Little is recorded of St.
Thomas the Apostle,
nevertheless thanks to the fourth
Gospel his personality
is clearer to us than that of some others of the Twelve. His name occurs
in all the lists of the Synoptists (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6, cf. Acts 1:13), but in
St. John he plays a
distinctive part. First, when Jesus announced His intention of returning to
Judea to visit Lazarus,
"Thomas" who is called Didymus [the twin], said to his fellow disciples: "Let us
also go, that we may die with him" (John 11:16). Again
it was St.
Thomas who during the discourse before the Last Supper raised an
objection: "Thomas saith to him: Lord,
we know not whither thou
goest; and how can we know the way?" (John 14:5). But
more especially St. Thomas
is remembered
for his incredulity when the other Apostles announced Christ's Resurrection to
him: "Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my
finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into his side, Iwill not believe" (John 20:25); but
eight days later he made his act of faith, drawing down the
rebuke of Jesus:
"Because thou hast seen me, Thomas,
thou hast believed; blessed are they that
have not seen, and have believed" (John 20:29).
This exhausts all our certain
knowledge regarding
the Apostle
but his name is the starting point of a considerable apocryphal literature,
and there are also certain
historical data which suggest that some
of this apocryphal
material may contains germs of truth. The principal
document concerning him is the "Acta Thomae", preserved to us with some variations
both in Greek and in Syriac,
and bearing unmistakeable signs
of its Gnostic origin.
It may indeed be the work of Bardesanes
himself. The story in many of its particulars is utterly extravagant,
but it is the early date, being assigned by Harnack (Chronologie, ii, 172) to
the beginning of the third century, before A. D. 220. If
the place of its origin is really Edessa,
as Harnack and others for sound reasons
supposed (ibid., p. 176), this would lend considerable probability to the
statement, explicitly made in "Acta"
(Bonnet, cap. 170,p.286), that the relics of Apostle Thomas,
which we know to have
been venerated at Edessa,
had really come from the East. The extravagance
of the legend may be judged from the
fact that in more than one place (cap. 31, p. 148) it represents Thomas
(Judas Thomas, as he is called here and elsewhere in Syriac
tradition) as the twin brother of Jesus. The Thomas
in Syriac is equivalant
to didymos in Greek, and
means twin. Rendel Harris who exaggerates very
much the cult of the Dioscuri,
wishes to regards this as a transformation of a pagan worship
of Edessa
but the point is at best problematical. The story itself
runs briefly as follows: At the division of the Apostles, India fell to the lot of Thomas,
but he declared his inability to go, whereupon his Master Jesus appeared in a supernatural way to Abban, the envoy of Gundafor, an Indian king, and
sold Thomas to him to be his slave and serve Gundafor as a carpender.
Then Abban and Thomas sailed away
until they came to Andrapolis,
where they landed and attended the marriage
feast of the
ruler's daughter. Strange occurences
followed and Christ
under the appearance of Thomas exhorted the bride to remain
a Virgin. Coming to India Thomas
undertook to build a palace for Gundafor,
but spend the money entrusted to him on the poor. Gundafor imprisoned him; but the Apostle escaped miraculously and Gundafor was converted. Going about
the country to preach, Thomas met with strange adventures
from dragons and wild asses. Then he came to the city of King
Misdai (Syriac Mazdai),
where he converted
Tertia the wife of Misdai and Vazan
his son. After this he was condemed to death,
led out of city to a hill, and pierced through with spears by four soldiers. He
was buried in the tomb of the ancient kings
but his remains were
afterwards removed to the West.
Now it is certainly a remarkable fact that about the
year A.D. 46 a king was reigning over that part of Asia south of Himalayas
now represented by Afghanistan,
Baluchistan,
the Punjab, and Sind, who bore the name Gondophernes or Guduphara.
This we know both from
the discovery of coins,
some of the Parthian type with Greek
legends, others of the Indian types
with the legends in an Indian dialect
in Kharoshthi characters. Despite
sundry minor
variations the identity of the name with the Gundafor
of the "Acta Thomae"
is unmistakable and is hardly disputed. Further
we have the evidence of the Takht-i-Bahi
inscription, which is dated and which the best
specialists accept as establishing the King Gunduphara probably began to reign about A.D. 20
and was still reigning in 46. Again there are excellent reasons
for believing that Misdai or Mazdai
may well be transformation of a Hindu name made on the Iranian
soil. In this case it will probably represent a certain
King Vasudeva
of Mathura,
a successor of Kanishka.
No doubt it can be
urged that the Gnostic
romancer who wrote the "Acta
Thomae" may have adopted
a few historical Indian names to lend verisimilitude
to his fabrication, but as Mr. Fleet
urges in his severely critical paper "the names put
forward here in connection with St.Thomas
are distinctly not such as have lived in Indian story and tradition"
(Joul. of R. Asiatic Soc.,1905,
p.235).
On the other hand, though the tradition that St.
Thomas preached in "India" was widely spread in both East
and West and is to be found in such writers as Ephraem Syrus,
Ambrose, Paulinus, Jerome, and, later Gregory of Tours and
others, still it is difficult to discover any adequate support for the long-accepted
belief that St.
Thomas pushed his missionary journeys as far
south as Mylapore, not far from Madras, and there
suffered martyrdom. In
that region is still to be found a granite bas-relief cross
with a Pahlavi (ancient Persian)
inscription dating from the seventh
century, and the tradition that it was here that St.
Thomas laid down his life is locally very
strong. Certain it is also that on the Malabar or west
coast of southern India
a body of Christians
still exists using a form
of Syriac for its liturgical language.
Whether this Church
dates from the time
of St. Thomas the Apostle (there was a Syro-Chaldean bishop John
"from India and Persia" who assisted
at the Council of Nicea in 325) or whether the Gospel
was first preached there in 345 owing to the Persian
persecution under Shapur (or Sapor),
or whether the Syrian
missionaries who accompanied a certain Thomas
Cana penetrated to the Malabar coast about the
year 745 seems difficult to determine. We know only that in the
sixth century Cosmas Indicopleustes speaks
of the existence
of Christians at Male
(? Malabar)
under a bishop who had
been consecrated in Persia. King Alfred the Great is
stated in the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" to have
sent an expedition to establish relations
with these Christians
of the Far East. On the other hand
the reputed relics of St.
Thomas were certainly at Edessa
in the fourth century, and there they remained until they were translated to Chios
in 1258 and towards to Ortona.
The improbable suggestion that St.
Thomas preached in America
(American Eccles. Rev., 1899, pp.1-18) is based upon a misunderstanding
of the text of the Acts of Apostles (i, 8; cf. Berchet
"Fonte italiane
per la storia della scoperta
del Nuovo
Mondo", II, 236, and I, 44).
Besides the "Acta Thomae" of which a different and notably
shorter redaction exists in Ethiopic and Latin,
we have an abbreviated
form of a so-called "Gospel of Thomas"
originally Gnostic, as
we know it now merely
a fantastical history of the childhood
of Jesus, without any
notably heretical colouring. There is also a "Revelatio Thomae",
condemned as apocryphal
in the Degree of Pope Gelasius,
which has recently been recovered from various sources in a fragmentary
condition
(see the full text in the Revue benedictine, 1911, pp. 359-374).
From: www.newadvent.org