Bookmark and Share
My Photo


    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.


« The State and the Sacred | Main | The greatest of six poverties, according to Mother Teresa »

Wednesday, September 19, 2012


Charles E Flynn

If Jesus were married, then being a eunuch for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 19:10-12) would be something in someone else's vocation description, but not Jesus'.

Chastity for the Sake of the Kingdom, General Audience, November 16, 1994.


Story would have been much different if it was some Roman or Pharisee confirming miracles. Press would have never given it the light of day. But some obscure writing by people that were not his disciples, must be true! Dumb, but we are asleep so what does it matter. Awake oh sleeper the fields are ripe with harvest.

Ed Peters

Notwithstanding the highly shrouded provenance of the document, it is, as you say, an interesting story. What gets me, tho, is how, after 20 decades of experience with such things, so many folks still swallow pseudo-news about ancient forgeries as if the assertions made in such docs were actually true. The longevity of lies is truly amazing.

Ed Peters

CEF: Ka-ching!

Charles E Flynn

Dr. Peters,

Thank you. Coming from you, "Ka-ching!" is a most melodious sound.

David K. Monroe

I've read 3 or 4 different versions of this story, and none of them have the rest of the verse that is quoted as, "Jesus said, 'my wife...'" So, does it just cut off there or what?

Not that it detracts from the essential silliness of a fourth century fragment of a second century Gnostic "gospel" being poised to bring all Christianity tumbling down in ruins, but it would be nice to know what the context for the statement is.

Peter L

I agree with David,it is strange that only a credit card sized piece of papyrus has been offered for viewing and this piece happened to contain such earth shattering words.Where is the rest of it and why has it been hidden so long.?I think we all know the answer to that.

If you look at the piece,it is quite clear to me anyway,it has been "cut" out of a bigger piece,parchment would not separate so cleanly into a near perfect "card" sized piece on it's own.If it is an ancient text and not a sophisticated forgery,there have been plenty of those,the owner of the papyrus didn't want the rest of it to be viewed for obvious reasons.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight


Ignatius Press

Catholic World Report


Blogs & Sites We Like

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad