon Magus at Rome, and the Apostle's subsequent crucifixion. These Acts as we have them are of high antiquity, though it is impossible to always discern whether patristic writers are quoting from them or an earlier tradition. Undoubtedly Commodian (c. 250) employed our extant Acts of Peter.

    Acts of St. John

    The heretical character imputed to these by certain Fathers is fully confirmed by extant fragments, which show a gross Docetism, and an unbridled phantasy. Doubtless the author intermingled valuable Ephesian traditions with his fables. There are reasons of weight to regard the work as having been composed, together with the Acts of St. Peter, and probably those of St. Andrew, by a single person, in the latter half of the second century, under the name of a disciple of St. John, called Leucius. Clement of Alexandria was acquainted with the pseudograph. The Johannine Acts of the Pseudo-Prochorus (compare the canonical Acts, vi, 5) are a Catholic working-over of Gnostic material.

    Acts of St. Andrew

    Pseudographic Acts of St. Andrew are noted by several early ecclesiastical writers, as in circulation among Gnostic and Manichæan sects. The original form has perished except in a few patristic quotations. But we possess three individual Acts under different names, which prove to be orthodox recensions of an original comprehensive Gnostic whole. These are:

    "The Acts of Andrew and Matthias" (or Matthew as given by some authorities)
    "Acts of Peter and Andrew" (the original language of the above is Greek)
    "The Martyrdom of the Apostle Andrew" has come down in both Greek and Latin recensions. The Latin text is the original one, and cannot be earlier than the fifth century. It purports to be a relation of the heroic death of St. Andrew by eyewitnesses who are "presbyters and deacons of the Church of Achaia". It has enjoyed credit among historians in the past, but no reliance can be placed on its data.
    (See APOSTOLIC CHURCHES; ANDREW, ST., APOSTLE.)

    The Acts and Martyrdom of St. Matthew

    The Acts and Martyrdom of St. Matthew are in literary dependence on the Acts of St. Andrew (q.v., supra), and hence the reading "Matthew" may be an error for "Matthias", since evidently the companion of Peter and Andrew is intended. The work exists in Greek and a later Latin. There is also a Coptic-Ethiopic martyrdom legend of St. Matthew. (See MATTHEW, ST., APOSTLE; APOSTOLIC CHURCHES).

    Acts of St. Thomas

    No Apostolic apocryphon has reached us in a completeness equal to that of the Thomas Acts. They are found in Greek, Syriac, and Ethiopic recensions. Their Gnostic traits pierce through the Catholic re-touching; in fact, the contents show a conscious purpose to exalt the dualistic doctrine of abstention from conjugal intercourse. Scholars are much inclined to attribute the original to a Syrian origin and an author who was an adherent of Bardesanes. The signs point strongly to the third century as the era. The translation of the remains of St. Thomas to Edessa in 232 may have furnished the inspiration for the composition. The Acts relate the prodigies performed by the Apostle in India, and end with his martyrdom there. They are interspersed with some remarkable hymns; some of real literary beauty but with strong Gnostic colouring. Recent researches have revealed elements of truth in the historical setting of the narrative. The Acts of St. Thomas are mentioned by Epiphanius and Augustine as in use in different heretical circles. St. Ephrem of Syria refers to apocryphal Thomas Acts as in circulation among the Bardesanites (see ST. THOMAS, APOSTLE).

    [i]Acts of St. Bartholomew [i/]

    We possess a Greek Martrydom, dating in its present form from the fifth or sixth century; also a Latin "Passio Bartholomæi". Both are tainted with Nestorianism, and seem to have come from a single Bartholomew legend. The Greek text recounts the marvels by which the Apostle overthrew idolatry and converted a king and his subjects in "India". The whole is a legendary tissue. (See BARTHOLOMEW, ST., APOSTLE).

    (b) Catholic Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles

    Acts of Sts. Peter and Paul


    These are to be distinguished from the Gnostic Acts of Peter and the orthodox Acts of Paul. The manuscripts which represent the legend fall into two groups:

    consisting of all but one of the Greek texts, containing an account of the journey of St. Paul to Rome, and the martyrdom of the two Apostles.
    composed of one Greek manuscript and a great number of Latin ones, presenting the history of the passio only.
    Lipsius regards the journey section as a ninth-century addition; Bardenhewer will have it to belong to the original document. This section begins with Paul's departure from the island of Mileto, and is evidently based on the canonical narrative in Acts. The Jews have been aroused by the news of Paul's intended visit, and induce Nero to forbid it. Nevertheless the Apostle secretly enters Italy; his companion is mistaken for himself at Puteoli and beheaded. In retribution that city is swallowed up by the sea. Peter receives Paul at Rome with Joy. The preaching of the Apostles converts multitudes and even the Empress. Simon Magus traduces the Christian teachers, and there is a test of strength in miracles between that magician and the Apostles, which takes place in the presence of Nero, Simon essays a flight to heaven but falls in the Via Sacra and is dashed to pieces. Nevertheless, Nero is bent on the destruction of Peter and Paul. The latter is beheaded on the Ostian Way, and Peter is crucified at his request head downward. Before his death he relates to the people the "Quo Vadis?" story. Three men from the East carry off the Apostles' bodies but are overtaken. St. Peter is buried at "The place called the Vatican", and Paul on the Ostian Way. These Acts are the chief source for details of the martyrdom of the two great Apostles. They are also noteworthy as emphasizing the close concord between the Apostolic founders of the Roman Church. The date (A.D. 55) of composition is involved in obscurity. Lipsius finds traces of our Acts as early as Hippolytus (c. 235), but it is not clear that the Fathers adduced employed any written source for their references to the victory over Simon Magus and the work of the Apostles at Rome. Lipsius assigns the kernel of the Martyrdom to the second century; Bardenhewer refers the whole to the first half of the third. The Acts of Peter and Paul undoubtedly embody some genuine traditions. (See ST. PETER; ST. PAUL; SIMON MAGUS).
    Acts of St. Paul

    Origen and Eusebius expressly name the praxeis Paulou; Tertullian speaks of writings falsely attributed to Paul: "Quod si Pauli perperam inscripta legunt." He is cautioning his readers against the tale of Thecla preaching and baptizing herself. Hitherto it was supposed that he referred to the "Acts of Paul and Thecla". The "Acta Pauli", presumed to be a distinct composition, were deemed to have perished; but recently (1899) a Coptic papyrus manuscript, torn to shreds, was found in Egypt, and proves to contain approximately complete the identical Acts of Paul alluded to by a few ecclesiastical writers. This find has established the fact that the long-known Acts of Paul and Thecla and the apocryphal correspondence of St. Paul with the Corinthian Church, as well as the Martyrdom of St. Paul, are really only excerpts from the original Pauline Acts. The newly-discovered document contains material hitherto unknown as well as the above-noted sections, long extant. It begins with a pretended flight of St. Paul from Antioch of Pisidia, and ends with his martyrdom at Rome. The narrative rests on data in the canonical books of the New Testament, but it abounds in marvels and personages unhinted at there, and it disfigures traits of some of those actually mentioned in the Sacred Writings. The Acts of Paul, therefore, adds nothing trustworthy to our knowledge of the Apostle of the Gentiles. Fortunately the above-cited passage of Tertullian (De Baptismo, xvii) informs us of its authorship and aim. The African writer observes that the pseudo-history was the work of a priest of Asia Minor, who on the discovery of the fraud, was deposed from an ecclesiastical charge, and confessed that he forged the book out of love for St. Paul. Experts ascribe its composition to the second century. It was already known when Tertullian wrote, and during the first centuries enjoyed a considerable popularity, both East and West. In fact Eusebius classes it among the antilegomena, or works having locally quasi-canonical authority.

    Acts of Paul and Thecla

    The early detachment of these as well as the Martyrdom from the Acts of St. Paul may be accounted for by ecclesiastical use as festal lections. Despite Tertullian's remark regarding this pseudograph, it enjoyed an immense and persistent popularity through the patristic period and the Middle Ages. This favour is to be explained mainly by the romantic and spirited flavour of the narrative. Exceptional among the apocryphists, the author kept a curb upon his fertile imagination, and his production is distinguished by its simplicity, clearness, and vigour. It deals with the adventures of Thecla, a young woman of Iconium, who upon being converted by St. Paul's preaching, left her bridegroom and lived a life of virginity and missionary activity, becoming a companion of St. Paul, and preaching the Gospel. She is persecuted, but miraculously escapes from the fire and the savage beasts of the arena. The relief into which abstention from the marriage-bed is brought in these Acts makes it difficult to escape from the conclusion that they have been coloured by Encratite ideas. Nevertheless the thesis of Lipsius, supported by Corssen, that a Gnostic Grundschrift underlies our present document, is not accepted by Harnack, Zahn, Bardenhewer, and others. The apocryphon follows the New Testament data of St. Paul's missions very loosely and is full of unhistorical characters and events. For instance, the writer introduces a journey of the Apostles, to which there is nothing analogous in the Sacred Books. However, there are grains of historical material in the Thecla story. A Christian virgin of that name may well have been converted by St. Paul at Iconium, and suffered persecution. Gutschmid has discovered that a certain Queen Tryphena was an historical personage (Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, X, 1864). (See THECLA.)

    Acts of St. Philip

    The extant Greek fragments supply us with all but five (10-14) of the fifteen Acts composing the work. Of these 1-7 are a farrago of various legends, each, it would seem, with an independent history; 8-14 is a unit, which forms a parasitic growth on the ancient but somewhat confused traditions of the missionary activity of an Apostle Philip in Hierapolis of Phrygia. Zahn's view, that this document is the work of an ill-informed Catholic monk of the fourth century, is a satisfactory hypothesis. The largest fragment was first published by Batiffol in "Analecta Bollandiana", IX (Paris, 1890). A Coptic "Acts of Philip" is also to be noted. (See PHILIP, ST., APOSTLE.)

    There are Latin, Coptic, Ethiopic, and Armenian histories of the missions and death of St. James the Greater, the son of Zebedee. Lipsius assigns the Latin to about the third century. Coptic and Armenian Acts and Martyrdom of St. James the Less depend mostly on the Hegesippus tradition, preserved by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., IV, xxii).

    Acts of St. Matthew

    The Apostolic Acts of the Pseudo-Abdias contain a Latin "Passio Sancti Matthæi", which preserves an Abyssinian legend of St. Matthew, later than the Coptic Martyrdom noticed in connection with the Gnostic Acts of that saint. The correct historical setting indicates that the recension was the work of an Abyssinian of the sixth century, who wished to date the establishment of the Abyssinian Church (fourth century) back to the Apostolic times. However, the kernel of the narrative is drawn from older sources. The Abdias Passio places St. Matthew's martyrdom in Abyssinia. (See MATTHEW, ST., APOSTLE.)

    Teaching of Addai (Thaddeus)

    In 1876 an ancient Syriac document, entitled "The Teaching of Addai, the Apostle", was published for the first time. It proved to closely parallel the Abgar material derived by Eusebius from the Edessa archives, and indeed purports to have been entrusted to those archives by its author, who gives his name as Labubna, the son of Senaak. It is full of legendary but interesting material describing the relations between Jesus and King Abgar of Edessa. Thaddeus,or Addai, one of the seventy disciples, is sent, after the Resurrection, in compliance with Christ's promise, to Abgar, heals the ruler and Christianizes Edessa with the most prompt and brilliant success. Notable is the story of the painting of Jesus made at the instance of Abgar's envoy to the former. Since the narrative of a Gaulish pilgrim who visited Edessa about 390 contains no allusion to such a picture, we may reasonably conclude that the Teaching of Addai is of later origin. Critics accept the period between 399-430. The Thaddeus legend has many ramifications and has undergone a number of variations. There is a Greek "Acts of Thaddeus", which identifies Addai with Thaddeus or Lebbæus, one of the Twelve. (See ABGAR; EDESSA).

    Acts of Simon and Jude

    A Latin Passio, which Lipsius attributes to the fourth or fifth century, narrates the miracles, conversions, and martyrdoms of these Apostles. It is found in the Abdias collection. The scene is Persia and Babylonia. It has been recognized that the historical setting of these Acts agrees remarkably with what is known of the conditions in the Parthian empire in the first century after Christ.

    The Acts of St. Barnabas

    The Acts of St. Barnabas appear to have been composed toward the end of the fifth century by a Cypriot. They are ascribed to St. Mark the Evangelist, and are historically worthless. They are extant in the original Greek and in a Latin version. The narrative is based upon the mutual relations and activities of Barnabas, Mark, and Paul, as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles.

    Gesta Matthiæ

    This is the latest of the pseudo-Acts, having been composed by a monk of Trèves, in the twelfth century, as a prelude to an account of the translation of the sacred relic, and the body of St. Matthias to that city, and their subsequent rediscoveries. It pretends to have derived the history of the Apostle's career from a Hebrew manuscript. (See MATTHIAS, ST., APOSTLE.)

    (c) Quasi-Apostolic Acts

    It must suffice to mention "Acts of St. Mark", of Alexandrian origin, and written in the fourth or fifth century; "Acts of St. Luke", Coptic, not earlier than end of fourth; "Acts of St. Timothy", composed by an Ephesian after 425; "Acts of St. Titus", of Cretan origin, between 400-700; "Acts of Kanthippe and Polyxena", connected with the legends about St. Paul and St. Andrew.
    Last edited by Milesian; Friday, October 8th, 2004 at 10:47 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •