WHAT ARE THE APOCRYPHA AND THE D

WHAT ARE THE APOCRYPHA AND THE DA VINCI CODE CLAIMS?

Presbytera Eugenia Constantinou

In general, "apocrypha" refers to books that were rejected from the canon of Scripture. But the term has different meanings depending upon if it is applied to the Old or New Testaments and whether Catholics, Protestants or Orthodox Christians use it.

lThe Term Apocrypha in the Old Testament

Regarding the Old Testament, originally all Christians had the same canon (list of books) of the Old Testament, the Greek version of the Jewish Scriptures known as the "Septuagint" (LXX), The Septuagint was widely considered by the earliest Christians to be an inspired translation and was the Old Testament of the Church. The Latin translation of the Bible (called the "Vulgate," which originated with St. Jerome around the year 400) also included books found in the Septuagint. Around 100 AD the Jews rejected the Septuagint Greek translation in favor of using Hebrew only, primarily because Christians used the LXX, The rejection included about 10 books and portions of books found in the LXX but that hadn't been in use by Hebrew speaking Jews in Palestine. The Christians continued to use the complete LXX, since the apostles used it. The Greek LXX (in the East) and the Latin Vulgate (in the West) were the undisputed versions of the Christian Old Testament for about 1,500 years.

But in the 16th century some Protestant reformers, such as Martin Luther, decided that the additional Old Testament books that formed part of the LXX but not used by Jews should not be in the Bible, since the Jews had decided not to include them. Luther first separated and later removed these from his German version of the Bible in 1534 and called them apocrypha, since he determined they should not be part of the canon of Scripture. That term is used to designate books rejected from the canon of Scripture.

The Catholic Church, in response, affirmed the inspiration of these books at the Council of Trent (1545), but called them deutero-canonical, which means they have a secondary status, but are still scriptural. However, for the Orthodox Church, these 10 books of the Old Testament, which Protestants call "apocrypha" and Catholics call "deutero-canonical" have always been and still remain canonical Scripture. The Protestant Old Testament canon contains the fewest books, just 39. Since Protestants publish most English-language Bibles, these books are usually omitted from the Bible entirely or are found in a separate section in the back of the Bible or between the two Testaments. If it is a Catholic Bible, such as the New American Bible or the Jerusalem Bible, most of these books are incorporated without distinction into the Old Testament, but not all of them. Thus, Orthodox Christians have the oldest and most complete canon of the Old Testament, 49 books.

The Term Apocrypha with regard to the New Testament

The canon of the New Testament is the same for all but a tiny minority of Christians: 27 books. In the case of the New Testament and for Orthodox Christians, the term apocrypha refers to ancient writings that falsely claimed to be written by apostles and by other disciples of the Lord. These books were rejected by the Church as counterfeit writings in the third and fourth centuries and were not included among the books of the New Testament because they were spurious and unauthentic. In fact, no Christians accept these books as genuine. These books appeared on the scene too late to have been actually written by any apostle. Some also contain passages that were used to promote false teachings (heresy), which indicates that heretics composed them.

What about "secret" writings that were suppressed, as claimed by The Da Vinci Code?

The word apocrypha means hidden. (Perhaps this is where the author_. of The Da Vinci Code got his ideas.) People who wrote these counterfeit books had a problem: how to get people to read the books. Why would anyone read these books when Christians already had a New Testament? To encourage people to read these counterfeit Christian books (apocrypha) that came into existence much later than the genuine books, people claimed the apocrypha were written by the apostles and contained hidden or secret teachings of Jesus available only to an elite few. (This is something like enticing people to participate in a financial scam where they are promised that only a few will be allowed "in" on the secret of how to get rich.)

The authors of these counterfeit books wrote them to promote their heresies, such as Gnosticism. Gnosticism was a serious problem in the early Church. Gnostics denied the human nature of Christ. They said that Christ was only divine, one of many divine beings that exist. He only seemed to be human and only seemed to die on the cross. This heresy is called "Docetism," from the Greek word dokeo "to seem" or "to appear." Gnostics claimed that Jesus did not come to earth to die of the salvation of human beings. He came to earth to reveal secret knowledge about how to get to heaven to a few elite "spiritual" disciples. The only people who could go to heaven were those who had acquired the secret knowledge (gnosis).

How does this compare to what we know about the Lord? On the contrary, the Lord made a point of having a very public ministry. To say that people were saved only by secret knowledge would be to make His whole life and teachings a lie, as well as making the existence and purpose of the Christian Church entirely pointless. In fact, the Lord stated that He taught nothing secretly. When He was brought to the high priest Annas, who questioned Him about His teachings, the Lord replied, "I have spoken spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing secretly. Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me what I said to them. They know what I said" (John. 18:2021). For this reply a guard struck the Lord.

The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction, but the author claims it is based on fact. However, its details are factually untrue or the interpretation or meaning he gives them are untrue. His skill as a writer and his obvious anti-Christian and anti-Catholic agenda has led many people to question their faith and to at least wonder whether the book is true. The author says that the powerful interests in the Catholic Church -- "The Vatican" — suppressed information about Christ. First, the Catholic Church did not exist as a separate entity until the 11th century. The powerful and highly organized Vatican he describes did not evolve until even later than that. Secondly, in the first centuries of Christianity, the Church did not have the type of organization or centralized leadership, such as the modern papacy, which would make possible the suppression of details about the life of Christ.

The author claims the Church concealed the fact that Jesus was married and had children. It also claims that Mary Magdalene was the chief apostle and that Jesus was an ordinary human being, not divine at all. It should be noted there would have been no reason for the Church to hide a marriage of Jesus, were it true. Marriage is not a sin. Had Jesus been married there would have been nothing sinful in that or in his having children. The baby and the marital relationship, had it been true, far from being hidden would have been extremely important in the early Church, just as His mother was extremely important in the early Church. Jesus would have presumably been the model of a married man, rather than the model of a celibate man. Christians would have been accustomed to the idea. In truth and fact, Jesus never married because He knew the purpose of His coming to earth was to die on the cross and He was completely devoted to this purpose. There would have been no point in getting married.

Could the Church have suppressed such information if it wanted to do so?

No, it would have been impossible for the Church to erase or expunge every writing that would have made mention of Jesus being married or having a child because that type of centralized control never existed in the early Church.

It also would have been impossible because books were hand-copied in antiquity and there was no control over the process of who copied books and who acquired them.

Could The Da Vinci Code claims be true nonetheless? Is there any evidence that Jesus was married?

There are many, many Christian writings of different types from the end of the first century through the second century and beyond - and none of these ever mention Jesus being married or having a child. Even the apocryphal gospels of the third and fourth centuries never mention anything like that. This idea is entirely imaginary.

The author of The Da Vinci Code also claims that Mary Magdalene was the leading apostle. First, be aware there is a strong feminist movement pushing this idea as part of a larger agenda, along with the idea that God is male-female and that the Church is somehow anti-female. But, in fact, women had important leadership positions in the early Church, including that of "apostle." But the term apostle had a wider meaning in the early Church. The Greek word apostle apostelos means "one who is sent." Jesus sent many people to preach, not simply The Twelve.

The term apostle as used in the early Church meant someone who had been part of the earthly ministry of Church before the crucifixion and who had also witnessed Him after the Resurrection alive again. (See Romans 16:7 for mention of apostles who are not among The Twelve). Apostle was not used to mean what it does today, a term synonymous with The Twelve. In fact, the Bible calls The Twelve simply that, "The Twelve" (See Luke 22:3, John 20:24. In Luke 22:33 he calls them "the Eleven," without Judas). Since apostle did not mean The Twelve as it does for us today, it is correct to say that women, such as Mary Magdalene, Fotini (the Samaritan woman at the well), and Junia, mentioned in Romans 16:7 were among the female apostles of the early Church.

Is there any hinted conspiracy behind the Last Supper painting by Leonardo Da Vinci? The author of The Da Vinci Code claims that one of the figures portrayed among The Twelve was a woman. The obvious and simple answer is that Leonardo Da Vinci would have had absolutely no historical knowledge of what first century Jewish garments looked like. Ancient Jews did not create paintings or statues, so Leonardo relied solely on his imagination in his painting. There is nothing historical about the painting, including what was on the table or even the fact that The Twelve are seated around a table.

Eugenia Constantinou is currently an adjunct professor at the University of San Diego and a former professor of New Testament at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology. She is currently completing her doctoral dissertation on "The Interpretation of the Book of Revelation in the Ancient Church of the East" at Universit^é Laval, Canada.