Clarifying notes, for the common inquirer, as concerning our Faith's utilization of certain fragmented texts are as follows:
Gospel of James: As it is wholly unclear to which "letter" by James Origen refers, but the Apocryphon/"Secret Book" clearly begins with an address and ends with an benediction, we purport that this text is the superior choice: The Protoevangelium of James does not, in any wise, discuss conceptually meaningful content in regards to Salvation; the Protoevangelium serves only as a mythos concerning the origin of Mary and Joseph — whereas, the Apocryphon deals directly with salvational awares in an epistle format. Empty Church tradition fails in the face of employed Logos upon the matter: This is self-evidential and corroborates Origen's contextual claims.
Gospel of Peter: As fragments of Peter's Works are found related, we have opted to treat the primary and secondary Fragments as two halves of an whole to best serve greatest considerations by the inquirer; The Gospel According to Peter is joined with the Apocalypse of Peter to allow for a full text from which to derive information dealing with the death (former Work) and resurrection (latter Work) of the Christ per Peter's accounts. Origen expressly states that these accounts were, in fact, divinely inspired (though, like all of his suppositions, he fails to substantiate them beyond deference to Apostolic ethos or unfounded pathos).
(Other Works mentioned by Apostolic Successive figures, but lost to us in the present: Gospel of Basilides, Gospel of The Twelve, Gospel of Matthias, Gospel of the Hebrews / Gospel of the Nazoreans)
