The Skeptic: A Deep Dive into Chapter Four of "The Secret Gospel of Mark" by Brett Landau and Geoffrey Smith

In 1973, Morton Smith published his extensive research on the discovery he made at Mar Saba, under the title Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark, with Harvard University Press. Concurrently, he released a more accessible version of his findings titled The Secret Gospel through Harper & Row. These publications brought his discovery out of the shadows of private correspondence and into the public eye, allowing scholars and the general public to scrutinize his work. However, access to the physical manuscript remained elusive, primarily due to its storage in the remote monastery of Mar Saba, deepening the mystery and skepticism surrounding Smith’s find.

The Discovery and Its Limited Access

Smith's discovery, a letter attributed to Clement of Alexandria, was peculiar in many respects. The manuscript was not found in a traditional codex or papyrus but was instead written on the endpages of a 17th-century book. This unusual preservation method raised eyebrows and fueled doubts. Scholars faced significant challenges in accessing the physical manuscript. Mar Saba's secluded location and the bureaucratic complexities of gaining permission to study manuscripts in such ancient, private collections added to the hurdles. Even Smith himself had gained access to Mar Saba through his contributions to the resettlement of Orthodox Christian refugees, illustrating the difficulties involved.

The primary sources available for study were the black-and-white photographs Smith took of the manuscript, which were included in his Harvard volume. Critics, however, questioned why Smith did not use color photography, despite black and white being a common choice for better contrast between ink and writing surface. Additionally, Harvard University Press cropped the photos, making it impossible to see the edges of the pages, a decision that further fueled skepticism.

Enter Quentin Quesnell: The First Accusation of Forgery

Quentin Quesnell, a rising scholar in biblical studies and theology, became the first to accuse Smith of forging the manuscript. His initial contact with Smith was a seemingly innocuous request for information about the Greek manuscript catalogue where Smith discussed the Clement letter. Smith responded promptly and generously, providing photocopies of the relevant pages from his personal copy. Quesnell's subsequent letter, however, revealed a series of questions that hinted at deeper suspicions. He inquired about the current status of the manuscript, any scientific tests conducted on it, and whether Smith had considered the possibility of it being a modern forgery.

Despite Smith's cordial and detailed responses, Quesnell had already formed the belief that the manuscript was a forgery. This culminated in his 1975 article in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly titled "The Mar Saba Clementine: A Question of Evidence," where he alleged that Smith's discovery was, in fact, a 20th-century forgery.

Quesnell’s Criticisms and Smith's Defense

Quesnell's primary criticism was that Smith failed to adequately document his discovery. He argued that Smith had a responsibility to ensure that the evidence was secure and accessible for other scholars to verify. Quesnell pointed to several issues: the use of black-and-white instead of color photographs, the cropping of the photos, and the absence of corroboration from other scholars who had examined the original manuscript.

Smith, in his defense, highlighted the practical challenges he faced. The remote location of Mar Saba and the limited scientific equipment available at the monastery made comprehensive testing difficult. Additionally, Smith was constrained by the political situation, as Mar Saba was under Jordanian control in 1958, and transferring the manuscript to Jerusalem for testing was not feasible. Smith's responses to Quesnell's questions emphasized these practical limitations.

The Forgery Hypothesis and the Motive

Quesnell suggested that the Mar Saba manuscript was forged between 1936 and 1958, based on the availability of Otto Stählin’s concordance of Clement’s writings. He speculated that the forger, whom he implicitly identified as Smith, might have created the manuscript as a controlled experiment to test scholarly reactions to new evidence. This hypothesis was based on Smith's own writings, where he expressed skepticism about scholars' abilities to interpret new data objectively.

Interestingly, Quesnell did not heavily focus on the physical characteristics of the manuscript to support his forgery claim. Instead, he pointed to Smith's dedications in his books, particularly the cryptic dedication in Secret Gospel to "THE ONE WHO KNOWS," as potential hints of a hoax. Quesnell's article thus straddled the line between raising methodological concerns and insinuating that Smith had deliberately planted a forgery.

The Hidden Motive: Homoeroticism and the Secret Gospel

While Quesnell’s published work emphasized methodological issues, private correspondence and early reviews reveal another underlying concern: the homoerotic undertones in the Secret Gospel. The text’s suggestion that Jesus engaged in intimate nocturnal initiation rites with a young man troubled many, including Quesnell. His review in the National Catholic Reporter highlighted this discomfort, suggesting that Smith's interpretation aimed to scandalize and challenge conventional Christian beliefs.

The Broader Impact and Continuing Controversy

Quesnell’s accusations, although not immediately gaining widespread acceptance, laid the groundwork for future skepticism. Scholars remained divided, with some supporting Quesnell’s forgery hypothesis and others defending Smith. The debate intensified in the 1990s when Jacob Neusner, a former protégé of Smith, publicly declared the Secret Gospel to be a forgery. Neusner’s harsh criticism, driven partly by a personal falling out with Smith, added fuel to the ongoing controversy.

Despite the heated debates and accusations, the Secret Gospel of Mark remains a fascinating and enigmatic artifact. The complexities of its discovery, the challenges in verifying its authenticity, and the intense scholarly debates it sparked highlight the intricacies and passions involved in the study of ancient manuscripts and early Christian history.

Conclusion

Chapter Four of Brett Landau and Geoffrey Smith's The Secret Gospel of Mark offers a compelling account of the skepticism and controversy that surrounded Morton Smith's discovery. Quentin Quesnell's role as the first scholar to publicly accuse Smith of forgery set the stage for decades of debate. Whether viewed as a remarkable find or a sophisticated hoax, the Secret Gospel of Mark continues to captivate scholars and challenge our understanding of early Christianity.