Mark 16 from the Sixteenth to the Nineteenth Century: Why Were the Doubts not Expressed Earlier?

Concerning the conclusio longior of the Gospel of Mark, scholars often assume that the few doubts of the Fathers ceased after Jerome and rose from the end of the eighteenth century. But a closer look at the history of the readings from the sixteenth-nineteenth leads to three findings. First, radical mistrust about Mark’s ending was formulated as early as the sixteenth century. Secondly, these reservations were expressed by a Catholic commentator, Cajetan, yet were ignored by both the Catholic and Protestant sides. Thirdly, it took almost 300 years to have these doubts heard for different reasons, but leading to the same result: the principle of sola scriptura, the competing principle of tradition, and ecclesiological concerns. This study reminds the contemporary scholars that they are not belonging to the sole rational era. Many of the hypotheses that are currently in vogue can already be found in texts from the sixteenth centuries onward. It also raises the question of the canonical text, even beyond the present day. Finally, it confirms the weight (or the burden?) of theological considerations in research, and the influence of beliefs in interpretations.