Steve Ray and the Protevangelium of James

Steve Ray’s Claims About the Apostolic Fathers and the Apocrypha

Steve Ray of Catholic convert comm is a frequent guest on Catholic answers live. And he was on again recently to discuss the Apostolic Fathers. He's put out videos about the Apostolic Fathers. He credits the Apostolic Fathers with having converted him to the Roman Catholic faith.

He puts out study guides of all sorts of things. He speaks frequently on this particular Subject. He's even written books for example upon this rock. And by the way if someone feels I'm being unfair to pick on Steve Ray you should look in here.

There's plenty of references to me in his writings, too. But how how accurate is he in his knowledge of the Apostolic Fathers?

Well.

We already documented for example errors in his part in regards to Jerome. I wouldn't consider of course Jerome an apostolic father. He's an early church father sort of. But we documented some major errors in his statements concerning the subject of the Apocrypha or the deuterocanonical Books that he went way beyond anything that any serious Student of the subject would ever say.

The Date and Content of the Protoevangelium of James

Now we've got a call here about the prote Evangelium of James and the prote Evangelium of James is According to Steve Ray in this phone call written around the beginning of the first century. The beginning of the first century would be before Jesus ministry.

So he probably meant the beginning of the second century, but even that's wrong even that is inaccurate as far as scholars are concerned the according to a clouk and the apocryphal Gospels an introduction from TNT Clark 2003 the prote Evangelium was composed between 150 and 200 in an unknown place.

Now 150 to 200 would be middle of the second century not the beginning to the end of the beginning of the third century. So no matter what he is an error on that. But listen to how he answers this question regarding the prote Evangelium of James.

Hi, thanks very much. Love the show. Thank you. Can you speak just a little bit about the proto Evangelium of James? Which I've read recently. It's a short work as you know on the early life of Mary and and I wonder.

You have to be very careful when reading them, and what can we take away from that? Or maybe better yet. What can you say that we should be we you know leery of when reading that the.

Proto-evangelium of James is the writing that was very early on probably the beginning of the first century and it tells the story of Joel came and Anna so we get the names or Mary's parents and the miraculous blade and an angel came and promised them a daughter.

And that's the story of the proto-evangelium and the early church. Believe it or not many of the early church read that right along script with other scripture of the. They would have given it the title script and determined that book was not included in there.

But the early church read it very carefully, and they gave it a very devotional and strong I think that we can read it probably as.

An.

Interesting document that probably contains a bit of truth in it, but because we don't know exactly what is okay.

And you don't know you don't have to know what the criterion was. Only reading on the new event that organ some of the places where they said that. The author did not seem to be too familiar with Jewish customs and things.

I'm just curious whether you you knew anything about what was it that made it rejected you know by that.

I don't know in that book.

Roman Catholic Scholarship on the Protoevangelium’s Historical Value

Now I like to contrast Steve Ray's assertions With the actual writings of Roman Catholic scholars here. We see the drone Bible commentary Edited by Brown and Fitzmyer two major names in Roman Catholic scholarship and on the subject the proto-evangelium of James they say We have already indicated that like other infancy Gospels this work has no real historical value in the apocryphal infancy Gospels greater imagination is given play the details the narrative become an object of interest in themselves and attention is shifted to other personages like Joseph and Mary their Proto-evangelium of James also the birth of Mary the revelation of James is the most famous of these Infancy Gospels and has had tremendous influence on popular Christianity.

Scholars have long pointed out that the author was Hopelessly inaccurate in his knowledge of Jewish customs. For instance the whole story of Mary's stay at the temple would not have been possible. Inevitably some will suggest that the use of the stories the proto-evangelium in pious literature and in the liturgy has somehow made them Historically reliable.

It is perhaps worth noting that Jerome was very critical of the proto-evangelium. Pope Innocent the first not only Rejected but also condemned the apocryphal of James as did the so-called Galatian decree in the 16th century.

Pope Pius the fifth suppressed the feast of st. Joachim and of the presentation of Mary in the temple. Although they were later restored. If the proto-evangelium is a valuable work It is not as a witness to what happened at the birth of Jesus But as a witness to Christian Marian piety in the second century.

Why the Protoevangelium Is Important for Marian Dogma, Not History

But to help you get an even better sense of just how far from Serious history the proto-evangelium of James is and by the way the reason that someone like a Steve Ray would have such a positive sense of this book is because this along with the essential Isaiah and these other second century writings are the very source of the Marian dogmas of The concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary the immaculate conception.

This is where it came from are these second third century type of very Gnostic tinge type of documents. This is the first place. We see these things showing up in almost every instance. We see these things being condemned by the Church of the day and then a thousand years later or more.

These all of a sudden become dogmas. Amazing factuality to that but just to give you the sense because most people have not read this. Here is a section from the proto-evangelium of James and it you'll even see here the sort of Non-natural birth sequence found in the proto-evangelium of James read for yourself and see if this Does not just by reading the words Demonstrate how a historical this source really is.