The Conflict between Peter and Mary, and other Issues:
Textual Comparison between selected Noncanonical Books of Early Christianity
Introduction: The Question is posed
The purpose of this essay is to look at a point made by James M. Robinson. Robinson writes in the prelude to The Gospel of Mary contained in The Nag Hammadi Library: "The confrontation of Mary with Peter, a scenario also found in The Gospel of Thomas, Pistis Sophia, and The Gospel of the Egyptians, reflects some of the tensions in second-century Christianity"(Robinson 1988:524). The words of Robinson, and the subsequent analysis and comparison, are significant to scholars of today because, our understanding of the conflicts and tensions existent in second-century Christianity is always in need of further study. This confrontation, one of Orthodox Christianity verses Gnostic traditions, and verses women in the roles of teachers, is one that is well deserved to be looked at given the works cited by Robinson, as will be seen later. To begin with, some background information on the Gospels that are compared is due.
Background on the Texts
The earliest Christians lived in a world quite different from our own. The first believers, who for the most part of the first two Centuries viewed as a Jewish sect, struggled to forge their identities (if not their very existence in the cases of Roman persecutions and Jewish and/or philosophical criticisms). They struggled to understand their place as followers of Jesus of Nazarene, The Christ, Son of God, Savior. As the Golden Age of Christianity ended and the period of living witnesses of the Christ closed, having a reliable source of His Word and teachings became increasingly important. As the various churches did not all use the same texts, the Church as a whole community needed a common list or collection of books. Just as important and necessary along with this, it had to be determined what the boundaries of the Church are. What is and is not acceptable belief and practice in order to receive Gods grace and Salvation? What is the structure of the Church? What body of literature, and the subsequent selection criteria for this body (canon), will be "Recognized?"(Eusebius III, 25 [Williamson G. A. 1989:88,89])
Nag Hammadi
As early Christians debated these issues, various schools (haireses) surfaced within the Church. Each school, and their divergent set of beliefs and practices, could be upheld by their own particular interpretations, and quite often by writing claimed to be of divinely inspired origin. A collection of some these texts was dug up in 1945, having been buried ca.400 CE, known as The Nag Hammadi Library. This collection contains no body of like-minded works one might find in a compilation of texts. Instead, these texts vary in their messages. Within the texts that are compared in this essay, for example, lie notable differences in beliefs, as well as significant variance approaches in forms of transmission. As Robinson points out, however, early Christianity saw a common thread in these works (Robinson 1988:3). They were, after all compiled into one body of writing. The underlying attribute that these books do have in common is their departure from Orthodox Christianity, as Eusebius points out (Eusebius III, 25 [Williamson G. A. 1989:88,89]). From this collection comes three of the four books examined in this essay, The Gospel of the Egyptians, The Gospel of Thomas, and The Gospel of Mary.
Pistis Sophia
The Pistis Sophia (Faith-Wisdom), a late Gnostic text, is the forth of these texts. Access to this text is limited to only the first Two books, given the College library contains no copy of it. The first 81 chapters are accessible via the Internet. This text is younger in age than the other texts. It is a product of 3rd Century Egypt, and contains, among accepted Biblical verses, instructions given to eleven disciples at the end of a twelve-year period after the Passion. Now that a brief background of the texts has been illustrated, it is time to move on to discuss Robinsons point mentioned above: the conflict between Peter and Mary in these Four gospels.
Peter and Mary
The Gospel of Mary
"Peter answered and spoke concerning these same things. He questioned them about the Saviour: Did he [Jesus] really speak with a woman without our knowledge (and) not openly? Are we to turn and listen and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?" Here, Peter seems to be calling into question two distinct parts of Marys claims. First, He questions whether Jesus would speak with one ("without our knowledge" [secretly]) who is not a member of the Apostles. This denotes a certain amount of pride on his part. "Did he prefer her to us?" This pride is responded to by Levi, ""Peter, you have always been hot-tempered. Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Saviour made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Saviour knows her very well. That is why He loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamed and put on the perfect man and acquire him for ourselves as He commanded us, ..." By this the author of the gospel is reminding its readers to be humble and follow the Saviors example. Furthermore, Levi is Reaffirming the teachings proposed by Mary by pointing out that the Savior made her worthy and He in fact loved her more than them. A second point made by this conflict is one of gender. "Are we to turn and listen and all listen to her?" It is this same passage, through Levi, that the author responds to this element. The teachings of the Savior are paramount to human opinion or tradition ("...and preach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or other law beyond what the Saviour said.").
The gospel of Thomas
The Gospel of Thomas survived in fragments before the discovery of Nag Hammadi. It was one of the first documents to be released of that collection. Its depiction of the conflict between Peter and Mary occurs in verse 114: "Simon Peter said to them, Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life. Jesus said, Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven." The tension seen in The Gospel of Mary is revisited here, but to a different end. In the above verse, Jesus response to Peter shows a lesson for females on how to reach the Kingdom of Heaven. It may be a Gnostic reference to shedding worldly distinctions in favor of returning to the Kingdom from which we came. Verse 11 is an example of this need to end such a dichotomy: "11 Jesus said, This heaven will pass away, and the one above it will pass away. The dead are not alive, and the living will not die. During the days when you ate what is dead, you made it come alive. When you are in the light, what will you do? On the day when you were one, you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?" There is a larger issue that this conflict intersects in Thomas: The treatment of gender in The gospel of Thomas. It is outside the scope and size of this essay to go into detail on the matter. See Meyer, New Testament Studies, vol. 31, 1985:554-570 for a treatment of the issue.
Pistis Sophia
In chapter 36 of the text, reference to this conflict is again seen: "Peter leapt forward, he said to Jesus: My Lord, we are not able to suffer this woman who takes the opportunity from us, and does not allow anyone of us to speak, but she speaks many times." Again as in Mary, one sees a prideful, self-importance in Peters words. This is all but ignored in Jesus response ("Jesus answered, he said to his disciples: Let him in whom the power of his Spirit has welled up so that he understands what I say, come forward and speak. ..."), choosing instead to include all who know("understands what I say") to speak. It is possible (if not likely), given the later date of this writing, that the author had access to the earlier writings referring to this conflict. The author in turn used this tension to make the above point. Indeed the fact that there is tension between Peter and Mary seems to be almost irrelevant to the further response of Jesus. The author therefor seems to be using a then known Biblical reference to teach a lesson.
The Gospel of the Egyptians
Robinsons reference to this work in regard to Peter and Mary is puzzling. There is found no reference to Peter or Mary in this work. With all due credit Robinson, the gap of several decades of experience may have caused this writer to miss an esoteric reference with the passages, but still, no reference was found. Dart, in his The Jesus of Heresy and History, also makes note of the Peter and Mary exchange. He refers to this exchange existent in The Gospel of Mary, The Gospel of Thomas, and the Pistis Sophia, but not The Gospel of the Egyptians.
It is interesting to point out, though, a significant difference in thought between The Gospel of the Egyptians, and the Pistis Sophia. The character Adamas is referred to in both works. In Egyptians, he is the "incorruptible man." In the Pistis Sophia, he is "the great tyrant." This is mentioned as a way of connecting these documents by way of subject matter failing a link through Peter and Mary. This might be an interesting topic to pursue in another paper, but for now it does not follow with this work.
Conclusion
As a final note, mention of chronology and its bearing on these texts: The Gospel of Mary and The Gospel of Thomas are both datable to the 2nd Century, while, as mentioned earlier, the Pistis Sophia dates from the 3rd Century. This would imply that the conflict, or the views of the authors held at that time, dates to the earlier century. What does this say about the role of women in early Christianity? Some scholars point out that, based on Gnostic sources such as these, the role of women and divine symbolism existed in Judeo-Christian heritage.
In conclusion, a final note on Robinson: Robinsons point that this confrontation is found in all four texts is not found and in fact contradicted by a second author, John Dart. Again, to his credit he has had much more experience with these texts than this writer and no doubt more experience than Dart. But unless this reference is made in an esoteric manner, it is not to be found. In writing this essay, I must keep in mind that the absence of finding can be just as significant than the discovery of it. Therefor, the list of texts including a reference to Peter and Mary would have to exclude The Gospel of the Egyptians for this writer. If data to the contrary exists, I do not see it. This is not a sign of insecurity, only an added word of respect to Robinson, without whose collection of writings edited this essay would have been impossible.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: WORKS CONSULTED
- Cross F. L., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed., London, Oxford University Press, 1988, pp. 204
- Dart J., The Jesus of Heresy and History, San Francisco, Harper and Row, 1988, pp.204
- Di Berardino A., Encyclopedia of the Early Church, NY, Oxford University Press, 1992, pp. 1130
- Meyer M.W. "Making Mary Male: The Categories Male and Female in the Gospel of Thomas," New Testament Studies, vol. 31, 1985, pg. 554-570
- Robinson, J. M. The Nag Hammadi Library, San Francisco, Harper and Row, 1988 pp.549
- G. A. Williamson, ed. tr. Eusebius: The History of the Church, rev.ed., A Louth, N.Y, Penguin, 1989, pp.314
- The University of Washington's Comparative Religion Page, "Comparative Religion: A Directory of Internet Resources for the Academic Study of Religion," available: http://weber.u.washington.edu/~madin/, 9/14/97
