GOSPELS, APOCRYPHAL

other written records. To take an example, it is obviotis that Justin knew the Sermon on the Mount; but when we examine his quotations from it we cannot be certain if he is citingMt.orLk. or both, or(possibly)an early Harmony of the two. It may be pointed out thatif , asisquite possible, the quotations point to the existence of Harmonies before Tatian's, that fact in reality pushes back the_ external evidence still earlier. Many, or most, of the differences of quotation, however, may probably be accounted for by the difficulty of citing memonter. When to quote accurately meant to undo a roll without stops or paragraphs, early writers may be pardoned for trusting too much to their memories. And it is noteworthy that as a rule the longer the quotation in these early writers, the more they conform to our canonical Gospels, for in long passages they could not trust their memories. The same peculianty is observed in their quotations from the LXX.

Bearing these things in mind, we may, without going beyond Tatian, conclude with the highest degree of probabiUty, from evidence which has undergone the closest scrutiny: (a) that our Mt. was known to, or was incorporated in a Harmony known to, Justin and the writer of the Didache (c. a.d. 120) and 'Barnabas'; and similarly (6) that our Mk. was known to Papias, Justin, Polycarp, and (perhaps) pseudo-Clement (' 2Clem. ad Cor.' ) , Hermas, and the author of the Gospel of pseudo- Peter and the Clementine Homilies, and Heracleon and Valentinus; (c) that our Lk. was known to Justin (very obviously), the Didache writer, Marcion (who based his Gospel on it), Celsus, Heracleon, and the author of the Clementine Homilies', and (d) that our Jn. was known to Justin, Papias, and Polycarp. A. J. Maclean.

GOSPELS, APOCRYPHAL.— According to Lk. I'S there were a number of accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus in circulation among the Christians of the 1st century. Among these were not only the sources of our canonical Gospels, but also a number of other writings purporting to come from various companions of Jesus and to record His life and words. In process of time these were lost, or but partially preserved. The Gospels were supplemented by others, until there resulted a Uterature that stands related to the NT Canon much as the OT Apocrypha stand related to the OT Canon. As a whole, however, it never attained the importance of the OT Apocrypha. Individual Gospels seem to have been used as authoritative, but none of them was ever accepted generally.

I. The Origin of the Apocryphal Gospels. — So voluminous is this literature, so local was the circulation of most of it, and so obscure are the circumstances attending its appearance, that it is impossible to make any general statement as to its origin. Few apocryphal Gospels reach us entire, and many are known to us only as names in the Church Fathers. It would seem, however, as if the literature as we know it might have originated: (o) From the common Evangelic tradition preserved in Its best form in our Synoptic Gospels (e.g. Gospel according to the Hebrews, Gospel of the Egyptians). (6) From the homiletic tendency which has always given rise to stories like the Haggadah of Juda^ ism. The Gospels of this sort undertake to complete the account of Jesus' life by supplying fictitious incidents, often by way of accounting for sayings in the canonical Gospels. At this point the legend-making processes were given free scope (e.g. Gospel of Nicodemus, Prot-evangelium of James, Gospel according to Thomas, Arabic Gospel of Infancy, Arabic Gospel of Joseph, Passing of Mary), (c) From the need of Gospel narra-tives to support various heresies, particularly Gnostic and ascetic (e.g. Gospels according to Peter, PhiUp, pseudo-Matthew, the Twelve Apostles, Basilides).

In this collection may be Included further a number of other Gospels about which we know little or nothing, being in ignorance even as to whether they were merely mutilated editions of canonical Gospels or those belong-ing to the third class. The present article will consider only the more important and best known of these apocryphal Gospels.

GOSPELS, APOCRYPHAL

II. Characteristics of these Gospels. — Even the most superficial reader of these Gospels recognizes their inferiority to the canonical, not merely in point of literary style, but also in general soberness of view. In practically all of them are to be found illustrations of the legend-making process which early overtook the Christian Church. They abound in accounts of alleged miracles, the purpose of which is often trivial, and sometimes even malicious. With the exception of a few sayings, mostly from the Gospel according to the Hebrews, the teaching they contain is obviously a working up of that of the canonical Gospels, or clearly imagined. In the entire Uterature there are few sayings attributed to Jesus that are at the same time authentic and extrar-canonical (see Unwritten Sayings). These Gospels possess value for the Church historian in that they represent tendencies at work In the Church of the first four or five centuries. From the point of view of criticism, however, they are of small importance beyond heightening our estimation of the soberness and sim-pUcity of the canonical narratives.

These Gospels, when employing canonical material, usually modify it in the interest of some peculiar doctrinal view. This Is particularly true of that class of Gospels written for the purpose of supporting some of the earUer heresies. So fantastical are some of them, that it is almost incredible that they should ever have been received as authoritative. Particularly is this true of those that deal with the early life of Mary and of the infant Christ. In some cases it is not impos-sible that current pagan legends and folk-stories were attached to Mary and Jesus. Notwithstanding this fact, however, many of these stories, particularly those of the birth, girlhood, and death of Mary, have found their way into the literature and even the doctrine of the Roman Church. Of late there has been some attempt by the Curia to check the use of these works, and in 1884 Leo xiii. declared the ProtevangeUum of James and other works dealing with the Nativity of Jesus to be 'impure sources of tradition.'

III. The Most Important Gospels. — 1. The Gospel according to the Hebrews. — (l) The earUest Patristic statements regarding our NT literature contain refer-ences to events in the life of Jesus which are not to be found In our canonical Gospels. Eusebius declares that one of these stories came from the Gospel according to the Hebrews. Clement of Alexandria and Origen, particularly the latter, apparently knew such a Gospel well. Origen quotes it at least three times, and Clement twice. Eusebius (HE ill. 25) mentions the Gospel as belonging to that class which, like the Shepherd of Hermas and the Didache, were accepted in some portions of the Empire and rejected in others. Jerome obtained from the Syrian Christians a copy of this Gospel, which was written in Aramaic, and was used among the sects of the Nazarenes and Ebionites, by which two classes he probably meant the Palestinian Christians of the non-Pauline churches. Jerome either translated this book from Heb. or Aram, into both Greek and Latin, or revised and translated a current Greek version.

(2) The authorship of the Gospel according to the Hebrews is in complete obscurity. It appears that in the 4th cent, some held it to be the work of the Apostle Matthew. Jerome, however, evidently knew that this was not the case, for it was not circulating in the West, and he found it necessary to translate it into Greek. Epiphanius, Jerome's contemporary, describes it as beginning with an account of John the Baptist, and commencing without any genealogy or sections dealing with the infancy of Christ. This would make it like our Gospel according to Mark, with which, however, it cannot be Identified if it is to be judged by such extracts as have come down to us.

(3) The time of composition of the Gospel according to the Hebrews is evidently very early. It may even have been one form of the original Gospel of Jesus,

308