Page:The Apocryphal Acts of Paul, Peter, John, Andrew and Thomas.djvu/142



Bardenhewer, Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, I (1902), 437–442.

Schmidt, Die Alten Petrusakten, 1903 (see Johannes-Akten in the index).

Schimmelpfeng-Hennecke in Hennecke, Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, 1904, 423–459; also in Hennecke, ''Handbuch su den Neutest. Apokryphen'', 1904, 492-543.

Leipoldt, ''Geschichte des Neutest. Kanons'', I (1907), 262 ff.

Bardenhewer, Patrology, p. 105 f.

The Acts of John, which have been made use of by the author of the Acts of Peter and Thomas, belong to the second century, perhaps to 150–180 A. D. According to Nicephorus, the Acts of John comprised twenty-five hundred stichoi, or lines, or about the same space as our present Matthew-Gospel occupies. Unless there is a mistake, we have about two-thirds of the whole, and it may be said that of all the Gnostic Acts these seem to have left the greatest traces on Church tradition. As author the name of Leucius is generally connected with the Acts of John, for he seems to have been a companion and an attendant on that apostle (comp. c. 18 ff., 60-62, 73, 111, 115). Several traditions concerning John, which are mentioned by very early writers, agree so closely with what we know to have been told in the Gnostic Acts as to favor the idea that these Acts may have been the original source of these traditions. But this account cannot be given of all the stories told about this apostle. For instance, the beautiful story of John and the robber appears to have been derived by Clement of Alexandria (Quis dives salv., 42) from some different source; for later Christian writers, who show independent knowledge of other things contained in the Leucian Acts, appear to have known for this story no other authority than Clement.

The Leucian Acts came under discussion at the Second Council of Nicæa, in 787. They had been appealed to by the Iconoclasts. In order to discredit their authority, passages from these Acts were read to the council to exhibit