300

Book Reviews / Novum Testamentum 54 (2012) 293-301

Holly J. Carey, Jesus Cry from the Cross: Towards a First-Century Understanding o f the
Intertextual Relationship between Psalm 22 and the Narrative o f Marks Gospel, LNTS
398 (London: T an d T Clark International, 2009), xv + 221 pp., ISBN 978-0-567
01858-8. $130.00.
In recent years there have been a number of studies on the use of the Old Testament
in Marks passion narrative. What makes Holly Careys contribution distinctive is her
concentration on the citation from Ps 22:2 at Mark 15:34 and her focus on current
issues in intertextuality and reader-response theory. Adopting a narrative-critical
approach, Carey studies the citation from Ps 22:2 not only in relation to the immediate context of Marks passion narrative, but how Mark 15:34 functions in the whole
narrative of Marks gospel.
To make her case Carey confronts two current issues in the study of intertextuality.
The first is reader competence. Carey claims that at the heart of her work is a desire to
see the text through the eyes, or hear the text through the ears of the first century
readers of the gospel of Mark (23). She argues for a level of competence on the part
of the implied readers sufficient to understand and interpret Marks use of Psalm 22.
This competence, she claims, has only to be located in the implied reader, not in
the average first century Christian (24), many of whom were illiterate. These first
readers she locates, with the majority of scholars, in the early Roman church.
The other major issue confronting intertextual studies with a narrative-critical focus
is whether Mark, or the other New Testament writers cited scripture atomistically or
contextually. Reviewing the previous discussions of the use of Psalm 22 in Marks passion narrative (6-22) Carey argues strongly for a contextual reading of the Psalm in
Marks passion/resurrection narrative (PRN) and that Marks earliest implied readers
would have known the paslm, would have heard the echo, and would have had their
understanding of Jesus death and resurrection shaped by it.
To make her case, Carey presents several lines of argument. In Chapter 3 she notes
the importance of Resurrection in Marks gospel, thus indicating a morphological fit
between the theme of humiliation/exhaltation in both Psalm 22 and the gospel. She
reviews Marks use of scripture in Chapter 4, and shows that often Marks citation of
scripture is contextual (especially the combination of Isa 56:7 and Jer 7:11 in Mark
11:17). Turning to the socio-cultural context of Marks gospel (Chapter 5) Carey
demonstrates that the motif of the Righteous Sufferer was indeed a widespread tradition in Jewish literature before and during the first century (124) and that language
from Psalm 22 was sometimes used to express this theme (Wisdom 2-5 and the
Teacher of Righteousness at Qumran). A review of the Righteous Sufferer theme in
Mark (Chapter 6) and the meaning and function of Psalm 22 in Marks PRN (Chapter 7) further strengthen her contention that Marks implied readers would have
understood the narrative of Jesus death and Resurrection in terms of the story of
Psalm 22.
Careys focus on one verse (Mark 15:34) in its larger narrative context enables her
to be thorough in her engagement of the issues raised in interpreting the verse. However, several important studies have been passed over. This is especially true with regard
Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2012

DOI: 10.1163/156853611X578338

Book Reviews / Novum Testamentum 54 (2012) 293-301

301

to the significant textual variation in the verse. The reading of Codex D, the Latin k
and a few others, why have you reproached me, which she admits could alter
the significance and meaning of the passage (151), she dismisses as having very little
support. She does not mention Harnacks view that this is the original reading, nor
C.H. Turners argument that since no scribe would have invented this reading, and
that the change to the normal text is amply accounted for by assimilation to the LXX
of Ps 22:2 or to Matt 27:46, reproached must be what Mark wrote in 15:34. Now
Bart Ehrman has proposed a motive for its invention (anti-separationist corruption by
proto-Orthodox scribes) but Ehrmans work is similarly not mentioned.
In addition, Careys treatment of the possible echo of Ps 69:22 at Mark 15:36
downplays the potential influence of this Psalm on Marks passion narrative. Psalm 69
was also considered a Psalm of the Righteous Sufferer, was used widely in New Testament passion apologetic (Lindars argued that it made the largest contribution) and its
key word, reproach () is a key word in Mark 15: everybody reproaches Jesus.
Moreover, Psalm 69 follows the same pattern of humiliation/exaltation as Psalm 22.
The function of Psalm 69 in Mark 15 should have received more attention. Although
it is not foregrounded as is Psalm 22, it is nonetheless important.
Another possible oversight might be Careys lack of references to the Epistle to
the Hebrews. Careys index mentions only Heb 12:17. The citation of Ps 22:22 at
Heb 2:12 and the probable allusion to the Psalm in Heb 5:7-8 (and at 2:9, if we take
the alternative reading apartfrom God) may have a bearing on the broader context in
which Marks implied readers would have understood the reference to Psalm 22 in
his PRN.
This is an impressive study of Psalm 22 in Mark, not least because it provokes such
textual questions. Careys contribution to the study of Mark, and of the use of the Old
Testament in the New Testament should not be ignored by anyone who wishes to give
serious attention to the Gospel.
Peter R. Rodgers

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(sV express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder( s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of ajournai
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.