phoebe's letter of introduction review 1951

8/19/2019 Phoebe's Letter of Introduction REVIEW 1951

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/phoebes-letter-of-introduction-review-1951 1/4

Harvard Theological Reviewhttp://journals.cambridge.org/HTR

Additional services for Harvard Theological Review:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click hereCommercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click here

Phoebe's Letter of Introduction

Edgar J. Goodspeed

Harvard Theological Review / Volume 44 / Issue 01 / January 1951, pp 55 - 57DOI: 10.1017/S0017816000031035, Published online: 23 August 2011

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0017816000031035

How to cite this article:Edgar J. Goodspeed (1951). Phoebe's Letter of Introduction. HarvardTheological Review, 44, pp 55-57 doi:10.1017/S0017816000031035

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/HTR, IP address: 128.122.253.228 on 07 May 2015



PHOEBE S LETTER OF INTRODUCTION

IN

a recent issue of the Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, in Man-

chester (XXI, 1948, pp. 224-40), Professor T. W. Manson writes of

"St. Pau l's Letter to the Rom ans — and Oth ers," arguing tha t Pau l

must have sent what we know as Romans out in two forms, one, our

chapters 1-15, to Rome; the other, the same, with the addition of

chapter 16, which would introduce Phoebe, to the church at Ephesus.

Professor Manson is of course well aware of the perplexing problem of

the rightful place of the great doxology, 1 6: 25 -2 7, which some manu-

scripts place at the end of chapter 14, most at the end of chapter 16,

but the oldest manuscript, the P

4 6

, a papyrus from the early third

century, places at the end of chapter 15. This location is in striking

accord with the internal evidence, and confirms the theory advanced

by David Schulz, more tha n a hun dred years ago, tha t c hapter 16 is

no pa rt of Ro m ans, bu t pa rt of a separate letter to E phesu s. Professor

Dodd, however, concludes that chapter 16 is an integral part of the

Letter to the Romans, inasmuch as "the burden of proof rests upon

those who would set aside the tradition in favor of the conjecture,"

P- 237-

But what s the tradition? We have seen tha t there are three differ-

ent textual traditions as to the rightful place of the great doxology, a

fact which certainly shakes the tradition, especially as scholars have

long felt its inap propriateness a t the end of chapte r 16. Th e testimony

of P

46

, an important item in the tradition, strongly suggests that the

Letter to Rome ended with chapter 15, capped with the doxology, and

that chapter 16 may perhaps be another letter altogether.

This is at once strongly confirmed by the character and contents of

that chapter . T he inclusion of Aquila an d Prisca among the perso ns

saluted, and foremost among them, at once suggests Ephesus as the

letter's destination, for it is there we would expect to find them; they

had been last heard of there.

The next person greeted is Epaenetus, the first man converted at

Ephesus. We would naturally expect to meet him there, rather than at

Rome; we do not know tha t he ever visited Rom e. Pau l's large acqu aint-

ance with men and women in the church to which Phoebe is going, their

family groupings, domestic arrangements, and Christian records, fits

very badly with Rome, where Paul has never been, but perfectly well

with Ephesu s where he has jus t spen t almost th ree years . I t is also far



56 HARVA RD THEOLOGICAL REV IEW

more natural for Paul to introduce Phoebe to people he knows than to

people to most of whom he is known only by name and reputation.

Manson is impressed with what he calls the acid comment of Lietz-

mann on the theory that Romans 16 is a letter to Ephesus: "A letter

consisting almost entirely of nothing bu t greetings . . . is a monstros-

ity ." Bu t had Lietzmann never carried a letter of introdu ction? Had

he never written one? Such a letter is no place for a religious lecture.

But in a letter introducing a Christian woman to a church on the other

side of the Aegean, they are not inappropriate, indeed they may be very

much in order.

The Roman world was a bad and brutal world, and inns were notori-

ously likely to be no places for a decent woman, particularly a Christian

wom an, to pu t up in. To commend P hoebe to the church at Ephesus

was one thing . Bu t it was not enough for the practical situation . Friends

must be found for Phoebe in Ephesus who will take her into their

houses with true Christian hospitality. By these num erous greetings,

Paul in effect introduces Phoebe personally to each of these family

circles, a most important service, if she is to be made safe and com-

fortable in Ep hesu s. Par ticularly th e women mentioned, with the ac-

count of their family circles, might lead to Phoebe's entertainment in

mo re tha n one of them . Th ese scholars seem to hav e lost sight of the

fact that Phoebe needs more than a place to go to church in Ephesus.

Even if these Christian family groups cannot entertain Phoebe, they

can certainly find a safe and respectable place for her to board while

in Ephesus.

Thus understood, this long line of greetings to Christian people in

Ephesus, so far from being a "monstrosity," is very much to the purpose

indeed It is in fact just w hat Phoebe needs most — a list of Christian

people in Ephesus to whom she can appeal for direction and assistance,

and even hos pitality. Per hap s Prisca and Aquila will tak e her in; they

had done as much for Paul. Perhaps Rufus' mother will look after her;

she had been a mother to P aul. It is striking how m any household

groups Pau l m entions. Bu t of course W ha t Phoebe needs is an invi-

tation to some Christian home in Ephesus. And this is precisely what

Pa ul's long list of his friends th ere provides. N o t th at th e lette r is to

her; but it is bound to interest twenty-eight people or groups of people

at Ephesus in looking after Phoebe on or soon after her arrival there.

If we are to understand this letter, Romans 16, we must try to realize

the position of a Christian woman trying to travel about the ancient

Rome world alone. Pa ul 's generous and well-considered effort to assist

her shows that he did not disapprove of her journey, and that he knew



PHOEBE S LETTER OF INTRODUCTION 57

the difficulties she would have to meet, and saw perfectly clearly how

Christian hosp itality would enable her to surmou nt them . As ancient

letters of introduction go (and there are many examples in the papyri),

Romans 16 is not a short letter but a long one. The list of names is

not a mo nstrosity bu t an essential pa rt of the comm unication. As Pau l

has only recently left Ephesus, the instruction, vss. 17-20 , is brief and

incidental; what can he add to what he has already said to them during

his stay of almost three years among them in Ephesus?

And if as I have long sought to show, the Pauline corpus was first

assembled in th e circle of E phesus (the ch urches of Asia, — Colossae,

Laodicea), it would be very natural not to omit from it their own letter

from Paul, too short to stand alone, but as an appendix to the great

Letter to Rome, written from the same place, at the same time. Phile-

mon might be included as a unit, as Paul to the Laodiceans, but to

present Romans 16 as "Paul to the Ephesians" would hardly do justice

to the great Ephesian church, the foremost of all the churches, when

the first collection of Paul's letters was made, and as Harnack called it,

the second fulcrum of C hristian ity. T he loss of its opening sa lutation

is natural enough, in the light of the treatment of the Corinthian letters,

two of which have so clearly been combined into one, simply by omit-

ting the address and salutation of one of them.

EDGAR J. GOODSPEED

Los ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.

phoebe's letter of introduction review 1951

Documents