The canon of truth and the triumph of John - Part 1

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

In the conclusion (Part 12) of 'God's Word or Human Words' we read the

following:

 

(p.113) Yet Irenaeus recognized that even banishing all " secret writings " and

creating a canon of four gospel accounts could not, by itself, safeguard the

Christian movement. What if some who read the " right " gospels read them in the

wrong way--or in 'many' wrong ways? What if Christians interpreted these same

gospels to inspire--or, as the bishop might say, to spawn--new " heresies " ? This

is what happened in Irenaeus's congregation--and, as we shall see, he responded

by working to construct what he called orthodox (literally, " straight-thinking " )

Christianity.

 

Beyond Belief (The Secret Gospel of Thomas), Chapter 3, p. 113.

 

 

Here now, is Part 1 of Chapter 4 - titled 'The Canon of truth and the triumph of

John'.

 

Enjoy,

 

violet

 

 

 

 

The canon of truth and the triumph of John - Part 1

 

(p.114) People engaged in spiritual exploration often are especially attracted

to the Gospel of John; for, although written with great simplicity--and,

apparently, to advocate faith--this gospel shines with paradox, mystery, and

hints of deeper meaning. Thus T.S. Eliot, moved by its opening lines, wrote

these in response:

 

And the light shone in darkness and

Against the Word the unstilled world still whirled

About the center of the silent Word. [1]

 

Some four centuries before Eliot, another poet, the son of converted Jews, an

intense young Spanish monk who would become a saint and mystic, chose John's

name as his own, calling himself John of the Cross. (p.115) Now, largely because

of the Nag Hammadi discoveries, we can see that, nearly two thousand years ago,

many of John's earliest readers also responded to this gospel in surprising and

imaginative ways.

 

How did those Christians whom Irenaeus calls " evil interpreters " read John and

the other Scriptures--and why did he oppose what they found there? Irenaeus

warns that these people " have cast truth aside " ; [2] they introduce lies that

entice and delude naive believers, but to many people their obvious fictions

actually seem true. Irenaeus says that the Christian poet and teacher

Valentinus, his disciple Ptolemy, and others like them have invented all kinds

of myths about what happened " in the beginning, " and even 'before' the beginning

of the world, and how the unknown Source of all being, which these Christians

sometimes call the primal Father and other times call Silence--since there are

no words to describe this Source--first poured forth streams of divine energies,

both masculine and feminine, whose dynamic interaction brought forth the

universe. Some followers of Ptolemy go on to say that divine Wisdom came forth

" in the beginning " and participated with God to bring forth the universe, as

described in Genesis 1 through 3.

 

Irenaeus may not have known that such questions were widely discussed in certain

Jewish circles among teachers and their disciples, who apparently influenced the

questions that teachers like Valentinus and Ptolemy asked, as well as their

interpretation of passages from Israel's Scriptures--especially Genesis, the

Psalms, and the oracles of Isaiah and Proverbs.

 

(p.116) We know little of Valentinus himself, since only a few fragments of his

writing survive, [3] but he, too, wrote a poem reflecting on the mystery of how

the visible universe emerges from the invisible Source, as Genesis 1:2 says,

after " the spirit moved above the depth " :

 

All things I see suspended through spirit;

All things borne along through spirit;

Flesh depending on soul,

Soul bound to air,

Air depending on ether,

From the depth, fruit brought forth,

From the mother's womb, a child. [4]

 

At the same time, Valentinus and his disciples were among the first, perhaps a

hundred years before the New Testament canon was established, to place these

newer " apostolic " writings along with Genesis and the prophets, and to revere

the authority of Jesus' sayings as equal to or even above that of Israel's

Scriptures. [5] Ptolemy even wrote in a letter to Flora, an aristocratic Roman

woman who studied with him, that Jesus' sayings offer " the 'only' unerring way

to comprehend reality. " [6] In discussing divine mysteries, Irenaeus says that

Ptolemy and members of his circle often cited passages from Paul's letters and

the " sayings of the Lord " known to us from Matthew and Luke; but what they

quoted repeatedly, " making the fullest possible use " [7] of it, was the Gospel

of John--which was, in fact, their favorite. When Irenaeus decided to arm

himself against these teachers by reading their commentaries and confronting

their authors, he may have known that Heracleon, whom he calls Valentinus's

" most respected " disciple, had written a famous 'Commentary on John'--which is,

so far as we know, the earliest commentary written on 'any' New Testament book.

[8]

 

When I first heard about Heracleon's commentary, I wondered: Why would anyone

bother to write a 'commentary' on a gospel written so clearly? And what would

attract a 'heretic' to a gospel that was to become the touchstone of orthodoxy?

Later, after studying the newly discovered sources, I saw that, by putting my

questions this way, I had unconsciously adopted Irenaeus's terminology and

incorporated his viewpoint. For what he did, with remarkable success, was

convince Christians that his reading of John's gospel--or any gospel, for that

matter--was the only correct reading, and that his approach was the " canonical "

scriptural interpretation. Irenaeus, as we shall see, insisted on what he called

the " canon of truth " and rejected the kind of exegesis which he said was

" current among Greek philosophers, " [9] such as certain Stoics who read Homer's

poems allegorically, taking gods like Zeus and Hera to represent elements of the

natural universe, and such as followers of Plato, who claimed to find in Homer's

poems allusions to teachings such as the transmigration of the soul. [10]

Irenaeus, alarmed by what Valentinus's disciples were doing, warns believers to

beware of approaching their own sacred texts in such ways. On the contrary, he

declares that, wherever possible, one must discern the obvious meaning; and

whenever a certain passage seems ambiguous or difficult, one's understanding

should be guided by those passages whose meaning seems clear. [11]

 

Heretics, Irenaeus warns, read wildly, concentrating on the enigmas, mysteries,

and parables they find in the Scriptures, rather than on passages that seem

plain; often they read incoherently, or in conflict with the obvious meaning of

the text. [12] (p.118) Although some write commentaries, many more respond to

what they find in Genesis, in Isaiah's oracles, Paul's letters, the Psalms, and

the gospels by coming up with songs, poems, visions, and " revelations " of their

own--even liturgical dance. As we shall see, the texts discovered at Nag Hammadi

bear out Irenaeus's suspicions, as well as his conviction about what was at

stake: what is spiritual truth, and how it may be discerned.

 

Beyond Belief (The Secret Gospel of Thomas), Chapter 4, p. 114-118

Elaine Pagels

Vintage Books, New York, U.S.A

ISBN: 0-375-70316-0

 

 

Notes:

 

For fuller and more technical discussions of the research summarized in this

chapter, see Elaine Pagels, " Irenaeus, the 'Canon of Truth' and the Gospel of

John: 'Making a Difference' Through Hermeneutics and Ritual, " in 'Vigiliae

Christianae' 56.4 (2002), 339-371; also Pagels, " Ritual in the Gospel of

Phillip, " in Turner and McGuire, 'Nag Hammadi Library After Fifty Years',

280-294; " The Mystery of Marriage in the Gospel of Phillip, " in Pearson, 'Future

of Early Christianity', 442-452; and 'Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis'.

 

[1] T.S. Eliot, " Ash Wednesday. "

 

[2] Irenaeus, AH 1, 'Praefatio'.

 

[3] For these fragments, with translation, along with a careful and important

recent study, see Christoph Markschies, 'Valentinus Gnosticus? Untersuchungen

zur valentinianischen Gnosis mit einem Kommentar zu den Fragmenten Valentins'

(Tubingen, 1992).

 

[4] The title of this poem, 'Theros', can be translated " harvest " or " summer

fruit. " The translation I present here is my own; for other translations and for

the Greek text, see Christoph Markschies, 'Valentinus Gnosticus'? 218-259; see

also the incisive response by Andrew McGowan, " Valentinus Poeta: Notes on

'Theros', " 'Vigiliae Christianae' 51.2 (1997), 158-178.

 

[5] For discussion, see Hans von Campenhausen, 'The Formation of the Christian

Bible', trans. J.A. Baker, from 'Die Entstehung der christlichen Bibel', first

edited in Tubingen, 1968 (Philadelphia and London, 1972), 80-87.

 

[6] 'Letter to Flora' 3.8.

 

[7] Irenaeus, AH 3.11.7.

 

[8] For sources and discussion, see Pagels, 'Johannine Gospel in Gnostic

Exegesis'.

 

[9] See, for example, Irenaeus, AH 1.9.4; and the discussion by R.L. Wilken,

" The Homeric Cento in Irenaeus' 'Adversus Haereses' 1.9.4, " 'Vigiliae

Christianae' 21 (1967), 25-33; A. Rousseau and L. Dautreleau, 'Irenee de Lyon

contre les Heresies' (Paris, 1965).

 

[10] For an excellent study of such teachings and interpretations, see the

recent work of R.M. Grant, 'Heresy and Criticism'. See also Robert Lamberton,

'Homer the Theologian: Neoplatonist Allegorical Reading and the Growth of the

Epic Tradition' (Berkeley, 1986).

 

[11] Irenaeus, AH 2.10.1-4. For a fascinating discussion of parallels between

gnostic and patristic exegesis of John's prologue, see Anne Pasquier,

" Interpretation of the Prologue of John's Gospel in Some Gnostic and Patristic

Writings: A Common Tradition, " in Turner and McGuire, 'Nag Hammadi Library After

Fifty Years', 484-498.

 

[12] See Perkins, " Spirit and Letter, " 307-327.