| |
The
Gospel of Mark
by John R. Donahue, S.J., and Daniel J. Harrington,
S.J.
Sacra Pagina 2. Liturgical, Collegeville,
2002. 488 pp. $39.95 (cloth). ISBN 0-8146-5804-0.
Acknowledging that “no biblical commentary
can do everything,” the authors of this substantial work have
“tried to do a few things that [they] regard as very important:
interpreting Mark as Mark and by Mark, noting the links between
Mark’s Gospel and the Old Testament, and exploring the meaning
of Mark’s Gospel for the first readers and for Christians today”
(p. 3). While readers will find the commentary quite traditional
in form and content, they will likely find it more user-friendly
than most such commentaries. The fifty-seven-page introduction offers
an excellent overview of Mark and the scholarly debates it has sparked
in the last two generations, including such topics as intratextuality
and intertextuality, form criticism, redaction criticism, “literary
artistry,” narrative criticism, Christology, discipleship,
Mark and the “Old Testament” and Judaism, eschatology,
Mark in relation to Paul and Peter, date and audience, plus a detailed
descriptive outline of Mark’s Gospel and a seven-page general
bibliography. The authors assume that the provenance of Mark’s
Gospel was Rome during or just after the Neronian persecutions and
that Christology and discipleship are Mark’s two central and
interrelated themes. Readers should resist any temptation to skip
the Introduction, for it offers an inviting and informative short
course on recent Markan scholarship.
The commentary itself supplies “translation,
notes, and interpretation” of the sixty-two sections into which
the Markan text has been divided. (Thankfully, the assigned section
numbers are not used in place of chapter and verse references in
the many cross-references.) The quite literal translation is not
meant to stand alone for liturgical use but is intended as a basis
for the notes and interpretation. Greek verbs in the imperfect tense
are frequently translated into “-ing” forms to denote
habitual or continuing action. Greek verbs in the “historical
present” tense (a Markan trademark), while translated into
the simple past tense, are frequently noted as enhancing narrative
vividness. The use of transliteration rather than Greek characters
in textual discussion makes the notes available to a broad audience.
The authors “regard the notes as the most important part of
[the] commentary because they provide the basic information for
appreciating the literary, historical, and theological significance
of each passage” (p. 3). Not surprisingly, the notes form the
largest part of the commentary; delightfully, they are clearly set
out on the page and clearly written. Another feature that adds to
the ease of use of this commentary is its lack of footnotes or endnotes.
Essential references are included within the text, and short bibliographies
“For Reference and Further Study” are conveniently given
at the end of most of the sections. (Indexes of “Principal
Ancient Parallels,” subjects, and authors appear at the end.)
But the best reading of the commentary (after
the Introduction) is in the interpretative sections. It is here
where the authors pull together their material to meet their three
stated goals: “interpreting Mark as Mark and by Mark,”
noting Old Testament links, and exploring meaning for ancient and
modern readers. The second goal is well met throughout, with the
citation and explication of countless Old Testament quotations,
allusions, and parallels. In addition, the authors have handled
well the challenge of creating a proper balance between repetition
and cross-referencing of information useful in more than one location.
In regard to the third goal, usually given special attention at
the close of each section of interpretation, I found the suggestions
for “actualization” (p. 127) in Mark 1–8 more thought-provoking
than the references to “material for preachers and teachers”
in Mark 8–16 (p. 291).
I experienced a similar shift in relation to
the first goal: “interpreting Mark as Mark and by Mark,”
by which the authors mean focusing on the meaning of Mark in its
final form, rather than on the historical Jesus or the pre-Markan
tradition. The first half of the commentary seems to call more attention
to overall Markan literary patterns, while the second half seems
to linger longer on issues of the historical Jesus and the history
of tradition—both before and after Mark. Throughout the commentary,
a surprising number of references are made not only to the synoptic
Gospels but also to John’s Gospel, Paul’s letters, and
even Hebrews and Revelation. In many instances, connections to these
texts might well be assumed by many contemporary Christian readers,
and the comments help clarify the Markan emphases. However, in some
instances, I felt that non-Markan texts, with some later connection
in the development of theology, were given more weight than appropriate
in a commentary claiming to focus on “Mark as Mark and by Mark.”
(See, e.g., the use of 1 John on p. 358, John’s gospel on p.
422, and Revelation on pp. 435–36, 440.)
Although the Sacra Pagina Series is by Catholic scholars with a
special outreach to Catholic clergy and laity, only scattered references
to the documents of Vatican II and the very careful discussion of
Jesus’ “brothers and sisters” would strike most Protestant
clergy and laity as distinctive. This is a commentary that has been
carefully and thoughtfully crafted by two moderate, pastoral, senior
Markan scholar-priests with the needs of the broader church in mind.
Pastors will find this commentary spends more time in their hands
and less on their shelves than others, and the congregations who
hear their homilies and sermons will be enriched and challenged.
Elizabeth Struthers Malbon
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Blacksburg, Virginia
<<
back to top
The Gospel according
to Mark
by James R. Edwards
Pillar New Testament Commentary. Eerdmans,
Grand Rapids and Apollos, Leicester, 2002. 552 pp. $40.00 (cloth).
ISBN 0-8028-3734-4.
The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the
Greek Text
by R. T. France
New International Greek Testament Commentary.
Eerdmans, Grand Rapids and Paternoster, Carlisle, 2002. 719 pp.
$55.00 (cloth). ISBN 0-8028-2446-3.
The Gospel of Mark, which for centuries lived
in the shadow of the other gospels, has become the center of intense
investigation. Scholars have written such a plethora of books and
articles that it is nearly impossible to keep pace with their literary
output. Nevertheless, the student of Mark will welcome the recent
arrival of two new commentaries. While neither book provides an
exhaustive survey of scholarly research, both are suitable additions
to any pastor’s library.
The first, by Edwards, is in a series whose
stated goal is to produce commentaries designed to “loosen
the Bible from its pages.” As D. A. Carson writes in his introduction,
authors in the series “interact with the most important informed
contemporary debate, but avoid getting mired in undue technical
detail” (p. x). Edwards succeeds admirably in achieving this
goal. His commentary is thoroughly informed by recent scholarship,
as the footnotes clearly document, but his reading of Mark’s
gospel is focused on the exposition of its message against the backdrop
of first-century Palestine.
Edwards brings to bear on Mark his knowledge
of the history and culture of ancient Palestine and his familiarity
with ancient Hebrew source material. He forswears lengthy discussions
of technical matters and offers instead a consistent and perceptive
reading of the gospel. Sprinkled throughout the commentary are a
few well-chosen and relatively brief excursuses on topics critical
for a proper understanding of the gospel of Mark. These include
examinations of the main titles Mark ascribes to Jesus (Son of Man,
Christ, and Son of God), as well as discussions of more technical
matters such as the secrecy motif in Mark. Throughout, Edwards shows
an awareness of current literary critical insights into Mark’s
composition. His treatment of Mark’s tendency to “sandwich”
or interweave stories is especially helpful.
The second commentary is the recent volume by
R. T. France. Although France bases his reading of Mark’s gospel
on the Greek text, the reader who is looking for a commentary to
replace the aging volumes by Vincent Taylor and C. E. B. Cranfield
will be disappointed. While his lexical comments are quite good,
France offers few detailed comments on Greek grammar and syntax,
and he limits his discussion of textual variants to those found
in the fourth edition of the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament.
The comparison with Taylor and Cranfield is perhaps more noteworthy
since these two authors present commentaries that proceed word-by-word,
or at least phrase-by-phrase. France, however, is more concerned
with the overall sense of Mark’s gospel and collects his comments
in the first instance by thematic sections, only later commenting
on individual verses. In fact, the author warns that those readers
who refer only to the verse-by-verse comments will miss some of
his more important remarks on the meaning of Mark’s gospel
(p. 2). France’s attention to the thematic and literary unity
of Mark’s gospel is a welcome corrective to the older style
of commentary, represented by Taylor and Cranfield, that often gave
the impression that the whole is merely the sum of the parts. The
truth is, of course, that Mark’s gospel deserves to be read
from beginning to end as a single expression of the author’s
intention, and France does an excellent job of keeping this objective
in focus.
In keeping with the non-technical nature of
both these commentaries, neither book reproduces the text of the
Gospel of Mark, nor do they offer fresh translations of the underlying
Greek text. Instead, they assume that readers have before them either
an English translation, such as the niv in Edward’s case, or
the standard UBS fourth edition of the Greek New Testament in France’s
case. Both books are suitably indexed, and both offer useful bibliographies
of the most important recent books and articles on the gospel.
Contemporary literary criticism has reminded
us that no reading of a text can be entirely neutral. It is therefore
commendable that both Edwards and France eschew any false sense
of objectivity and acknowledge at the outset the evangelical stance
from which they read and interpret the Gospel of Mark. To say that
both of these authors are “evangelical” is not, however,
to say that they are “fundamentalist.” Both authors, for
example, readily acknowledge the creativity of the Markan author
in arranging and composing the gospel. They are, however, more likely
to give credence to the Papias tradition of Mark’s reliance
on the apostle Peter’s preaching in Rome, a determination that,
in turn, makes them more likely to ascribe greater confidence to
the historical reliability of the Markan account. This tendency
is perhaps more pronounced in Edwards than in France, but in neither
book does it become the overriding concern. In both books, the main
objective is to help the reader hear and understand Mark’s
proclamation concerning Jesus the Messiah.
Mark’s vivid and compelling narrative about the events surrounding
Jesus’ ministry and death represents one of the earliest attempts
to offer a consistent interpretation of Jesus’ role in God’s
salvific plan. For this reason, the Gospel of Mark deserves to be
studied carefully by both pastors and teachers. These two new commentaries
on the Gospel will ably assist the interested reader in appreciating
the message of the second gospel.
Michael E. Vines
Lees-McRae College
Banner Elk, North carolina
<< back to top |
