|
LESSON 83.
THE PERICOPE DE ADULTERA.
674. Misinterpretations of Scripture are bad enough;
mistranslations worse. We have dealt with both of these as
they concerned woman’s place in the Divine economy. But
worse than either misinterpretations and mistranslations are
mutilations. God has pronounced a solemn curse upon those
who are guilty of such manipulations,¾at
least as far as the last book of the Bible is concerned, and
it may apply to all the other books as well, for Proverbs
30: 5,6 reads: “Every word of God is tried: . . . add not
thou unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found
a liar.” The curse in Revelation 22:18 reads: “I
testify unto everyone that heareth the words of the prophecy
of this book, If anyone shall add unto these things, God
shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this
book: and if anyone shall take away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of
the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the
things that are written in this book.”
675. If we will look in a Revised Version of the English
Bible we will discover that a certain section,¾John
7:35 to 8:11,¾has
been placed within brackets and spaced off from the rest of
the text of the Gospel; and this marginal note has been
added in explanation: “Most of the ancient authorities
omit John 7:35-8:11. Those which contain it vary much from
each other.” Now we must examine the exact facts of the
case; and, thanks to the careful investigations of the late
learned Dean Burgon of Chichester, our task is not so
difficult.[1]
The story recorded in John 8 is but consistent with Jesus
Christ’s entire human history in His treatment of women.
Because of this fact, it will never be blotted out of the
Book, but will be the “word” by which men will be judged, as
to their treatment of the social evil, in that Last Day of
Judgment (John 12:48).
676. First, let us explain: The ancient manuscripts of
the N. T., none of which are older than 400 A.D. (though, of
course, they may in some cases be direct copies of the
original autographs), are divided into Uncials and Cursives.
The former term means that they are written wholly in
CAPITAL LETTERS, the latter term implies that they are
written in a running hand, something like
handwriting. There are about sixty uncials of the Gospels,
and a thousand or so cursives. It is generally assumed that
the uncials are older than the cursives, but this is not
always the case; certain cursives are a century older than
the uncials. Tischendorf, in 1859, made the latest discovery
of an entire Bible of ancient date, in the Greek tongue.
This particular uncial is certainly very old, and it did not
contain the story of the woman taken in adultery; and this
fact, it has been claimed, clenches the proof that the story
does not belong to the original text; for seven other
uncials, it is claimed by Tischendorf, omit this portion.
This has led to the marginal note in the R.V.The portion has
been called the Pericope de Adultera, meaning an
excerpt,¾a
portion selected for the Church readings relating to an
adulteress. For short, we will call it by this name in these
Lessons.
677. Whether the marginal note in the R.V.is correct or
not, those who hold Tischendorf’s manuscript in high esteem
are likely to contend that “most ancient authorities” are
against the pericope; but that is largely a mere
opinion that those that contain it prove thereby their own
lack of authority. Dean Burgon says of Tischendorf’s claim
that eight uncials in all omit the pericope: “No sincere
inquirer after truth could so state the evidence,” and
then shows that several of these manuscripts happen to omit
the pericope for the simple reason that they are
lacking at this place,¾that
is, a page or two is lost out. This sort of “evidence” is as
though I claimed that “All hail the power of Jesus’ name”
was not in the Church Hymnal, because my copy of it had two
or three pages torn out at the very place where one would be
guided by the Index to look for it. After weighing the
claims as to the omission of the pericope, Dean
Burgon asserts that only three uncials (“ancient
authorities”) actually omit the portion; and two of these
are demonstrably copies of a common original. That seventy
out of a thousand or so cursives omit it is a
matter of small moment,
of which Dean Burgon gives satisfactory explanation,¾as
also for its omission from the three uncials, at the same
time.
678. It happens that the Eastern section of the early
Church appointed that Christ’s discourse at the Feast of
Tabernacles, given in the 7th chapter of John’s Gospel,
should constitute the church reading portion on the day of
the Festival of Pentecost (Whitsunday); and to this section
was added, not unnaturally, the 12th verse of chapter eight.
But the verses immediately concerned in recounting the story
of the woman taken in adultery were reserved for another
day,¾St.
Pelagia’s Day, October 8th. In order to join up well the
verses for Whitsunday, the following were omitted
altogether: “And every man went unto his own house. Jesus
went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning He
came again into the temple, and all the people came unto
Him: and He sat down and taught them,”¾7:53
and 8:1, 2. Thus, by the entire omission of three verses,
two Lessons were made, one for the Festival of Pentecost,
and the other for St. Pelagia’s Day.
679. St. Pelagia is
a name applied to at least three persons, but undoubtedly
the one to whom this section finally referred was the one
sometimes called “the sinner.” She lived at Antioch (as did
a virgin “St. Pelagia”), and was a courtesan and dancer. She
was suddenly converted under the preaching of Bishop Nonnus,
some time in the very beginning of the fifth century. After
conversion, she retired to the Mount of Olives, and died
three years later of strict penance. Some of the cursives,
as we have said, and an uncial or two have omitted the
pericope altogether. Now, it appears why; they were
either manuscripts prepared for Church lessons, or copies of
such,¾or
at any rate, copies of John’s Gospel which had been
influenced by the Lectionaries of the Church.
680. The proof that such was the case is given by Dean
Burgon: Some of the ancient manuscripts of the Gospels are
so marked on the margin as to indicate the portions to be
used in church. At the beginning of such a portion, the
Greek word for “beginning” (arche) is written, and at
the end, the Greek word for “end,” (telos). But for
the reading for Whitsunday, another Greek word is written at
the margin of John 7:53, namely hyperba, “overleap,
skip”; and at 8:12 a second Greek word signifying
“recommence” (archai), and lastly the usual telos
at the end of the lesson. Now Dean Burgon claims that it
is impossible that this section, if actually without
authenticity, should ever have got so imbedded in the
ancient Church readings, into the middle of the lesson for
Pentecost, that the ancient Church authorities should
invariably have written these directions,¾for
the Church reading must have been fixed before any of the
present-day uncials had come into existence, being very old.
All the manuscripts having these markings for Church lessons
on their margin, have these special directions for the
reading for the Festival of Pentecost. In a word, the Reader
of the Scripture Lesson at Church would not have been
directed to “skip” something that had not previously existed
there.
681. To use Dean Burgon’s own words: “By the very
construction of her Lectionary, the Church, in her corporate
capacity and official character, has solemnly recognized the
narrative in question as an integral part of St. John’s
Gospel, and as standing in its traditional place, from an
exceedingly remote time.” . . . “In this way then it is that
the testimony borne to these verses by the Lectionary of the
East proves to be of the most opportune and convincing
character. The careful provision made for passing by the
twelve verses in dispute:
¾the
minute directions which fence off twelve verses on this side
and on that, directions issued, we may be sure, by the
highest Ecclesiastical authority, because recognized in
every part of the ancient Church,¾not
only establish them effectually in their rightful place. . .
but fully explain the adverse phenomena which are
ostentatiously paraded by adverse critics.”
(To be continued.)
[1]
Causes of Corruption in the Traditional
Text.—Appendix 1. |