P 75 – A
Forgery?
By William Cooper
On the 22nd of January 2007, Pope Benedict XVI was
presented with a papyrus manuscript which had hitherto been known as Bodmer
Papyrus XIV-XV, or more formally as P75. What he was receiving that day on
behalf of the Vatican Library was a papyrus containing textually corrupted
portions of the Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of John. The value of the papyrus
in the Vatican’s eyes lay in the surprising - almost verbatim - support that it
gave to the text of the Vaticanus,1 and its reception by the Vatican
was given a concomitant degree of publicity.
Here, after all, was proof for the integrity of Codex
Vaticanus sufficient for the laying of any doubts and fears on the part of all
those scholars who may have harbored misgivings about that integrity - and there
were plenty of them. However, the history of P75 (Bodmer XIV-XV) before it
arrived at the Vatican is of some interest to us, for its origins, provenance,
and acquisition are shrouded in obfuscation and ambivalence. It is a story that
needs to be told. It needs to be told because of the undeniable Jesuit
involvement in the manuscript’s acquisition, its promotion, and its all too
mysterious provenance. The story begins with one ‘Father’ Louis Doutreleau, SJ.2
Louis Doutreleau (d. 2005) was a French Jesuit priest
who was heavily involved in the work of an organization called Sources
Chrétiennes (Christian Sources), which busied - and still busies itself with the
recovery and translation of ancient patristic texts. Sources Chrétiennes was
itself founded in 1942 (a strange enterprise to begin in France whilst World War
II was at its height) by three other Jesuits, namely Jean Danielou (later
Cardinal), Claude Mondesert, and Henri de Lubac (admirer of the Jesuit mystic,
Teilhard de Chardin, and later Cardinal). So the Jesuitical background of what
follows can hardly be made clearer.
Doutreleau, for his part, busied himself for many years
as the go-between for the famous bibliophiles Chester Beatty and Martin Bodmer
in their quest for ancient papyri to stock their respective libraries, and they
would only purchase such manuscripts on Doutreleau’s recommendation. He would
tell them which papyri had become available, which ones would be of interest to
them, and what they should expect to pay, using as his middle man a Cypriot
dealer named Phokion Tano - or so he said. And so the scene was set. Doutreleau
soon became a trusted source for Chester Beatty and Bodmer libraries, and they
trusted his word - and his manuscripts - implicitly.
That is how the papyrus subsequently known as Bodmer
XIV-XV (P75) came to be included in a batch of papyri that was sold to Martin
Bodmer in Switzerland in 1952. According to Doutreleau, the papyrus was obtained
from a shadowy figure from Cairo who was known to him under the unlikely alias
of “Bey of Papyrus.” 3 Whence and from whom this man is supposed to
have obtained it has never been established, in spite of Doutreleau’s own
alleged inquiries, but it had come into Doutreleau’s hands as usual through
Phokion Tano, or so Doutreleau claimed. The shadowy details, said Doutreleau,
were a necessary device to avoid detection by the Egyptian Antiquities Authority
and police, so that the papyrus could be smuggled out of Egypt to Switzerland -
and not, as some mean-spirited readers might suppose, to conceal where it really
came from. But there is something strange going on here which we must now look
into. In concerns Papyrus P75 (Bodmer XIV-XV) and its condition when Doutreleau
sold it to Martin Bodmer.
“This very valuable
old codex was rebound in late antiquity, by pasting fragmentary leaves of the
quire together as cartonnage to thicken the leather cover, and by sewing the
binding thongs through the inner margin of the quire so near the writing that
the codex could not be opened wide enough to be actually read.”4
Hold that statement: “could not be opened wide enough to
be actually read.” How is it, then, that Doutreleau was able to commend this
papyrus and its contents to Bodmer if he could not have known what was inside
the cover? Doutreleau had to have known what was inside the binding before he
sold it to Bodmer for him to be able to tell Bodmer what it was he was buying.
After all, the undisturbed binding wasn’t dismantled until after it had come
into the Bodmer Library’s possession, and it was dismantled for the plain and
simple reason that the papyrus within could not be studied with the binding in
the way. Yet Doutreleau knew exactly what was inside that binding before it was
dismantled - a binding so tight that the papyrus within could not be read. That
is strange, very strange indeed.
Whether Martin Bodmer thought it strange is not
recorded, but he was clearly happy to purchase it anyway. After all, here were
allegedly the earliest fragments of Luke and John ever discovered (being
arbitrarily dated - by whom we don’t know - to AD 175- 225), being thus some two
centuries or more older than Vaticanus’s alleged 4th century date, and moreover
containing overall the same adulterated Alexandrian text as Vaticanus. 5
Thus, Papyrus Bodmer XIV-XV was announced to the world as the authority that put
all doubts about Vaticanus to rest. The death knell of the Received Text was
being rung out at last.
But the story doesn't end there. The papyrus was
purchased from the Martin Bodmer trust for a “significant sum” by the
entrepreneur Frank J. Hanna III, it in all innocence to the Vatican as a gift
for their library. It is now known under a third designation: the Mater Verbi
Papyrus. How it made its way from Switzerland to Rome, though, is a story in
itself. Dated the 5th of March 2007, Discovery News issued the following
bulletin:
“11.8 excerpts may be
put on display for the general public. Collectively known as the Bodmer Papyrus
XIV-XV, the documents date to 175-225 AD and consist of 51 leaves from a manu
script that originally consisted of 72 leaves folded in the middle to form a
single quire, according to Fa ther Richard Danahoe, rector of the Cathedral of
St. Paul in Birmingham, Alabama, who also helped with the acquisition. “The
papyrus authenticates that which has been passed down over the millenia,” Fr.
Donahoe told Discovery News. He believes it is even possible the texts may have
been copied from the original gospels… The papyrus was mysteriously smuggled to
Switzerland, where collector Martin Bodmer purchased it… With drama befitting a
Dan Brown novel, the papyrus was transported from Switzerland to the Vatican.
“An armed motorcade surrounded by people with machine guns picked up the texts,”
said Krupp, the only Jewish man to have ever been twice knighted by two popes.
Donahoe added, “The materials were carried in the passenger section of a public
plane that had some seats re moved. Officers then escorted it to the Vatican.”
Donahoe believes the papyrus has now come full circle. He said, “It has been a
pilgrimage, a holy journey, to bring the texts back to the church, back to their
proper home.” 6
Any Christian reader musts have wondered at the time
what possible part machine guns could play in the protection and preservation of
the Word of God, and with equal misgivings must have asked themselves what was
meant by the statement that papyrus had “come full circle.” Now to come full
circle, an item must end up in the same place where it began, in this case the
Vatican. Now what are we supposed to conclude from such a statement as that?
What we know for certain is that the Jesuits had an
active interest in promoting Codex Vaticanus even before Tischendorf set out on
his Sinaiticus quest. Then, about a hundred years later, when Codex Vaticanus
was wanting serious backup for the claims that were being made about it, a
papyrus emerges onto the world scene that exactly answers the need. It came onto
the scene via the Jesuit Doutreleau, a man who had taken and who lived by the
fearful Jesuit oath. He belonged to an international and very powerful body -
the so-called Society of Jesus - whose entire history is soaked in subterfuge,
subversion, forgery, and even murder and the making of wars. He could only give
a most unsatisfactory account of how he came by the document, or even from
whence it came, yet he knew exactly what was inside the cover of the papyrus
before that cover was even removed.
What happened to the papyrus collection containing
Bodmer XIV-XV on arrival at the Bodmer Library is itself an appalling record.
Speaking in particular of the papyrus known as Bodmer XXII, containing
Lamentations, an apocryphal Epistle of Jeremiah, and Baruch, Robinson tells us
this:
“...Bodmer sent it to
Zurich (where he had business interests) to have it relaxed and photo graphed;
somehow Bodmer’s son was involved. The relaxing and ‘consolidation’ was very
crudely done, with a hot iron in fact, with resulting splits in the parchment
leaves; folds in some leaves were pressed into overlaps with resulting loss of
letters; and the photos were made by a newspa per photographer, rather poorly.
This is the ‘year of disappearance’ to which Kasser later alluded, I believe.
His allusion was purposely obscure be cause he did not want to offend Bodmer…
whom he thought to have acted incompetently.”7
Incompentence? Or a deliberate attempt to give a
recently forged document an appearance of age? When an established, professional
library starts taking a hot iron to its ‘ancient’ papyri (and a ten-year old
would know better than to do such a thing), then suspicions must be surely
abound. No man in his right mind would even think of placing a hot iron on such
fragile and unique documents, and then to have them photographed ‘poorly’ in
black and white by a professional photographer who was well equipped enough and
who would certainly have known how to take a good photograph. The whole episode
stinks, and gives the guilty parties a ready answer for any who would dare to
question the age of these papyri. They cannot be tested because they were
spoiled by incompetent librarians who seem to have thought they were doing the
laundry. Even C14 dating would be useless on papyri that have been heated and
pressed under the application of a hot iron. Incompetence? No. The Bodmer
Library’s technicians are by no means incompetent.
In all, it is plain that the world of Bible scholarship
has yet again suffered a massive deception. The execution of it was simple
enough. The organization to which Doutreleau belonged, the Jesuit-run Sources
Chrétiennes, whether it knew what was happening or not, had scholars enough
within its ranks who were sufficiently expert in Greek uncial calligraphy of the
2 nd -3 rd centuries to carry out such a forgery, and blank sheets of papyrus of
that age may be had in plenty. There’s no shortage of the stuff. Besides, even
modern papyrus can be given a convincing appearance of age, especially when its
appearance is published through poor-quality black and white photographs. How
simply the forgery was done, and what a colossal impact it has had on Bible
apologetics and criticism, will not be known this side of eternity. But now, and
on the strength of this one papyrus alone (P75 = Bodmer XIV-XV), scholars are
convinced that Codex Vaticanus holds the authentic text of the New Testament
when, in reality, nothing could be further from the truth.8 It was
and remains a massive deception.
More recently, in 2012, the world was regaled by the
announcement that a papyrus has surfaced which spoke of Jesus having a wife,
and, not surprisingly, it tumbled onto the world stage under the name of The
Gospel of Jesus’ Wife. The place of its launch into the public arena was Rome
during a conference at the Vatican. But why is that also not a surprise? When
asked where it came from, the official answer was from ‘a private collector in
Germany who wishes to remain anonymous.’ Of course. But the question is, why
should this papyrus fragment have surfaced at all, and at such a time?
Dan Brown’s blasphemous novel, The Da Vinci Code, which
spoke fictitiously of the bloodline of a Jesus wedded to Mary Magdalene, was
still bringing in much-wanted public interest and cash to the Vatican, and many
people around the world (aided by an uninformed and gullible press) were buying
into the idea of a married Jesus. So hey, presto, an ancient-looking papyrus
fragment depicting Jesus as speaking of His wife, appears just in time.
Eventually, of course, the papyrus came to be examined,
and the only marvel was the number of faults and errors it contained - not to
mention its appalling handwriting. To begin with, and quite apart from the fact
that its provenance was ‘unknown,’ its appearance was highly suspicious. It has
a nice straight edge along the top, with no upper margin which would normally
have been provided to protect the writing from damage due to wear and tear, and
its size and shape was that of any business card. The language it was written in
pretended to be Sahidic Coptic written in Greek characters, yet its grammar and
spelling were all over the place. Its text was actually a reworking of many
phrases contained in the gnostic Gospel of Thomas as posted online where it is
known as the Grondin Interlinear, and hilariously, in one of its words, the
fragment was seen for the nonsense that it was.9 Not that it will be
the last attempt to deceive the world by defaming the Word of God. There will
doubtless be many others. This is merely the latest in a very long line of
Vatican forgeries, stretching back all the way to the fourth century AD.
[Excerpted with permission from The Forging of Codex
Sinaiticus by Dr. William R. Cooper]
Endnotes
1. “The Bodmer Papyrus, dated around the year 175, is
the oldest extant copy of parts of the Gospels of John and Luke. Discovered in
Egypt in the early 1950s, the papyrus influenced the course of biblical
scholarship. When scholars saw such remarkable agreement between the texts, they
had to acknowledge that the fourth-century Codex Vaticanus, the oldest complete
version of the gospel, was indeed authentic.” - http://
solidarityassociation.com/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=233:bodmerpapyrus&Itemid=249.
2. The full story is told in great detail by Robinson:
The Story of the Bodmer Papyri - see Bibliography. The letters ‘SJ’ stand for
Society of Jesus - the Jesuits in other words.
3. Ibid., p. 41.
4. Ibid., p. 156.
5. See Edwards, Sarah A. ‘P 75 under the Magnifying
Glass.’ Novum Testamentum. Vol. 18, Fasc. 3 (Jul., 1976). Pp. 190-212.
6. http://www.meta-religion.com/Archaeology/Israel/
earliest_gospels.htm—which merely reproduces the Discovery News bulletin from:
http://dsc.dicovery.com/ news/2007/03/05/gospel_arc.html?
category=archaeology&guid=20070305094530.
7. Robinson, James. The Story of the Bodmer Papyri. pp.
19-20.
8. For a technical in-depth assessment of Codex
Vaticanus, it is instructive to consult Hoskier’s Codex B and its Allies: A
Study and an Indictment. 1914. 2 vols. London.
9. For an examination of the fragment, see:
DiazMontexano, Georgeos. “Mary, Jesus’ Wife”: A IV Century Coptic Papyrus - True
or False? 2012. (tr. Cesar Guarde). Printed by Amazon.co.uk Ltd.
Dean Burgon Society News – June 2019 – Issue 119