The Vatican newspaper is dismissing as “a clumsy forgery” the papyrus fragment identified by Harvard professor Karen L. King as a fourth-century Egyptian text portraying Jesus as married.
The current edition of the weekly newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, includes a lengthy analysis by Coptic scholar Alberto Camplani raising questions about the fragment’s unknown provenance and King’s interpretation of its meaning. An accompanying editorial derides King’s argument as “compliant with a contemporary ideology that has nothing to do with ancient Christianity and the figure of Jesus.”
Comments
The Vatican is cowering. It's hard to believe that there could be such fear in Rome that they have to lash out like a cornered wild beast.
Maybe it would be a little more reasonable for them to actually study the fragment before declaring it a forgery. They seem to be in absolute panic.
And in the end, beyond the scientific interest and curiousity, and depending on the findings, this will all mean....what...that the Catholic Church must rethink it's poistion on Women?? That the Catholic Church must regard women as equal to men?? That women can be priests? That their main role is not being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen always ready to service their bearded, sandaled husbands when they come home from a hard day of philosophysing with other bearded and sandaled men?? And let's say they do "determine" that 684 angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of the 552 that Canon Law previously stated as Dogma? Now what? Do men in robes and pointed hats stop wanting to molest children? Are gays then to be traeted as full and equal human beings rather than being condemned to hell as before? Do we do away with burning people in Hell forever, and ever, and ever, for one transgression asgaint the almighty "Burner in Cheif" and his rules, because they were kiled in a car accident before they could get to that sacred ritual called "confession" where a man in a robe tells the "Burner in Cheif" your sins and gets forgivennes on your behalf??
Folks, don't you get it?? All this stuff was invented BEFORE we determined the Earth was ROUND. This is all...every single last bit of it...pure nonsence. And if it was non-hurtful nonsence, and it just gave people hope, I would be all for this mythology. BUT IT IS NOT!!!! It is responsible for death, destruction, mahem, hurt, and misery of mankind for centuries. We've got to wake up and stop this BS!!
Actually many ancient Greeks and Romans believed that the earth was round, and Eratosthenes came very close to estimating it's circumference. This was denounced as a pagan believe by the Church.
It is interesting that the Smithsonian would be involved in a dispute with such curious origins. I guess this must be one of those old saws. " First get your facts and then distort them". Or a conclusion in search of a study. It doesn't inspire confidence in higher education.
This comment has been removed.
King did herself and this fragment a disservice by choosing such a provocative title as “The Gospel of Jesus’s Wife”. That poor choice undermines the academic veneer King has been trying to place on her work.
Mythology develops over time.The reason we have such little writing about Jesus around the time of his life is because he really wasn't that famous a guy at the time. The other reason is that those people in the church over the next several hundred years who wanted to maintain and increase the mythological story, destroyed any text they may have found that contradicted their version of the myth. Like the Vatican would just come out and ever say, "Yeah, it appears that Jesus was married," or "you know what, the funny thing is it seems that the Mormons were correct all along!"
Of course they dismissed it as a forgery. It threatens the foundation of the [ahem] celebate male priests. In the early history of the Christian Church priests were married. This nonsense about being run by "celebate" males didn't come along until later. Don't mistake Christ for what humans did under his name.
Prof. King and others like Elaine Pagel at Princeton are contemporary non-sectarian scholars of early Christianity who have done much to help us better understand the early development of Christianity as a religion. Researching the (very) human diversity of views and the wrestling of ideas in the first centuries after Christ make religions like Catholicism uncomfortable of course, since Catholicism grounds its truth in prophecy. Exploring the very human origins of Christianity with rigorous historical scholarship is anathema to a body that begins not with scholarship, nor with history, but rather the revealed word of God. Uncovering what appeared to have been lively debates like the question of whether Jesus was married is not what the Vatican wants to see or hear, so it's understandable they would quickly play the "forgery" card before all the evidence is in.
On the other hand, perhaps the Vatican should take comfort that this might proof that Jesus wasn't gay as some have speculated.
This comment has been removed.
Not really. Considering a number of semi-scandals in recent years among politicians and celebrities, I'm not sure being married *proves* much of anything about orientation.
There are plenty of public documents available from the time, and from the Romans. If Jesus were married, you'd see evidence of it in more than one place, in many places, and not on just a single scrap that was written 300 years after he died. In other words, 'nice try'.
Yo. You'd think there'd be photos on at least one person's iPhone.
You're entire thesis about documents from the time is incorrect. The New Testament was finally approved at the Council of Trullan in 692 and the church thereafter began systematic destruction of conflicting writings. Since there was no printing, there were precious few copies of documents and that made destruction relatively easy.
It's obvious to anyone who thinks that there would be opposition to the views of the church hierarchy, but only fragments of that literature survives. Doesn't that strike you as strange?
In addition, most surviving documents of the Roman Empire were in the libraries at Constantinople and Alexandria., and were largely destroyed by Christian crusaders and Muslim conquerors.
The Vatican knows it's fake because they have the real document hidden safely away.
Was it Cardinal Law who came to the conclusion that this was a forgery?
My, my. . . Such a shocking reaction--not that the marriage story would totally undermine the weak foundation supporting Catholic Church teachings and beliefs.
The very existence of Jesus is on similarly shaky evidence. It is hard to credit a group that finds evidence off Jesus' existence convincing when they critiquse the veracity of similar documents.
"Papayrus alleges Vatican is Clumsy Fake." As the previous commentators note, the papyrus , even if genuine, would represent a tradition, not a biography. No one knows the biography. The issue is how fair and rational Catholics choose to deal with women.