Philip Jenkins is a professor of history at Baylor University, specifically in the Institute for the Studies of Religion. His prior books include The Jesus Wars, which I also read and thought to be excellent.

The announced purpose of The Many Faces of Christ is to correct what Jenkins calls a myth concerning the history and development of Christianity. The myth is that what we now consider the canonical bible became generally accepted early on (no later than the fourth century), and that the many apocryphal “gospels” now known to scholars were “lost” for at least a millennium, and hence had scant influence on the history of Christianity. Jenkins says they were not lost. In fact, many of them were in general circulation, at least to the extent that any books were circulated in the dark ages and medieval times, before the invention of the printing press. In fact, stories from some of those “gospels” were generally accepted by Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.

Three examples of such extra-canonical stories that were taught to me in my Catholic grade school and were generally absorbed by orthodox Roman Catholic churches are:

1. St. Michael, the archangel, led the “good” angels in the “battle of heaven,” and vanquished the disobedient angels led by Lucifer, ultimately casting them into hell.



2. The “Harrowing of Hell”: After his crucifixion, Jesus descended into hell to free Adam, Abraham, and other just people who had died before Christ could “redeem” them and who could not enter heaven until after the Resurrection.



3. The parents of Christ’s mother Mary were Joachim and Anne, both of whom became canonized saints. Neither person is mentioned in the current canonical bible.

Cults of the Virgin and other saints grew up, partially as a result of the teachings of these alternative scriptures. The art of the middle ages embodies many stories taken from those texts.

On the other hand, many of the non-canonical gospels were recognized as heretical. Although the Church attempted to suppress them, they sometimes became the basic teachings of heretical sects. Jenkins observes that the Church hierarchy attempted to define and consolidate orthodox theology at various ecumenical councils, but it was only partially successful in channeling and limiting the beliefs of the faithful. Heresies proliferated throughout the entire history of the Church.

Jenkins also points out that what is now considered “The Bible” was not generally recognized until the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century. Even after that time, Roman Catholics, Protestants, and Eastern Orthodox churches adopted somewhat differing collections of writings that each considers “The Bible.” Moreover, each group of Christian churches disagrees with Jewish scholars on some of the constituents of the Old Testament. In fact, even Muslims have created their own version of the life of Jesus in which he is born of the Virgin, but Jesus recognizes that the real Messiah will come after him and his (the Messiah’s) name will be Mohammed!

Jenkins views the Protestant Reformation as a key moment:

"…which marked a fundamental reorientation in attitudes toward the whole concept of scripture and on authority in religion more generally. While we know the movement stressed the absolute authority of scripture, it is easy to forget that it rewrote the rules of how that Bible was constituted. The Reformation was a war on the alternative gospels and their influence….[T]he Reformation created the Bible that we have known ever since. In terms of chronology, then, we have our story wrong by over a thousand years. The Christian church did indeed demote the ancient alternative scriptures, but in the sixteen century, rather than the fourth.”

In one sense, ironically, the invention of the printing press facilitated the suppression of the alternative gospels. Before mass printing, just about anyone could create a book in the way books were produced at that time - by writing it out by hand. The manuscript would then be passed around from local church to church. After the printing press, however, only printed books had any cachet. And the presses were few in number and were strictly controlled by various governmental bodies that could dictate what would be printed. Thus very few of the alternative scriptures were ever printed en masse, and they survive today only in hand written manuscripts.

Finally, Jenkins makes an appeal to read and study those alternate gospels:

"…no church ever granted formal canonical status to, say, the Gospel of Nicodemus—but that book did far more to shape Christianity over a millennium or so than perhaps any other biblical text outside the gospels and Revelation. At particular times and places, the same points have applied to the Marian Gospels. If we do not take full account of such books and their impact, we are missing a very large portion of the history of Christianity."

Evaluation: For those interested in the history of Christianity, this is an excellent overview of the early years of the faith.

(JAB) ( )

11-12/15 B&C review of non-canonical texts covering Jesus--these are not bad, unless they claim inspiration

The following article is located at: http://www.booksandculture.com/articles/2015/novdec/those-other-gospels.html

Those Other Gospels
How believers in the first millennium read non-canonical texts.
Amy L. B. Peeler | posted 10/19/2015

First and last paragraphs good summary.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
If the life of Jesus were fully recorded, the books would overflow the world. So John the Evangelist says at the close of his gospel (John 21:25). In one sense, this is true of any human life. The recording of each event, each word, each thought would be impossibly voluminous, and surely John means this. But he must also mean something more. For to record the life of the Son of God in the flesh is not simply the writing down of what happens but also the why and the how. To narrate a life is one thing; to narrate the life of God is something else. Therefore, the church doggedly affirmed the need for more than one gospel. The four with their multiple perspectives did a better job of capturing the richness of the Savior's life than did any single one. Yet, even by the evangelists' own testimony, they did not capture the whole, so over time other believers in Jesus contributed to the literature. Recent books by Philip Jenkins and Vernon K. Robbins focus their attention on these other accounts of Jesus.

In The Many Faces of Christ: The Thousand-Year Story of the Survival and Influence of the Lost Gospels, Jenkins follows the path of his previous work by unearthing aspects of the church that many (especially in the West) have forgotten or ignored. If one desires to learn more from every age and locale where followers of Jesus (broadly construed) existed and wrote about the meaning of his life, this book is an excellent place to start.

Jenkins' historical ax to grind raises its edge against a narrative that has become increasingly popular in recent decades. He articulates it well:

[T]he earliest centuries of the faith (before Constantine) were marked by sprawling diversity and creativity, and many schools of thought contested freely. But the democratic, egalitarian, and Spirit-filled Jesus movement then atrophied into the repressive, bureaucratic, Catholic Church of the Midddle Ages. The narrow orthodoxies of a monolithic church replaced the effervescent "many Christianities" of the earliest centuries … . The medieval church was built on the ashes of burnt books.
Not true, Jenkins counters: "the lost gospels were never lost." Rather, these other stories of Jesus thrived in the art and drama of Europe, and the texts endured and sometimes even became canonical in the Eastern world. His research shows that it was not only the very early church that was diverse. "We should ask when that has not been true. When was the Christian world ever monolithic in such matters? No such historical moment ever existed. Jesuses abound, and always have. So do gospels."

Each chapter begins with a well-told story about an unfamiliar account of Jesus and the people who championed or derided it. Thus Jenkins fleshes out his claims about the diversity of Christianity, at times by era, at others by geography, theme, text, or religious affiliation. One striking evidence of this diversity is the Golden Legend, which provides the beginning story of Jenkins' fourth chapter. An account of Christian history written in Latin around 1270, Legenda Aurea, one of the most popular books in medieval Europe, preserved and passed on alternative gospels. Like the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, a disturbing account of Jesus' life from age 5 to 12, or the Acts of Pilate, which depicts Jesus' Harrowing of Hell, these alternative texts filled gaps in the canonical gospels or tackled theological questions upon which the church had said little. They met a felt need; hence, they were widely and enduringly popular.

The four gospels affirmed as canon did not tell everything about the life of Jesus—admittedly they leave big gaps.
Jenkins emphasizes a handful of ideas in The Many Faces of Christ, including the importance of wide geographical and chronological data as well as the dialectic between official decrees and grassroots realities. While his argument is quite convincing, one consistent orienting structure through the chapters—say, moving through different locales or times or themes—would have helped me grasp the bigger story more clearly and kept his chapters from feeling repetitive. In addition, at times I wondered if he stretched his argument a bit far. Did texts like the Gospel of Thomas really contribute to the notion of pantheism in Buddhism? Did the Apocalypse of Peter influence descriptions of hell in Dante? Do the apocrypha help explain the presence of dualism in heretical Eastern European sects? I do not question that the "lost texts" continued to show up in other versions, textual and visual, throughout the Middle Ages across the known world, but we should not underestimate the broader human propensity for non-canonical ideology. Modern Christians need not read the Gospel of Truth to display escapist (Gnostic) tendencies.

One might assume that Jenkins' book argues for a leveling of the playing field or that he is urging Western Christians to listen to the other stories that believers across the world and throughout the centuries have found important. He is clearly doing the latter, as his closing sentence declares: "Anyone interested in those rediscovered ancient gospels should be told the wonderful news—that a millennium of other writings awaits them, no less rich and provocative in their contents." He is not preaching the former, however—that the canonical and non-canonical gospels are indistinguishable. The "other accounts of Jesus" whose content and history he so winsomely describes throughout the book do not belong in the same category chronologically or historically. The canonical gospels, Jenkins writes, "really do take us directly to the world of Christ and his immediate followers in ways that no other candidate can or ever could."

On the point of differentiation between canonical and other accounts, Robbins' Who Do People Say I Am? Rewriting Gospel in Emerging Christianity is magnanimous to a fault. With warm, conversational, and instructional prose, Robbins presents a case for mutual influence. His goal is clear: "My thesis is that as early Christians used Gospels, those Gospels used them. In other words, influences are very subtle. Once something comes into the domain of our experience, it influences us and we influence it." The book demonstrates mutual interpretation of texts particularly well. Robbins traces extensive connections between Israel's Scriptures and the many gospels, as well as influence among the accounts of Jesus.

The first six chapters present an account of Jesus' identity as found in the canonical gospels, with initial chapters covering the Q material and the "Son of Man" traditions. In these accounts, the identity of Jesus is often compared to previous roles in Israel, of which Jesus is shown to be the fullest and ultimate example. Each of the next six chapters focuses on a non-canonical text with the goal of helping "readers both expand their knowledge of Christian tradition and deepen their understanding of one or more Gospels inside the New Testament." Robbins treats the Gospel of Thomas, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Infancy Gospel of James, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Judas, and the Acts of John. In these texts, Jesus cannot be compared to anything. He is "something different from what anyone has ever expected." Possibly these gospels, very interesting examples indeed, best help Robbins explain concepts in the canonical gospels, but I could not locate his reasoning for the selection of these particular texts and not others.

This book would serve well anyone desiring to know more about the stories of Jesus, inside and outside the Bible. It would be a handy supplement to a course on the Gospels or Jesus, providing context and explanation for some popular (and very foreign) texts. Robbins' socio-rhetorical reading strategies—a methodology he has championed—prompt him to ask illuminating questions of the text: "What exactly did Jesus do that called forth [these] kind of description[s] about him and his activities, and why did he do it?" Robbins asks readers to seriously consider the implications of following a suffering Messiah amid the tensions that led to the Jewish War of 66-70. Elsewhere he suggests that the anointing of Jesus' feet as recounted by Luke might be in preparation for the long journey to Jerusalem, and that Jesus' unique account of Isaiah's prophecy in Luke 4 may be due not to Lucan editing but to Jesus' memorization of the text. Questions of social location and rhetorical strategy allow Robbins to see things in the text that others might have passed over.

Moreover, this book provides a superb vehicle for learning about many alternative accounts of Jesus; Robbins' treatment of the non-canonical accounts is both thorough and gracious. It is a good thing "to keep an open mind," as he suggests, or else the reading of the non-canonicals becomes an exercise in the construction of straw men. Nevertheless, I wonder if programmatic open-mindedness sometimes blurs important distinctions. While it may be true that "many of the things that are strange to us may be very meaningful for some other people as they attempt to understand Jesus," is it the case that "the 'more strange' that Jesus becomes as this book proceeds, the closer we get to the 'innermost nature' of Jesus"? Diversity of accounts? Yes. Multivalence and richness in the life of Jesus? Absolutely. Even the ability to appreciate strangeness in others because of the unfamiliarity of Jesus is a wonderful goal. This text lacks, however, any discussion of the regula fidei, a notion that would help (especially inexperienced readers) understand why a spiritual Jesus who did not actually die on the cross, as depicted in the Acts of John, was ruled by the consensus of the church to be out of bounds.

The four gospels affirmed as canon did not tell everything about the life of Jesus—admittedly they leave big gaps. What was Jesus like at age seven? What was he doing on Holy Saturday? Jenkins and Robbins provide wonderful introductions to texts that attempted to answer questions like these and many others. Their books and the texts they write about do deserve attention. When we study and appreciate such accounts, we not only learn more about Christ-followers in other times and places but also, I suggest, come to see that the canon is not an elaborate conspiracy designed to suppress tantalizing and illuminating tales. Instead, we might come to see the canon more deeply as the wisdom of the church and the wisdom of God to privilege the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, four awesome and inspiring narratives whose treasures are inexhaustible.

Amy L. B. Peeler is assistant professor of New Testament at Wheaton College.

Copyright © 2015 by the author or Christianity Today/Books & Culture magazine.