Gospel Fragments Research Articles

Menologia of cyrillic early printed liturgical tetraevangelia issued in Vilnius

Merely four out of 110 Cyrillic early printed liturgical Tetraevangelia were printed in Vilnius. Three of them were issued at Mamonich Printing House (1575, 1600 and ca. 1620) and one at Vilnius Brotherhood of the Holy Spirit (1644). As these four editions were frequently consulted in various book studies and completely neglected in liturgical scholarship, the commemorations of saints and feasts present in Menologia (i.e., in the fixed liturgical calendar) of all of Vilnius Gospels and other typologically homogeneous books were chosen as the subject of this research.This study was based on all Cyrillic early printed liturgical Tetraevangelia, i.e., books issued before the year 1800. Special attention was paid to the three 16th c. Moscow (so-called anonymous) and the first two Lviv editions (issued in 1636 and 1644), as they are sometimes treated as the origins of Vilnius Gospels.Textual and liturgical analyses of Menologia were the main research methods applied in this publication. The varying number of days in the twelve months, the presence or absence of saints and feasts, as well asthe verbatim correspondence of the names of commemorations and the information on the recitation of the Gospel fragments at the Divine Liturgy have been analysed. The outcomes of the undertaken research have proven that three Mamonich Gospel editions copied the Muscovite liturgical tradition, whereas Vilnius Brotherhood’s Tetraevangelion fully reproduced the first Lviv Gospel.This means that one of the three 16th c. Moscow anonymous Tetraevangelia had served as the origin for the first Mamonich edition, and that the fourth Vilnius Gospel is an accurate copy of the first Lviv Tetraevangelion. Textual variants revealed in Vilnius Gospel editions must be treated as the result of the printers’ text revision. A full list of all 203 commemorations present in the Menologia of the four Vilnius Tetraevanalia was added to this study.

Практика «братского исправления»: богословские истоки и конфессионально-культурная специфика

Fraternal correction (“correctio/correptio fraterna”), or love-motivated edification of the sin­ner, aimed at his repentance and correction based on the gospel fragment Matt. 18:15–17, was a part of everyday practices in early Christian and monastic communities; later it re­ceived theological interpretation and justification in the writings of Augustine, Alexander of Hales, Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, Jean Gerson, of early Modern scholastics. The theological and canonical thought of different epochs turned to this topic often in con­nection with specific socio-political circumstances or events of church life. Despite the di­versity of points of view, fraternal correction was understood as a positive prescription, for the fulfillment of which certain conditions are necessary: their absence makes it possible to refrain from edifying the sinner; in some situations, it is even morally unacceptable to re­sort to this procedure. In the literature for the laity, a positive prescription for fraternal cor­rection has appeared since the 13th century; over the next centuries, this prescription be­comes more and more categorical, in the early Modern times, it turns into an uncondi­tional duty: failure to fulfill this duty was regarded as a sin and was subject to confession. The procedure described in Matt. 18:15–17 also becomes one of the forms of horizontal moral reform in early modern societies, is used by different Protestant denominations to jus­tify the practice of censorship of morals and the activities of church courts (consistories), is also used to give legitimacy to certain situations of denunciation in both Catholic and Protestant communities.

Fakes, Forgeries, and Fictions: Writing Ancient and Modern Christian Apocrypha

Fakes, Forgeries, and Fictions: Writing Ancient and Modern Christian Apocrypha

An Origenian Background for theLetter to Theodore

AbstractTheLetter to Theodoremay need to be reattributed to Origen of Alexandria. Many of its features seem demonstrably Origenian, and its language aligns with early Christian and Origenian usage. Two noncanonical gospel fragments in the letter do not betray a modern author, but rather evoke early Christian symbolism and narrative structure. The single garment worn by a character in the first fragment reflects Christian symbolism and resembles the philosopher’s garment, which many early Christians adopted and portrayed in material artifacts. Origen’s intellectual interests can explain the letter’s preparation for philosophical exegesis, and its language reflects his text-critical practice. Nevertheless, Origen’s circumstances indicate the text of the noncanonical gospel fragments is unreliable. The letter also echoes Papias in the manner that Origen does. Morton Smith’s account of its discovery does not betray a forgery or hoax, but plausibly depends on other nonfiction works of manuscript discoveries written during the 1960s. Further work may be needed to secure attribution, but Origenian authorship is a simpler explanation of the evidence than modern forgery.

Gender in Biblical Studies after the Forgery of The Gospel of Jesus’s Wife

Abstract The Gospel of Jesus’s Wife (GJW) was announced in 2012, but was effectively declared “dead” in June 2016 when it was shown beyond doubt to be a modern forgery. This article, rather than discussing the content or authenticity of GJW, considers the role of gender in scholarly discourse on GJW. While conversation about GJW began as one would expect for a newly announced Gospel fragment, its subtext soon evinced preoccupations with gender in the field of biblical studies. Particularly troubling was the sexist intonation of scholarly discourse, which came to associate GJW and its advocates with “hyperfeminism” and deemed the fragment’s owner’s spouse an “eccentric wife.” This article is an effort to both describe the texture of scholarly discourse as well as identify factors contributing to the sexist discussion that ensued. These problems are representative of pervasive issues that are often ignored in the field of biblical studies.

Fakes, Forgeries, and Fictions: Writing Ancient and Modern Apocrypha. Proceedings from the 2015 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium ed. by Tony Burke

Reviewed by: Fakes, Forgeries, and Fictions: Writing Ancient and Modern Apocrypha. Proceedings from the 2015 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium ed. by Tony Burke Christopher Tuckett tony burke (ed.), Fakes, Forgeries, and Fictions: Writing Ancient and Modern Apocrypha. Proceedings from the 2015 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2017). Pp. xxviii + 414. Paper $51. This volume comprises papers from the 2015 York University Christian Apocrypha Symposium, held in Toronto. Tony Burke ("Introduction") sets the scene in an initial essay, surveying a range of different instances of people seeking to pass off texts as written by someone else, or coming from a much earlier era. In relation to Christian literature, the survey reaches up to the present, with modern "forgeries" considered as well as more ancient ones. Two essays consider broad questions (explicitly or implicitly) of modern nomenclature. Bart D. Ehrman ("Apocryphal Forgeries: The Logic of Literary Deceit") provides a summary of his recent monograph on forgeries, helpfully distinguishing different categories and arguing forcefully that all forgeries are examples of literary deceit. A slightly different view is taken by Pierluigi Piovanelli ("What Has Pseudepigraphy to Do with Forgery? Reflections on the Cases of the Acts of Paul, the Apocalypse of Paul, and the Zohar"), who argues that pseudepigraphy in some religious texts may be distinguished from forgery in that the authors of such texts perhaps felt themselves genuinely inspired to speak on behalf of earlier figures, rather than intending to deceive anyone. Stanley E. Porter ("Lessons from the Papyri: What Apocryphal Gospel Fragments Reveal about the Textual Development of Early Christianity") contends that apocryphal Gospel fragments can and should be used in the study of the text of the NT Gospels (though perhaps the fact that apocryphal Gospels are not NT manuscripts may limit their usefulness in this respect considerably) and that these fragments show the relatively stable form of the NT Gospel texts (though how this follows is not entirely clear). A number of essays focus on individual "apocryphal" Christian writings. Brent Landau ("Under the Influence [of the Magi]: Did Hallucinogens Play a Role in the Inspired Composition of the Pseudepigraphic Revelation of the Magi?") argues that the text considered may have arisen from ritual practices, perhaps under the influence of hallucinogens (Landau tentatively suggests a form of mushroom). Scott G. Brown ("Behind the Seven Veils, II: Assessing Clement of Alexandria's Knowledge of the Mystic Gospel of Mark") refers to a number of passages in Clement of Alexandria's undisputed writings to show how Clement may have interpreted sections of the Secret Gospel of Mark: Clement could thus very well have known the Gospel and hence the likelihood of his being the author of the letter to Theodore (containing the extracts of the Secret Gospel) is enhanced. Pamela Mullins Reaves ("Pseudo-Peter and Persecution: [Counter-]Evaluations of Suffering in the Coptic Apocalypse of Peter [NHC VII,3] and the Letter of Peter to Philip [NHC VIII,2]") shows how the figure of Peter is used in the texts chosen to give alternative views on suffering and martyrdom. Gregory Peter Fewster ("Paul as Letter Writer and the Success of Pseudepigraphy: Constructing an Authorial Paul in the Apocryphal Corinthian Correspondence") focuses on the remarkable success of 3 Corinthians (in the manuscript tradition) in [End Page 358] promulgating the Pauline heritage, even if the text is not particularly Pauline in its content. Anne Moore ("'Days of our Lives': Destructive Homemakers in the Passion of Andrew") compares the chosen text with modern soap operas and shows how the minor characters in the story serve to undermine the family ethos and structure. Timothy Pettipiece ("Manichean Redaction of the Secret Book of John") analyzes links between the Apocryphon of John (in its various forms) and later Manichean writings. Brandon W. Hawk ("'Cherries at Command': Preaching the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew in Anglo-Saxon England") shows how at least one apocryphal text was used positively and enthusiastically in later contexts. Three essays consider more modern "forgeries," or "apocryphal" texts: Tony Burke ("Apocrypha and Forgeries: Lessons from the 'Lost Gospels' of the Nineteenth Century") surveys a number of such examples; Bradley N. Rice ("The Apocryphal Tale of Jesus' Journey to India: Nicolas Notovich and the Life of...

The Resurrection of Jesus in the Gospel of Peter: A Tradition-Historical Study of the Akhmîm Gospel Fragment

<i>The Resurrection of Jesus in the Gospel of Peter: A Tradition-Historical Study of the</i> Akhmîm <i>Gospel Fragment</i>

TheGospel of Jesus' Wife: Constructing a Context

It has been proposed that references to Jesus' relationship to Mary Magdalene in theGospel of Philiprepresent a possible context for an early gospel fragment in which Jesus refers to her as ‘My wife’. It will be argued here that Mary's relationship to Jesus inPhilipis determined by her role as privileged recipient of revelation, not by her marital status. More significant in accounting for the Jesus' Wife fragment is theGospel of Thomas, which the author appears to have known in precisely the text-form represented by the one surviving Coptic exemplar.

A newly published 'gospel fragment'

A newly published 'gospel fragment'

Book Review: Collection of Non-Canonical Gospel Fragments in Paperback

Book Review: Collection of Non-Canonical Gospel Fragments in Paperback

Gospel Fragments: The 'Unknown Gospel' on Papyrus Egerton 2, by TOBIAS NICKLAS; Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 840, by MICHAEL J. KRUGER; Other Gospel Fragments, by THOMAS J. KRAUS.

Gospel Fragments: The 'Unknown Gospel' on Papyrus Egerton 2, by TOBIAS NICKLAS; Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 840, by MICHAEL J. KRUGER; Other Gospel Fragments, by THOMAS J. KRAUS.

The Oldest Manuscript of the Four Gospels?

Since the summer of 1994 I have been studying the Gospel fragments known as P4, P64 and P67, in order to determine whether they are all the work of the same scribe, and if so the nature of the manuscript of which they formed part. The fragments have been published as follows:P4: the definitive edition is by Jean Merell in RB 47 (1938) 5–22 and Planches I–VII.P64: first edited by C. H. Roberts in HTR 46 (1953) 233–7 and plate; re-edited, with revised edition of P67, in R. Roca-Puig, Un papiro griego del Evangelio de San Mateo, 2a edic, con una Note de Colin Roberts (Barcelona, 1962) with plate.

A New Testimonium to a Judaic-Christian Gospel Fragment from a Hymn of Romanos the Melodist

A New Testimonium to a Judaic-Christian Gospel Fragment from a Hymn of Romanos the Melodist

Jewish-Christian Gospel Tradition

This work represents the first independent study of the Jewish Christian Gospel fragments and of the use of the Jewish-Christian Gospel tradition in early Christian and medieval literature.

Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development

In this magisterial volume, which is destined to become the standard test for studying the tradition and history of the early Christian Gospel literature, the author treats more than a dozen Gospel writings from the first two centuries. These Gospels include more than the standard canonical Gospels, covering also such writings as the Gospel of Thomas, the Apocryphon of James, and the Gospel of Mary and others. The book is divided into six major sections. The first examines the origins and meanings of the term Gospel. Then follows a section on early collections of saying including, of course, a study of Q. A third section traces the movement from the dialogue Gospels through narratives about Jesus to the Gospel of John. Mark, Matthew and Like receive thorough consideration in the fourth section, followed by an exploration of the early extant harmonization s of the canonical Gospels (Justin martyr, Tatian, Epistula Apostolorum, etc.) The concluding section deals with various Gospel fragments known from papyri and from casual mentions in the church fathers. Throughout Ancient Christian Gospels, the author provides all technical information (attestation, manuscripts, etc.) needed by the scholar, but also translations of all data, general introductions and explanations in an effort to make the book accessible and useful for the general reader. Helmut Koester is John H. Morison Professor of New Testament and Winn Professor of Ecclesiastical History of Harvard University and author of the widely used two-volume Introduction to the New Testament.

The Yale fragments of the West Saxon gospels

The manuscripts which contain the Old English translation of the gospels have been little studied since Skeat's compendious editions of the last century, yet the interest and importance of these codices, no less than that of the texts they preserve, should not be underestimated. The vernacular translation of a biblical text stands as a monument to the confidence and competence of Anglo-Saxon monastic culture; the evidence of the surviving manuscripts can offer insights into the development and dissemination of this text. The following study examines two fragments from an otherwise lost manuscript of the West Saxon gospels, which are preserved as an endleaf and parchment reinforcements in the binding of a fourteenth-century Latin psalter now in the Beinecke Library at Yale University, Beinecke 578. I shall first discuss the psalter and its accompanying texts in the attempt to localize the manuscript and its binding. I shall then turn to the West Saxon gospel fragments; after presenting a description and, for the first time, a complete transcription, I shall attempt to locate this text in the context of other Anglo-Saxon gospel manuscripts.

Clement of Alexandria and Secret Mark: The Score at the End of the First Decade

Late Spring of 1982 will see the tenth anniversary of the full publication of Clement's letter and its gospel fragments. Accordingly, this seems an appropriate occasion to review the discussion of them to date. The following review is based on about 150 published items that have come to my attention. No doubt some have been missed, but I trust these are representative.

The New Gospel Fragment from Oxyrhynchus

Previous articleNext article FreeExploration and DiscoveryThe New Gospel Fragment from OxyrhynchusEdgar Johnson GoodspeedEdgar Johnson Goodspeed Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 31, Number 2Feb., 1908 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/474014 Views: 89Total views on this site Citations: 1Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in The Biblical World (1893-1920), which is continued by The American Journal of Theology (1897-1920). PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Daniel R. Schwartz Viewing the Holy Utensils (P.Ox. V, 840), New Testament Studies 32, no.11 (Feb 2009): 153–159.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688500013576

The Gospel of Peter

It is perhaps not unfitting that some notice should be taken in our Society of Church History of what has proved to be one of the most interesting and important literary finds of recent years. I refer to the Greek MS., discovered by U. Bouriant in a tomb at Akhmîm, Egypt, in 1886, and first published in the fall of 1892. The MS. contains, as is well known, brief fragments of an early Christian Gospel and Apocalypse and two more extended fragments of the Book of Enoch. The fragment of the Apocalyse does not contain the name of its author, but toward the close of the Gospel fragment Peter is indicated as the writer of the Gospel in the sentence: “I Simon Peter and Andrew my brother took our nets and went away to the sea.” We have references in early Christian literature to a Gospel and an Apocalypse of Peter, and there can be little doubt that the fragments in question belong to those long-lost works. I shall concern myself to-day only with the Gospel fragment, which has excited chief interest among scholars and has already given rise to an extended literature.