B*********e
发帖数: 254 | 1 A Sermon on the Pericope Adulterae
Bible Research > Textual Criticism > Story Of The Adulteress > Quo Vadis?
Quo Vadis?
A Sermon on the Pericope Adulterae
by Michael Marlowe, 2004
The Quo Vadis story is one of those Legends of the Saints that are well-know
n to Catholics but practically unknown to Protestants. It is an ancient lege
nd concerning Peter's martyrdom, believed to be from the second century, and
preserved in the collection of legends included in the apocryphal Acts of P
eter. George Edmundson in The Church in Rome in the First Century (London, 1
913) summarizes the legend thus:
His friends, so runs the story, had entreated the Apostle to save his life b
y leaving the city. Peter at last consented, but on condition that he should
go away alone. But when he wished to pass the gate of the city, he saw Chri
st meeting him. Falling down in adoration he says to Him 'Lord, whither goes
t Thou?' [Latin, quo vadis?] And Christ replied to him 'I am coming to Rome
to be again crucified.' And Peter says to Him 'Lord, wilt Thou again be cruc
ified?' And the Lord said to him 'Even so, I will again be crucified.' Peter
said to Him 'Lord, I will return and will follow Thee.' And with these word
s the Lord ascended into Heaven . . . And Peter, afterwards corning to himse
lf, understood that it was of his own passion that it had been spoken, becau
se that in it the Lord would suffer. The Apostle then returned with joy to m
eet the death which the Lord had signified that he should die.
Regarding the authenticity of the story Edmundson says, "That it contains a
story that is authentic in the sense of being based on events that really oc
curred is not improbable. The Peter described here is the Peter of the Gospe
ls." Likewise J.B. Lightfoot in his Ordination Addresses and Counsel to Cler
gy (London, 1890) defended the authenticity of the story: "Why should we not
believe it true? ... because it is so subtly true to character and because
it is so eminently profound in its significance, we are led to assign to thi
s tradition a weight which the external testimony in its favor would hardly
warrant."
In this same manner the authenticity of the Story of the Adulteress has been
maintained by some churchmen. Before its insertion into copies of the Gospe
l of John during the fourth century, this very popular story must have been
transmitted in the same way that the Quo Vadis legend was transmitted, and t
here is nothing which can be said on its behalf which cannot also be said on
behalf of the Quo Vadis legend. Yet because it obtained a place in medieval
copies of John's Gospel, the Story of the Adulteress eventually attained to
the status of Holy Scripture.
A similar case is the insertion of the Story of Susanna into the ancient Gre
ek versions of Daniel. This apocryphal story—which has much in common with
the Story of the Adulteress—was very popular among both Jews and Christians
in the first century. It is a story about a woman who was accused of adulte
ry by two men who were themselves exposed as sinners by the prophet Daniel.
David A. deSilva theorizes that, among the Jews, Susanna was at first a "fre
e-floating Hebrew story" about Daniel that "arose too late" to be included i
n the Hebrew text of Daniel. But the popularity of the story was such that i
t eventually was inserted into Greek versions of the book of Daniel in vario
us places: between chapters 12 and 14 in the Septuagint, and at the beginnin
g of the book in Theodotion's version [1] It then came to be regarded as an
integral part of the canonical Daniel by many early Christians, and it conti
nues to be regarded as such by Roman Catholics.
John Calvin, a great champion of the sola scriptura principle at the time of
the Protestant Reformation, made the following remarks on the Story of the
Adulteress in his commentary on John's Gospel:
It is plain enough that this passage was unknown anciently to the Greek Chur
ches; and some conjecture that it has been brought from some other place and
inserted here. But as it has always been received by the Latin Churches, an
d is found in many old Greek manuscripts, and contains nothing unworthy of a
n Apostolic Spirit, there is no reason why we should refuse to apply it to o
ur advantage.
Along the same line is the argument of a recent commentator, William Hendrik
sen. In his Exposition of the Gospel According to John (1953) he writes:
The story fits well into the present context ... Christ as pictured here (7:
53-8:11) is entirely in character ... though it cannot now be proven that th
is story formed an integral part of the Fourth Gospel ... we believe ... tha
t what is here recorded really took place, and contains nothing that is in c
onflict with the apostolic spirit. Hence instead of removing this section fr
om the Bible it should be retained and used for our benefit. Ministers shoul
d not be afraid to base sermons on it!
In this way we go on, preaching as Scripture a passage which has no right to
be presented as such, in the full knowledge of the fact that the story is a
bsent from the early manuscripts. This is said to be "for our benefit." Yet
the benefits of this passage are very doubtful.
The Story of the Adulteress is one of the most abused passages in all of Scr
ipture. The climactic saying of the passage, "let him who is without sin amo
ng you be the first to throw a stone," is the favorite text of those who ref
use to repent of their sins and who will not hear a word of correction from
Christian brothers. Such an attitude is actually encouraged by preachers who
liken sharp criticism of sin to the stones of the Pharisees. What else can
a preacher make of this passage in a day such as ours, after all stonings an
d all meaningful church discipline have ceased? Indeed, stonings had ceased
even in the first century, when the right of the Jews to inflict capital pun
ishment was taken away from them by the Roman authorities. It is useless to
point out that "Go and sin no more" is tacked onto the end of the story afte
r the impressive and dramatic climax of the story has done its work. This ap
ocryphal story is the central text of our debased "pop Christianity" with it
s easy-believism and its cheap grace, and it is quite possible that it was a
dded to Scripture in the fourth century with the very same thing in view —
the discouragement of all meaningful church discipline.
It was during the fourth century that the Church was established as the offi
cial religious institution of the Empire, and was promptly overwhelmed by ma
sses of unregenerate "converts." Many of those who had fallen away under the
Diocletian Persecution were seeking readmission. It was during the fourth c
entury that the Donatist controversy raged, in which decisions had to be mad
e concerning the treatment of the traditores who had denied the faith under
persecution and who had surrendered their copies of the Bible to be burned.
The Donatists said that church leaders who had done this were never again to
be trusted, and in general they tried to maintain the strict church discipl
ine of former times, against the liberalizing trends of the fourth century;
but in general the church was becoming worldly now, and increasingly lax in
maintaining moral discipline. Under the patronage of Constantine the bishops
in the larger cities lived like secular princes. Many people who perceived
that the broad Church was being seriously corrupted began to organize themse
lves into fraternities apart, and this was the beginning of the monastic ord
ers — but the Donatists rejected this course and aimed to purify the Church
itself. Constantine tried to suppress them by force. They were called schis
matics, and even branded as heretics, for trying to enforce church disciplin
e. Augustine, the famous Bishop of Hippo, wrote several treatises against th
eir attempt to purify the Church, and maintained that the Church was rightly
a mixture of "wheat and tares." At the beginning of the fifth century the D
onatist movement was finally stamped out. This is what was going on in the C
hurch during the time when the Story of the Adulteress was inserted into Joh
n's Gospel. As Raymond Brown observes, "It was only when a more liberal peni
tential practice was firmly established that this story received wide accept
ance." [2]
In discussions of the text-critical issue here, one often sees the opinion o
f Augustine quoted. In a treatise entitled De Adulterinis Conjugiis ("On Adu
lterous Marriages") written at the beginning of the fifth century, Augustine
wrote, "Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of the true fait
h, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning,
removed from their manuscripts the Lord's act of forgiveness toward the adu
lteress," and this explanation for the absence of the passage from early man
uscripts is apparently held to be credible by some. [3] But surely Augustine
's explanation is not based upon any real knowledge of the matter. He says,
"I suppose" (credo). How could he possibly have any information about the su
pposed motives of the scribe of Papyrus 66, which predates Augustine's treat
ise by two centuries? But in any case, Augustine's own motives are clear eno
ugh, because in De Adulterinis Conjugiis his purpose is to defend his sacram
ental view of marriage, in which a marriage bond is held to be indissoluble
even after the wife has committed adultery, indeed even if she continues in
this sin without repentance. Augustine maintains that the Story of the Adult
eress shows that the husband must forgive it. The husband is eternally bound
to her, Augustine says, and if he divorces her and marries another, he is a
n adulterer. The defense of this extravagant teaching is the occasion, then,
for his appeal to the Story of the Adulteress, and he calls those who rejec
ted it inimici verae fidei, "enemies of the true faith." It is yet another e
xample of how the story has lent itself to abuse, in support of unbiblical t
eachings and practices.
The comparison with the Quo Vadis legend is instructive in more ways than on
e. This old legend about Peter's martyrdom is a testimony to the earlier and
far better days of the Church, in the second and third centuries, when the
Church was truly a fellowship of the martyrs. As Peter flees from his appoin
tment with the cross Jesus meets him on the road and causes him to remember
the words, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take u
p his cross, and follow me." (Mark 8:34) This is the true apostolic spirit.
But now we are done with all that, and the church is filled with adultery.
The ministers of Christ and stewards of the Word of God should consider this
matter carefully. An adulterated Scripture goes hand-in-hand with an adulte
rated Church.
1. David A. deSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002),
pp. 235-6. deSilva also observes that "There are many folktales of 'the inno
cent woman falsely accused' and of 'the young, intelligent judge,'" citing M
. Delcor, Le livre de Daniel (Paris: Gabalda, 1971), p. 277. The major diffe
rence between Susanna and the Story of the Adulteress is that Susanna was in
nocent, but it may well be that the "Adulteress" was also innocent in an ear
lier form of the story. Eusebius, in his Church History, probably refers to
such an early form of the story when he relates that Papias (who is said to
be a disciple of the Apostle John) "put forth another history concerning a w
oman accused of many sins before the Lord; and this history is contained in
the Gospel according to the Hebrews" (iii. 39). We can well imagine some Jew
ish Christian adapting the Jewish folktale to Christian purposes by making C
hrist fill the role played by Daniel in the Story of Susanna. For the simila
rities with Susanna in the Greek Daniel see Frederick A. Schilling, "The Sto
ry of Jesus and the Adulteress," Anglican Theological Review 37 (1955), pp.
91-106.
2. Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (i-xii), in the Anchor Bib
le series (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1966), p. 335.
3. "Adulterous Marriages," translated by Charles T. Huegelmeyer, Book 2, §
7, in The Fathers of the Church: Saint Augustine: Treatises on Marriage and
Other Subjects (New York: Catholic University of America Press, 1955), p. 10
7. The original Latin text of De Adulterinis Conjugiis Book 2 §§ 6 and 7 f
rom the Nuova Biblioteca Agostiniana series reads as follows:
Quod autem tibi durum videtur, ut post adulterium reconcilietur coniugi
coniux, si fides adsit, non erit durum. Cur enim adhuc deputamus adulteros,
quos vel baptismate ablutos vel paenitentia credimus esse sanatos? Haec crim
ina in vetere Dei lege nullis sacrificiis mundabantur, quae Novi Testamenti
sanguine sine dubitatione mundantur; et ideo tunc omni modo prohibitum est a
b alio contaminatam viro recipere uxorem; quamvis David Saulis filiam, quam
pater eiusdem mulieris ab eo separatam dederat alteri, tamquam Novi Testamen
ti praefigurator sine cunctatione receperit. Nunc autem posteaquam Christus
ait adulterae: Nec ego te damnabo; vade, deinceps iam h noli peccare; quis n
on intellegat debere ignoscere maritum, quod videt ignovisse Dominum amborum
, nec se iam debere adulteram dicere, cuius paenitentis crimen divina credit
miseratione deletum?
Sed hoc videlicet infidelium sensus exhorret, ita ut nonnulli modicae fi
dei vel potius inimici verae fidei, credo, metuentes peccandi impunitatem da
ri mulieribus suis, illud, quod de adulterae indulgentia Dominus fecit, aufe
rrent de codicibus suis, quasi permissionem peccandi tribuerit qui dixit: Ia
m deinceps noli peccare, aut ideo non debuerit mulier a medico Deo illius pe
ccati remissione sanari, ne offenderentur insani. Neque enim quibus illud fa
ctum Domini displicet, ipsi pudici sunt et eos severos castitas facit; sed p
otius ex illo sunt hominum numero, quibus Dominus ait: Qui sine peccato est
vestrum, prior in eam lapidem iaciat. Nisi quod illi conscientia territi rec
esserant et temptare Christum atque adulteram persequi destiterunt; isti aut
em et aegroti medicum reprehendunt et in adulteras adulteri saeviunt: quibus
si diceretur, non quod illi audierunt: Qui sine peccato est (quis enim sine
peccato?) sed: Qui sine isto peccato est, prior in illam lapidem mittat; tu
m vero forsitan cogitarent, qui indignabantur, quod adulteram non occiderant
i, quanta illis misericordia Dei parceretur, ut adulteri viverent.
Bible Research > Textual Criticism > Story Of The Adulteress > Quo Vadis?
http://www.bible-researcher.com/quovadis.html |
|
