Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

FROM THE GOSPELS TO JESUS §8.7
ditions and the inconsequential character of so much of the variations have
hardly encouraged an explanation in terms of literary dependence (on Mark or
Q) or of literary editing. Rather, the combination of stability and flexibility positively
cried out to be recognized as typically oral in character. That probably implies
in at least some cases that the variation was due to knowledge and use of the
same tradition in oral mode, as part of the community tradition familiar to Matthew
and Luke. And even if a pericope was derived from Mark or Q, the retelling
by Matthew or Luke is itself better described as in oral mode, maintaining the
character of an oral retelling more than of a literary editing. 314
In both cases (narratives and teachings) we also noted (1) a concern to remember
the things Jesus had done and said. The discipleship and embryonic
communities which had been formed and shaped by the impact of Jesus' life and
message would naturally have celebrated that tradition as central to their own
identity as disciples and churches. We noted also (2) that the memories consisted
in stories and teachings whose own identity was focused in particular themes
and/or particular words and phrases — usually those said by Jesus himself. And
(3) that the variations and developments were not linear or cumulative in character,
but the variations of oral performance. The material examined indicated neither
concern to preserve some kind of literalistic historicity of detail, nor any
readiness to flood the tradition with Jewish wisdom or prophetic utterance.
Finally (§8.6), we have observed that the pattern of the oral traditioning
process was probably established more or less from the beginning (before the
first Easter) and was probably maintained in character through to (and beyond)
the writing down of the tradition. The first impact (sequence of impacts) made by
Jesus resulted in the formation of tradition, which was itself formative and constitutive
of community/church through Easter, beyond Galilee and into Greek,
and was preserved and celebrated through regular performance (whether in communal
or specifically liturgical gatherings) or reviewed for apologetic or
catechetical purposes. In other words, what we today are confronted with in the
Gospels is not the top layer (last edition) of a series of increasingly impenetrable
layers, but the living tradition of Christian celebration which takes us with surprising
immediacy to the heart of the first memories of Jesus.
On the basis of all this we can begin to build a portrayal of the remembered
Jesus, of the impact made by his words and deeds on the first disciples as that impact
was 'translated' into oral tradition and as it was passed down in oral performance
within the earliest circles of disciples and the churches, to be enshrined in
due course in the written Synoptic tradition.
314. R. F. Person, 'The Ancient Israelite Scribe as Performer', JBL 117 (1998) 601-609,
argues that the scribes understood their task as re-presenting the dynamic tradition of their
communities, as illustrated from some of the scribal interventions in lQIsa a .
254