What do you think?
Rate this book
The Gospel of Mark: A Liturgical Reading
How Baptism and the Eucharist Shaped Early Christian Understandings of Jesus
Long before the Gospel writers put pen to papyrus, the earliest Christians participated in the powerful rituals of baptism and the Lord's Supper, which fundamentally shaped their understanding of God, Christ, and the world in which they lived. In this volume, a respected biblical scholar and teacher explores how cultural anthropology and ritual studies elucidate ancient texts. Charles Bobertz offers a liturgical reading of the Gospel of Mark, arguing that the Gospel is a narrative interpretation of early Christian ritual. This fresh, responsible, and creative proposal will benefit scholars, professors, and students. Its ecclesial and pastoral ramifications will also be of interest to church leaders and pastors.
Long before the Gospel writers put pen to papyrus, the earliest Christians participated in the powerful rituals of baptism and the Lord's Supper, which fundamentally shaped their understanding of God, Christ, and the world in which they lived. In this volume, a respected biblical scholar and teacher explores how cultural anthropology and ritual studies elucidate ancient texts. Charles Bobertz offers a liturgical reading of the Gospel of Mark, arguing that the Gospel is a narrative interpretation of early Christian ritual. This fresh, responsible, and creative proposal will benefit scholars, professors, and students. Its ecclesial and pastoral ramifications will also be of interest to church leaders and pastors.
288 pages, Paperback
Published October 18, 2016
2 people are currently reading
11 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
May 2, 2025
This was a really frustrating read. On the one hand, Bobertz offers some interesting suggestions about how early Christians might have read Mark. He argues that Jesus reenacts the rituals of baptism and the Lord’s Supper throughout the narrative, showing how Christians participate in not just Christ’s death and resurrection, but in every stage of his ministry as well.
However, for every insight, Bobertz has about two or three headscratchers. He has a real bad case of “if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” He thinks Mark’s audience is wrestling with Gentile inclusion in Jewish house churches, and as a result, *everything* is about that. I’m not kidding. The paralytic let down through the roof? Gentile. The two disciples who went ahead of Jesus to find a colt? Gentiles. The Last Supper? You guessed it, it’s about the Gentiles. And that theme is definitely present in Mark (I would say even more so than one might think at first glance; Bobertz is right on in a couple places). But he has to contort everything to fit within that paradigm because he thinks it’s the main (even only) theme in the book.
Overall, Bobertz’s case would have actually been a lot stronger if he focused on a few key passages instead of going through the entire book in commentary fashion. The way he did it just highlights all of the weaknesses of his case. But there are still some gems in here, and I think Bobertz is on to something generally, so I can’t bring myself to give it one star (as much as I wanted to at times). So, two stars it is.
However, for every insight, Bobertz has about two or three headscratchers. He has a real bad case of “if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” He thinks Mark’s audience is wrestling with Gentile inclusion in Jewish house churches, and as a result, *everything* is about that. I’m not kidding. The paralytic let down through the roof? Gentile. The two disciples who went ahead of Jesus to find a colt? Gentiles. The Last Supper? You guessed it, it’s about the Gentiles. And that theme is definitely present in Mark (I would say even more so than one might think at first glance; Bobertz is right on in a couple places). But he has to contort everything to fit within that paradigm because he thinks it’s the main (even only) theme in the book.
Overall, Bobertz’s case would have actually been a lot stronger if he focused on a few key passages instead of going through the entire book in commentary fashion. The way he did it just highlights all of the weaknesses of his case. But there are still some gems in here, and I think Bobertz is on to something generally, so I can’t bring myself to give it one star (as much as I wanted to at times). So, two stars it is.
March 16, 2021
Bobertz has a hammer called the New Perspective on Paul and everything is a nail in Mark.
For example, in Mark 2 the paralytic is carried into the house by four men- for Bobertz, the number four means he must be a Gentile. The pharisees get mad that Jesus forgives the man's sins- the problem must be that he forgave the sins of a Gentile. A more reasonable reading: 4 is the number of universality in Mark, not specifically of non-Jews; and the pharisees’ statements clearly indicate that the problem is their disbelief in his identity as the Son of God.
Things like this, where Bobertz says things that are not supported by the text, make the book very frustrating. It doesn't help that Christ's atoning work on the cross is ignored completely. Bobertz's exegesis is crippled by his method.
However! Bobertz has a great eye for sacramental imagery and intertextuality in Mark. He is the only commentator I've read who sees the baptismal connection in the healing of the demoniac in chapter 5. While you may not get any idea of what anything actually means from Bobertz, you'll at least get a sense of the structural elements of Mark here.
For example, in Mark 2 the paralytic is carried into the house by four men- for Bobertz, the number four means he must be a Gentile. The pharisees get mad that Jesus forgives the man's sins- the problem must be that he forgave the sins of a Gentile. A more reasonable reading: 4 is the number of universality in Mark, not specifically of non-Jews; and the pharisees’ statements clearly indicate that the problem is their disbelief in his identity as the Son of God.
Things like this, where Bobertz says things that are not supported by the text, make the book very frustrating. It doesn't help that Christ's atoning work on the cross is ignored completely. Bobertz's exegesis is crippled by his method.
However! Bobertz has a great eye for sacramental imagery and intertextuality in Mark. He is the only commentator I've read who sees the baptismal connection in the healing of the demoniac in chapter 5. While you may not get any idea of what anything actually means from Bobertz, you'll at least get a sense of the structural elements of Mark here.
August 12, 2024
An Incredible Study of This Gospel
For anyone trying to more closely understand the inclusive nature of the Christian faith, this reading of the Gospel of Mark provides a strong textual analyses that detail by detail provides an understanding of inclusion as the most basic message of Jesus Christ.
For anyone trying to more closely understand the inclusive nature of the Christian faith, this reading of the Gospel of Mark provides a strong textual analyses that detail by detail provides an understanding of inclusion as the most basic message of Jesus Christ.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews