Chapter XXII.--Appion and Athenodorus Return to Simon.
When Appion and those who were with him heard this, they howled and lamented, saying: "Why did you not receive him?" And when at the same time Athenodorus wished to say to me, "It was Faustus, your father;" Appion anticipated him, and said, "We learned from some one that Simon, finding him, urged him to go along with him, [1544] Faustus himself entreating him, since he did not wish to see his sons after they had become Jews. And hearing this, we came, for his own sake, in search of him. But since he is not here, it is plain that he spake the truth who gave us the information which we, hearing it from him, have given to you." And I Clement, perceiving the design of Peter, that he wished to beget a suspicion in them that he intended to look out among them for the old man, that they might be afraid and take to flight, assisted in his design, and said to Appion: "Listen to me, my dearest Appion. We were eager to give to him, as being our father, what we ourselves deemed to be good. But if he himself did not wish to receive it, but, on the contrary, fled from us in horror, I shall make a somewhat harsh remark, Nor do we care for him.'" And when I said this, they went away, as if irritated by my savageness; and, as we learn next day, they went to Judæa in the track of Simon.
[1544] This is supplied purely by conjecture.
Chapter XXIII.--Peter Goes to Antioch.
Now, when ten days had passed away, there came one of our people [1545] from our father to announce to us how our father stood forward publicly in the shape of Simon, accusing him; [1546] and how by praising Peter he had made the whole city of Antioch long for him: and in consequence of this, all said that they were eager to see him, and that there were some who were angry with him as being Simon, on account of their surpassing affection for Peter, and wished to lay hands on Faustus, believing he was Simon. Wherefore he, fearing that he might be put to death, had sent to request Peter to come immediately if he wished to meet him alive, and to appear at the proper time to the city, when it was at the height of its longing for him. [1547] Peter, hearing this, called the multitude together to deliberate, and appointed one of his attendants bishop; and having remained three days in Laodicea baptizing and healing, he hastened to the neighboring city of Antioch. Amen.
[1545] Supplied from the Recognitions.
[1546] This part is restored by means of the Recognitions.
[1547] [The narrative in the Recognitions (x. 65) is the same up to this point. But, instead of this somewhat abrupt conclusion of this chapter, we find there several chapters (from the close of chap. 65 to the end, chap. 72), which round out the story: the confession of the father in his metamorphosis, his restoration, the Apostle's entry into Antioch, his miracles there, with the happy re-union of the entire family of Clement as believers. It should be added, as indicating the close relation of the two narratives, that the closing sentence of the Homilies is found, with slight variations, in Recognitions, x. 18.--R.]
Apocrypha of the New Testament
Apocrypha of the New Testament.
Translated by Alexander Walker, Esq., One of Her Majesty's Inspectors of Schools for Scotland.
Introductory Notice
to
Apocrypha of the New Testament.
By Professor M. B. Riddle, D.D.
------------------------
The translations which follow have been made from the critical edition of Tischendorf (see Bibliography at close of this volume). The text varies greatly from that of Fabricius. It was found impossible to introduce the various readings and to cite the manuscript evidence supporting them. Those who are interested in such study will have recourse to the volumes of Tischendorf.
The general character of the writings here grouped as "Apocrypha of the New Testament" will appear from even a cursory perusal of them. It did not require any great discernment to distinguish between these and the canonical books of the New Testament. The negative internal evidence thus furnished in support of the authority of the latter need not be emphasized. But attention may well be called to certain historical facts in regard to these apocryphal writings:--
1. No one of them ever obtained any general recognition among Christians; still less, a place in the Canon of the New Testament. A few so-called Gospels are referred to by early writers; some obtained local recognition; others, written for a purpose, were pressed into notice by the advocates of the tendency they were written to support: but, as a rule, the books were soon rejected, and never obtained extensive circulation.
2. Though a few of the Apocryphal Gospels are of comparatively early origin (see Translator's Introduction), there is no evidence that any Gospels purporting to be what our four Gospels are, existed in the first century, or that any other than fragmentary literature of this character existed even in the second century. The Canon of the New Testament was not formed out of a mass of writings possessing some claim to recognition, though there is a popular impression to this effect.
3. Here the character of the writings comes in as confirmatory evidence. Of the Apocryphal Gospels in general, R. Hofmann [1548] well says: "The method employed in these compositions is always the same, whether the author intended simply to collect and arrange what was floating in the general tradition, or whether he intended to produce a definite dogmatical effect. Rarely he threw himself on his own invention; but generally he elaborated what was only hinted at in the Canonical Gospels, or transcribed words of Jesus into action, or described the literal fulfillment of some Jewish expectation concerning the Messiah, or repeated the wonders of the Old Testament in an inhanced form, etc. The work done, he took care to conceal his own name, and inscribed his book with the name of some apostle or disciple, in order to give it authority." As a rule, therefore, the Apocryphal Gospels give details regarding those periods of our Lord's life about which the New Testament is wisely silent.
The genesis of much of the literature resembles that of modern "Lives of Christ" written to present a view of the Person of our Lord which is not in accordance with the obvious sense of the New Testament. Probably some of the Apocryphal Gospels and Acts were not intended to be forgeries, but only novels with a purpose. [1549]
4. But while the early Church exercised proper discernment, and the Canon of the New Testament was soon definitely recognised and universally accepted, the apocryphal writings were not without influence. The sacred legends, the ecclesiastical traditions, all too potent in their effect, are in many cases to be traced to these writings. Much that Rome inculcates is derived from these books, which the Western Church constantly rejected. It is, therefore, not strange that modern Protestant scholarship has been most active in the investigation of this literature. The study of these works furnishes not only a defense of the canonical books of the New Testament, but an effective weapon against that "tradition" which would overbear the authority of Holy Scripture. No attempt has been made to annotate the various works in illustration of the above positions, although the temptation to do so was very great. A few notes have been appended, but it was felt that in most cases the intelligent reader would not fail to draw the proper conclusions from the documents themselves. Those who desire to investigate further will find the best helps indicated either in the Introduction of the translator or in the Bibliography which closes this volume and series.
It will be noticed that no Apocryphal Epistles are included in the literature which follows. Such forgeries were less common, and the Apocryphal Acts furnished a more convenient channel for heretical opinions and argument. Of the few in existence, some appear, in connection with other works, in the Acts of Thaddæus, in the Pseudo-Ignatian Epistles, in the Clementine Homilies (Epistles of Peter to James), and in Eusebius. The forged letters of Paul, to the Laodiceans and a third to the Corinthians, deserve little attention, being made to supply the supposed loss suggested by Col. iv. 16 and I Cor. v. 9. The correspondence of Paul and Seneca (six letters from the former and eight from the latter) has a certain interest, but scarcely deserves a place even among the apocryphal writings.
[1548] Schaff-Herzog, i. p. 105.
[1549] In most cases the vocabulary of the books furnishes positive evidence of the late origin. A great number of terms can be traced to a particular period of ecclesiastical development, while the dogmatic tendencies which point to a given (and comparatively late) period of controversy are frequent and obvious.
Translator's Introductory Notice.
------------------------
Our aim in these translations has been to give a rendering of the original as literal as possible; and to this we have adhered even in cases--and they are not a few--in which the Latin or the Greek is not in strict accordance with grammatical rule. It was thought advisable in all cases to give the reader the means of forming an accurate estimate of the style as well as the substance of these curious documents.
Part I.--Apocryphal Gospels.
The portion of the volume, extending from page 361 to page 476, comprising the Apocryphal Gospels properly so called, consists of twenty-two separate documents, of which ten are written in Greek and twelve in Latin. These twenty-two may be classed under three heads: (a) those relating to the history of Joseph and of the Virgin Mary, previous to the birth of Christ; (b) those relating to the infancy of the Saviour; and (c) those relating to the history of Pilate. The origines of the traditions are the Protevangelium of James, the Gospel of Thomas, and the Acts of Pilate. All or most of the others can be referred to these three, as compilations, modifications, or amplifications.
There is abundant evidence of the existence of many of these traditions in the second century, though it cannot be made out that any of the books were then in existence in their present form. The greater number of the authorities on the subject, however, seem to agree in assigning to the first four centuries of the Christian era, the following five books: 1. The Protevangelium of James; 2. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew; 4. The History of Joseph the Carpenter; 5. The Gospel of Thomas; 9. The Gospel of Nicodemus.
We proceed to give a very brief notice of each of them.
I. The Protevangelium of James.--The name of Protevangelium was first given to it by Postel, whose Latin version was published in 1552. The James is usually referred to St. James the Less, the Lord's brother; but the titles vary very much. [1550] Origen, in the end of the second century, mentions a book of James, but it is by no means clear that he refers to the book in question. Justin Martyr, in two passages, refers to the cave in which Christ was born; and from the end of the fourth century down, there are numerous allusions in ecclesiastical writings to statements made in the Protevangelium.
For his edition Tischendorf made use of seventeen mss., one of them belonging to the ninth century. The Greek is good of the kind, and free from errors and corruptions. There are translations of it into English by Jones (1722) and Cowper (1867).
II. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew.--The majority of the mss. attribute this book to Matthew, though the titles vary much. The letters prefixed, professing to be written to and by St. Jerome, exist in several of the mss.; but no one who is acquainted with the style of Jerome's letters will think this one authentic. There are, however, in his works many allusions to some of the legends mentioned in this book. Chapter i.-xxiv. were edited by Thilo, chapters xxv. to the end are edited for the first time by Tischendorf. It is not very clear whether the Latin be original, or a direct translation from the Greek. In most part it seems to be original. The list of epithets, however, applied to the triangles of the Alpha in chapter xxxi. are pretty obviously mistranslations of Greek technical terms, which it might not be difficult to reproduce.
III. Gospel of the Nativity of Mary.--This work, which is in substance the same as the earlier part of the preceding, yet differs from it in several important points, indicating a later date and a different author. It has acquired great celebrity from having been transferred almost entire to the Historia Lombardica or Legenda Aurea in the end of the thirteenth century. Mediæval poetry and sacred art have been very much indebted to its pages.
The original is in Latin, and is not a direct translation from the Greek. In many passages it follows very closely the Vulgate translation.