482 GOSPELS (UNCAXONICAL)
GOSPELS (UNCANONICAL)
being produced as late as the Muhammadan era, and as early as the 1st cent. A.D. But, with one or two exceptions, we cannot do justice to them unless we set them not over against the Gospel literature of the first hundred years after the Death of Jesus but among the currents and move- ments which occupy the subsequent two hundred years of Christianity in the Mediterranean basin. The interests wjiich led to their composition were sometimes doctrinal. There was a constant desire * to convey esoteric teaching under the guise of revelations made by the risen Christ to His disciples, between the Resurrection and the Ascen- sion, for example ; there was also a desire to re- cast or amplify the Synoptic traditions in order to express certain views of the Christian gospel. Furthermore, dogmatic interests led to the elabora- tion of stories about tlie birth of Mary as well as of Jesus, and to the composition of tales which filled up the childhood of Jesus. But the latter were as often due to naive curiosity as to dogmatic aim, and a much larger part must be assigned to the former motive (if it can be called a motive) than is usually allowed. Here the influence of Oriental folk-lore and mythology would naturally operate, in addition to the desire to mark the fulfil- ment of OT prophecies. And it would operate not as a purely literary motive but as one result of preaching and teaching. The same interests which led to the rise of midrashic literature among the Jews led to the rise of uncanonical Gospel-stories among the early Christians. The popularity of the latter was too strong to be put down by ecclesi- astical decisions. Not even the strict use of the canonical Gospels in the worship of the Churches was able to check the popular appetite for such tales and traditions as survive in the un- canonical Gospel literature ; they were read for private edification + even when they were not used in worship ; and recent discoveries have proved how numerous and wide-spread were the versions of such Gospels even Avhen the term ' apocryphal ' in its opprobrious sense was being applied to them by the authorities. The historical critic has some- thing better to do than look in tliese Gospels for primitive, authentic traditions about the teaching and ministry of Jesus, which may correct or supplement the nucleus preserved in the canoni- cal Gospels ; if he does so, he will be likely as a rule to look for a kingdom and find asses. On the other hand, he has something better to do than to pour indiscriminate ridicule on these popular documents. Their ends and motives, however little they may appeal to a modern mind, were not always perverse. For example, in one of the extant Sahidic Gospel-fragments (TS iv. 2 [1896], pp. 165, 237), the narrator, after de- scribing (partly as in the Protevangelium Jacobi, 21 ; see below, p. 484) how the star of Bethlehem had • the form of a wheel, its figure being like a cross, sending forth flashes of light ; letters being written on the cross, This is Jesus the Son of God,' anticipates an objection. 'Someone will say to me. Art thou then adding a supple- ment to the Gospels?' Unfortunately, the frag- ment breaks off here, and we have no means of knowing how the writer answered his critic, unless
• Which, as we learn from Clement of Alexandria (Eus. UE ii. 1), was by no means confined to Gnostic Christians (see W. Wrede, Das Messias<jehe.imnis in den Enan'jelien, 1901, p. iU\ (.).
t There is a si^cnilicant indication of tliis in Jerome's letter to Laeta, advising her how to bring up her daughter (Ep. cvii. 12). The girl is to read 'tlie Gospels, which are never to be laid aside. . . . Let her eschew all apocryiihal writings ; if she desires to read them not for the truth of their doctrines but out of reverence for their miracles, let her understand that they are not the work of those whose names they bear, that many faulty things are mixed up in them, and that it requires great discretion to look for gold among mud.' This was written in A.D. 403.
from a Coptic sermon of Euodius, who praises such supplements — evidently as justified by Jn 203i> 2P5. It is not often that we come upon any such self-consciousness in the writers of the un- canonical Gospels. Usually we have to infer their spirit and aim from the contents of their work. But even so, the naive temper which characterizes several of the leading uncanonical Gospels is as noteworthy as the theological tendencies which dominate others.
5. The very fact that such Gospels were com- posed is significant, in view of the fact that ' Gospel ' in the 2nd cent, began to be limited to the sayings and deeds of Jesus.* It proves the steady interest in Jesus, even in circles whei'e the interest was due to tendencies more or less semi- Christian in character. No doubt, several of the uncanonical ' Gospels,' as we shall see,t were not originally called Gospels at all, while even those Avhicli professed to be such should be rather de- scribed as religious handbooks or treatises ; still, even after we make such qualifications, we must recognize that, whether an uncanonical Gospel wished to make Jesus more or less of a human being than the Synoptic or Johannine tradition presented, there was a wide-spread desire to convey new ideas by means of a tradition about His personality. Acts of various apostles were not sutficient ; even apocalypses did not meet the demand. Gospels were necessary, and Gospels were supplied. t