THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
dependent on the identification of this Spirit, whose manifestations formed the basis of all church life with " the mind that was in Christ Jesus." Rigidly his converts must be disciplined in the subordination of the spectacular gifts of the Spirit, " miracles," " tongues," " prophecies," to the " abiding," the moral (I Cor. xiii.).
It is no surprise, therefore, to find Paul, three years after his conversion, going up to Jerusalem to " become acquainted with Peter, " literally " to hear his story " (Gal. i. 18). From that Petrine story must have come many an R *" *ts allusion in Paul's letters to Jesus' and teachings (I Thess. iv. 15; I Cor. vii. Character. 10> ix- 14)> the purity of his life (II Cor. v. 21), the tragedy of his betrayal and death (I Cor. xi. 23), the manifestations of his resurrection glory (I Cor. xv. 3-7). From it came certainly the institution of the Eucharist (I Cor. xi. 2.3-2.5; see below, II., § 8), but not that of baptism (I Cor. i. 17). Moreover, if it related, as may surely be assumed, marvels of healing and exorcism outshining those of the " strolling Jews, exorcists " and even the " gifts of healing " and " miracles " boasted in the Church (I Cor. xii. 28-29), it is somewhat significant that Paul ignores this whole element, large as it looms on the pages of Mark. Ultimately in the latest of the undisputed epistles Paul states the essence of his Gospel in a " nutshell " (Phil. ii. 4-11; cf. Mark. x. 42-45). Such is Paul's messianism, the starting-point of which is the glorified one of his vision, but in its backward look almost overleaps the earthly career as a mere episode, a period of " humiliation," in the great economy of God, with whom this second Adam had enjoyed the riches of heaven (II Cor. viii. 9) before the first Adam walked in Paradise. Essentially and fundamentally Paul's Gospel is an incarnation doctrine, closely allied in its sacraments, its aspiration to life by mystic union with Christ and God in the Spirit, and even in its terminology, with Greek and Oriental mystery religion. Its ^oteriology recalls the avatar doctrine of the redeemer-gods (see Hinduism). That which gives it power to assimilate rather than be assimilated in the maelstrom of intermingling religious ideals, is its ethical root in the life and teaching of the historic Jesus.
It can not be too emphatically insisted that the
gospel of Peter was essentially, in its starting-point,
and in religious value, identical with that of Paul
(I Cor. xv. 11; Gal. ii. 2, 6-8, 15-16). It also did not
start from the story of the ministry,
p' . e but from the resurrection (Acts iv.
Gospel ^- ^ rested upon an experience of Peter only less profoundly ethical than Paul, a rescue by the felt presence of the risen Christ from the abyss of moral agony. The four canonical Gospels have uniformly canceled the story of this fundamental event in the history of the Christian religion in favor of more concrete, more tangible and marvelous tales of the empty tomb and reappearances of Jesus in palpable form. Not a trace of this appears in Paul. His account of the tradition of the resurrection appearances is unassailable, and certainly complete. It puts his
own experience in line with Peter's, and coincides with the remnants and allusions in the Gospel narrative of how first of all " the Lord appeared to Simon " (Luke xxiv. 34). Many traces of this initial vision of Peter exist in the canonical story itself (Mark xiv. 28, xvi. 1, cf. ix. 2-10), in additions to it (John xxi. 1-13), in extra-canonical fragments (Gospel of Peter, end), and above all in the recorded prayer of Jesus for the " turning again " of Simon (Luke xxii. 32). These amply corroborate the statement of Paul that the first " appearance " was " to Simon," and establish the essential justice of the tradition which explains the name of " Cephas " or " Peter " (" Rock ") as given because the Church owed its foundation to the newborn faith of this disciple. Because Peter in Galilee rallied his " brethren " with the assurance of his experience of a manifestation of Jesus in glory, Christianity became a religion. What was — what is the experience of the presence of the risen Christ? This is not a problem of history but of religious psychology. With Peter's experience, soon repeated in that of his " brethren," of 500 at once, of Pentecost, of James, of Paul (I Cor. xv. 3-8) " the Gospel " began its career. It was essentially the story of the resurrection as a message of redemption (II Cor. v. 19-21). The psychological phenomenon, vital as it is in the spiritual history of the race, falls from its very nature outside the limits of this discussion; yet it alone accounts for the preservation of the implied story of Jesus' previous career.
In Peter's case as in Paul's this starting-point was the resurrection. But that which tradition reports (Papias, in Eusebius, Hist, eccl., III.,xxxix. 15) of the nature of Peter's preaching is that which could be anticipated from all known of his past. To Peter the remembrance of Jesus' earthly _ T career would not be, as to Paul, a
Character mere episode in the eternal plan of re- ' demption, an avatar of God's redeeming Spirit suffering humiliation and death. It would be a priceless jewel of personal recollections filled with foregleams of the later glorification. Peter's Christology would be fundamentally not an incarnation doctrine, but just as it is actually found in the Petrine speeches of Acts (ii. 32-36, iii. 18-23, 26) an apotheosis doctrine. An early source even sketches the outline of Peter's story. It " began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power; who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil, for God was with him." From this point it passes immediately to the story of the crucifixion in Jerusalem and the witness to the resurrection (Acts x. 37-41). The correspondence of this outline with the outline of that Gospel (Mark) which tradition declares to be founded on Peter's narrative, is a phenomenon of great significance. Disregarding the portions elaborated in the Pauline interest, which show connection at many points with Q and perhaps also with the " special source " of Luke, and taking only the underlying narrative, three essential data appear in Mark: (1) the beginnings in Galilee after the bap-