It
all began in Harvard, where feminist theologian Karen King (pictured above) announced that an
ancient fragment of papyrus contained the words in Coptic, “Jesus said to them,
my wife…” Wow. So Jesus was married! Way to go—and to get attention. For it certainly did get attention. The papyrus was promptly dubbed the “Gospel
of Jesus’ Wife”, and those dubious of its authenticity (such as the Vatican)
were written off as partisans in the church’s continued struggle against women
priests. Harvard scholars with long
lists of initials after their names solemnly released a series of articles
defending Ms. King’s position. Time magazine solemnly announced that
several “teams of scientists” had therefore “proved its authenticity”. With all the gravitas they could muster, journalists intoned “the ink and
papyrus are very likely ancient, and not a modern forgery”. The pieces appeared, of course, just before
Easter as modern journalism’s contribution to religious dialogue in the West. The
hubbub over the “Gospel of Judas” in about 2006 had died down, so it was time
for something else. What better news for
a journalist could there be than the explosive discovery that Jesus was
married, and that the Church had been wrong all along about yet something
else? Stop the presses!
Then
it quickly began to unravel. A Coptic specialist at Indiana Wesleyan
University, Christian Askeland, said that a few factors immediately indicated
that they were dealing with a forgery, one of which was the fact that the
Coptic dialect used in the papyrus fell out of use before the date that radiometric
tests indicated that the papyrus was made. Mark Goodacre, New Testament prof and Coptic
scholar at Duke University came to the same conclusion: “It is beyond reasonable doubt that this is a
fake”. So did Alin Suciu, researcher at
the University of Hamburg and Coptic manuscript specialist: “Given that the evidence of the forgery is now overwhelming,
I consider the polemic surrounding the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife papyrus over.” Okay then.
Nothing to see here. Move along
everyone. Let’s just forget the whole
thing. Sorry, Ms. King.
I
think though that it would be a mistake to just forget the whole thing, however
much Ms. King and her Harvard colleagues might like us to do so. For the episode reveals something important
about how our culture, and some in academic circles, look upon the traditional
views of the historical Church—namely, that our culture is predisposed to
accept any story, view, or discovery which casts doubt on the Church’s
traditional faith. Any news release or
theory which could embarrass the Church or portray it in an unfavourable light
as a collection of hide-bound obscurantists, will find an eager and ready
audience, what sales people call “a motivated buyer”. Certain sections of the academic world and
the totality of the mass media will jump on any band-wagon or story deemed to
be destructive of the Church’s traditional beliefs. No sense sitting on the story until real
scholars have pondered it, tested it, and subjected it to rigorous proof. Easter is coming, and there is nothing that
sells better than the latest revelation that the Church has been proven wrong
once again.
This
means that we should sit lightly on The Latest Thing that comes down the
journalistic pike when it announces in its customary solemn tones that the
Church’s faith has been again proven to be bogus. Whether it’s an ossuary or a papyrus
presented for our excited consideration, it is likely that when the dust
settles the debate between believers and unbelievers will be pretty much where
it was before. It is a mistake to let
journalists or academics get us worked up.
It has all been done before.
Easter comes around every year and the media will be hard at their work
of coming up with something new. Two
years ago, a feminist scholar from Harvard helped them out. Who will help next time? Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.