New / Other Gosepels; Mary, Thomas, etc

[EsclavoDeCristo]

I’m trying to explain to a co-worker why the Church does not accept these gospels as valid. She sees the biblical gospels as being approved by ‘the pope’ and the new ones as not being approved by the pope; or in other words, the only difference in validity is that one has human approval and the other does not. Along with that is her mistrust of the Church and cynicism toward Rome, bishops, popes, etc.

How can I explain to her why the “Gospel of Mary Magdalene” cannot be accepted as valid?

Thanks!

 

[scaron]

Well, to a certain extent, the canon was defined by the Pope, in as mush as it was a result of the Synod of Hippo (393) and the Councils of Carthage (397 and 419), under the direction of St. Augustine.

But the important point to make is that these were not just decrees from some Council Fathers (even if they were popes, Saints, and Doctors of the Church).

The books which made up the Christian Canon made it into the list due to their use in liturgy. It always drives me nuts when folks say that Catholics are not scriptural, but liturgical - scripture as we have it (at least New testament scripture) only exists today because it was used in liturgy!

The Council Fathers selected for the Canon those books which clearly spoke to the people, and had the undeniable presence of divine inspiration - the Word of God. Catholics also believe that this selection was under the guiding hand of the Holy Spirit.

The Gnostic and other other “gospels” clearly did not pass this test.

Of course, the final proof (for us Catholics) is that, as a proclamation for a Council of the Church, (actually several) called by the Holy Father, this list is infallible. That won’t mean anything to a non-Catholic, but it is true never the less.

An interesting point about the “protestant” or “gnostic” canons rises from the doctrine of infallibility. If infallibility does not exist in the human world, how do you know your list is correct? This is a stumbling block for Protestants who do not accept the Septuagint. They must admit that the Protestant Canon is a “fallible collection of infallible books”. They cannot know their list is right, and have to admit it may be wrong.

 

[Byzcat]

Try this one on your friend.

All of the canonical gospels were composed before the close of the first century, and each was written by an apostle or a close associate of the apostles- people who had first-hand knowledge of the events written about therein.

The earliest of the Gnostic gospels dates to the second century, and those claiming to have been written by apostles are proven forgeries. Also, Nag Hammadi, where most of the Gnostic “gospels” were found, is in Egypt- not exactly the place where you would expect to find a heavy concentration of works written by close associates of Jesus and the apostles. I would expect that a great cache of authentic early Christian writings (by apostles or their immediate disciples) would either be found somewhere in Israel, not Egypt. Perhaps more likely would be that such works would not be found stashed in a single cave, but would have been found scattered to the four corners of the known world, being as how the apostles went to said four corners on missionary journeys.

 

[patrick457]

Well, a four-Gospel Canon was already in place during Irenaeus’ time (160 AD), about the time when many of the Apocryphal Gospels (Gnostic or not) were being written; and by the year 200, Origen may have already been using the 27 books of the New Testament (though the canonicity of some books, such as Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John, and Revelation were still being disputed and some books such as the Apocalypse of Peter or Clement’s Epistles or the Shepherd of Hermas are accepted as belonging to the canon by some communities).

Also, another feature which distinguishes the Four Gospels from the others is the fact that they paint Jesus in a quite ‘down-to-earth’ light (unlike in some others where Jesus is shown as a distant, aloof person spouting off a lot of flowery expository jargon).

(To note, here is a link to a translation of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene)

Take for example (Pistis Sophia, chapters 4, 5, and the first half of 6):

…The disciples, however, sat with one another in fear, and were greatly agitated. They were afraid, however, on account of the great earthquake which happened, and they wept together, saying: “What will happen now? Perhaps the Saviour will destroy all the places.”

As they were saying these things and were weeping to one another, on the ninth hour of the following day the heavens opened, and they saw Jesus coming down, giving light exceedingly, and there was no measure to the light in which he was. For he gave more light than in the hour that he went up to heaven, so that the men in the world were not able to speak of the light which was his, and it cast forth very many rays of light, and there was no measure to its rays. And his light was not equal throughout, but it was of different kinds, and it was of different types, so that some were many times superior to others, and the whole light together was in three forms, and the one was many times superior to the other; the second which was in the middle was superior to the first which was below; and the third which was above them all was superior to the second which was below. And the first ray which was below them all was similar to the light which had come down upon Jesus before he went up to heaven, and it was quite equal to it in its light. And the three light-forms were of different kinds of light and they were of different types. And some were many times superior to others.

It happened, however, when the disciples saw these they were greatly afraid and agitated. Now Jesus, the compassionate and tender-hearted, when he saw that his disciples were in great agitation, he spoke to them saying: “Be courageous. It is I, do not fear”.

Now it happened when the disciples heard these words, they said: “Lord, if it be thou, draw thy light-glory to thyself so that we can stand, otherwise our eyes are darkened and we are agitated, and also the whole world is agitated, because of the great light which is thine”.

Then Jesus drew to himself the glory of his light. And when this had happened all the disciples took courage, they came before Jesus, they all prostrated themselves at the same time, they worshipped him, rejoicing with great joy. They said to him: “Rabbi, where didst thou go, or what was thy service in which thou didst go, or for what reason were all these disturbances and all these earthquakes which happened?”.

Then Jesus, the compassionate, said to them: "Rejoice and be glad from this hour because I have been to the places from whence I came forth. From today onwards now I will speak with you openly from the beginning of the truth until its completion. And I will speak with you face to face, without parable. I will not conceal from you, from this hour onwards, anything of the things of the height and of the place of the truth. For I have been given authority , through the Ineffable and through the First Mystery of all the mysteries, that I should speak with you from the beginning until the pleroma, and from within outwards, and from without inwards. Hear now, so that I tell you all things…’

The first Book of IEOU, Chapter 1-2

This is the book of the gnoses of the invisible God, by means of the hidden mysteries which show the way to the chosen race, leading in refreshment to the life of the Father in the coming of the Saviour, of the deliverer of souls who receive themselves the Word of life which is higher than all life-in the knowledge of the living Jesus, who has come forth through the Father from the aeon of light at the completion of the Pleroma in the teaching, apart from which there is no other, which the living Jesus has thaught to his apostles, saying: “This is the teaching in which dwells the whole knowledge.”

The living Jesus answered and said to his disciples: “Blessed is he who has crucified the world, and who has not the world to crucify him.” The apostles answered with one voice, saying: “O Lord, teach us the way to crucify the world, that it may not crucify us, so that we are destroyed and loose our lives.”
The living Jesus answered: “He who has crucified it is he who has found my word and has fulfilled it according to the will of him who has sent me.”

The Infancy Gospel of Thomas (not the same as the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas), 1st Greek Form, chapters 4-5

Later he was going through the village again when a boy ran and bumped him on the shoulder. Jesus got angry and said to him, “You won’t continue your journey.” And all of a sudden, he fell down and died.
Some people saw what had happened and said, “Where has this boy come from? Everything he says happens instantly!”
The parents of the dead boy came to Joseph and blamed him saying, “Because you have such a boy, you can’t live with us in the village, or else teach him to bless and not curse. He’s killing our children!”
So Joseph summoned his child and admonished him in private, saying, “Why are you doing all this? These people are suffering and so they hate and harass us.” Jesus said, “I know that these are not your words, still, I’ll keep quiet for your sake. But those people must take their punishment.” There and then his accusers became blind.
Those who saw this became very fearful and at a loss. All they could say was, “Every word he says, whether good or bad, has became a deed - a miracle even!” When Joseph saw that Jesus had done such a thing, he got angry and grabbed his ear and pulled very hard. The boy became infuriated with him and replied, “It’s one thing for you to seek and not find; it’s quite another for you to act this unwisely. Don’t you know that I don’t really belong to you? Don’t make me upset.”

Try to compare these to Jesus’ words in the Gospels (especially the Synoptic ones) and see which one is more believable and ‘true-to-life’.

 

[NotWorthy]

Is she aware that none of these Gospels are new and that the Church was already familiar with these documents when She determined the Canon?

These Gospels HAVE been rejected by the Church over 1600 years ago.

 

[Sophomore]

Is she aware that none of these Gospels are new and that the Church was already familiar with these documents when She determined the Canon?

These Gospels HAVE been rejected by the Church over 1600 years ago.

Exactly! The Church fathers knew these writings AND the authors; their intentions, their agendas, their followers, and their errors. We should look at these issues with 2nd & 3rd century eyes, not from way over yonder here in the 21st century.

 

[NotWorthy]

Exactly! The Church fathers knew these writings AND the authors; their intentions, their agendas, their followers, and their errors. We should look at these issues with 2nd & 3rd century eyes, not from way over yonder here in the 21st century.

Good point. The Gospels were not hidden either. I believe there are a total of 41 or 42 different ones that are known about today. Some of them are supposed to be good reading. They may be absolutely true, but the Church determined that they simply aren’t inspired.

 

[Rolltide]

Good point. The Gospels were not hidden either. I believe there are a total of 41 or 42 different ones that are known about today. Some of them are supposed to be good reading. They may be absolutely true, but the Church determined that they simply aren’t inspired.

Lol… here you go… they’re so well “hidden” that I found them in about 2 seconds of searching on the internet!

earlychristianwritings.com

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I’m trying to explain to a co-worker why the Church does not accept these gospels as valid. She sees the biblical gospels as being approved by ‘the pope’ and the new ones as not being approved by the pope; or in other words, the only difference in validity is that one has human approval and the other does not. Along with that is her mistrust of the Church and cynicism toward Rome, bishops, popes, etc.

How can I explain to her why the “Gospel of Mary Magdalene” cannot be accepted as valid?

Thanks!

The Church hardly had to reject them - they pretty well got themselves rejected. As post 4 shows ​

They are popular because (for instance):

• they were not canonised - & are therefore “underdogs” (unlike the canonised gospels, which are bad & nasty because they were canonised
• the loser “must have been” in the right
• people love novelty; & these are new to most people
• what is different is - supposedly - therefore better
• the four gospels are not novel
• people are suspicious of authority - especially if it that of a religion
• parts of them agree with current fads
  If the Hypostasis of the Archons, or the Gospel of Eve, or the Questions of Bartholomew, or the Book of Jeu, or some such writing were canonised - people would want something else.

 

[Byzcat]

I think people like to believe that authority figures (in this case, the Church) are always trying to put something over on the rest of us. Of course, they are often right, but in this case, not.

Anybody remember the movie “Stigmata”?

I wanted to heave a brick at my television when I was watching it. (What? A person can’t be curious?) Not because of the theological errors, which were numerous and serious and just, bad. It was the fact that this woman was going through all this pain and agony and suffering over a book that you can pick up at Borders

Some people should do their homework.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I think people like to believe that authority figures (in this case, the Church) are always trying to put something over on the rest of us. Of course, they are often right, but in this case, not.

Anybody remember the movie “Stigmata”?

I wanted to heave a brick at my television when I was watching it. (What? A person can’t be curious?) Not because of the theological errors, which were numerous and serious and just, bad. It was the fact that this woman was going through all this pain and agony and suffering over a book that you can pick up at Borders

Some people should do their homework.

“Stigmata” was entertaining to watch (unless one is squeamish, of course) - by the end of it, I almost found myself believing that the “Gospel of Thomas” had been suppressed ​

In reality, the GoT has been studied in great detail for
many years, so the premise on which the narrative depends - that the GoT has been studied only in sections, so that no one would rbe able to read the entire thing - is moonshine. It’s good as a dramatic device, just as the death of Boromir at the end of “The Fellowship of the Ring” is good as a dramatic device: but the premise on which “Stigmata” depends is as fictional as the events in “The Fellowship of the Ring”.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who have difficulty distinguishing between reality & fiction (as the enormous fuss over a recent novel suggests ) The result: conspiracy theories about the supercomputer in the Vatican that registers every single Protestant in the world, & daftness about the Great Pyramid of Gizeh - which Adam built (!)

My favourite example of confusion between reality & fiction in the form of reality is this one:

• In the late 1990s Tony Blair did indeed join a mindless tabloid campaign to release Deirdre Rashid from prison, even though she was a character in Coronation Street rather than an actual victim of miscarriage of justice.
  guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/may/22/labour.television

Coronation Street is a long-lived “soap” on British TV:

• itv.com/coronationstreet/