Structure of St. Mark's Gospel

Abstract

The dissertation presents the results of an examination of the literary structure of Mark's narratives as they now stand in his Gospel. A common assumption is that the form critics analyzed the structure of the Gospel narratives, but the Introduction of the dissertation shows that, apart from the discussion of the stylistic scheme or construction of paradigms or apophthegms and tales or miracle stories, the form critics did not give much consideration to narrative structure, if this is understood as the order of content within a story. Noting the form critics' discussion of the schemes of apophthegms and miracle stories and interpreting 'form' as structure, interpreters of form criticism in the English speaking world gave form an emphasis that it did not have in the works of Dibelius and Bultmann and led many readers of form criticism to believe that the form critics' method was committed to a study of structure, when the form critics were interested primarily in observing the presence of typical features and motifs and comparing these with Hellenistic parallels and Rabbinic analogies. Ever since the work of the form critics, there has been a need to examine in detail the literary structure of all the Gospel narratives, especially those in Mark's Gospel, for its priority is assumed.

In the dissertation Mark's narratives are presented in colometric form according to sense lines and thought groups and compared with the parallels of Matthew and Luke to see whether one can go beyond the broad, twofold and threefold schemes of form-critical analysis and detect a greater number of structural sections not only in apophthegms and miracle stories but in all the narratives of Mark's Gospel. The dissertation is limited to the discussion of structure with special reference to the form-critical positions of Dibeiius, Bultmann, and Taylor. Before one can talk meaningfully about Mark's work as a redactor, it is necessary to have an adequate understanding of the structure of his narratives.

Part I of the dissertation illustrates seven kinds of narrative sections that are evident in Mark's stories arranged colometrically: a setting statement, situation statement, reply-to-the-situation statement, problem section, reply-to-the-problem section, result statement, and consequence statement. Types of each kind of narrative section are discernible through stylistic tendencies that appear at corresponding locations in Mark's narratives. Except for the result statement, which appears mostly in miracle stories, there is no correlation between recognizable types of the narrative sections and the form critical categories. With this general absence of correlation, it is apparent that the narrative categories of form criticism are structurally not distinctive.

Part II presents Mark's narratives in colometric form and grouped according to narrative structure. The seven kinds of narrative sections—setting, situation, reply to the situation, problem, reply to the problem, result, consequence—for the most part appear in that order m Mark's narratives and so constitute a pattern of narration. Not all the narratives have all these sections. Instead most of the stories individually display one of five abbreviated forms of the Full Pattern. -In t>ne-variation the reply to-the-situation statement is omitted. In a second variation the problem and reply-to-the-problem sections are omitted.

Sometimes the Full Pattern or either of the variations appears in a short form without result and consequence statements. Inasmuch as the order of sections is the same both in the Full Pattern and its abbreviated forms, it is evident that all the stories in Mark's Gospel have been written according to one pattern of narration and thus have essentially the same narrative structure.

The pattern in its six forms (Full Pattern Long, Full Pattern Short, Variation #1 Long, Variation #1 Short, Variation #2 Long, Variation #2 Short) is evident throughout Mark's Gospel—in long narratives as well as short ones, in stories in the Passion Narrative as well as in the rest of Mark's Gospel. Once the pattern is understood, it becomes a useful criterion for identifying stories on the basis of their narrative structure. The pattern is very regular in Mark's narratives. In seventy-four of eighty-six identifiable stories the sections of the pattern appear in their proper order. Nineteen of the seventy-four regular stories are extended, generally through developments of the problem and replies to these developments. Five of the twelve irregular stories are extended as well as irregular. Even the irregular stories manifest the pattern.

There is therefore no story in Mark's Gospel that does not show the influence of the narrative pattern.

The regularity of the pattern in Mark's stories becomes further apparent through comparisons with the parallels of Matthew and Luke. When Matthew's parallels have the same structure as Mark's stories, there is often much verbal agreement between Matthew and Mark; but Matthew's structure is frequently different with the presence of special Matthaean material. Sometimes Luke's parallels also have different structure with material found only in Luke, but generally his parallels display the greatest number of pattern irregularities.

Time and again the pattern is most regular and clearest in Mark's stories.

Time and again the pattern is most regular and clearest in Mark's stories. The regularity and clarity of the pattern in Mark's narratives suggest that Mark himself was responsible for the composition of his stories. This estimate is supported by other recurrent signs of order, such as the step development of thought, the presentation of ideas in an orderly manner, the clustering of stories with the same form of the pattern, the restatement of an initial concern near the end of a story, and the presence of the pattern within the pattern.

The occasional appearance of the pattern within sayings of Jesus suggests that Jesus Himself might have used the pattern in His teaching. Although it is possible that Jesus did use the pattern in some way in His teaching, it is preferable to attribute to Mark the regularity and clarity of the pattern when it is present in Jesus' sayings.

Grounds for thinking that Jesus could have used the pattern, however, are found in the fact that the narrative pattern and its various forms are evident in significant stories of the Old Testament. A number of these stories are presented in colometric form in English at the end of Part II of the dissertation to show that the structure of Mark's narratives is essentially the same as that of certain stories of the Old Testament. One does not need to look to Rabbinic analogies or Hellenistic parallels to account for the structure of Mark's narratives.

In its presence in stories of the Old Testament, the pattern was a traditional pattern that Would have been culturally known to both Jesus and His disciples through their familiarity with the Scriptures. Brief consideration is given to the possible influence of the pattern on Jesus, the formation of the oral tradition, and the kerygma. The possibility that the kerygma of the early Church was influenced by the traditional pattern is suggested by the presence of the pattern in certain speeches in Acts. In portraying a human dilemma that was answered by an authoritative, redemptive word or act of Jesus, the traditional pattern would have been useful as a Gospel pattern for use within the kerygma.

The many signs of regularity and order in the structure of Mark's narratives suggest that Mark, with an apparent sensitivity to order, might have been the Evangelist who best preserved the order of the tradition before him. Part III of the dissertation presents further evidence that indicates that Mark was an orderly writer. The definition of structure as the order of content enables one to regard as thematic structure the orderly recurrence of ideas in Mark's narratives, as these have been delineated by the narrative pattern.

A study of the themes of Mark's narratives shows that they recur in the fashion of rhythmical parallelism. Instead of there being a single point to a story, most of the narratives have at least two ideas that are restated in a rhythmical fashion.

Narratives have at least two ideas that are restated in a rhythmical fashion.

Five types of thematic structure are described and illustrated: (I) abab, (II) ab ab, (III) ab_a + b, (IV) a + b ab_, (V) ab ab ab. Each type has inverted forms. Every type except Type IV has extended forms. Two of the extended forms have inverted forms.

These structures, which are rhythmical, complete, and negative in tone, accentuate the chief thematic concerns of Mark's Gospel: the Messiahship of Jesus and His suffering and death. Also, the structures promote understanding of the arrangement of material in Mark's stories and provide clues for their interpretation.

Thematic structures in sayings of Jesus suggest that His teachings displayed rhythmical order from time to time; but on account of Mark's apparent interest in order, it is difficult to determine whether rhythmical order in Jesus' sayings stems from Jesus or from Mark.

The thematic structures are most apparent in Mark's stories in comparison with the parallels of Matthew and Luke. The structures are frequently imperfect, lost, or absent altogether in the parallels of the two other Evangelists, especially Luke. The regularity of the thematic structures may be seen as another sign of Mark's methodical workmanship, and the completeness of these structures is evidence of his thoroughness and carefulness as a writer.

Mark's workmanship may also be seen in certain relationships between the thematic structures and the narrative pattern. These relationships display consistency in the written presentation of Mark's stories. Such consistency is another indication that Mark himself was somewhat responsible for the formation of his narratives.

The examination shows that the analysis of literary structure as the order of content is an important method of investigation of biblical literature for clearer understanding of Jesus and traditions of the early Church about Him.