« ÎnapoiContinuă »
Thou art Peter") unsuited apparently to this significant occasion, and unworthy, it seems, of the uniform dignity of Jesus.
II. "I will build my church": apart from the appearance here of the rare term ekkλŋoía, there is a concreteness of conception about ἐκκλησία, the future, and an obtrusion of the personal element, which stand opposed to the body of Jesus' utterances about the society of his followers and his part in its future. The sense in which Jesus could have intended that the movement initiated by himself should be grounded upon another is difficult to apprehend; that there should grow up an effort, after Jesus, to locate primacy among men within the circle of his earliest followers is natural, if not inevitable.
12. The whole passage has limited intelligibility, and makes large demands for interpretative expedients, when taken as from Jesus; it is transparent in the light of human ambition, exhibited in the historical development of a new community.
Howbeit, after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.
E Compare portion G.
And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, that thou to-day, even this night, before the cock crow twice, shalt deny me thrice.
GOSPEL LK 22:31-34
A Simon, Simon, behold, Satan asked to have you, that he might sift you as wheat:
H And in like manner also
but I made supplication for thee, that thy faith fail not: and do thou, when once thou hast turned again, stablish thy brethren.
And he said unto him, Lord, with thee I am ready to go both to prison and to death.
But he spake G Compare portion E.
Compare the tendency toward personalizing sayings of Jesus as exhibited in
gospel LK 21:14, 15, the rewriting of document MK 13:11.
The above paragraph is brought under examination in the present study solely because of the content of the portion C, which contains the words of future outlook, "when once thou hast turned again, stablish thy brethren." These words, it will be observed, are peculiar to the Lukan account.
The evangelist Matthew has used his document MK in this paragraph with notable fidelity in the details; the departures of the Lukan account are of an unusually marked character. From the evidences here and contiguous to this paragraph in Luke, it may be surmised that Luke is using some minor source on the history of Passion Week. It is not important to determine, were that possible, whether it is a case of gospel against document or document against document in the comparison of the Lukån and Markan records in the above paragraph. That they are two records of one event seems clear; the internal evidence may be examined to determine which of the two is more consistent and original.
Except for the opening assertion to Peter in the portion A, "asked to have you (vμâs) that he might sift you," the Lukan narrative has to do wholly with one person, the man Peter. And even that statement about the Twelve is addressed to Peter alone. In document MK, on the contrary, Jesus speaks to the whole company, "All ye shall be offended," and, though Peter is the most outspoken of them, it is recorded that all assured Jesus of their faithfulness-"And in like manner also said they all." The remark of Peter in portion D presupposes that Jesus had spoken as portion A of document MK represents; probably for this reason it has dropped out of the Lukan narrative, that narrative retaining only the more general words of Peter in portion G as portion E.
It is not easy to hold at the same time the impression of the occasion derived from the Lukan account and that made by the Markan record. The former has most vividly the marks of a private conversation with Peter; the latter as clearly the indications of a dealing with the Twelve. And if the words were addressed to the Twelve as a whole, and those in portion C personally to Peter, the latter would surely tend to awaken mixed feelings, if not discord, among men who were deeply solicitous and ambitious as to relations to one another within their company. It seems necessary to conclude def
initely that one or other of the representations, and not both, reflects the actual history of the occasion.
When one views the two records, each as a whole, it seems difficult to make choice of the Lukan as more historical than that of document MK; the latter impresses one as much the more normal and probable. Looked at more closely as to particulars of phraseology, the portions A, C of the Lukan record seem unusual. The reference to the activity of Satan in this form, the idea of the securing of Peter by request, the representing of Jesus as praying personally for Peter, the use of "faith" in that sense which alone is here suitable to it, the formal, ecclesiastical-laden content in "turned again" as here used— all these are strangely unfamiliar and discordant notes, it seems, when regarded as from Jesus. But beyond all that these suggest is the distinctive atmosphere of another age and mode of view and estimate of function expressed in the phrase, "stablish thy brethren." By it the signal centering of the Lukan narrative about Peter is understood; the whole Lukan paragraph apparently takes its place by the side of the similarly affected and directed words of gospel MT 16:18: "And I also say unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church."
$3. JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES OF THE CHURCH
DOCUMENT P 854B
A Take heed to yourselves: if thy brother sin, ebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.
if he sin against thee seven times in the day, and seven times turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.
GOSPEL MT 18:15-22
A And if thy brother sin against thee, go, shew him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established. And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican.
The above Matthaean paragraph on "the church" is part of that chapter in gospel MT which presents more problems of various kinds
than any other chapter in that gospel. The eighteenth chapter of Matthew is the parallel to document MK 9:33-50, the most difficult and most confused portion of that document, though its problems are only in part those presented by the greatly enlarged Matthaean parallel. Because of the questions involved in these portions of document MK and gospel MT, it was thought advisable to submit the whole to a thorough comparative study when the sources and their history were being considered. It is not possible to estimate aright any part of Matthew's eighteenth chapter without a knowledge of the mode of structure of the whole chapter. So far as seems now practicable, the endeavor has been made on pp. 67-78 to determine the sources and editorial method of Matthew in this chapter. To the results reached on those pages the attention ought first to be directed.
It will be observed that in that preceding study it was suggested that the importance of the portions T-V there exhibited in the reputed teaching of Jesus about the future was so considerable that those portions required separate treatment. As dealing with "the church" of the future they belong in the present study, and are set forth in the above paragraph A-E. The document P parallel to these sayings is found in P §54B. It will be recalled that the decision was reached that Matthew, finding in document MK the portion K (p. 70), added to it the other half of document P §54A, and continued with P §54B, the intervening portions M-S (pp. 70, 71) being derived, perhaps, as suggested on pp. 76–78. But whence came the additional sayings in portion U (p. 71), and how account for the differences between the Matthaean and the document P forms of the portions T,V? These are the problems of the present study.
As a result of the close comparison of portions P-S (pp. 70, 71) with the parallels in document P as preserved in P §46, it was determined that the portions P,Q,S were not inserted by Matthew's drawing them from document P, but came from some subsequent hand, to whom the parable of the Lost Sheep had come independently of document P. Shall it be affirmed that likewise the extensive enlargement of document P §54B as found in the portions A-E (above) is to be attributed to some subsequent editor, the evangelist not having gone farther than to insert the second half of P $54A and P§54B, being led to this natural addition by the fact that he found the one
half of P §54A at this point in his document MK (portion K on p. 70)? Such seems to be the witness of the external evidence. Is it confirmed by the content of the added portions in A-E above, that is, do these portions bear within themselves any evidences that they belong to the later periods of gospel formation?
Obviously the beginning should be made by a comparison of the above Matthaean portions A, E with their parallels in document P. If within these Matthaean portions there be found accretions which indicate a late origin, it may be reasonably concluded that the other portions came into gospel MT in the later periods of its formation. Conclusions based on comparative study may rightly be taken as indicating the direction in which one should look for the solution of problems presented by portions where the absence of parallels makes such comparative study impracticable.
It seems beyond doubt that the above Matthaean portion A is the elaborate expansion of the simple thought in portion A of document P §54B. The document P record suggests correction and forgiveness as between brethren; that of gospel MT carries forward the thought two stages, the final being formally judicial. If Jesus spoke the sayings as in gospel MT, it is improbable that they would be reduced in any report to the proportions shown in document P. On the other hand, growth from the form in document P to that in gospel MT, under the influence of the organizing impulse of a new community, seems entirely normal, if not necessary. The Matthaean portion A seems to reflect the beginnings of the endeavor to settle all disputes between the brethren within the limits of the Christian community, rather than by an appeal to the civil authorities. It is this mode of procedure that Paul urged upon his converts, though he does not affirm that his exhortation is based in any injunction from Jesus. One naturally raises the question whether Jesus would likely be concerned thus to work out a method of judicial procedure for the future of his society, while leaving the life of that society, in all of its larger and more significant phases, to be wrought out by his followers as the result of experience. And it is further to be asked whether it accords with the spirit of Jesus as elsewhere manifested to regard and treat a fellow-man, under any circumstances, as suggested
II Cor. 6:1-8.