Page:The Apocryphal Acts of Paul, Peter, John, Andrew and Thomas.djvu/14

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

their memory preserved in Catholic Christendom, partly by the festal homilies of eminent Fathers, and partly by religious poetry and works of sacred art. Like all legends or myths preserved in popular memory, however, they present great difficulties in the way of a satisfactory treatment from a literary point of view, perpetually springing up, as they do, afresh, now here, now there, now in one shape, now in another, and again withdrawing themselves in a tantalizing way, for a longer or shorter period, from the eyes of the historical inquirer. The older church martyrologies and calendars, subject as they were to continuous processes of change and augmentation, and the collectanea of later chroniclers and legend writers, who for the most part copied one from another, have furnished us with rich stores of legendary matter, which only in rare instances can be satisfactorily traced back to their original sources."

There can be no doubt that numerous apocryphal apostle-legends were current during the second century, and that certain written recensions existed, as may be seen from allusions and references by early writers. But with the fourth century the testimonies as to the existence and use of apocryphal Acts become numerous. Most explicit in this respect is the testimony of Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, A. D. 858, who in his Bibl., cod. 114, speaks of a volume purporting to be written by Leucius Charinus,[1] and containing the travels of Peter, John, Andrew, Thomas and Paul. Photius describes the book[2] as both foolish and heretical. It taught the existence of two Gods—an evil one, the God of the Jews, having Simon Magus for his minister; and a good one, whom, confounding the two Persons it identified with Christ. It denied the reality of Christ's incarnation, and gave a Docetic account of his life on earth, and in particular of his crucifixion; it condemned marriage, and regarded all generation as the work of the evil principle; and it told several silly and childish stories. We can satisfactorily

  1. Schmidt (loc. cit. pp. 27-77), after examining the direct and indirect testimonies of tradition, comes to the conclusion that the authorship of Leucius can originally only be claimed for the Acts of John.
  2. The passage is given by Zahn, Acta Joannis, p. 215 f.