Disclosure: A Literary Form in the New Testament

Author(s): Terence Y. Mullins

Source: Novum Testamentum, Vol. 7, Fasc. 1 (Mar., 1964), pp. 44-50
Published by: BRILL
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1560250 .
Accessed: 28/07/2013 10:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Novum Testamentum.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 DISCLOSURE
A LITERARY FORM IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
BY

TERENCE Y. MULLINS
Philadelphia (Pa) U.S.A.

In a recent article 1) JACK T. SANDERS discussed the work done

by PAUL SCHUBERT in analyzing the Thanksgiving as a literary
form. SANDERS sought to refine certain points in SCHUBERT'S
delineation of the Thanksgiving. He pointed out that while
SCHUBERT had identified the elements of the beginning of the
Thanksgiving definitely, the end of the Thanksgiving was not
comparably worked out. (SCHUBERT was aware that he had not
defined the terminal point of the Thanksgiving, stating, "In some
cases, however, it is not easy to say where the thanksgivings termi-
nate." 2) He went on to cite specific cases, noting the easily marked
end of the Thanksgiving in I Cor., Philippians, and II Thess., then
pointing out difficulties in Philemon, Rom., et al. Chapter I is
largely devoted to this problem.) SANDERS, therefore, set out to
show that "the transition from the eucharisto period at the opening
of a Pauline letter to the body of the letter is more formally structur-
ed than SCHUBERT realized." 3)
SANDERS' work was in two parts. First, he showed that certain
distinctive elements occur following the Thanksgiving and that their
presence serves to indicate the end of that form. Second, he analyzed
the internal structure of the Thanksgiving to show that the end of
the Thanksgiving follows a pattern. It is the first part of his work
which concerns this paper. I shall point up some implications of his
description of the "distinctive clause" which he finds following the
Thanksgiving.

1) J. T. SANDERS, "The Transition from Opening Epistolary Thanksgiving

to Body in the Letters of the Pauline Corpus," JBL, LXXI, Part IV, Dec.,
1962.
2) P. SCHUBERT, Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings (Berlin,
I939), P. 4.
3) SANDERS, op. cit., p. 348.

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 DISCLOSURE 45

I
In his analysis of the distinctive clause which marks the beginning
of the body of the letter after the Thanksgiving, SANDERS cites seven
elements which constitute its form. With the exception of the
trivial element, ? 2 "the particle 8u,"these are in fact elements of
the Petition form as I have described it. 1)
His ? i correspondsto the petition verb;? 3 and ? 4 correspondto
the address; ? 5 and ? 6 represent different ways of expressing the
divine authority phrase, and ? 7 corresponds to the desired action.
Since the divine authorityphraseis the New Testament counterpart
of the popular courtesyphrase, the only element of the Petition as
I analyzed it which is not included in SANDERS' list is the back-
ground. It is clear, therefore, that the effect of this first part of
SANDERS'article is to establish the fact that the Thanksgiving is
frequently followed by a Petition, and that the latter form constitu-
tes one clear mark to show where the Thanksgiving ends.

II
In his analysis of the Thanksgiving, Sanders lists various exam-
ples of clauses which follow the Thanksgiving. Although most of
these are Petitions-or serve the formal operation of a Petition 2)_
not all of them so qualify. At one point SANDERS says, "this opening
formula either counselsthe adelphoior wishes themto knowconcern-
ing a certain subject, and it appeals to the authority of the Lord
(or of God, or both)." 3) He continues, "If the adelphoiare informed
or the writer wishes them to know, a OTL
clause follows the naming of
the subject, stating briefly what is to be known concerning the
subject. A skeleton of the two types would be
8s u4tL&o8EAXpo[,
7XpocxaCXC)
8ia To0 6v6OiTO' 'IT6o?o XpL6,ou,
rspL . . .
LVa ...

1) T. Y. MULLINS, "Petition as a Literary Form," Novum Testamentum,

Vol. V, Fasc. i, I962.
2) In order to have clean distinctions, I feel we must restrict forms to
pure types. Thus, 2 Cor. xii 8 would not properly be classed as a Petition.
And nothing is to be gained by calling it a pseudo-Petition or a quasi-
Petition. We may better say simply that sometimes phrases which resemble
the form stand in lieu of a form, or that they serve the formal operation of
a form.
3) SANDERS, op. cit., p. 353.

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
46 TERENCE Y. MULLINS

and
oui sAo 6 sE u aOcayVoSv, aCsXcpoL,
To) ...

OT . .." 1)

Now the first of these is, as I have shown, a distinct literary form,
the Petition. Since one of SANDERS'two types is a definite form, it
is natural to wonder if the other may not be a distinguishable
literary form, too. An examination of his evidence is revealing.
Looking back over the examples he gives (pp. 348-352). one finds
that twelve of them are Petitions (ten personal petitions using
2) and two are familiar petitions using Ipcoro 3)). Five
xCpoxaXcXO
of the examples, however, are of SANDERS'"second type," using
0Aco. 4) This suggests that there may be a literary form in New
Testament Greek which expresses a wish, perhaps related to the
wish forms identified by EXLER5). Examination of the use of 0sXco
in the New Testament and in the epistolary papyri, however, shows
that there is not enough definable structure to isolate a literary
usually appears as a simple verb plus infini-
form of this sort; OAXco
tive, or OT6or 'vWclause.
Nevertheless, there is one peculiar use of OsXo which properly
deserves to be recognized as a distinct literary form, for 6Xco,when
used with a noetic verb in the infinitive, serves as a rhetorical
stereotype for the presentation of specific information. Its form
follows pretty well the description given of the second type by
SANDERS.I call this form the Disclosure. Four elements constitute
the Disclosure. They are:
I. 0Xco,
2. noetic verb in the infinitive,
3. person addressed,
4. information.
A fifth element may appear; it is the vocativeaddress.It is not basic,
however. The usual order of the elements as they appear in the

1) Ibid.
2) i Cor. i Io; Rom. xii I, xv 30 f, xvi 17; I Cor. xvi 15 f; 2 Cor. ii 8, vi i,
x i; Phil. iv 2 f; I Thes. iv io.
3) 2 Thes. ii i f and I Thes. v 12. Phil. iv 2 is listed as a personal petition
because it contains both verbs and the more intense appeal defines the type.
4) Rom. xi 25 f; I Cor. x I, xi 3, xii 1-3; I Thes. iv 13.
5) F. EXLER, The Form of the Ancient Greek Letter, A Study in Greek
Epistolography (Washington, I923).

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 DISCLOSURE 47

epistolary papyri is fairly rigid. It is: noetic verb,person addressed,

06Xo, information. The following examples from many types of
letters and from several collections serve to demonstrate the usual
rigidity of order which the form exhibits:
noetic verb/personaddressed/OXco/information
P. Oxy. 937: YELVWGXELV / a, /O6XA/0Trt ?ypaOa4S PLOL7Tept o?
?Oltav6J?ol 'AycxT?LZ-
voq 1)
P. Oxy. II55: yLvwsXLv / (T /[6?]XW] e?Tl ?u6u ?7rp?YXOc 's

'AX?sav8p7av. . . 2)
P. Oxy. II85: ysLvct5xiv / uL~ /06X /0T TO LV OCpyUPOV rSq
p[
XOCaou pLS?V]4 oxroapaX-

OU. . . 3)
P. Oxy. 1481: ysVC)XS?Lv / 7[s] /OSXo/Ti &6MT'rouaououXpo6vou

j.L xoa ovu c'&ao6vs[L]]v,

""67T?L' XoL7COU 4)

P. Oxy. I493: YLvc)XSLv / Gs /O6?X,/la?X'pX OTL[xa? 'Av -

TO5OGVTOqpI 7VO ?Xo-
pLua&LYV 70u1 TOV ULOV
o
o5v'To xal x6ox?'-
S?pC)(7T
pouvrToaala 7cavT'oq,5)
P. Oxy. I670: i,8voc / as /06?Xo/ OTt?oTtX6?V? 'AX?-
zvs8p?Lav 6?oxXY]pouvT?5
T' lXa8L 'E7rscp. 6)
P. Oxy. 1683: [YL]yvaoxltv/ as X
/Oo/xuploc LPou a[?X]c(p, arc?X-
OS?7TpcO r?T'rpC6VO T)V
ivytn'f}&[v6v 7)
P. Giess. Ii: rc
FvoaxsLv / ?s /O?XtO/ O'rt ?7T?T7GCX7V 5iS TOV U67O

aot voptov Lovoq . . . 8)

1) B. GRENFELL and A. HUNT, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri (London, I898-

1948), Vol. VI, p. 305.
2) Ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 257.
3) Ibid., Vol. IX, p. 199.
4) Ibid., Vol. XII, p. 240.
5) Ibid., Vol. XII, p. 250.
6) Ibid., Vol. XIV, p. I27.
7) Ibid., Vol. XIV, p. I44.
8) O. EGER, E. KORNEMANN, P. M. MEYER, Griechische Papyri im

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
48 TERENCE Y. MULLINS

P. Giess. 13: / as
FELvWaXELV 6-1 'ApaLv6v
/O6Xw)/ tior`e`=V,L

?kyouoac toLoc yeyove-

v . 1)
P. Loud. 4II: y&V6uxLv / os X
/OSG/xupl/ tou xc-7Tp&vov-t
V tp0 . . . 2)
P. Lond. 414: yevwcxlv / Gs t)
/OsoW/CEptl o0U PPEOULOU t0[
~E~OXES... 3)

P. Lond. 4I7: YWVOGX&v/GE /OsXo/XUP&e 7rsEpl] 7XOLU?O TOU

aG,rpovLow ... 4)
P. Lond. 973: YSLVO)aX5V / GE /O5?&/OCL &lXocCOotl Xc(PLV-tov
,ou oCsXypou... 5)

And, in addition see P. Oxy. I770, I773; BGU 1040, 1042, I043.
Nevertheless, the order of the elements is not a constitutive part
of the form. A revealing exception to the usual order is found in
P. Oslo. 50. There the following occurs:
Os?o/person addressed! noetic verb/ information
oe,;kw as ye&VW'GXsrV /0 r taPcysv6evosvoq EiS T31
6?LV ...6!)

This is the order which the Disclosure form follows in the New
Testament. (Usually the vocative address comes between the noetic
verb and the information. Only two of the eight occurrences of the
Disclosure in the New Testament lack the vocative address, but one
which has it, i Cor. 12: ib, has the entire order of the elements
scrambled and the vocative address comes between the information
and Oe'o.) Sanders gives a list of examples 7) which includes I Cor.
12: ib and three other instances of Paul's use of the Disclosure with
the vocative address, Rom. xi 25; I Cor. x I; and I Thess. iv 3. In his
later exposition he refers to the other two, Rom. i 13 and 2 Cor. i 8.8)

Museum des Oberhessichen Geschichtsvereins zu Giessen (Leipzig, I910-I9I2),

Band I, pp. 46-47.
1) Ibid., Band I, p. 51.
2) F. G. KENYON and H. I. BELL, Greek Papyri in the British Museum
(London, I893-I9I7), Vol. II, p. 281.
3) Ibid., Vol. II, p. 292.
4) Ibid., Vol. II, p. 299.
5) Ibid., Vol. III, p. 2I3.
6) S. EITREM and L. AmUNDSEN, Papyri Osloenses (Oslo, 1931), Fasc. II.
7) SANDERS, op. cit., pp. 349-352.
8) Ibid., p. 360.

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 DISCLOSURE 49

He also gives one example of Paul's use of the Disclosure form

without the vocative address, I Cor. xi 3.
To this one more should be added.
OXwo/ person addressed / noetic verb / information
Col. 2: I 06(o / y0&put,0q
~[ax??0 / / q?KxoV...
Thus the elements which constitute the Disclosure follow a
fairly regular but not a rigid order in the New Testament. It is an
order different from that usually occurringin the epistolary papyri,
but found in one, P. Oslo. 50.

III
While in general I go along with Sanders' conclusion that the
appearance of the Petition or the Disclosure following the Thanks-
giving marks the latter boundary of the Thanksgiving, nevertheless,
I hesitate to accept this as a hard and fast rule. These forms can be
incorporated as complete units within other forms. This is clear
from BGU 8I6 which reads yLvCocxZv as 0Xto, ratorep,O'L ?uXo-
pLcar xotoXX 'IJCSpc ... 1). This example is cited by SCHUBERT
with the comment that we have here "a complete, formal thanks-
giving, serving as an introduction to the letter proper." 2) And he
places this non-religious use alongside the religious use saying,
"the epistolary form and function is the same in both types." 3)
Yet here the Thanksgiving clearly constitutes the informationele-
ment in a Disclosure form. Moreover, there is no reason why a
Thanksgiving or a Disclosure might not serve as backgroundfor a
Petition. It would, therefore, seem better to state as a general rule
that: when the Thanksgiving is followed by any recognizable ele-
ment of another form, the termination of the Thanksgiving is
thereby marked. If the Thanksgiving constitutes the backgroundof
a Petition, for example, and is followed by the petition verb, that
indicates the end of the Thanksgiving form.
SANDERS' suggestion that "a type of form criticism, different
from that employed in the study of the gospels" should be sought
"for a more careful analysis of the letters of the Pauline corpus" 4)

1) Agyptische Urkunden aus den Kiniglichen Museen zu Berlin (Berlin,

I895-I933), P. 132; P. 73I2). Band 3, Heft 5.
2) SCHUBERT, op. cit., p. 176.
3) Ibid.
4) SANDERS, op. cit., p. 362.
Novum Testamentum VII 4

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
50 MULLINS, DISCLOSURE

is quite realistic. It should not be limited to the Pauline corpus

however. The need is for a study of literary forms of New Testament
times with the main emphasis on structure rather than on content.
The best work in this field has been done by EXLER1). His book
contains an excellent collection of formulae. The work of analysis,
interpretation, and critical evaluation of these forms, however, is
largely untouched. EXLERidentified Opening Formulas, dating
formulas, closing formulas, three types of Wish, the Illiteracy
Formula, and the Oath Formula. Except for the Opening Formulas,
all of these need sharpening. They are scarcely usable as precisely
identified forms at present.

SUMMARY

The Disclosure is a literary form identifiable in koine Greekof the

New Testament period. Its characteristics are four: the use of 0Xxo,
identification of the person addressed,a noetic verbin the infinitive,
and the information,usually introduced by O,T.It may also have a
vocativeaddress. The termination of the New Testament Thanks-
giving form can be delineated by the appearance of a recognizable
element of the Disclosure or, more often, of the Petition. The ele-
ments of the Disclosure appear in a fairly rigid order in the non-
literary papyri; a far less rigid and quite different order is followed
in the New Testament uses of the Disclosure.

1) F. EXLER, op. cit.

This content downloaded from 152.14.136.96 on Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:26:52 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions