God in the Dock: Dialogic Tension in the Psalms of Lament (JSOT Supplement)

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT SUPPLEMENT SERIES

357

Editors David J.A. Clines Philip R. Davies Executive Editor Andrew Mein Editorial Board Richard J. Coggins, Alan Cooper, J. Cheryl Exum, John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon, Norman K. Gottwald, John Jarick, Andrew D.H. Mayes, Carol Meyers, Patrick D. Miller

Sheffield Academic Press A Continuum imprint

This page intentionally left blank

God in the Dock Dialogic Tension in the Psalms of Lament

Carleen Mandolfo

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 357

For my grandmothers Beverly Medford (1918-1995) and Angela Seina (1913-1998) Their memory is cherished

Copyright © 2002 Sheffield Academic Press A Continuum imprint Published by Sheffield Academic Press Ltd The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX 370 Lexington Avenue, New York NY 10017-6550 www.SheffieldAcademicPress.com www. continuumbooks .com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Typeset by Sheffield Academic Press Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by Bookcraft Ltd, Midsomer Norton, Bath

ISBN 0-8264-6200-6

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments Abbreviations

vii ix

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

1

Chapter 2

HEARING VOICES A Distant Voice on Voicing Modern Voices on Voicing Previous Multi-voiced Interpretation

9 9 11 16

Chapter 3

ESTABLISHING THE DIALOGUE Analysis of Dialogic Lament Psalms Analysis of Dialogic Thanksgiving Psalms

28 30 92

Chapter 4

STYLISTIC AND THEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DIALOGIC PSALMS

104

Indicative Interjections in Psalms of Lament Imperative Interjections in Psalms of Lament Content Data for Didactic Interjections Thematic Categories of Didactic Interjections

107 110 112 117

Chapter 5

SOCIO-RHETORICAL CONTEXT Defining'Cult' Bakhtin and Socio-rhetorical Criticism Dialogism and Psalms Psalms and their Socio-ideological Context Socio-rhetorical Conclusions

149 150 156 166 175 193

vi

God in the Dock

Chapter 6

SOME CONTEXTUAL OBSERVATIONS AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS General Conclusions Bibliography Index of References Index of Authors

197 204 207 215 221

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study began with a simple desire to understand better the rhetorical function of voicing in lament psalms. In the process, a whole new theological, philosophical and linguistic world opened up before me. I am indebted to those who aided my receptivity to this new world. John Hayes deserves my deepest gratitude for making me aware of the need for such an undertaking in Psalms study, and for keeping me on the path when I might have strayed. He is not only a brilliant scholar, but a model of generosity and humaneness. Any theoretical contributions this study might make to the field of Psalms research would not have been possible without the sagacious and diligent input of Martin Buss. I cannot thank him adequately. The department of religious studies at Saint Mary's College was kind and supportive enough to make allowances in my workload so that I might finish this project on time. Although not directly involved in this project, the debt of gratitude I owe to Dr Barbara Green, OP, is immeasurable. She is responsible for igniting and nurturing my passion for biblical literature, in general, and dialogic criticism, in particular, and continues to be a model of erudition and dedication to our profession. She was my first true mentor, and now a valuable friend. Last, but far from least, I want to thank my parents, Jerry and Sandra Mandolfo, for always being proud of me, and my partner, Dr Cheshire Calhoun, who's made me a better scholar and person.

This page intentionally left blank

ABBREVIATIONS

AAJR AB ANETS ATLAMPP BES BHT Bib BKAT BO BR BWANT CBQMS CJT ConBOT CRAIBL CThM CTQ FOTL FRLANT HAR HSM Int IRT IS ISBL JAOS JBL JBR JCS JR JSOT JSOTSup Jud LAE

American Academy for Jewish Research Anchor Bible Ancient Near Eastern Texts and Studies ATLA Monograph Preservation Program Biblical Encounters Series Beitrage zur historischen Theologie Biblica Biblischer Kommentar: Altes Testament Berit Olam Biblical Review Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Monograph Series Canadian Journal of Theology Coniectanea biblica, Old Testament Comptes rendus de I 'Academic des inscriptions et belleslettres Calwer Theologische Monographien Concordia Theological Quarterly The Forms of the Old Testament Literature Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Hebrew Annual Review Harvard Semitic Monographs Interpretation Issues in Religion and Theology Interpreter Series Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Bible and Religion Journal of Cuneiform Studies Journal of Religion Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series Judaism Literature of the Ancient Egyptians

X

LAI LAPO LBS LCBI MLBS MSA MT NAcc OBT OCM OTL PEGLBS RelSRev SANE SBLDS SBLSS SBT ScDoc SHCANE STDJ SUNYSJud THL TUMSR TynBul UTPSS VTSup WB WMANT ZA W

God in the Dock Library of Ancient Israel Literatures anciennes du Proche-Orient Library of Biblical Studies Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation Mercer Library of Biblical Studies Monographs on Social Anthropology Masoretic Text New Accents Overtures to Biblical Theology Oxford Classical Monographs Old Testament Library Proceedings of the Eastern Great Lakes Biblical Society Religious Studies Review Sources from the Ancient Near East SBL Dissertation Series SBL Semeia Studies Studies in Biblical Theology Scripta et documenta Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient Near East Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah SUNY Series in Judaica Theory and History of Literature Trinity University Monograph Series in Religion Tyndale Bulletin University of Texas Press Slavic Series Vetus Testamentum, Supplements Welt der Bibel Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

For many generations scholars and readers have attended to the shift in tone—from lament or complaint to praise or thanksgiving—that is a generic feature of most individual lament psalms. What has not been recognized is that these tonal shifts are at times accompanied by a shift in voice, from first person to third person, respectively. In general, whether directly connected to a shift in tone or not, voicing shifts within individual laments have been given little notice. In a number of laments, a third person, didactic voice, is inserted into what otherwise constitutes a prayer (supplicatory discourse directed toward the deity).1 These shifts are recognizable primarily by means of a simple grammatical shift, though content can also play a part in recognition: Psalm 4 v. 2 When I call, answer me, God of my justice (vindication?); when besieged, widen the ramparts for me. Pity me and hear my prayer. v. 3 People, how long will my glory be turned to shame? You love vanity, you seek falsehood, sela. v. 4 Know that YHWH sets apart the devout for himself. YHWH hears when I call to him. v. 5 Tremble and sin not; speak in your heart (contemplate), upon your bed, and be silent, sela.

1. These psalms are: 4; 7; 9; 12; 25; 27; 28; 30-32; 55; 102; 130.1 would prefer the designation 'grievance' or 'protest' rather than 'lament', because it is a more accurate reflection of the stance taken by the supplicant as highlighted in this study. Still, because it is the more common and easily recognized term, I will use 'lament'.

2

God in the Dock v. 6 Offer offerings for a just outcome, and trust YHWH. v. 7 Many say, 'Who will show us good?' Lift upon us the light of your presence, YHWH. v. 8 You have put joy in my heart, (ever since) their grain and wine increased. v. 9 In peace, I will both lie down and sleep; for you, YHWH, alone, cause me to dwell in security.

Based primarily on grammatical markers that will be explained in detail in Chapter 3, Psalm 4 is broken down according to alterations in voicing. The voice of primary interest to this study is italicized; it is marked by a shift to third person discourse, and strikes a very different tone than the supplicant's discourse. Whether the source for this dialogism can be found in the ancient worship practice for which they were surely composed cannot be determined by this study. It is certainly possible that multi-voicing is a literary convention, and not part of some ancient performative context in which liturgical participants spoke or sang these voices antiphonally. Still, at the least, these voices represent different consciousnesses; and the theological upshot of a dialogic reading is profoundly different than one that attributes the different voices to one speaker. This study's primary task will be to make socio-rhetorical and theological observations based on a dialogic understanding of particular psalms. This will be accomplished after a thorough exegetical examination of the voicing phenomenon. Only secondarily will observations be made about actual contexts. At the very least, it will be suggested that these psalms still exhibit remnants of what once was a performative existence (i.e. performed orally, although that doesn't preclude that they simultaneously existed in a written form).2 The 2. W.W. Hallo's reading of neo-Sumerian laments suggests their evolution from Sumerian 'letters of petition', which were deposited at the temple of the god being invoked or read aloud at the temple by a gala singer ('Individual Prayer in Sumerian: The Continuity of a Tradition', JAOS 88 [1968], pp. 71-89, esp. pp. 75-76). Thus, an oral and written incarnation existed simultaneously. It is impossible to know whether or not an oral form preceded the letter form, or if letters were mere substitutes for performed prayer (perhaps the supplicant was too sick or too distant to visit the temple). In any case, the fact that we know these letters were deposited at temples firmly establishes their cultic connection. Whether spoken or oral, their raison d'etre is to communicate efficaciously with the divine. The performative characteristic of voicing shifts is absent from these neo-Sumerian psalms in any case, so their value for

1. Introduction

3

shift in voicing is the primary evidence of a former oral existence.3 As S. Niditchhas observed, an 'oral aesthetic' infuses Hebrew Scripture. The oral mentality of ancient Israel leaves behind hints of orality even in written works, so that the written text is not fully understood or appreciated without knowledge of the oral world: 'To study Israelite literature is to examine the place of written words in an essentially oral world.'4 Of the Psalms specifically she makes the observation that they could have been produced in a written fashion, but with an 'oral rhetoric in mind'.5 Furthermore, a method that pays attention to voicing should help make sense of some of the very confusing rhetoric present in many psalms, which seem to make illogical shifts in mood, voicing and content. M.M. Bakhtin's socio-linguistic theories and philosophical approaches to language will provide the blueprint that will make manifest the significance of reading certain psalms dialogically as opposed to monologically. His work will complement many unique theological observations by grounding those readings in real life—seeing them as a reflection of social conflicts, in which members of Israelite society struggled to express their understanding of YHWH in a way that was loyal, yet authentic and attentive to the often 'unfair' challenges life presented. One theological position both voices can agree on: YHWH is ultimately responsible for all things; for one voice that understanding manifests itself in assertions of YHWH's judicial management of the universe, for another voice it comparison in terms of this study lies in their clear cultic connection. See also K. Seybold, Introducing the Psalms (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1990), p. 196, who offers evidence that in Mesopotamia, prayers of the individual, which were clearly originally performed orally in a cultic ritual, were written down so that they could be used by anyone. Thus, their literary life is closely tied to their cultic life. 3. C. Broyles, The Conflict of Faith and Experience in the Psalms: A FormCritical and Theological Study (JSOTSup, 52; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989), p. 19, in passing, suggests that changes in address may not have been used for literary effect, but rather suited a psalm's usage in worship. 4. S. Niditch, Oral World and Written Word: Ancient Israelite Literature (LAI; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1996), p. 134. 5. Niditch, Oral World, pp. 126-27. She describes the process as 'a written imitation of oral-style literature'. See also R.F. Person, 'The Ancient Israelite Scribe as Performer', JBL 117 (1998), pp. 601 -609, in which he postulates scribes as performers, who did not slavishly copy down oral transmission, but preserved them in such a way that they addressed the ongoing needs of the community. At the same time, though, he contends that scribal work was done under the influence of an oral sensibility, and that we should see signs of that orality in those texts that more clearly originated as oral 'texts' (such as the psalms).

4

God in the Dock

manifests itself in calling YHWH to account for breaches in covenantal responsibilities. Ritual, and specifically performance, theorists will undergird the enterprise—they will help us to understand how, at a functional level, psalms as performance (i.e. oral) literature both reflect, and help mitigate, crises, spiritual and physical.6 Of course, exactly how lament rituals functioned psychologically and socially cannot be answered as easily as one might approach more straightforward historical questions (not that historical questions pertaining to the psalms have been settled, either), but as N. Jay points out, the inexactness of ritual approaches is not a fault in itself: The notion that because we cannot possess the meaning we fail is based on a mistaken idea of understanding. Trying to understand the meaning of ritual is not an act of acquisition but a work of relating; the understanding is not an end point that can be reached so much as it is a movement of turning toward the social world of the ritual actors.7

It is the hope of this study that the best way to 'turn toward' the sociotheological world of ancient Israel is by reading with ears tuned to hear more than one voice, and hence more than one worldview. In this way, we can achieve a more nuanced hearing of those voices that protest and sometimes cast doubt on Israel's more normative theological discourse. Otherwise, those voices are often given less than their due by interpreters who tend to read all biblical voices through the filter of the normative or 'true' Word.8 The phenomenon of voicing shifts has received very little attention by form-critics in the past.9 Despite its monumental contribution to psalms 6. R. Bauman's (Folklore, Cultural Performance, and Popular Entertainments [New York: Oxford University Press, 1992], p. 41) definition of'performance' suits well our understanding of the function and form of lament psalms: performance is a type of communicative event, 'an aesthetically marked and heightened mode of communication, framed in a special way and put on display for an audience'. 7. Jay, Throughout your Generations (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), p. 13. 8. This dynamism has been made the focus of W. Brueggemann's recent theological magnum opus, Theology of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1997). Brueggemann's observations will undergird the theological observations in chapter four of this study. 9. C. Westermann stands out as one who has paid particular attention to the three main subjects of psalmic discourse—supplicant, God, enemies—but this study will focus on non-divine discourse as well as those voicing shifts that are marked by nothing more than grammatical shifts, and are almost never recognized as quotations.

1. Introduction

5

study, form-criticism, traditionally, has been primarily concerned with issues of form, time, place and occasion, while function has been largely neglected.10 While function certainly bears some relation to the notion of Sitz im Leben, the type of function that concerns this study has less to do with physical setting that with ideological setting. To get there, we will ask, How do voicing shifts function, rhetorically, within certain psalms, and then how do multi-voiced psalms function within the religious expression of ancient Israel? This study will rely on form-critical categories and insights, but will take them one step further, by introducing a new approach to psalms study—dialogic criticism. In form critical terms, the outcome of this approach might tempt one to declare a new typological category called 'multi-voiced', or 'dialogic' psalms, but since this phenomenon occurs in psalms that are significantly different from one another, both in style and content, it seems prudent to resist such a move. However, there is a common denominator, other than multi-voicedness, that enables us to link these psalms under a single rubric: the third person voice is distinguished by a didactic quality. The Psalter as a whole has often been understood throughout Jewish history, and later, Christianity, as serving an instructional purpose, in other words as composed of revelatory utterances. As a result its performative and expressive qualities are downplayed." In this vein, the notion of instruction as intrinsic to cultic contexts has not received much attention. J.C. McCann, for example, wants to stress the instructional use psalms finally came to in their latest form: 'Although the Psalms may have originated primarily within the liturgical life of ancient Israel and Judah, they were nonetheless appropriated, preserved, and transmitted as instruction for the faithful.'12 McCann's approach sets up an unnecessary dichotomy between cultic and teaching functions in ancient Israel. I want to walk a middle ground, where cult is seen as the ideological field from which theological instruc-

10. S. Balentine, Prayer in the Hebrew Bible (OBT; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1993), p. 17. 11. Note, in this regard, the tenth-century giant of Jewish scholarship, Saadiah, who even while recognizing that most discourse in the Psalms consists of words to or about God, still characterized them as revelation, meant to provide spiritual and moral instruction. On this see M. Buss, Biblical Form Criticism in its Context (JSOTSup, 274; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), p. 70, and M. Sokolow, 'Saadiah Gaon's Prolegomenon to Psalms', AAJR 51 (1984), pp. 131-74. 12. J.C. McCann, 'The Psalms as Instruction', Int 46, (1992), pp. 117-18.

6

God in the Dock

tion was dispensed from the outset. In other words, from the beginning, psalms were not only words of 'faithful persons to God',13 but also contained words of persons directed to persons. And because these speakers uttered what might be considered God's words in some sense, these psalms had revelatory or didactic characteristics at their inception, not just late in their transmission history, when editorial activity rendered them 'scriptural'. A dialogic reading allows us to see more clearly the integral connections between cult and instruction. In an unpublished dissertation, J. Corvin distinguishes between efficacious and effective prayers.14 Efficacious are those which are meant to bring about a change in the situation through direct appeal to the deity. But there are prayers that are also, if not primarily, meant to bring about a change in the human beings involved in the prayer rite, and that includes the audience as well as the supplicant. These latter are what Corvin calls effective.15 Because of their edificatory objective, these prayers necessarily belonged in a public setting. A number of psalms that are fundamentally of the efficacious type have components that can usefully be classified as effective. For example, in those psalms where praise or thanksgiving is the dominant element, the effective component can be quite significant, sometimes dominating the psalm to the point that it is more testimony than prayer. In fact, the instructional aspect of thanksgiving psalms has long been recognized,16 but in some laments there is also an effective component, though it tends to be more limited, and in the form of brief interjections. These didactic components tend to be accompanied by a shift in voicing.17 This dramatic aspect suggests that they were not intended for 13. McCann, 'Instruction', p. 119. 14. 'A Stylistic and Functional Study of the Prose Prayers in the Historical Narratives of the Old Testament' (PhD dissetation, Emory University, 1972), p. 145. 15. The effective aspect of prayer can be better understood by looking to ritual theories and seeing what they can tell us about the power of ritual to shape and control its practitioners. This will be done in Chapter 5. See also, A. Cronbach, 'The Social Implications of Prayer', in D. Philipson (ed.), Hebrew Union College Jubilee Volume (1875-1925) (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1925), pp. 483-512. 16. S. Mowinckel, Psalms in Israel's Worship, II (New York: Abingdon Press, 1962), pp. 32, 39. Also Seybold, Introducing the Psalms, p. 83. Both make a connection between wisdom psalms and thanksgiving psalms, as the main purpose of both types is to admonish, exhort and testify. 17. But not always. This study will focus on the didactic elements that are accompanied by a voicing shift because the shift helps highlight by contrast those didactic elements. Furthermore, it is through close reading of dialogic lament psalms

1. Introduction

1

just any manner of public setting (like a school where they might have been read for edification), but were performed as part of congregational worship.18 This study will explicate the phenomenon of voicing in the psalms in two stages: First, in Chapter 3,1 will conduct a thoroughgoing grammatical analysis of each psalm, paying particular attention to the didactic voice, thus establishing each one's dialogic structure. Chapters 4 and 5 will be more theoretical in nature; the didactic content of these interjections will be examined as a way of teasing out the implications of the phenomenon for understanding the nature of Israel's religious and ethical worldview. The question that will drive this section is, What can be deduced about Israel's religious and cultural ethos from the fact that instruction played an integral role in Israel's liturgical lament tradition? As a part of this secondary goal, various explanations for the contexts of these psalms will be explored cursorily (Chapter 6), including how they functioned in the cult, as well as possible priestly involvement in the recitation of the psalm ritual.19 Because of the diverse ways in which the interjections operate in the psalms, it is difficult to describe their structure in general terms without going to the texts themselves and working through examples. Still, before proceeding to a detailed analysis of these psalms, it would be useful to lay out the criteria by which I have determined the existence of voicing shifts. The two categories in which the phenomenon manifests itself are: (1) grammatical; and (2) content. Grammatically, the shift can most often be discerned in terms of person and/or number. Looking again to Psalm 4 as an example: v. 2 When I call, answer me, God of my justice (vindication?); when besieged, widen the ramparts for me. Pity me and hear my prayer. v. 4a Know that YHWH sets apart the devout for himself. that the theological tension evident in almost all lament psalms can best be explored. 18. Seybold, Introducing the Psalms, p. 42, identifies the Psalms as a collection of liturgical-devotional texts that served to make individual experiences available for the edification of the whole community. See also, Cronbach, 'Implications', 492-3. 19. By 'cult' I do not necessarily mean formal activity that went on solely within the temple precinct. Cult permeated the culture of ancient Israel on many levels, both public and private. See M. Buss, 'The Meaning of "Cult" and the Interpretation of the Old Testament', JBR 32 (1964), pp. 317-25, for a broad explication of the intricacies of cultic phenomena.

8

God in the Dock

This shift involves a movement from second person discourse addressed to YHWH to third person discourse about YHWH. Since this study involves examination of voicing events, charts that establish changes in both speaker and addressee, where it is possible to distinguish, will be provided. Where it is not possible to distinguish, this too, will be indicated. In several of the psalms under consideration there is frequently a movement in the category of addressee from 2ms direct address (as would be expected in a prayer directed toward YHWH) to 2mp direct address (usually in the form of an imperative) or 3m singular or plural indirect address (where a person or group is being spoken of). Obviously, speaking of a. person or group does not make them an addressee precisely, but to keep confusion to a minimum, it adequately serves the purposes of this study to think of these instances as indirect address. Throughout Psalm 4, for example, the addressee switches back and forth from 2ms to 2mp forms of speech, in addition to a couple of verses of indirect third person address. When the discourse moves away from standard prayer form, it is often difficult to determine addressee. Of course, by definition, the only speaker discernible must be a first common singular or plural voice. In this study, this voice typically calls attention to itself by the use of T or 'me'. Usually, we can fairly label this speaker the petitioner. In Psalm 4, however, there are lines in which no definitive pronoun is used: v. 4a Know that YHWH sets apart the devout for himself.

In cases like this, the speaker may or may not be the petitioner, but the shift in voice and general tone makes such an attribution unlikely. Another tell ing grammatical indicator of multi-voicedness is the change in mood that often accompanies these interjections. It is not surprising to note that frequently the mood that characterizes an instructional interjection is the imperative. In Ps. 4.5-6, for example, we hear a commanding voice that offers the listeners (the imperatives are plural) a lesson in how to remedy a perceived rupture with YHWH. But just as frequently the mood of the didactic interjection remains in the indicative. Not every shift in voice and mood implies a change in speaker, of course, and sometimes a shift may be discerned when the grammar is ambiguous. Content-based clues must be considered alongside grammatical hints. Little can be said about this criterion without going to the texts themselves, so further explication must await Chapter 3.

Chapter 2 HEARING VOICES

1. A Distant Voice on Voicing Although there has been very little modern critical work that has paid attention to the dialogic quality of many psalms, there is an example of premodern scholarship that may serve as our muse in undertaking this study. An example from early twentieth century psalms criticism that acknowledges the phenomenon this study is addressing, and which, as far as I know, has been subsequently neglected, is the work of English scholar, S. Horsley (173 3-1806).' The pre-modern emphasis on the aesthetic value of the psalms may have been one reason for his attention to this phenomenon. While twentieth (and twenty-first) century research, following Hermann Gunkel's lead, has been primarily interested in the sociological setting of narrowly defined genres of psalms, previous research, in the wake of Robert Lowth (1710-87), concentrated on rhetorical and poetic types of biblical literature,2 more broadly construed than we are accustomed to doing, and thus focused more on the literary/poetic characteristics of the literature itself. That is not to say that early exegetes were not aware of 1. S. Horsley, The Book of Psalms (ed. H. Horsley [1776-1847]; London: F.C. & J. Rivington, 1816). Horsley was the bishop of St Asaph after a time as tutor of Christ Church at Oxford and after being assigned domestic chaplain at St Paul's in 1777 by Bishop R. Lowth. At his death he left a legacy of several publications in the fields of science, politics, and theology, as well as a number of sermons (see Sir L. Stephen and Sir S. Lee [eds.], Dictionary of National Biography: Founded in 1882 by G. Smith [London: Oxford University Press, 1917]). T.H. Home (Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures [4 vols.; Philadelphia: E. Littell, 1827]) adopts Horsley's position in this regard without making any further contributions to the subject. 2. For an overview of the history of genre/form-criticism, biblical and otherwise, see Buss, Biblical Form Criticism. Also, Buss's shorter review, 'The Study of Forms', in J.H. Hayes (ed.), Old Testament Form Criticism (TUMSR, 2; San Antonio, TX: Trinity University Press, 1974), pp. 1-56.

10

God in the Dock

finer distinctions within the various types of biblical literature,3 but it was not until the work of Gunkel that an extensive formal system was worked out for the Psalter. Furthermore, I am not suggesting that Gunkel turned away from an interest in aesthetic characteristics. On the contrary, that was a primary focus of his work, but those coming after him have deemphasized that aspect of his scholarship.4 Drawing on Lowth's ground-breaking work on Hebrew poetry, Horsley addresses generic concerns related to the Psalter: The Psalms are all poems of the lyric kind; that is, adapted to music, but with great variety in the style of composition. Some are simply Odes... Some are of the sort called Elegaic... Some are Ethic, delivering grave maxims of life... In all these, the Author delivers the whole matter in his own person. But a very great, I believe the far greater part are a sort of Dramatic Ode, consisting of dialogues between persons sustaining certain characters. In these Dialogue-psalms the persons are frequently the Psalmist himself, or the chorus of Priests and Levites, or the leader of the Levitical band...5

Horsley's descriptions are based mainly on aesthetic and stylistic considerations ('Odes'), or subject matter ('Ethic'). Where his interests intersect with the main interests of this study, is in his assignation of 'Dramatic Ode' to a large number of psalms. Horsley does little more than distinguish the psalms as performative, as well as lay out the differing voices in a few psalms. He does not draw out the implications (whether rhetorical, cultic or ethical) of this distinction. In Psalm 55, for example, he distinguishes between the supplicant's (vv. 1-21, which he breaks down into three parts), an oracular (v. 22) and the psalmist's (v. 23) voices. His 'oracular' voice—'Cast your burden upon YHWH, and He will sustain you. He will never let the just one stumble'—coincides with what I will call the didactic voice in this psalm. However, the distinctions he makes do not seem to be based on grammatical voicing shifts, but rather on content and, perhaps mostly, on intuition. One reason the multi-voiced structure of the psalms has rarely been emphasized might have to do with our relatively modern notions of the 3. One common way of delineating the various types of psalms was to categorize them according to subject matter, a system that for all intents and purposes often looked very similar to Gunkel's classification. 4. See Buss, Biblical Form Criticism, pp. 209-62, for a review of Gunkel's place in the history of ideas. 5. Horsley, The Book of Psalms, pp. xiv-xv.

2. Hearing Voices

11

layout of dramatic works, for example, theatrical or screen plays. Horsley recognizes this possibility when he notes: It is no objection to this notion of Psalms in dialogue, that none of them are distinguished into the parts of the different speakers. In the works of any profane writer, the parts that belong to different persons in a scene are usually distinguished by prefixing, to the beginning of each speech, the initials of the name of the person to which the speech belongs; but this is a modern practice. In the oldest MSS of the ancient Greek plays, the persons of the drama are not so distinguished any more than the persons in the Psalms; but these distinctions have been supplied by Editors... It would be useful...if a paraphrase were given with these distinctions in the proper places, and yet the want of them is not very great; for I will venture to say that a reader of ordinary penetration, who has once had the hint that he is reading a dialogue, will easily perceive to what speakers the different parts of the dialogue belong.6

Interestingly, Horsley's rather broad categorization may actually go farther, or as far anyway, toward helping us assign a context to these psalms than do the specific categories of individual lament or thanksgiving. In the end, it is doubtful that reading some psalms 'dramatically' will allow us to be as specific as Mowinckel's cult-functional approach is in assigning psalms to a specific cultic setting, but it may help cement the relationship between psalms and the cult. And concomitantly, attention to voices should help us discover what socio-rhetorical and theological purpose was served by those voices I have identified as having a didactic role to play in the performance of several psalms. This is not to say that in their extant form, the psalms are actual dramatic 'scripts', but rather that Horsley's observations are astute, and may suggest that in their final form many psalms still retain a remnant of their former cult-dramatic incarnation. I have been unable to find any other scholar of Horsley's age, or otherwise, who has undertaken a like task.7 This study takes it upon itself to once again put the spotlight on and draw out the 'dramatic' spirit of the Psalter. 2. Modern Voices on Voicing Hermann Gunkel is traditionally considered the father of form criticism, a method that he applied to the psalms with profound results. Gunkel was 6. Horsley, The Book of Psalms, pp. xvi-xvii. 7. Horsley does allude to, but does not identify, a' considerable though neglected critic' who understands the Psalms as a sort of'Heroic Tragedy' and to whom, I infer, Horsley is indebted for his views on this matter.

12

God in the Dock

interested first and foremost in how the psalms were used in the religious (whether public or private) life of the ancient Israelites. Furthermore, this cultic (broadly construed)8 orientation to the Psalter continued for nearly 50 years without a real competitor to challenge its supremacy. Recently there has been a move away from reading the psalms as the cultic prayers of ancient Israel and toward understanding them in their context as Scripture.9 This approach tends to understand the Psalter as a type of wisdom book, compiled to be read privately for the edification of the pious.10 This move accords with the gaining popularity over the past two decades of new literary critical methodologies, as well as with B. Childs's notions of canonical criticism, which many see as a subcategory of the new literary approach. Although rarely stated explicitly, this critique reads in the psalms God's word to humanity, and de-emphasizes the performative, or prayerful, aspect of the psalms. The existence of multiple voices, one of which performs a didactic function not unlike the goal of some wisdom literature, illustrates that we have not yet exhausted the efforts to understand the public and ritual role played by the psalms. To set the stage for this endeavor, the following brief review of twentieth-century scholarship will focus on form-critical and cult-functional methods. Throughout the twentieth century, scholars understood the psalms in one of two ways: as the word of humans to God, or as the word of God to humans; in other words, as either prayer or revelation. Form-critical or cult-functional critics concern themselves primarily with the former designation, attempting to discover under what historical circumstances these prayers were directed toward God. Newer literary and canonical critics address themselves to the latter, seeing the psalms in their final form as 8. A definitive understanding of cult has yet to be achieved. As will be discussed in Chapter 5, Gunkel (and Mowinckel) operated with an overly narrow definition of cult. 9. It should be noted that the Catholics, A. Robert and A. Deissler had made moves in the same direction several years earlier. While they were influential in France and Germany, respectively, their work seems to have been subsequently neglected in this particular regard. See especially A. Robert, 'L'exegese des psaumes selon les methodes de la Formgeschichte Schule', in R. Diaz (ed.), Miscellanea Biblica B. Ubach (ScDoc; Montiserrati, 1953); and A. Deissler, Die Psalmen (3 vols.; WB 1; Dusseldorf: Patmos-Verlag, 1963). 10. Or to be read in a non-cultic public setting, such as a school. See G.H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (SBLDS, 76; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985); and J.C. McCann (ed.), The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter (JSOTSup, 159; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992), for studies that exemplify this approach.

2. Hearing Voices

13

wisdom literature meant to edify their readers about God's ways.11 Although somewhat oversimplified, this is a useful way of categorizing the modern history of psalms research. Despite attempts to do otherwise, the Psalter is in a unique position in that it is the only biblical book that can be read almost exclusively as the words of humans to God. The books of the Pentateuch have been read as the words of God to humans, as have the prophets, on the whole, but only the psalms can be characterized throughout as prayer. Psalms as prayer assume a primary dialogic movement from human being to God.12 Psalms as revelation assumes an opposite, but still vertical, movement. A study of didactic interjections assumes neither orientation, but rather a horizontal dynamic—the human-to-human flow of information. In other words, didactic interjections can be read as instruction emanating from humans, and flowing to humans. Needless to say, this communication functions in cooperation with the vertical. In other words, the ritual aim of most psalms is to establish or maintain a connection with the divine, and somehow to assist in the continued ordering of the universe. Furthermore, the didactic elements of laments are quite likely meant to be understood as a counterpart to God's own speech. While the psalms may have undergone permutations since the time of their production, at the very least, we still have 'patterns' in many psalms that seem to reflect their cultic origins. Granting such a postulation, instruction finds its place in the cult. Modern scholarship has been relatively uninterested in pursuing a multivoiced interpretation of the psalms. Although many have acknowledged that a voicing shift occurs in a number of psalms, only here and there has it been suggested that the shift in voice signals a new speaker, except 11. Some premodern scholars also understood the book of Psalms as revelation. As mentioned in a previous note, the medieval Jewish exegete, Saadiah Gaon, considered the psalms as a second Pentateuch, the revelatory word of God bestowed on humanity for the purpose of edification. Furthermore, he noted the many shifts in voicing evidenced in the psalms and this phenomenon, too, he incorporated into his position on the revelatory nature of the Psalter: the change in speakers was understood as ensuring the listeners would not become bored by the teachings being imparted to them. See U. Simon, Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms (SUNYSJud; Albany: SUNY Press, 1991), pp. 1-11; and Buss Biblical Form Criticism, p. 70. 12. Obviously there are some psalms that do not seem to be directed to God, but in general we can still label them prayers in that they are words certainly meant to reach the ears of God. Perhaps it would be useful to distinguish between direct prayers and indirect prayers.

14

God in the Dock

where that voice clearly belongs to the deity (apparently speaking through a human agent). For example, even with Mowinckel's insistence on reading psalms as cultic products, produced for liturgical situations, he is mostly deaf to human-to-human communication in the lament psalms. However, his acknowledgement of the performative aspects of the psalms as a part of one cultic ritual or another is an area where he and this study agree: [I]t [the festival cult] is a sacred drama, representing the salvation which takes place. This dramatic character tallies with the fact that the cult is a mutual act on the part of God and of the congregation, with address and answer, action and reaction.13

While recognizing the dialogic character of many psalms as expressed through the communication between God and the people, Mowinckel rarely shows signs that he is aware of a human-to-human communication present in some psalms, particularly where the petitioner might actually be an addressee. In many places Mowinckel gives examples of his contention that the psalms were dramas performed for the sake of the congregation, replete with a cast of characters. But according to him, these characters, except for the prayer him or herself, typically only speak on behalf of the deity, or in order to quote other people, perhaps the enemies, as in some psalms of lament. For example, in Psalm 12 Mowinckel identifies two voices—the voice of the supplicant and an oracle of YHWH as spoken through the cultic priest or prophet.14 He does not, however, pay any attention to the other shifts in voicing that could suggest multiple voices, or discourses. Much more recently, K. Schaefer expends a small but significant portion of the introduction to his commentary on the phenomenon of voicing shifts.15 He makes little in the way of concrete observations in this regard but he does stipulate a connection between voicing shifts and a liturgical or cultic setting, suggesting that in such psalms as 93, the shifts in voicing can be accounted for by an antiphonal interchange between 'soloist' and 'chorus'. Significantly, he makes this connection for even those psalms that are not typically designated 'liturgical'. For the most part, though, he makes no attempt to parse out these voices, and often assumes that in spite of a shift the speaker in fact does not change. 13. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, I, p. 19. 14. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 76. 15. K. Schaefer, Psalms (BO; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2001), pp. xxiXXV.

2. Hearing Voices

15

Even fewer scholars have been interested in systematically pursuing the didactic characteristics of some psalms, except where the goal is to read the psalms as wisdom literature. More to the point, human-to-human didactic discourse in the psalms has never been the focus of a study. A number of scholars recognize the presence of several parties, including the supplicant and YHWH, in the recitation of the psalms. It is also sometimes noted that a choir joins in to sing a refrain, but, noting this exception, the notion that more than one human voice might be present has almost never been considered. For example, A. Weiser pays attention to the many psalms in which a shift in voice from second to third person address takes place, but he accounts for this, quite reasonably, by postulating a change in addressee rather than speaker.16 In other words, where the petitioner was speaking to YHWH, she then switches to addressing the congregation. Weiser cites Ps. 32.8 as an example. The problem with such a reading is that the pronominal suffix used for the addressee in v. 8 is 2ms rather than the 2mp we would expect if a congregation were being addressed. When it comes to identifying speakers and addressees in multi-voiced psalms, this inattention to grammatical details is not unusual. Another common explanation is that 32.8 contains the words of God spoken by a prophet.17 Gerstenberger is the only commentator I have found who suggests that vv. 8-9 constitute human instruction in the context of a liturgy,18 but he does not elaborate. Most scholars seem fairly wedded to the notion that the pray-er's voice is the only human voice, with rare exceptions, that we hear in the psalms. What may lie behind this predisposition are modern notions of ownership and authority that even Mowinckel, with his cultic sensitivities, was unaware of. For most moderns, the term 'prayer' connotes something very personal; it belongs solely to the one praying it. One's prayer does not include another's voice. Even if performed publicly, in the cult, it is not expected that any voice other than that of God's will respond to the petitioner. But it is probably the case that in ancient Israel the notion of a purely private relationship with the deity was not part of the religious ideology. There may have been religious officials in ancient Israel who claimed authority from God and at the same time spoke, more or less, in 16. A. Weiser, The Psalms (OIL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962), p. 69. 17. H.J. Kraus, Psalmen, I ( BKAT 15.1-2; Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 5th edn, 1978), pp. 405-406; L. Delekat, Asylie und Schutzorakel am Zionheiligtum (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967), p. 74. 18. E. Gerstenberger, Psalms (FOIL, 14; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), p. 142.

16

God in the Dock

their own voice. Roman Catholic priests come closest in Christian circles to this type of authority. In the confessional, the penitent confesses to and receives moral instruction from the priest. It is acknowledged that the priest speaks with divine authority, but it is also the case that the priest is not speaking the word of God in quite the same way that we understand prophets in ancient Israel to be speaking in God's own voice, understood by the formulaic phrases 'thus says YHWH', 'utterance of YHWH', etc. Form-critical and cult-functional methods have helped develop the rhetorical and historical tools needed to understand better those psalms that contain didactic interjections, but have not been employed as yet to study systematically the phenomenon. Apart from the bias of modern religious sensibilities, another, more concrete, reason why such a study has not been undertaken is that since Gunkel, form critics have typically worked with established generic categories, each of which have several characteristics in common with several other psalms (including similar terminology, often syntactically arranged in similar ways and conveying a similar state of mind). Didactic interjections are never listed as one of these characteristics simply because they seem to occur willy-nilly, crossing generic boundaries and occurring in only about 20 per cent of the Psalter. This type of multi-voicedness could constitute a distinct category of its own, but to label as a separate genre the psalms containing it would be pushing the accepted understanding of the term 'genre'. Unlike most form-critical categories, this phenomenon takes on a different form and function from psalm to psalm, depending on the rhetorical goal of the particular genre in which it is utilized. Furthermore, the content and tone vary significantly. The only consistent features are a change in voice along with a didactic content. Further, there is not any theme or tone of voice in the psalms in which the interjections appear that can lead us to postulate a single life setting ('cult' is too broad a setting to be satisfactory in this regard). These factors contribute to the difficulties encountered in studying instructional elements in multi-voiced psalms. 3. Previous Multi-voiced Interpretation We are ready to look at instances in which scholars have indeed recognized more than one voice in several psalms, or have noted in them the presence of horizontal discourse. None of these readings, though, makes a systematic attempt to explain the grammatical phenomenon on which this study is based.

2. Hearing Voices

17

To date, there seems to be three main categories of multi-voiced interpretation: (1) oracular interjections (or indications of such even when they do not actually appear in the psalm); (2) those psalms (or parts of) that seem to reflect wisdom themes and language and are thus thought to be directed to human audiences (in cases where the whole psalm seems to be a wisdom address, there may not be more than one voice present); and (3) psalms frequently called liturgical psalms that have antiphonal elements and that may have been sung in part by the congregation or choruses. The first and third categories include examples of psalms where shifts in voicing have been discerned, but in these cases the non-petitioner voice(s) does not necessarily include a didactic element. On the other hand, the wisdom psalms certainly are characterized by an instructional tone, only a couple of which, though, also include a shift in voicing. By looking at previous work that considers all the components about which we are concerned (even if these components are not brought together as a distinct subject of study), we will be better able to define the parameters of'didactic interjections' as understood in this study. Oracular Interjections As early as H. Gunkel and J. Begrich, the notion that the ritual accompanying many psalmic petitions included a divine oracle has been routinely accepted, although the details have been disputed. Mowinckel suggested that supplicants in distress would seek guidance from a priest, or some other cultic functionary, and that the response they subsequently received was in the form of an oracle.19 Strictly defined, an oracle is simply 'a word of God'. In some psalms, direct, first person speech by the deity is made explicit. In others, it is missing altogether and only a rhetorical gap marks where an oracle may have been inserted during the course of the prayer. Sometimes all that is recorded is an 'imitation' oracle, in which God's speech is recorded indirectly, in the third person. In still others, there is an ambiguous voicing shift, containing oracle-like elements, but the identity of the speaker is unclear. In terms of actual, first person oracles, Gunkel and Begrich believed they were delivered by a priest, speaking for the deity.20 The oracle itself rarely shows up, even in lament psalms, where we would most expect it. In Ps. 60.12-14, there is an indication that a inquiry has been answered, although the actual oracle goes unrecorded: 19. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 53. 20. H. Gunkel and J. Begrich, Einleitung in die Psalmen (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), pp. 370-75.

18

God in the Dock Is it not that you, O God, have rejected us? You do not go out, O God, with our army. Grant us help against enemies; For worthless is the assistance of humankind. With God we will do mightily; He will trample our enemies.21

Although there is a shift in addressee, the speaker, responding to an unrecorded oracle, may remain the same. In many psalms the existence of an oracle is less certain. In Psalm 62, for example, we may have the case of a petitioner bringing his or her hardship to the temple, directing a petition to YHWH, and then waiting 'in silence only for God' for an answer (w. 1,6). It seems in v. 12 an answer has been given. It is possible that vv. 10-11 record the actual oracle, but there seems little about them that could be described as an oracle or promise. They are strongly didactic instead and are reminiscent of themes often found in wisdom literature. It is true that the change in mood in v. 9 may indicate a change in voice, but whether that voice should be understood as a divine voice, or rather as a second human voice, cannot be determined without a more thorough rhetorical investigation.22 Psalm 12.6 may be one of the few psalms that, directly or indirectly, actually maintains a record of an oracle.23 In this case, it seems clear that we have at least two distinct discourses operating—first, the petitioner; then in response, YHWH. This is made explicit by the use of ill IT "IDS'1 in that same verse. Unlike Psalm 62, Psalm 12 records the kind of response we would expect from an oracle. Instead of only two voices, though, there may actually be three voices operating in this psalm—the petitioner; YHWH; and a third, providing instruction. This possibility will be investigated in the following chapter. The phrase ITIiT HQN* is reminiscent of the prophetic phrases used to 21. Translation mine, as are all biblical excerpts unless otherwise stated. 22. It is also possible that the expression of confidence found in v. 12 (and in many other psalms of complaint) was not the result of an oracle, but may have served a more purely rhetorical function (Buss, Biblical Form Criticism, p. 470). 23. SeePss. 12.6; 20.7; 27.5, 14; 35.3; 60.8-10; 91.14-16; 108.8-10 (italicizedare those psalms that will be covered in this study). Mowinckel adds 21.9 to the list, but there is little sign of an oracle. In the majority of these the oracle itself is not preserved, only hints that an oracle may have been a regular part of a ritual of petition. Mowinckel includes general promises that occur in the psalms as a form of oracle (Israel's Worship, II, 61-2.). Hence, he examines Pss. 2; 45; 89; 110; and 132 in his section on cultic prophecy.

2. Hearing Voices

19

mark speech of YHWH and makes clear that we are dealing with what is intended to be vertical speech. In fact, this is one piece of evidence that leads Mowinckel to suggest, against Gunkel and Begrich, that the psalmic oracles were relayed by a cultic prophet rather than a priest.24 Using comparisons drawn from ancient Mesopota*mian and Arabian customs, he argues that Israel's first priests were originally custodians of the sanctuary, oracle priests, or 'seers', not yet the sacrificial practitioners they later became. They were responsible for the casting of lots with 'Urim and Thummim' in a quest for answers to petitions. After the settlement in Canaan, there developed a distinction between two types of revelation: priestly (which still included Urim and Thummim and more 'official' modes of revelation), and prophetic (which consisted of more spontaneous, ecstatic modes of revelation). The prophetic role also included that of intercessor, that is, the prophet may have been the one responsible for praying for the congregation.25 While affirming the existence of a distinct kind of prophet who was connected to the temple, Mowinckel concedes that it would have been difficult to distinguish between priest and prophet when both were working under the auspices of the temple cult.26 Given Mowinckel's desire to locate psalms within the temple-cultic apparatus, it is not surprising that if there was any connection between Israel's psalmody and its prophets, then Mowinckel would find a connection between those prophets and the temple. Mowinckel compares these cultic prophets to the 'seers' of Babylon who were included among the temple personnel. For Mowinckel, the strongest argument for prophetic involvement in the psalmic oracle is his distinction between the form of prophetic utterance and what he perceives would have been the priestly 'style' had they been responsible for the revelatory proclamation. Basing his conclusions on the form of priestly torah as found in the Pentateuch, he expects to find in the psalms either an apodictic or casuistic style of address, one that is commanding and didactic, rather than the 'picturesque' style preserved in the Psalter. Instead, As far as the psalms are concerned, neither the promises ('oracles') of Yahweh that have been handed down to us, nor those that may be inferred

24. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 53. 25. See also, A.R. Johnson, The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1944), pp. 50-51; and S.H. Hooke, Prophets and Priests (IS, 3; London: T. Murby & Co., 1938). 26. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship,II, p. 58.

20

God in the Dock from different allusions, have this [apodictic or casuistic] form; they are all of them clearly and distinctly kept in the usual prophetic style.27

His assumption that priestly oracles would have to follow the form of priestly torah does not necessarily follow. It seems just as likely that the prophets borrowed from the corpus of communal worship forms, finding a discourse accessible to the multitude. Mowinckel says as much when he argues against the long-held opinion that hymns found in the Psalter are reliant on forms borrowed from Second Isaiah, and that furthermore, there are many examples of prophets borrowing from the Psalter.28 Overall, his message seems mixed: cultic prophets delivered oracles in a 'prophetic' style, but prophetic literature, in general, shows signs of having relied heavily on psalmic forms. Relying on comparative ANE literature, I. Engnell is a strong proponent of prophetic dependence on psalmic material: The psalms as cult poetry represent an older and more original type of piety and Sitz im Leben, which the Prophets presuppose and upon which they depend to a large extent... The Prophets are also the ones who receive, and not the ones who give, as far as language, form, and style are concerned: they draw from the ancient sacral language which is to be found, in part, in the psalms with their fixed liturgical terms and phrases, their forms and figures.29

This is to be expected, according to Engnell, because prophets played an important role in the cult, especially by mediating and proclaiming the oracle. His views parallel Mowinckel's in this regard. The fact that many psalms share a style with prophetic literature does not, in my opinion, necessarily mean that prophets were involved in the cultic recitation of certain psalms. Instead, if it is as Mowinckel, Engnell and others have suggested that the prophets relied on the psalms, then the psalm material may have been primary, and its similarity with prophetic poetry cannot be used to argue for the existence of prophetic involvement in rites connected with the psalms. Buss offers a logical compromise to the personnel question: both priests and prophets served as divine mediators in the cult, only in different cir27. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 58. 28. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship I, p. 190. 29. I. Engnell, 'The Book of Psalms', in John T. Willis (ed.), A Rigid Scrutiny: Critical Essays on the Old Testament (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1969), pp. 68-122, esp. p. 108. See also A. Bentzen, Introduction to the Old Testament, I (Copenhagen: G.E.C. Gad, 1961), pp. 163-64, where he states that the prophets used liturgical forms, and particularly the liturgical torah (see Hag. 2.11), when they wanted to teach the people the commandments of God.

2. Hearing Voices

21

cumstances; and furthermore, neither prophetic speech nor psalmic speech supercedes the other.30 He distinguishes between particular and general oracles. The former would have been offered to a supplicant by a prophetic figure in answer to a specific request or dilemma. This is in contrast to the psalms that tend to contain more general oracular statements, usually about YHWH's attributes. These, Buss believes, were probably delivered by members of the Levitical caste who were responsible for the general education of the people.31 He is quick to point out that the categories of prophet and priest were not mutually exclusive. One could have been a priest by descent and a prophet by calling.32 What is most useful about this theory is that it frees us from having to assign either priest or prophet to the role of divine mediator; both may have been involved, depending on the particular need or context. In any case, it is only a secondary, if interesting, goal of this study to determine precisely who speaks the different voices. If psalms were part of large-scale liturgical rituals (or even smallerscale, yet still 'official', set rites) it makes some sense that the oracular utterances they contain would have been of a general sort. Furthermore, oracles not designed to answer a particular need or request would naturally assume didactic overtones, becoming venues for broad ethical formation. Still, we must be careful here not to mix apples and oranges—oracles are, by definition, instances of vertical discourse, while didactic interjections may be understood as horizontal discourse. The ways in which these two types of interjections relate will concern us in the exegetical work to follow. As we will see, it can be very difficult to distinguish between a word of YHWH and a human voice being interjected into a prayer. Perhaps human-to-human didactic interjections in the psalms are simply stylized oracles by which means the one delivering the psalmic instruction in the midst of a liturgy is coopting divine authority? There are some explicit instances in the psalms of divine discourse, but there are many more instances of ambiguous voicing. It remains to be seen if there can be established any objective criteria that will enable us to distinguish between human and divine discourse. 30. M. Buss, 'The Psalms of Asaph and Korah', JBL 84 (1963), pp. 382-92. 31. Buss, 'Asaph', pp. 385-86. Education as a responsibility of the Levites is widely accepted. See J. Blenkinsopp, Sage, Priest, Prophet (LAI; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995), p. 82. Of course, the distinction between priest and Levite complicates matters. 32. Buss, 'Asaph', p. 390.

22

God in the Dock

Wisdom Psalms These are often considered human-to-human communication, as is the case with most wisdom literature. In addition, those psalms that include only a small section that is wisdom-like often include a voicing shift. Sometimes only the addressee switches, most often from God to the congregation, but sometimes the new addressee may just as well be the petitioner, in which case there is clearly a change in speaker. There is very little agreement on which psalms to label wisdom. Entire psalms that parallel wisdom themes (e.g. emphasis on torah or an acrostic style, etc.) and seem to have no obvious connection to liturgy (e.g. Pss. 1; 19; 119) are fairly universally defined as wisdom psalms. The status of others that only have some wisdom elements are disputed. Of late, there has been a huge body of scholarship accumulating on this question by those reading the psalms in their final form as literature, rather than as performative texts. Focusing on the last stages of the editorial process, many of them read the entire Psalter through a wisdom lens, attributing the wisdom elements to wisdom redactors.33 In other words, going back to the distinction I made previously, they choose to read the Psalter on the whole as revelation. In addition, scholars often locate these psalms outside the cult, in terms of both composition and usage. It should be noted, however, that there are those who deny the existence of wisdom psalms altogether, notably I. Engnell: It is now generally thought that the psalms in the Book of Psalms were revised for the purpose of making them edifying literature. Some scholars think that this may be explained by assuming that the final redaction of the Book of Psalms as a body of literature was partly accomplished in scribal circles, and not in priestly circles connected with the cult. However, this point of view should not be overemphasized, partly because it clearly rests on the assumption that the Book of Psalms contains several so-called Wisdom Psalms, which is by no means true.34

The didactic elements of many psalms that most assume have their provenance in sapiential circles, Engnell believes belonged to Torah liturgies originally connected with the king.35 He cites Psalm 1 as exemplary: 33. L. Perdue (Wisdom and Cult [SBLDS, 30; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977], however, does consider the possibility that so-called wisdom elements are intrinsic to the Psalter and that the later sages and scribes learned part of their style from cultic prayer. 34. Engnell, 'Book of Psalms', pp. 75-76. 35. Engnell, 'Book of Psalms', p. 100.

2. Hearing Voices

23

This psalm is a kind of 'word of blessing' connected with a so-called [tz?daqah]-\.sfo\Q, a 'mirror for kings', and therefore is one of those psalms which in reality are the basis for the parenetic style, which both prophetic and 'sapiential' circles adopted from the cult.36

In addition, terminology typically thought to be derived from the wisdom tradition (e.g. the language used to describe 'the two ways' as found in Pss. 1,112, etc.) should rather be understood, according to Engnell, as an intrinsic part of the cult where Israel's ethical standards were cultivated. Similarly, he refutes the claim that acrostic psalms (e.g. 119) are mere shadows of their wisdom counterparts and asserts an opposite direction of influence.37 As early as neo-Sumerian laments we have evidence of a mixing of genres, lyric and wisdom.38 This would seem to argue against an evolutionary understanding of wisdom elements in psalms as occurring only late. There may have been sharing from the beginning, or as Engnell would seem to imply, the cult, being the earlier institution, may have been the primary locus of development for those aspects usually considered to belong to wisdom circles. Thus, we may have some evidence that instruction was a function of the cult during pre-exilic times, and not just the later imposition of sages, or even only a late wisdom influence. Engnell's views notwithstanding, Psalm 1 is fairly universally deemed a wisdom psalm, because of its focus on torah and the 'two ways', as well as the style of the poem which comes very close to what one might see in Proverbs.39 Most argue it was a late addition, composed for use in an educational or private setting distinct from the cult. Psalm 34, on the other hand, is an excellent example of a thanksgiving psalm that employs wisdom elements, but still shows clear cultic connections. In this case, the call to praise in v. 4 is one indicator of the psalm's liturgical character. The occurrence of voicing shifts that include didactic discourse is another indication of its performative character. Thanksgiving psalms commonly include didactic elements in the form of exhortations to the congregation.40

36. Engnell, 'Book of Psalms', p. 100. 37. Engnell, 'Book of Psalms', pp. 100-101. 38. Hallo, 'Individual'. 39. This psalm does not have any voicing shifts, but it may still have been a cultic piece. In other words, it's possible to understand the entire psalm as a type of sermon. This is a possibility for other wisdom psalms as well. 40. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 89, suggests that the frequent use of wisdom themes in thanksgiving psalms is an indication that wisdom literature and cultic traditions equally influenced one another. Many scholars have tried to establish a flow of influence in one

24

God in the Dock

The didactic elements of this, and other multi-voiced thanksgiving psalms, as well as this study's observations involving didactic elements rarely noted in lament psalms, can shed light on the role of instruction within Israel's cult.41 Gerstenberger argues that all wisdom psalms were originally composed to be used liturgically. But in terms of dating he believes they reflect the concerns of the later synagogal community whose aim was the edification and orientation of its members. Furthermore, he says that many of them should be understood as prayers; that is, as discourse directed toward God, not as wisdom literature*2 In general, I think this is true, except that within the psalms that only inject wisdom language selectively into their discourse, we may be hearing humans instructing other humans. Mowinckel acknowledges both aspects when he says, In spite of the didactic character of the 'learned psalmography', it has one characteristic in common with genuine psalmography; these poems are, and must be considered as, prayers. Like every real psalm, they address God, even though they often address men as well.43

Unexpectedly, Mowinckel concludes that these psalms may have been part of a cult-free psalmography developed by learned laymen who were the intellectual heirs of the cultic prophets and temple scribes. Still, he concedes that many of the composers of wisdom psalms may have been Levitic priests who were in charge of composing and collecting cultic hymns, and so may have indeed composed these works (especially, for instance, thanksgiving psalms) for use in cultic ceremonies.44 For the most part, though, he believes that those psalms he considers originally private poetry came into the cult at a later time when the scribes who were editing the final collection included some poems familiar to them from settings other than a worship service.45 All said, there is little reason to ascribe didactic elements solely to a non-cultic setting. As J. Corvin points out, public prayer provides a perfect pedagogical opportunity: 'If education is direction or the other, usually arguing for the influence of wisdom upon psalmography (see J.C. McCann, G. Wilson, et al. cf. also Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 112). 41. A. Laytner is one who understands instruction as one of the main functions of laments (Arguing with God: A Jewish Tradition [Northvale, NJ: J. Aronson, 1990]). 42. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 20. 43. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 108. 44. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 110. 45. Those he considers originally private poetry include Pss. 1; 19; 34; 37; 49; 78; 105; 106; 111; 112; 127.

2. Hearing Voices

25

best achieved during the time of greatest attention, then it was inevitable that the didactic motive would become associated with prayer. Both prayer and education were important and complementary aspects of Israel's religion.'46 He is concerned mostly to point out the obvious edifying features of the thanksgiving psalms and hymns, even while maintaining their status as prayers. He asserts that many of these psalms were prayed as much for the benefit of a secondary audience as for YHWH. Psalms 34 and 66 are excellent examples of the crucial role the congregation played in the performance of this type of psalm: Let me bless YHWH at all times; His praise is in my mouth continually. My soul will boast about YHWH; The poor will hear and they will rejoice. Magnify YHWH with me! And let us exalt his name together (34.2-4). Come! Hear! And let me recount for all who fear God what He has done for me (66.16).

The fact that psalms of this type often speak of God in the third person raises the question whether or not they should be considered actual prayers. The human-to-human didactic element (of which only a part is quoted here) certainly goes beyond a few interjectory lines, unlike most of the lament psalms with which we will be dealing. Still, the psalms of praise can help fill in the picture of the divers ways didactic elements function in the psalms, and in the cult, as a whole. Liturgical Psalms Lastly, there is a peculiar category of psalm, often multi-voiced, that few scholars have been able to label satisfactorily. These psalms are often called 'liturgical'. This designation is misleading since so many psalms are understood to have functioned liturgically within the cult. Westermann's definition is the simplest: Those psalms are called liturgies which are clearly shaped by some liturgical activity, those in which a combination of liturgical speech with liturgical action can be recognized. In its simplest form this might consist only of clearly recognizable antiphonal dialog. Such antiphonal dialog at worship always presupposes, as far as we know, an activity (stylized as it may be): 46. Corvin, 'Stylistic', p. 149.

26

God in the Dock an interchange between two groups, or between a liturgist and a congregation—summons and response to a summons.47

Mowinckel even puts laments containing signs of an oracle in this category because of their antiphonal characteristics.48 The designation 'liturgical' should not be considered a distinct genre. These psalms often belong to another genre, the secondary designation being tacked on to describe the performative features of that particular psalm. Psalm 118, for example, is a hymn that also clearly has antiphonal elements. Verse 27 implies some sort of sacrificial procession, as well, lending more credence to the liturgical designation. Not surprisingly, pilgrimage songs, such as Psalm 122, and Songs of Zion (which can be thought of as pilgrimage songs), such as 15, 24, 48 and 76, are also included in this group. Psalms 15, 24, 48 and 76 also happen to have a didactic element. In Psalm 24.3, the worshippers arrive at the gate of the temple complex and ask a question: 'Who shall ascend to the mountain of YHWH?' They receive an answer, apparently from a priest, in the form of instruction about how to be pHH enough to enter the temple area. Psalm 15 has a very similar form, except that in this case it seems to be YHWH responding to the question. It has been frequently noted that these psalms include several voices, perhaps having parts sung by several choirs.49 While antiphonal psalms could be considered human-to-human discourse in some instances, they are not necessarily didactic; the interjection is more like a refrain and is thus a stylistic rather than a functional feature. In sum, we are confronted with many different psalm types that include a shift in voicing. This obviously complicates our task of defining and understanding the function of didactic interjections in psalms of lament and thanksgiving, but the previous review should allow us to focus on our specific objectives. This is probably best done by making explicit the ways in which the categories of voicing shifts just reviewed compare and 47. C. Westermann, The Psalms: Structure, Content and Message (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980), p. 97. 48. Mowinckel,Israel's Worship,II, p. 75. 49. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 75. Cf. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 17. Many hymns, because of their call to worship, could be included in this category. Most of these psalms will not be the concern of this study because the voicing shifts are not particularly didactic, and have been identified numerous times in the past. They are very formulaic and probably can not add much to our knowledge of Israel's worship services or socio-theological ethos. Many neo-Sumerian psalms share similarities with Hebrew psalms, containing frequent exhortations to sing the deity's praises and respond antiphonally (Hallo, 'Individual', p. 74).

2. Hearing Voices

27

contrast with this study's approach to didactic interjections. Oracular interjections: Scholars studying this phenomenon are concerned to find instances of divine speech (or imitations thereof) interjected into the various psalms types. In laments, oracles seem to occur most specifically as answers to petitions. On the other end of the spectrum, in hymns, oracles seem more general, consisting simply of the deity's selfascription. The dialogic psalms in which God is clearly speaking in first person speech are outside the purview of this study. They are often didactic on some level, but are an intrinsic component of vertical prayer discourse, which expects a response from the deity, and thus are not 'interjections' per se into a prayer between a speaker (or speakers) and God. However, Psalm 12, which shows evidence of an oracular utterance does fall within the range of this study because it contains mixed divine speech and non-divine (i.e. horizontal) interjections. Wisdom psalms: These are clearly didactic horizontal discourse, but in some instances include no shifts in voicing and thus are not inter]ectory. Furthermore, the 'torah' psalms, such as Pss. 1,19 and 119, are extremely difficult to locate in the cult and show no obvious signs of being performed. There is the possibility, by analogy, of explaining them as long homilies by showing their thematic and terminological similarities with the didactic interjections. In the end, any attempt of this sort would be speculative in the extreme. Neither the cultic nor non-cultic provenance of these psalms can be established with any degree of certainty.50 The 'wisdom' psalms that will directly concern us are those that include wisdom elements but still exhibit explicit performative qualities, like Psalm 32. In other words, we will work with only those psalms in this category whose instructional elements are interjected into a discourse belonging primarily to another voice. For the sake of clarity, it would be wise to distinguish between wisdom psalms and psalms containing 'instructional' elements. Liturgical psalms: Not much need be said of this category. Antiphonal songs, by definition, are multi-voiced, but only those that interject a distinct didactic message will concern us. Furthermore, unlike the majority of the psalms containing didactic interjections, these are more often communal psalms and would require special classification as the performative quality seems to be serving a purpose consistent with the practices of communal psalmic ritual, and any didactic function seems purely auxiliary. 50. It should be noted, however, against much recent scholarship, that the similarities between these psalms and multi-voiced psalms with didactic voicing shifts suggests the possibility that they too arise from cultic rather than lay wisdom circles.

Chapter 3 ESTABLISHING THE DIALOGUE At this point, it is assumed that the phenomenon being investigated is, at the very least, identifiable on a textual level, even if it cannot be proved to be a reflection of actual ancient performances. The presence of voicing shifts in a number of psalms is a reality in and of itself, the exploration of which can illuminate our reading of these particular psalms, as well as the entire Psalter. Furthermore, in the event our reading conflicts with actual ancient usage (something we can probably never know with certainty) we can be assured, whether it was intentional or not, that the original composers of these psalms have provided us with 'inside' information on the worldview under which they operated, and from which emanates the theology and ethos reflected in the psalms. After the textual evidence has been explored, it will be the task of the later, more theoretical, chapters to explore the limits of what can be deduced about the rhetorical and theological message, as well as the physical setting of multi-voiced psalms. Many more psalms than appear in this study could arguably be placed in the multi-voiced, or dialogic, category. To provide as succinct an introduction as possible to the phenomenon, it seems wisest to limit this particular analysis to only those psalms that most obviously fit the criteria already covered in the introduction, that is, those psalms that primarily occur in the form of a prayer (human-to-deity discourse), but into which are inserted interjections that play a didactic role in the psalm. The majority of these are lament psalms, but Psalms 30 and 32, usually identified as thanksgiving psalms, will also be analyzed.' These two prayers, both of which contain a fairly thorough lament, as well as a didactic element, will help round out the study. In the following exegetical work, grammatical and thematic data will be analyzed to determine the delineation of discourses. For the sake of simplicity, the terms 'speaker', 'actor', 'addressee', etc. will be used to 1.

Sometimes Ps. 32 is categorized as a penitential psalm.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

29

make distinctions between discourses that perform different rhetorical tasks within the psalm. Thus, the use of the terms 'voice', 'speaker' and 'discourse' should be taken as delineating separate rhetorical roles within each psalm, and not necessarily as dependent on the actual context in which they operated. For the time being, 'performative' should be understood as indicative of the dialogic quality they possess, distinct from issues of setting. Although for now real contexts are mostly set aside, one basic assumption regarding the context in which these psalms originally functioned is made. That the provenance of many psalms is found in the cult is something that has long been understood,2 and this study will not take the time to revisit this argument in much more detail than has already been done. In fact, at the conclusion of this study it will become clear that the existence of dialogic psalms bolsters theories that situate psalms within a cultic sphere. In the translation, the verses are broken down according to structural composition, as well as voicing considerations, with the didactic interjections placed in italics. Likewise, in the chart that follows each translation, the didactic segments also appear in italics. The chart detailing the structure of the discourse is broken down to fit the divisions indicated in the translation. The category 'nature of discourse' provides a description of the generic components of each psalm. The terminology used under this heading follows that which has been used in many standard form-critical treatments of the psalms over the years.3 For example, it is widely recognized that lament psalms are composed of, with varying consistency, an invocation, lament, petition, affirmation of confidence, etc. Due to the acknowledgment of dialogical characteristics in the psalms analysed, the description of the structure deviates from typical form-critical studies by the inclusion of an instructional or descriptive component assigned to a discourse performing a didactic role. In the column designated 'speaker' the persona responsible, rhetorically, for the discourse is listed. No attempt will be made at this point to establish this identity with any certainty, but only terms that are descriptive of the role they play in the psalm will be used. Since I have chosen to 2. The understanding of cult assumed in this study will be fully detailed in a later chapter. For now, cult or cultic will merely mean pertaining to the (mainly public) religious sphere. 3. In particular, though, I tend to follow Gerstenberger' s terminology as found in Psalms. His terms do not differ much from the classic works, such as Gunkel's and Mowinckel's.

30

God in the Dock

deal only with those psalms that fit the category of 'prayer', the role of speaker will usually be assigned to what I am calling the 'petitioner'. In the parentheses that often follow, the grammatical evidence for making such a determination is indicated. For example, 'Ics' alludes to the first common singular pronouns or suffixes employed in the pertinent verses. The other designation that will occur in this column, 'didactic voice' (for stylistic ease hereafter often referred to as 'DV') is never followed by parenthetical information. In fact, the lack of determinative pronouns in the verse or verses characterized as such is one of the criteria used to determine a shift in voice. In the column designated 'addressee' is indicated whether the speech is directed toward a divine or a human audience. Pronominal information is provided in the parentheses that follow. When the addressee is identified as human, the information in the parentheses indicates in what way, if any, the discourse is still oriented toward the deity. This will usually take the form of '3ms ref to deity', which simply means that the deity is being spoken of, rather than spoken to. As expected, the didactic discourses will always be assigned a human addressee, only the number will vary. In the notes that follow the charts, the information summarized in the charts will be explicated. In the first set of notes, the focus will be on grammar and structure. In the second set of notes, content will be the focus, with an emphasis on the way in which the discourses dialogically interrelate. This will include identifying the main thrust of the petitioner's discourse, as well as the didactic discourse, and then juxtaposing them to see where they are in tension and where they are comparable or complementary. In this way, the worldview assumed by the discourses can be made explicit. For the sake of maintaining a logical flow of argument, comments on the structure of a psalm will, from time to time, naturally include some allusion to content, but only in so far as it assists in explaining a grammatical or structural point. 1. Analysis of Dialogic Lament Psalms Psalm 4 v. 2 When I call, answer me, God of my justice; when besieged, widen the ramparts for me. Pity me and hear my prayer. v. 3 People, how long will my glory be turned to shame? You love vanity, you seek falsehood, sela.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

31

v. 4 Know that YHWH sets apart the devout for himself. YHWH hears when I call to him. v. 5 Tremble and sin not; speak in your heart (contemplate), upon your bed, and be silent, sela. v. 6 Offer offerings for justice (for a just outcome), and trust YHWH. v. 7 Many say, 'Who will show us good?' Lift upon us the light of your presence, YHWH. v. 8 You have put joy in my heart; their grain and wine have increased, v. 9 In peace, I will both lie down and sleep; for you, YHWH, alone, cause me to dwell in security. verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2

invocation and petition challenge to opponents description of YHWH affirmation of confidence exhortation petition thanksgiving

petitioner petitioner or YHWH didactic voice petitioner didactic voice indeterminate petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms) human (2mp) human (3ms refto deity) human human (mp imv) deity deity (2ms)

3 4a

4b 5-6 1 8-9

Notes on Structure. This psalm is typically understood as an individual lament. Read dialogically, it moves from petition to instruction to resolution. The verses in which YHWH is directly addressed by a 1 cs voice (vv. 2, 8-9) form an inclusio around the body of the psalm. In v. 3 the addressee switches but the person and number of the speaker remain the same. Is this still the petitioner, or might it be the voice of the deity? It would take more than an internal grammatical study to make this determination. One might want to consider, for example, that in the Psalter "DID is used overwhelmingly as a characteristic of God. Still, Gerstenberger points out several instances in which this type of reproachful admonition is ascribed to humans in the Bible.4 In the Psalms it is unusual for the plaintiff to address her adversaries so directly. It is not imperative to solve this ambiguity at present. Most important for our purposes are those places where the speaker is indeterminable and the content of the discourse has a didactic quality. These would include 4.

Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 55.

32

God in the Dock

vv. 5-6, and perhaps 4a. In each of these cases we have a human addressee, and YHWH is spoken of in the third person. This is in contrast to those verses where a 1 cs actor speaks to God directly (we can safely attribute this voice to the petitioner). The use of mp imperatives (-lin-l, -im, -IKCDnrr ^N, TIEN, -1(211, im?, -intm) in vv. 4a and 5-6 indicates more than one participant. Assigning a different speaker to the separate halves of v. 4 is somewhat awkward, but the fact that vv. 4a and 5-6 share verbal forms and a similar exhortative tone, suggests that they should be considered as playing one role within the psalm. What is clear is that in what is essentially a prayer (human-to-God discourse), human-to-human discourse is interjected. Gerstenberger's assumption of a single-voiced prayer forces him to understand the exhortations in w. 4-6 as directed toward the opponents by the petitioner. That it is directed toward a numerous human audience (would the petitioner's particular enemies be present at such a ritual?) seems fairly obvious based on the use of plural imperatives. What is less certain is that the petitioner is doing the exhorting. Verse 2 makes it clear that the petitioner is asking God to vindicate her. In such a context, it seems somewhat unlikely that the petitioner would then take it upon herself to chastise directly the opponents.5 It is common throughout the psalms to hear the supplicant complain about enemies, but it is rare to hear them directly addressed. Instead of spoken by the petitioner, these verses might be addressed to the petitioner (and audience) in response to the request made in v. 2. The supplicant asks for help, and the instructional discourse provides a method for obtaining relief from suffering. Once these words are spoken in answer to the petition, the following words of confidence, spoken by the petitioner once again, are understandable. The didactic interjection is centrally positioned in the psalm, coming between the petition and resolution. The entire mid-section of the psalm involves some complicated shifts in voicing. The switch to mp imperatives in w. 5-6, combined with a move away from discourse directed to YHWH, would seem to suggest a different voice.6 As opposed to the first voice, which was tentative and clearly in some kind of distress, this other voice seems to be responding to the petitioner and the audience in a confident, 5. C. Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981), p. 193, notes that one of the hallmarks of an individual lament is the supplicant's seeming inability to act against his enemies on his own behalf. 6. Verse 4b is the obvious exception. Either there is rapid shifting or this verse can be attributed to the speaker of the instructional material acknowledging her ability to reach God. It is somewhat disruptive to the flow I am suggesting, but does not annul the validity of the broad structural observations.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

33

knowledgeable manner. In response to 'Hear my prayer'—a request that implies the current absence of God—the voice beginning in v. 4 offers comfort and instruction in how to remedy the disharmony. The fact that a masculine plural audience is addressed suggests that the situation of the petitioner is utilized as a lesson for the entire congregation; it does not mitigate the possibility that this voice is other than the suppliant, or that the suppliant is not one of those being addressed by the instructional voice. The fact is that this rhetorically complex psalm makes better sense if different discourses are heard in conversation.7 Finally, in v. 8, the petitioner, recognizable by Ics pronouns and 2ms verbs addressed directly to YHWH, offers a final response expressing joy (iinbd) at YHWH's generosity. Evidently something happened between petition and resolution that brought about a positive outcome for the supplicant (or at least an expectation of such).8 In what way is the expression of confidence a response to the interjection which preceded it? Along these lines, what must be considered next is how these two discourses interact rhetorically. Notes on Content. Basically, two distinct discourses are discernible here: the fundamental discourse is the prayer, with its vertical orientation, while 7. Verse 7 utilizes terminology reminiscent of the priestly blessing found in Num. 6. Although v. 7 may belong to the same speaker as vv. 5-6, and may eventually help us establish the identity behind the interjections, its content is of secondary importance at this point because its rhetoric is not instructional in tone, nor is 7b even addressing humans. 8. Interestingly, G.A. Anderson, 'The Praise of God as a Cultic Event', in G.A. Anderson and S. Olyan(eds.), Priesthood and Cult in Ancient Israel (JSOTSup 125; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), pp. 15-33, discusses how simchah is to be understood within a cultic/liturgical context and not as a spontaneous outpouring of emotion by the psalmist. The public expression of joy was the ritual obligation of a petitioner after a prayer request was answered. In Ps. 4 it seems reasonable to think the expression of joy resulted from something tangible that occurred within the ritual event, something corresponding to the middle section of the psalm when the lamenter's voice is silent. Anderson goes on to say that a person in a state of lamentation was akin to a person who was unclean for reasons of ill health etc., and, just as a healed person was required to make sacrifices and perform other rituals upon getting well, so the petitioner was required to thank YHWH through specific acts of joy. This notion of a petitioner being compared to a person in a state of tame' might be worth exploring—just as priests were responsible for proclaiming an ill person tahor, perhaps they were involved in the lament ritual for similar reasons. Perhaps only they could bring the person from a state of mourning to joy.

34

God in the Dock

the secondary discourse consists of the instructional interjections. Looking at the way the two discourses interrelate may provide some insight into the ethos that lies behind the rhetoric. Because of the use of the imperative, the didactic verses in Psalm 4 consist of very active demands. 'Tremble' (from the root T3~l) should probably be understood as a proper response to the awesomeness of YHWH, or, perhaps more appropriately in this context, as the physical manifestation of a process of grieving or lamentation as is suggested by the use of the same verb to describe David's actions as he lamented the death of his son, Absalom, in 2 Sam. 19.1. Additionally, the addressees are being commanded not to sin and to spend time in introspective reflection. This combination of commands suggests that the petitioner has brought on herself the distress being lamented, although the petitioner seems to make no such admission. The second half of the instruction turns from an introspective orientation and demands instead actions that are oriented toward YHWH. These actions include offering a sacrifice, an explicitly cultic activity meant, in this case, to secure justice for the supplicant. Once done, the only further action necessary is to trust YHWH. In fact, if these lines are to be read in parallelism, then the sacrifice itself is to be correlated with trust. By making a sacrifice in conjunction with a petition, the supplicant would be explicitly trusting YHWH to act justly. In other words, the supplicant will have done her part and will have the expectation that YHWH should do likewise. Implicit in this scheme is the notion of YHWH as judge: a case is brought before the divine court; proper respect is paid by the plaintiff; and it is left to the judge to carry out justice. Furthermore, the supplicant's initial plea is expressed in juridical terms, and specifically refers to YHWH, as 'my vindication' or 'justice' (""(TliJ). Of interest, though, is the fact that only the didactic verses imply the possibility of culpability on the part of the supplicant. The supplicant offers no cause for her distress, unless, of course, v. 3 is assigned to the petitioner, in which case not only does there seem to be no admission of guilt, but instead, blame is directed

at ersr'ia. The initial discourse consists of a request directly addressed to YHWH to 'hear' and 'pity' the supplicant, based on the deity's previous acts of mercy. There is no suggestion on the part of the supplicant that the present plight is deserved. The implication, then, is that the world is not presently obeying the expectations of p*"TJ£. Implicit in this plea, unaccompanied by repentance or admission of guilt, is an indictment of YHWH. This implicit

3. Establishing the Dialogue

35

indictment is counteracted by the rhetoric of the didactic interjection. This interjection implies that the supplicant is to search her own soul for the cause of the state she is in, and to 'sin not'. There is no hint in the didactic discourse that YHWH is to blame, or that the world is not operating in an orderly and just manner. It falls on the supplicant to reverse her sinful behavior and 'trust' YHWH. In fact, this admonishment to sin not and trust subtly shifts the indictment to the supplicant. Implicit in the command to trust is the notion that all is proceeding as it should. In the final verses the supplicant seems to internalize this message and find peace. Psalm 7 v. 1 A Shiggayon of David which he sang to YHWH concerning the deeds of Cush, the Benjaminite. v. 2 YHWH, my god, in you I trust. Save me from all who pursue me, and rescue me, v. 3 lest he rend my soul like a lion, tearing [it] apart, and there is none to rescue [me]. v. 4 YHWH, my god, if I have done this, if there is iniquity in my palms; v. 5 If I have repaid evil to one at peace with me (instead, though, I have delivered, in vain, the one vexing me), v. 6 let the enemy persecute my soul, and entrap and trample my life to the earth; and lay my honor in the dust. v. 7 Arise, YHWH, in your anger; lift yourself up against the fury of those vexing me. Rouse yourself on my behalf. Ordain fairness! v. 8 Let the congregation of the tribes encompass you, and for their sake return to the high place (seat of judgment?). v. 9 YHWH arbitrates between the peoples; judge me, YHWH, according to my innocence, and according to my integrity within me. v. 10 Let the wickedness of the evil ones cease, and establish the just. The one who tests the thoughts and emotions is a just god. v. 11 My defense depends on a god who saves the upright of heart. v. 72 God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant every day.

36

God in the Dock

v. 13 If one does not turn back then He whets his sword, He has bent his bow and readied it. v. 14 And He has readied for himself instruments of deathHe has made arrows into burning ones. v. 15 Observe! He pledges iniquity, and conceives trouble, and gives birth to falsehood, v. 16 He has dug a ditch and hollowed it out, and fallen into the pit he made. v. 17 His trouble will return on his own head and upon his scalp his violence will descend. v. 18 I will praise YHWH according to his justice, and I will sing the name of YHWH Elyon. verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2-3 4-6 7-8 9a 9b-10a lOb

invocation and petition assertion of innocence petition description of YHWH petition (response to v. 9a)

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) didactic voice

deity (2ms) deity deity (2ms) human (3ms refto deity) deity

11 12-14 15-17 18

description of YHWH (response to v. lOa) assertion of confidence description of YHWH description of wicked vow of praise

petitioner (Ics) didactic voice petitioner (Ics) didactic voice didactic voice petitioner (Ics)

human (3ms refto deity) human/deity(?) human (3ms refto deity) human human

Notes on Structure. Psalm 7 may be categorized as an individual lament, meeting many of the criteria for that designation (i.e. petition, assertion of confidence, etc.).9 The psalm begins and ends with the supplicant's discourse, as do many of the multi-voiced prayers in the Psalter. The early part of the psalm, consisting mostly of petition and a setting forth of the case, can be ascribed to the petitioner, while the latter part of the psalm (except for the last verse) seems to belong to another voice, which provides a wisdom-like lesson on the fate of evil-doers. The mid-portion of the psalm alternates between the petitioner's and another's voice. Furthermore, the two voices seem to be responding to one another fairly 9. Gerstenberger (Psalms, p. 63) gives it the alternative designation of 'Protestation of Innocence'.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

37

directly. The short instructional discourse in v. 9a is centrally located in the psalm, and should perhaps, along with the petition of v. 9b, be understood as embodying the main themes (judgment and justice) of both of the discourses. A closer look at grammatical details will help explicate this structure. The supplicant's voice can be identified by the use of Ics verbs and pronouns throughout the early portion of the psalm. This voice directly addresses the deity, using 2ms pronouns in the address. Highlighting the urgency of the supplicant's petition, ms imperatives are employed by the supplicant in vv. 2, 7 and 8. The shift from 2ms direct address to 3ms in v. 9 signals a new voice. A segue is provided by v. 8 in which there is no use of Ics speech to indicate that the supplicant is still speaking. Still, the ongoing use of ms imperatives makes it fairly clear that v. 8 is a continuation of v. 7.10 The didactic interjection in v. 9a makes a general claim about YHWH's attributes, using 3ms speech. Immediately following, moving back to the more particular case of the supplicant, YHWH is addressed again, directly, by the supplicant, who renews her plea for personal salvation. The plea in v. 9b can be understood as responding directly to the previous interjection, using similar, but not identical terminology: verse 9a uses fH while v. 9b uses C3S^, the first being in the indicative to describe a quality, the second being in the imperative to make a request. In other words, the supplicant responds to a description of one of YHWH's attributes by requesting that YHWH act in a way consistent with that attribute. Verse lOa moves back to the theme of universal judgment (recompensing the wicked and just according to their deserts), but continues the style of the supplicant, using imperatives to direct YHWH's actions. Verse lOb may shift again; the deity (Elohim, rather than YHWH, is used) is once again described, not addressed. With this interjection, the supplicant is offered assurance that God is capable of answering her request. Based on the grammatical criterion of person for determining voicing, v. 11 is ambiguous. Elohim is spoken of indirectly, by the use of a ms participle (ITtJlQ), but the use of a Ics pronoun makes it clear this verse belongs to the supplicant's discourse. Verse 11 provides a good example of the rhythmical (albeit irregular) style evident, but often overlooked, in multi-voiced psalms. To this point, we have heard either the supplicant addressing the deity, or another, as yet unidentified voice, addressing a 10. Verse 8 is notoriously difficult to translate, making it nearly impossible to argue to which discourse it belongs.

38

God in the Dock

human audience (the supplicant and/or the audience). Now it seems we are hearing the supplicant in conversation with someone other than God. The discourses represented in multi-voiced psalms resemble dance partners at a square dance, in which established partnerships make up the predominant configuration of the dance, but are broken up from time to time for aesthetic reasons and other partnerships are temporarily established. Verse 12 serves as an introduction to a final, lengthy instructional section which extends through v. 17. Verse 12 is set off from the concluding didactic section in that, as with the previous didactic sections, it speaks of divine attributes, while vv. 13-17 describes the fate of the wicked. It is hard to show conclusively that a voicing shift occurs from v. 11 to v. 12 since in v. 11 we heard the supplicant speak of the deity indirectly as well. Verse 12 does not contain any first person pronouns that would verify it as belonging to the supplicant, but that does not necessarily prove the verse belongs to a voice other than the supplicant. In a case like this, content must be relied on to make a determination. Notes on Content. As we have seen with other verses in this psalm, vv. 11 and 12 can be read dialogically. In other words, reading for content only, it makes sense to read v. 12 as a response to v. 11—supplicant: 'My defense depends on a god who saves the upright of heart.' respondent: 'God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant everyday.' As with much of the psalm, reading dialogically helps make sense of the repetition that occurs in these two verses. Stylistically, this interpretation makes sense as well. It seems reasonable to read v. 12 as an introductory statement to vv. 13-17 (as well as a response to v. 11). v. 11 My defense depends on a god who saves the upright of heart. v. 12 God is a just Judge, but a god who is indignant every day. v. 13 If one does not turn back then He whets his sword, He has bent his bow and readied it. v. 14 And He has readied for himself instruments of death— He has made arrows into burning ones. v. 15 Observe! He pledges iniquity, and conceives trouble, and gives birth to falsehood, v. 16 He has dug a ditch and hollowed it out, and fallen into the pit he made. v. 17 His trouble will return on his own head and upon his scalp his violence will descend.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

39

In v. 12 God is described as a judge with the emphasis on his harsh judgments. The following verses then go on to describe how God's judgment is played out against the iniquitous. More precisely, v. 12a echoes v. 11, whilev. 12b announces the theme taken up in w. 13-17.Even ifwe accept that v. 12 does belong to a voice other than the supplicant and is connected to the following verses, it still must be shown that w. 13-17 do not fit the rhetoric of the supplicant. It seems somewhat illogical to assign vv. 13-17 to the supplicant (although scholars often do it). It seems unlikely that the voice that petitions the deity in a time of crisis to intercede against her enemies is the same voice that confidently asserts a universal order that assures the selfdestruction of the wicked. Trying to make sense of these verses as part of the discourse of the petitioner, Gerstenberger understands w. 13-15 as the resumption of the supplicant's complaint (v. 3) and vv. 16-17 as an imprecation against, or condemnation of, the enemies.'' He seems perplexed by his own explanation: 'Strangely enough, there is another round of complaining and of condemning enemies.'12 He explains this in light of 'the ceremonial procedure': 'The supplication has to be repetitive in order to reach the divine addressee'.13 Although possible, this explanation seems to complicate the data. These verses are not suggestive in form or content of either complaint or imprecation. Even Gerstenberger recognizes that vv. 16-17 'are proverbial in character', but insists that they 'are here used in imprecative form'. 14 In fact, 'proverbial' is a term that could be used to describe all of vv. 13-17. As Gerstenberger is clearly recognizing, they have a didactic bent and do not fit the previous rhetorical style used by the supplicant in the early part of the psalm.15 In short, the psalm begins with a petition, but ends (penultimately) with a moral lesson, not with further complaints by the supplicant. The instructional discourse acts as a response to the petition.16 We do not hear a discourse that seems clearly to belong to the supplicant again until the

11. Gerstenberger, Psalms, pp. 63-65. 12. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 65. 13. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 65. 14. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 65. 15. Weiser. The Psalms, p. 139, also notes the didactic quality of these verses. 16. The use of DN to start v. 13 is reminiscent of both wisdom literature (particularly Proverbs) and casuistic Pentateuchal law. The use of a third person referent is closer to the style used in biblical law texts than proverbial texts, the latter being typically couched in a second person dialogue format.

40

God in the Dock

vow of praise in v. 18, the rationale for which can be seen in the instruction imparted in vv. 12-17. Unlike Psalm 4, which contains direct instruction in the form of commands, the didactic interjections in Psalm 7 simply provide information on the attributes of YHWH (or Elohim). As was touched on above, the dialogical structure of this psalm is particularly evident. The repetition of themes coupled with frequent changes in person serves to highlight this quality. The supplicant's discourse resounds with the hope that YHWH will adjudicate her case fairly, and every didactic interjection (vv. 9a, lOb, 1217) responds to this fervently expressed wish in the affirmative—'God is a just judge!' is the prevailing message. In Psalm 4, the theme of YHWH as judge is implicit in the rhetoric, but here it is explicit. YHWH adjudicates Cp"7) in v. 9a and is able to judge a person based on that person's intentions, not just outward actions (v. lOb). Verse 12 explains that God metes out justice according to just deserts, and w. 13-17 provide an extended description of how this attribute is manifested—the world is set up so that the evildoer brings about his own demise. YHWH does not need to act directly, but both v. 12, preceding this section, as well as the praise expressed in v. 18 makes it clear that YHWH, the just judge, is to be given credit for this self-correcting system. At the start of the psalm, the supplicant makes her request and emphatically asserts her innocence (vv. 2-8). In accord with her relatively lengthy assertion of innocence (vv. 4-6), the supplicant demands 'fairness' (v. 7) from YHWH. The first interjection (v. 9a) is noncommittal, but simply states that YHWH is judge, a statement that offers little in the way of direct comfort to the petitioner. The petitioner responds with a more pointed request that YHWH not only judge, but also judge based on the supplicant's p~IH and DR. This is followed up by the supplicant with a request that YHWH specifically eliminate evil and establish the innocent. The interjectory voice in lOb offers even more assurance than was requested by responding with the information that God judges according to what is inside a person. The implicit message is that one may not always be privy to God's standards of judgment, but that they are above those of mere humans in so far as God judges what cannot be seen by humans. The particular point being made to the supplicant is that if she is indeed innocent, she has nothing to fear because God knows her heart; but at the same time there is an implicit threat that things may not go as the supplicant would like or expect based on what God finds in the supplicant's soul. The

3. Establishing the Dialogue

41

supplicant makes a last attempt to secure the satisfaction she is seeking by proclaiming that her only hope relies on a god who rescues the innocent (v. 11). And again her plea is answered and at the same time rebuffed. Verse 12a responds that God is indeed a just judge, but that this justice implies a retributive aspect. This, at least, is slightly more gratifying than the similar statement made in v. 9a, which lacks the adjective (p'HU). And the latter half of v. 12 picks up on the concern voiced by the supplicant in v. lOa that God deal with the wicked. v. lOa Let the wickedness of the evil ones cease, and establish the just. v. 12 God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant every day.

The remainder of the interjection follows through on this point and lays out in detail exactly how the wicked will be recompensed. Finally, with this extended reassurance that YHWH does 'Ordain fairness!' (v. 7c), the supplicant seems satisfied and in the final verse vows praise to YHWH. The fact that the supplicant offers praise only after a detailed accounting of the fate of the wicked makes it clear that vindication for her consists primarily in the destruction of her enemies. At the core of the psalm is the issue of what constitutes divine justice. Psalm 9 v. 1 For the leader; on the death of Labben. A psalm of David. v. 2 I will praise you, YHWH, with all my heart; I will relate all your wonders, v. 3 I will be glad and rejoice in you; I will sing in praise of your name, Elyon, v. 4 when my enemies retreat, stumbling and perishing at your presence. v. 5 For you have upheld my cause and my case; sitting on the throne as a just judge, v. 6 You have rebuked the nations; you have destroyed the wicked; their name you have blotted out forever and ever, v. 7 The enemy is no more,17 in perpetual ruin; You have uprooted cities: their very memory is blotted out. 17. Or, 'the enemies are no more'. The noun Q'l&H) is singular; the verb (liSH) is plural.

42

God in the Dock

v. 8 YHWH abides forever, establishing his throne for judgment, v. 9 He judges the world injustice; He adjudicates between the peoples with fairness, v. 10 YHWH is a fortress for the oppressed; a fortress in times of distress. v. 11 Those who know your name trust you; 'for you have not abandoned those who seek you, YHWH. v. 12 Sing praise to YHWH, -who dwells on Zion; declare among the peoples his deeds, v. 13 For He avenges blood: He has remembered them; He has not forgotten the cry of the afflicted. v. 14 Have compassion on me, YHWH; see my affliction from those who hate me, from the one trampling me down among the gates of death, v. 15 so that I may relate all your praise in the gates of the daughter of Zion, that I may rejoice in your salvation. v. 16 The nations have sunk in the pit they made,. In the net which they hid, their foot is caught. v. 17 YHWH is known by the judgment He executes. By the work of his own hands, the wicked one is snared, v. 18 The wicked will be turned toward Sheol, all the nations which forget God. v. 19 For not forever will the needy be forgotten, nor the hope of the afflicted perish forever. v. 20 Rise, YHWH, do not let men have power; let the nations be judged before you. v. 21 Set fear in them, YHWH; let the nations know they are only men. verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2-4 5-7

vow of praise account of salvific acts/motivation

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms) deity (2ms)

8-10

description of YHWH

didactic voice

human (3ms ref to deity)

18. The translation TANAKH has 'you who lift me from the gates of death'. To make better sense of the syntax, and to assume a parallel structure, I'm choosing to read 'DDllD from the root DQ"1 rather than DTI.

3. Establishing the Dialogue 11 /2-7J19 14-15 16-19 20-21

affirmation of confidence exhortation/description ofYHWH petition/vow of praise description of fate of wicked at YHWH's hands petition

43

petitioner (?)

deity (2ms)

didactic voice petitioner (Ics)

human—mp imv (3ms for deity) deity (2ms)

didactic voice

human (3ms ref to deify)

petitioner (?)

deity (ms imv)

Notes on Structure. It is frequently suggested that Psalms 9 and 10 constitute a unity. There are two main reasons for this: First, the two psalms together were clearly intended originally to adhere to an acrostic style.20 This pattern has either been disrupted in subsequent redactions, or was not closely adhered to in the first place. Secondly, the lack of a superscription for Psalm 10 suggests that it once was read in conjunction with the psalm that precedes it. Other factors that impede reading Psalm 9 as a unity unto itself include its confusing generic characteristics. Because of its opening lines, most scholars categorize Psalm 9 as a thanksgiving psalm. If so, v. 14, which is clearly a plea of the kind we hear in psalms of lament, seems out of place. This can more easily be accounted for if we consider Psalm 10, which is clearly a lament, as an integral part of Psalm 9. But there is some internal evidence available for designating Psalm 9 a lament (or at least more lament than anything else).21 A close reading of the tense (or aspect) and other grammatical indicators in the early part of the psalm suggests that the thanksgiving there proffered is contingent upon the assistance of the deity. The combination of imperfect verbs in vv. 2-3 along with the use in v. 4 of the preposition 3, which is used to introduce an adverbial clause, is indicative of a vow, a generic element characteristic of lament psalms, although they are typically placed at the end of such

19. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 73, labels this section 'the call to worship', an element most frequently found in hymns, where it typically opens the psalm. He explains its presence here by proposing that it was borrowed from the hymn form. It is hard to defend the central positioning of this particular call to worship if it were indeed functioning in such a way. 20. As preserved in the LXX, from the second century. 21. This psalm, along with Ps. 10, according to C.C. Broyles, Conflict,p. 44, is a God-lament, that is, a lament that blames God for the misfortune being endured by the supplicant.

44

God in the Dock

psalms.22 Therefore, the supplicant is not in fact praising YHWH after the actual fact of deliverance, which is what one expects in the thanksgiving genre, but is vowing to offer thanks when YHWH provides deliverance. All told, it does not seem unreasonable to read Psalm 9 by itself as a unified lament psalm, as it now appears in its extant MT form. As with many other prayers in the Psalter, it begins and ends by invoking YHWH to action of some sort. Simply because the vow and the petition seem to have been inverted in this case is not a sufficient reason to read this psalm as other than a psalm of supplication.23 Perhaps the restrictions imposed by the acrostic pattern have contributed to the generic idiosyncrasies witnessed here. As with the psalms we have looked at thus far, Psalm 9's dialogic structure alternates between the voice of the supplicant and a didactic voice. The supplicant's initial vow and account of YHWH's salvific acts comprise about a third of the entire psalm. Verses 2-4 employ imperfect verbal constructions, while, as would be expected, the accounting of past deeds in vv. 5-7 occurs in the perfect form. It is difficult to determine whether the past activities are supposed to have occurred in the far or the recent past. If we take v. 14 as the primary petition of the psalm, it makes less sense to understand vv. 5-7 as describing the resolution of the present crisis for which v. 14 serves as the petition. The only other option would be to read the psalm as a thanksgiving psalm, with v. 14-15 then occurring as a complete anomaly. This seems less preferable than taking w. 5-7 to be referring to the remote past, recounting times gone by when YHWH had come to the aid of the supplicant in particular (v. 5), and upheld the universal ethical structure in general (vv. 6-7). If this reading is correct, then the supplicant is trying to establish, by persuasive rhetoric, a situation in which YHWH can do little else but respond positively to the supplicant's petition when it is finally made.24 22. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 150, also comments on the tense that leads him to call Pss. 9 and 10, together, 'a prayer of supplication'. 23. As M. Buss points out, form critics expect a rigidity of form that is not natural to genres. Genres may be, in fact, fairly fluid configurations: '[A] "genre" is a probabilistic structure and not an "all-or-nothing" structure. One should deal with probabilities of genres rather than with the lines between genres. The features of a genre are all probabilistic; they do not lie side by side but crisscross each other. In fact, there is no strictly right or wrong arrangement' (private email correspondence). 24. S. Pulleyn, Prayer in Greek Religion (OCM; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), pp. 19-20, notes the propensity of ancient Israelite supplicants to use the formula daquia-dedisti ('Give because you have given') in addressing their concerns to YHWH.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

45

Verse 8 is the first place in the psalm where there is evidence of a voicing shift. The deity is no longer addressed directly, but is spoken of in the third person. Furthermore, in the account of salvific acts, the verbs are perfects, thus suggesting reference to specific acts; in vv. 8-10 imperfects and one participle are used, lending credibility to the notion that a different rhetorical activity is taking place, in this case they are used instructively. The use of imperfects and participles is appropriate to the task of describing attributes rather than specific acts.25 These grammatical particularities make clear the instructional tone of the section. This didactic interjection is aptly placed, following on the heels of the supplicant's motivational plea. The didactic voice responds by retelling and summing up, in general terms, the points made in the supplicant's speech—YHWH judges justly and protects those in need. Similarly, in accord with .the more universal tone of the interjection, v. 9 echoes the theme of v. 5, but extends its scope beyond the case of the supplicant. Many of the same root words are even used—CDSEJ, I"1"! and p~Ti£—but to different effect. Where the supplicant says, 'For you have upheld my case [CDSEJQ]', the response in v. 9 is, 'He judges [CDSEJ] the -world'. Verse 11 returns to 2ms speech directed to YHWH. There is a mixture of perfect and imperfect verbs here and it is difficult to ascertain the speaker. It seems simplest to assume that v. 11 marks a brief return to the discourse of the supplicant. According to Pulleyn, this is in contrast to Greek prayer, which often contains the formula da-quia-dedi ('Give because /have given'), which implies that the deity owes the petitioner something. Pulleyn suggests that the covenantal structure of ancient Israelite religion demanded a deference for the deity that would disallow such a crude version of reciprocity. Still, he admits that certain psalms come close to making demands on the deity based on a quid pro quo sensibility. But even in psalms like 17 and 26, which he cites, the reason stated for the deity's obligation is phrased in terms of universal justice. In other words, the deity is obliged to relieve the suffering of the petitioner because the petitioner has done nothing to deserve such suffering, not because the petitioner has proffered gifts to YHWH. I'm not convinced that this differs in any significant manner from a quid pro quo approach to prayer. Rather it's that the covenantal structure of Israelite religion was such that the best 'thing' one could give to the deity was obedience. 25. B. Waltke and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), p. 506, describe one use of the imperfect (or 'prefix') as a 'habitual non-perfective' that is frequently used in poetry and proverbial expressions for the purpose of describing an attribute or ongoing activity, with no special tense value. Participles, of course, in their role as adjectives, are frequently used for the purpose of describing a subject.

46

God in the Dock

v. 10 YHWH is a fortress for the oppressed; a fortress in times of distress. v. 11 Those who know your name trust you; for you have not abandoned those who seek you, YHWH.

Of course, it could reflect a completely different voice; its central position in the psalm, the way it repeats, but personalizes, the statement made in v. 10 is suggestive of a refrain, perhaps sung by a chorus, or as the response of the congregation. Occupying, along with v. 11, a central position in the psalm are vv. 1213. YHWH is again referred to in the third person. The two imperatives in v. 12 are plural, making it clear that whatever ritual this psalm accompanied it was a congregational event, even if it only focused on one person. After hearing the recitation of YHWH's deeds and then attributes, v. 12 calls on all assembled to praise him as he duly deserves. Verse 13 returns to a cataloguing of YHWH's attributes. The root 2J~n used here recalls its usage in v. 11, where it referred to those who seek YHWH. In v. 13 YHWH does the seeking—he 'seeks' wrongdoers. Verse 13 is more than just a response to v. 11, though; it sums up everything that has been said up to this point in two short lines, tying the two main themes— YHWH avenges evildoers and has not forgotten those who suffer— together. The second half of v. 13a, 'He has remembered them', can be read with either what came before it or what comes after it. 'Them' could refer to blood (which in Hebrew is in the plural), or it could refer to 'the afflicted'. In any case, it acts as the linguistic glue that ties together the main themes of this psalm. After establishing once and for all that YHWH is available to those who need him, we get to the heart of the supplicant's prayer. YHWH is addressed directly with ms imperatives. A conditional tone similar to that employed in the early part of the psalm is invoked in vv. 14-15 by the use of ] JJQ1? in conjunction with imperfect verbs.26 With that, the praise referred to in v. 15 ('so that I may relate all your praise in the gates of the daughter of Zion, 1 will rejoice in your salvation') depends on YHWH's taking action against those afflicting the supplicant. If this were meant to be a psalm of thanksgiving, the sense of conditionality would not be so evident.27 26. It is not uncommon in Mesopotamian prayers to find a conditional vow of praise. For example, note the prayer to Enlil in M.-J. Seux, Hymnes et prieres aux dieux de Babylonie et d'Assyrie (LAPO, 8; Paris: Cerf, 1976), pp. 274-75. 27. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 74, tries to explain the presence of petition elements

3. Establishing the Dialogue

47

The section composed of vv. 16-19 shifts tone radically away from petition and vow to another accounting of YHWH's juridical and martial attributes. YHWH is referred to once again in the third person. The first interjection (vv. 8-10) echoes v. 5,andw. 16-18 pick up the supplicant's second concern, as voiced in v. 6—the wickedness of the nations. But in vv. 16-18 the primary audience is not YHWH and so should not be seen as an attempt at persuasion, but rather descriptive and didactic. The final two verses return to more petition, addressed directly to YHWH. They are odd in that they make no reference to the personal plight of the supplicant, but only request of YHWH that he assert his power over the D'll The repetitive character of this psalm has been pointed out throughout this analysis, so it is not at all surprising that the theme of the wicked nations should arise again. The fact that there is no explicit mention of the supplicant's plight is more surprising. The less-thanspecific tone is reminiscent of v. 11, in which case YHWH was also directly addressed, but no mention was made of the supplicant's particular case. These verses may have been sung by a chorus, or the congregation, as well. The possibility that an I-psalm was used in a public setting along with the fact that throughout this psalm allusions suggestive of a more universal nature were made, can help explain the impersonal ending. In other words, in the early accounting of the deeds of YHWH the supplicant is setting up a scenario in which her personal enemies are put in perspective—if YHWH has thwarted entire nations, as well as evil ones, in the past, surely he can defeat the supplicant's enemies. In this light, vv. 20-21 make sense as a summary petition. Notes on Content. The types of interjections used in this psalm vary, direct command (vv. 12-13) and indirect instruction (vv. 8-10, 16-19). As with Psalm 7, the main thrust of the didactic portions of Psalm 9 paints YHWH as a just judge. In fact, this psalm is teeming with juridical language (C3SKJ, C3S2JQ, ]*~1, "fin, etc.). YHWH as judge is made especially explicit in vv. 8-10. These verses both affirm the previous discourse of the supplicant and fine tune it to some extent. On the surface the didactic discourse seems simply to reassure the supplicant by reiterating, although in a more general way, the rhetoric of the supplicant. This it indeed does do, but less obvious in the interjection is a censure of the supplicant's conditional phrasing. (referring also to vv. 20-21) in what he considers a thanksgiving psalm by suggesting that the congregants were playing it safe and petitioning YHWH prophylactically, in the event of future misfortune.

48

God in the Dock

The supplicant tries to appeal to YHWH by recounting past accomplishments (vv. 5-7). The discourse that is then interjected (w. 8-10) into this persuasive rhetoric speaks of attributes rather than potentially idiosyncratic deeds, thus negating the need for supplicant's persuasive tactics. The instructive voice is, in essence, asserting that just judgment is at the very heart of who YHWH is; thus, as this same voice then prompts us in v. 12, YHWH is to be praised unconditionally. This helps to explain the function of the universal language found in what is clearly an 1-psalm. Likewise, it accounts for what seems an odd ending—concern for the fate of the nations—in an individual psalm. The conditionality of the supplicant's plea is being remolded to reflect a more dependable theology. As already mentioned, vv. 12-13 occupy a roughly central position in the psalm and are possibly meant to legitimate the theology posited in the instructional discourse by involving the audience in activity that actualizes the beliefs. Furthermore, the mp imperatives used in v. 12 offer a way of indoctrinating the human audience into this theology by urging them to vocalize the message. This is the most obviously effective didactic moment in the prayer, its explicit goal being to 'effect' a change in the audience rather than bring about a resolution to the crisis. After the climax of vv. 12-13, the supplicant persists in making a petition couched in a vow of conditional praise (vv. 14-15). This is again refuted with the notion that YHWH is completely trustworthy, presiding over a world in which the wicked are snared in their own trap (vv. 16-19). The upshot of this message is again that the supplicant need not bribe YHWH to act justly. Psalm 12 v. 1 For the leader; on the Sheminith. A Psalm of David v. 2 Help, YHWH! For the pious one is no more; for the faithful ones have vanished from among human beings, v. 3 Everyone speaks vanity with their neighbors; with flattering lips and a double heart they speak. v. 4 YHWH will cut off all flattering lips, the tongue speaking grandiosely, v. 5 those who say, 'by our tongue we will prevail; our lips are our own, who is lord over us?' v. 6 'Because of the ruin of the poor, the sighing of the needy, Now I will arise,' says YHWH. 'I will set in safety the one who pants for it.'

3. Establishing the Dialogue

49

v. 7 The promises of YHWH are pure promises; silver purged in an earthen crucible, refined seven times. v. 8 You, YHWH, will keep them, guarding us from this generation forever. v. 9 The wicked walk about on every side when worthlessness is valued among human beings. verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2-3

invocation and complaint (oracular) description of YHWH's future acts (response to w. 2-3) salvation oracle for deity descriptive comment on oracle affirmation of confidence summary complaint (or instructional?)

petitioner

deity

didactic voice

human (3ms refto deity)

intermediary

human

didactic voice

human

petitioner (for congregation?) petitioner (didactic voice?)

deity (2ms)

4-5

6 7 8 9

indeterminate

Notes on Structure. Psalm 12 shares characteristics with both individual and congregational laments. Is the 'pious one' mentioned in v. 2 the petitioner? But then what to make of the plural 'faithful ones'? In the oracle in v. 6, an individual is alluded to who will be saved by YHWH, but in v. 8b a Icp object pronoun is used insinuating the petition of a large group. Lastly, and perhaps most tellingly, there is no use of the Ics pronominal form used in the complaint section as is frequently the case in I-psalms. The LXX records the start of v. 2 as 'Help me\ suggesting that there may have been a time when this psalm was used in individual rituals, but was refashioned for communal use.28 The lack of a Ics form in w. 2-3 makes it hard to determine definitively the speaker, but the direct address to YHWH and the call for assistance suggests we are dealing with the supplicant's voice; whether that persona 28. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 83, comes to a similar conclusion. Gunkel, Psalmen, p. 43, followed by Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, I, p. 194, opted for a communal setting.

50

God in the Dock

should be understood as an individual or a collective does little to affect the type of rhetorical analysis that is to be used in delineating the different discourses. Once again we are confronted with a back and forth dialogic style; the interjections converse with the supplicant's discourse and respond to the oracle. Direct second person discourse opens the psalm, but unlike most other dialogic psalms it does not close the psalm, occurring rather penultimately. Furthermore, the deity is not even indirectly spoken of in the final verse (cf. Ps. 7.18). Still, the final verse seems integral to the psalm. In both theme and the use of DTK ""33 it echoes v. 2 and thus forms a nice inclusio around the body of the prayer. Following the petition and complaint of w. 2-3, the first voice shift occurs in v. 4. YHWH is spoken of in the third person. The verb fHT may be understood as a jussive or as a simple imperfect. Most read it as the former—'Let YHWH cut...'—and label it an imprecation. Verses 4-5 may, with equal legitimacy, be read prophetically or as a statement of fact, the latter serving as a description of YHWH's attributes (imperfects were used descriptively in Psalm 9). Read attributively, it works well as a response to the petition voiced in v. 2 as well as the complaint in v. 3. Even if the jussive is maintained it can still be read dialogically as a type of official invocation made on behalf of the supplicant in response to the supplicant's complaint. In any case, in the next verse, YHWH lives up to the statement made in v. 4 and proclaims oracularly that he will indeed answer the petition of those oppressed by 'flattering lips'. Unlike other voices involved in the recitation of multi-voiced psalms, YHWH's speech is marked here (iTIiT ~IDW). This suggests that in the ritual there was the possibility of confusion over to whom to attribute the discourse, or the marker was added later, when the psalm was written down. Gerstenberger describes vv. 7-9 as 'almost proverbial' and understands them as a response to the oracle.29 Weiser likewise calls v. 7 a response to the oracle and recognizes a change in voice, claiming that it should be read as the 'Amen' of the congregation.30 YHWH is referred to in the third person and his m~lQ8 are described as 'pure' and 'refined', in contrast to the pomposity and flattery of those who are the object of complaint. Gerstenberger reads all of w. 7-9 as a single form element. On the 29. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 81. 30. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 160. Also, YHWH's speech is not always marked in the Psalter, which allows for the possibility that human voices other than the supplicant might go unmarked as well.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

51

contrary, v. 9 seems set off in style and content from the other two verses. Verse 7 has a didactic quality that v. 8 lacks with its return to direct address to YHWH. Each of these three verses can be read as rhetorically distinct discourses. The didactic voice in v. 7 parallels the same voice in vv. 4-6 and forms an inclusio around the discourse of YHWH, acting as affirmation of the power and trustworthiness of the deity. With v. 8 we return to the discourse of the supplicant. Using the pronoun 'us', the supplicant is now clearly praying for the benefit of the congregation.31 Even in light of the promise and affirmation of YHWH's trustworthiness, the psalm ends on a dark note. It almost seems a resumption of the complaint, similar to the statement made in v. 3. There are no grammatical clues in this verse to help decide to whom the discourse belongs nor to whom it is directed. Content suggests that it belongs to the supplicant, but it has a refrain-like, summary quality that may suggest it is meant to be heard as not belonging to any particular discourse. Notes on Content. A further structural observation is helpful for understanding how the content of the discourses relate to one another. In terms of voicing, we see that the psalm forms a chiastic structure that appropriately positions the oracle of YHWH in the center with the addition of a refrain at the end: A. Petition for help addressed to YHWH (vv. 2-3) B. YHWH described as on who can/will respond (vv. 4-5) C. Oracle of YHWH—YHWH will act to save (v. 6) B1. YHWH (i.e. his promises) described as dependable (v. 7) A.1 YHWH addressed directly with words of confidence (v. 8)# Refrain.Reason for petition summarized (v. 9)

The supplicant's discourse forms the outer layer of the structure, with the didactic discourse forming an inner layer enclosing the words of the deity. The first didactic interjection (B) responds directly to the petition voiced by the supplicant, even using the precise phrase used by the supplicant, 'flattering lips'. Like many of the didactic interjections we have already looked at, the interjection is meant to reassure. And as if to highlight the absurdity of the question of the impious: 'Who is lord over us?' YHWH asserts his supremacy. Interestingly, though, the oracle somewhat side31. Verse 8 is prone to amendments. 'Protect us' is often amended to 'protect them' or 'protect him'. This is probably due to an improper understanding of the referent in the previous phrase 'guard them', 'them' probably referring to the 'promises' mentioned in v. 7.

52

God in the Dock

steps the precise complaint as posed by the supplicant. The issue in w. 2-3 has to do with the multiplication of those who speak falsely. The distress of the pious is only implied, but it is exactly that to which the oracle responds, mentioning nothing about the seemingly legion liars (although we can assume they are the ones vanquishing the poor), but rather focusing on the salvation of the poor and needy. The first didactic voice (w. 45) assures the supplicant that YHWH will handle the owners of the flattering lips as they deserve; or if we read my as a jussive, then this same voice invokes YHWH to act in such a way. We have seen this theme in the didactic interjections of previous psalms examined—YHWH can be counted on to maintain an ethical universe in spite of how things might appear to the supplicant at the time of the petition. So it is all the more interesting when we actually hear what is supposed to be the voice of the deity promising something slightly different. YHWH indeed will protect the oppressed, but not necessarily 'cut off the oppressors. This is not to say that the supplicant is not asking for protection for herself (or her group), she is, but the thrust of the request centers around the proliferation of the impious. This reading goes some way toward justifying the generically irregular character of v. 9. Instead of praise or a vow, v. 9 does not seem to move beyond the original complaint. Understandably so, since the oracle does not completely satisfy the complaint as originally expressed by the supplicant. Ostensibly, the wicked may not be requited according to the word of YHWH. Furthermore, the second didactic interjection (v. 7) offers assurance that YHWH's promises are 'pure', but the promises as stated in the oracle do not folly address the main complaint. The supplicant then reiterates the point made in v. 7 by saying that she trusts YHWH to keep his word and preserve the congregation from 'this generation' even though the wicked might continue to 'walk about on every side'. Thus, the central objective of the didactic discourse (along with the oracle) is to eliminate any concern on the part of the supplicant, but the voice of doubt and complaint gets the last word anyway. Psalm 25 v. 1 Of David. To you, YHWH, I lift up my soul. v. 2 My god, in you I trust—may I not be ashamed; may my enemies not triumph over me. v. 3 Moreover, all who wait for you, let them not be put to shame; Let the frivolous deceivers (or, 'those who take commitment lightly') be put to shame.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

53

v. 4 Make known to me your way, YHWH, teach me your paths. v. 5 Lead me in your truth and teach me; for you are the god of my salvation. I wait for you all day. v. 6 Remember your compassion, YHWH, and your loyalty, for they are from of old. v. 7 Do not remember my youthful sins and transgressions; according to your loyalty, remember me, as befits your goodness, YHWH. v. 8 Good and upright is YHWH, therefore He guides sinners in the way. v. 9 He leads the humble in judgment; He teaches the humble his way. v. 10 All the paths of YHWH are steadfast truthfulness for those who keep the decrees of his covenant. v. 11 For the sake of your name, YHWH, pardon32 my iniquity, though it be great. v. 12 Who is it who fears YHWH? That one will be shown which path to choose, v. 13 His soul will lodge in goodness; His progeny will inherit the land, v. 14 The counsel of YHWH is for those that fear Him; and His covenant will be made known to them. v. 15 My eyes are ever toward YHWH, for He will loose my feet from the net. v. 16 Turn to me and show me compassion, for I am desolate and afflicted, v. 17 The troubles of my heart increase; lead me forth from my distresses, v. 18 See all my affliction and suffering, and forgive all my sins, v. 19 See my enemies, for they are great; and they hate me with a violent hatred, v. 20 Keep my soul, and save me; may I not be ashamed, for I sought refuge in you. v. 21 O God, redeem Israel from all its troubles. 32. M. Dahood, Psalms, I (AB, 16-17A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966-70), p. 157, explains the odd placement of the waw in flfl/Dl in terms of a waw-emphaticum, suggesting an imperative sense.

God in the Dock

54

verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

Ib 2-7

invocation affirmation of confidence/ petition description ofYHWH

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms) deity (2ms)

didactic voice

petition/confession of sin proverbial guidance

petitioner (Ics)

human (3ms refto deity) deity (2ms)

8-10 11

12-14 15

16-20 21

affirmation of confidence petition/complaint congregational petition

didactic voice petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) indeterminate

human (3ms refto deity) human (3ms refto deity) deity (2ms) deity

Notes on Structure: Psalm 25, an acrostic poem, is generally understood as an individual psalm of lament,33 although Gerstenberger identifies it as a congregational lament.34 Somewhat unique in a lament psalm is the absence of a vow of praise.35 The Ics speech of the petitioner dominates the early and later parts of the psalm. Conversely, vv. 8-14 (except for v. 11), which Gerstenberger calls 'a congregational digression', convey a more general message; the speaker is no longer clearly identified, and YHWH is spoken of in the third person. The petitioner's and DV's discourses alternate, with the petitioner's brief acknowledgment of sin occupying a central position at v. 11. The acrostic form leads some to presuppose a literary, rather than performative, context for the psalm. But the alternation between prayerful speech and speech that seems to take into consideration an audience other than God, seems a good defense of Gerstenberger's notion that acrostic psalms are liturgical texts.36 Adding more weight to this idea is the clear addition of the final verse, which 33. So Gunkel, Einleitung, p. 172; Weiser, The Psalms, p. 238; J. Hayes, Understanding the Psalms (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1976), p. 82; and Dahood, Psalms, I, p. 155. 34. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 119. 35. Westermann, Praise and Lament, p. 75. 36. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 121. The insistence on assigning a literary origin to acrostic pieces seems misplaced in any case. It seems more reasonable to assume that acrostics served a mnemonic purpose for oral recitation.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

55

seems to have been added on as a liturgical refrain. Of course, this does not preclude the possibility that the text was originally a literary piece later transformed into a liturgical work, as Weiser believes,37 but in either case, it is well-suited to a performative setting. Against Gerstenberger, I would designate the psalm an individual lament or complaint, but in accord with Gerstenberger, it does seem to have been incorporated into some type of communal setting. This may be what Gerstenberger and Weiser are suggesting, in essence, but it needs to be made clear that there is a difference between a congregational psalm and an individual psalm performed before a congregation—the former is performed to take care of corporate needs, while the latter concentrates on an individual's needs in a corporate setting. The details of this nuance are more appropriately the concern of following chapters. The psalm opens with a brief word of confidence directed by the penitent to the deity. This is followed by the initial petition. In addition to the typical requests that focus on the supplicant's enemies found in lament psalms, the supplicant of Psalm 25 adds a request for knowledge (v. 4-5a). Verses 5b-7 return to more traditional petitionary terminology, but the didactic interjection that begins at v. 8 picks up on the supplicant's unusual request and elaborates on it, making it the central theme of the instructional section. Verses 8-10 are recognizable as instructional speech by the way in which they speak of YHWH in the third person.38 R. Murphy recognizes the 'interruption' of these verses into the supplicant's prayer as demonstrating a wisdom influence.39 In trying to explain how w. 8-10 might belong to the speech of the supplicant, Dahood explains them as an 'autobiographical touch', whereby the supplicant is explaining to the audience that, although she had been guilty of various sins, YHWH has shown her the way.40 There is no evidence in the psalm that the petitioner has been delivered from her distress; in fact, the final section of the psalm (vv. 16-20) would argue against it. In vv. 8-10, adjectives (DIE and ~lt£T) are used to comment on YHWH's inherent qualities, and imperfects (rnv, ~pT and "IQ^") are used to describe activities that are indicative of his 37. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 241. 38. Hayes, Understanding, p. 83, also sees this section as instruction, probably spoken by a priest to the supplicant. 39. R. Murphy, 'A Consideration of the Classification, "Wisdom Psalms"', in J.L. Crenshaw (ed.). Studies in Ancient Israelite Wisdom (LBS; New York: Ktav, 1976), p. 166. 40. Dahood, Psalms, I, p. 157.

56

God in the Dock

character. In Psalms 7 and 9, where we also encountered imperfects used in this way, the verbs had to do in some way with the judging attributes of YHWH. Here, the three main verbs are synonymous with teaching or guiding. The second two verbs used in the didactic discourse, "lOV1 and ~pT (v. 9), were also used by the supplicant in v. 4. In fact w. 9-10 of the interjectory discourse share a significant amount of vocabulary with the early portion of the supplicant's petition, allowing for the possibility that the instruction be read as a direct response to the plea. Midway into the didactic discourse, serving also as the midway point of the psalm, the supplicant's voice is heard again in v. 11. The speaker is easily identifiable by the use of a Ics pronominal suffix. Likewise, the addressee is clearly identified as YHWH by the use of the vocative and 2ms speech. Immediately following this short petitionary interlude, the discourse shifts back to the didactic voice. Verse 12 picks up where v. 10 left off, with the use of the roots HT and "p~t. In proverbial style, vv. 1314 describe the positive outcome of a life lived in 'fear' of YHWH, fear being a prerequisite to being shown (i~!T) by YHWH which way ("f~n) to choose. Additionally, YHWH will make known (UT)—more instructional terminology—his covenant to the one who fears him. The didactic terminology stops abruptly with v. 15 and does not resume for the remainder of the psalm. At this point, it is clearly the supplicant speaking again, but to a human audience rather than YHWH, who is alluded to in the third person. The tone of this verse is not exactly prayerful (though it contains a Ics pronoun), not being addressed to YHWH, nor is it didactic, being too personal and case-specific to serve that purpose. Verses 16-21 are all addressed directly to the deity and are in the form of a typical psalmic lament: a plea is made, the distress is described and enemies are blamed. The mention of enemies seems slightly out of place in a penitential psalm, unless we are to believe the enemies caused the supplicant to sin,41 or that the sin brought on the enemies. Verses 19-20 echo the concerns expressed in the opening verses (vv. 2-3), forming a nice inclusio around the body of the psalm. Verse 21 lies outside the acrostic structure, and was possibly a later addition. YHWH is alluded to as 'God', and there is no indication of who the speaker is. The tone of personal petition which has characterized the supplicant's discourse throughout is broadened to include all of Israel. 41. Hayes, Understanding, p. 83.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

57

Notes on Content. Once again we are confronted with a clear dialogic structure that can be seen as something of a conversation, stylized though it may be, between the supplicant and a didactic voice. A close look at the interaction between the two can provide some interesting insights into the rhetorical make-up of the psalm. In the midst of her distress, the petitioner makes a terse request for moral guidance on how to live in a way pleasing to YHWH: v. 4 Make known to me your way, YHWH, teach me your paths. v. 5a Lead me in your truth and teach me; for you are the god of my salvation.

The DV responds at length on how YHWH is a god who shows sinners 'the way', and how those who follow YHWH's path will live a fulfilled life, as will their children. In response to the supplicant's request, this voice encourages the supplicant in her quest for knowledge of YHWH. Except for the fact that we have grown accustomed to reading psalms as monologic compositions, we should be struck by the illogic of supposing the supplicant is answering her own request. Some would understand the didactic section as an attempt by the supplicant to urge YHWH to answer her request by praising those very attributes the supplicant is calling on. While this understanding is possible, the fact that the didactic discourse focuses so narrowly on that aspect of the supplicant's request that would seem to offer only indirect relief from the suffering being experienced suggests that the rhetorical goals of the two discourses diverge somewhat. Only a portion of the supplicant's speech mentions a desire to be shown how to conduct a moral life. This is picked up and elaborated on by the didactic voice. In v. 11, the supplicant acknowledges her failures, and thus implicitly acknowledges the need for instruction, but is still mainly interested in a show of mercy from YHWH.42 After v. 5, she makes no more explicit requests for instruction. In response to v. 11, the didactic voice once again implicitly stresses the supplicant's responsibility for making a lifestyle change, a change that would result from fearing YHWH and following the right path (vv. 12-14). In response to this message, the supplicant's final petition veers completely away from the desire for instruction and concentrates on a plea for deliverance. 42. Perhaps, as Hayes, Understanding, p. 83, suggests, the supplicant is making a confessional statement in response to a priest, claiming that she is indeed one who fears YHWH.

58

God in the Dock

Although the generalized instructional discourse that comprises the central portion of the psalm can be used to argue for Gerstenberger's designation of this psalm as a congregational lament, it is more likely that an individual psalm is being used to impart lessons to the community as a whole. Through the petition of the supplicant, as well as the instructional voice, aspects of Israel's prevailing ethos and theology (which asserts that those who follow YHWH's paths will prosper) are reinforced in the community. Picking up on this aspect, Weiser and others list this psalm as one of those showing signs of wisdom influence.43 Such ideas as 'fear of YHWH' certainly can be used to make such an argument. The difference between the instruction offered here and that of wisdom literature has to do with context—both literary and social. Wisdom literature, per se, is not found in the form of prayer, nor, as far as we know, is it found in inclusive public settings, but rather in somewhat exclusive settings, such as schools dedicated to teaching royalty, scribes and the priesthood. 44 Psalm 27 v. la Of David. YHWH is my light and my salvation; whom should I fear? YHWH is the stronghold of my life; of whom should I be afraid? v. 2 When evil ones, my enemies and foes, draw near to me to devour my flesh, they stumble and fall, v. 3 Though an army encamp against me, my heart will not fear. Should a war rise up against me, even so, would I be confident. 43. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 89. He does, though, acknowledge that cultic literature may have influenced sapiential literature, as well. 44. Furthermore, in that setting, instructional material is read, recited and studied, as distinguished from material that came into existence primarily to be performed. Didactic elements in the cult could have served to instruct a broader base of society. Until relatively recently, for example, only the elites of European society read and studied texts; the majority of people received their cultural/religious indoctrination orally, through the performance of liturgy. It seems plausible that cultic leaders learned their material in wisdom schools and used the cultic apparatus to pass on what they learned to the multitude. In any case, with the evidence garnered thus far in this study, which attests to the frequency of pedagogical interests in many psalms, it should be expected that wisdom echoes would seep into the Psalter here and there.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

59

v. 4 One thing I ask of YHWH, that only will I seek— To live in the house of YHWH all the days of my life, to gaze upon the beauty of YHWH, to inquire in his temple, v. 5 If He will shelter me in a pavilion on the day of evil, conceal me in the hiding place of his tent, on a rock set me, v. 6 then451 will raise up my head over my enemies roundabout; I will offer sacrifices of joy in his tent; I will sing and chant to YHWH. v. 7 Hear my voice, YHWH, when I cry; show me compassion and answer me. v. 8 To you my heart said, 'Seek my face.'46 Your face, YHWH do I seek, v. 9 Do not hide your face from me; Do not thrust away your servant in anger. You have been my help— Do not forsake me, do not abandon me, God of my salvation, v. 10 If my father and my mother should abandon me, then YHWH will take me in. v. 11 Teach me, YHWH, and lead me on a straight path on account of my foes. v. 12 Do not hand me over to the will of my adversaries, for false witnesses have arisen against me, as have those who breathe out violence. v. 13 Were it not that I trusted to look upon47 the goodness of YHWH in the land of the living. v. 14 Wait for YHWH; Be courageous and let your heart be strong. Wait for YHWH.

45. "^3 (v. 5) plus nnU (v. 6) suggests a contingency situation: 'If.. .then...' iffl^ in this case implying the immediate, possible, future. 46. Hebrew uncertain. 47. This is a difficult verse. See Dahood, Psalms, I, pp. 169-70, for an explanation that at least makes sense of the syntax.

60

God in the Dock

verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

lb-3

affirmation of confidence petition

petitioner (Ics)

petitioner (1 cs)

7 8-12

affirmation of confidence/ vow of praise invocation petition

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics)

human (3ms ref to deity) human (3ms ref to deity) human (3ms ref to deity) deity (2ms) deity (2ms) human (v. 10)

13 14

affirmation of confidence exhortation

petitioner (Ics) didactic voice

4-5 6

petitioner (Ics)

human (3ms ref to deity) human (ms imv)

Notes on Structure. Psalm 27 is an individual lament in spite of the fact that it does not begin with address directed toward YHWH as do most of this type. Because of the abrupt change in tone between vv. 6 and 7, the unity of this psalm has been much discussed.48 Gerstenberger preserves the unity of the psalm by explaining the alternating 'moods' as the result of'the contingencies of ritual procedure'.49 While the 'mood' might seem to make an abrupt switch at v. 7, the content of the psalm is consistent enough to argue against breaking the psalm in two without more persuasive evidence. It is common enough for an individual lament not to voice explicitly its complaint or petition until a later point in the psalm (see Psalm 9). Furthermore, v. 5 can be read to suggest that the supplicant is preparing to make a request of YHWH. Rather than translating "*3, the particle that begins the verse, as introducing a statement of confidence as is usually done, it should be read in conjunction with nnU of v. 6 as the introduction of a conditional clause. Thus, 'If He will shelter.. .then I will raise...' This makes the best sense of the use of nflU along with an imperfect verbal conjugation. We saw a similar sentiment, although expressed with different grammar, in Ps. 9.2-3. Mesopotamian and Greek prayer commonly contain vows of praise registered in a contingent fashion.50 48. See Gerstenberger, Psalms, pp. 125-26, for a brief review of the history of this discussion. 49. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 125. 50. K. Van der Toorn, Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel: Continuity and Change in the Forms of Religious Life (SHCANE, 7; NY; Leiden; E.J. Brill, 1996), p. 139. For the da-ut-dem ('Give so that I will give') formula in classical Greek, see Pulleyn, Greek Religion, p. 17.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

61

As with other multi-voiced psalms, this one alternates between address directed toward YHWH and address that speaks of YHWH, but in this case it is clearly the petitioner who continues to speak, simply changing addressees, until v. 14. We find this same structural idiosyncrasy in Psalm 23, for example, where the supplicant starts out by expressing confidence in YHWH's benevolence, and halfway through the psalm switches to directly addressing YHWH.51 Although the plaintive tone is subdued, Psalm 23, like 27, makes explicit mention of trouble only in the portion of the psalm addressed directly to the deity. Frequently in multi-voiced psalms, the discourse that speaks of YHWH in the third person has a didactic quality, but in these cases, where the supplicant is doing the speaking about YHWH, the discourse is more confessional in tone. Not until the last verse of the psalm do we hear a didactic comment interjected into the discourse of the supplicant. Verse 14 is the only verse in the 'complaint' section of the psalm (vv. 7-14) that is not directly addressed to YHWH. But unlike the earlier portion of the psalm, which is also not addressed directly to YHWH, v. 14 does not seem to belong to the discourse of the supplicant. Its exhortative tone is stylistically dissimilar to anything previously encountered in the psalm. It is composed of three imperatives, and the first and last phrases of the verse (miT^K H-lp) are exactly the same. In very few of the dialogic psalms studied thus far is the didactic component expressed in the form of a direct command; usually the interjection takes the form of indirect instruction in which YHWH's attributes are described. Gerstenberger recognizes v. 14 as an anomaly, describing it as an exhortation to the worshiping community.52 The problem with this explanation is that the imperatives used to do the exhorting are in the singular. Weiser seems to be aware of this difficulty when he assigns the speaking role of v. 14 to the supplicant, but rather than understanding the addressee(s) as the congregation, he believes the supplicant is rousing 'himself to courageous hope'.53 Weiser is forced to hypothesize this rather unlikely scenario because of an apparent devotion to reading the psalm monologically. There is an obvious, though overlooked, singular addressee that can be called on to solve this dilemma—the supplicant herself.

51. See also Ps. 19. 52. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 127. 53. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 254.

62

God in the Dock

Notes on Content. A number of commentators explain v. 14 as something akin to a priestly oracle.54 Obviously this cannot be understood in the strict sense since the speaker speaks of YHWH not as YHWH, which is what one would expect in an oracle proper. A. Deissler simply understands it as priestly encouragement (priesterlichen Zuspruch}, reminiscent of Hos. 12.7.55 Hayes suggests that exhortations like these (also found in Pss. 4,31 and 55) might be related to the oracular utterances found in communal psalms of lament—both serve to offer encouragement to the petitioner(s). Both of these explanations have the advantage of recognizing the supplicant as the addressee. The didactic interjection in this psalm is so brief there is little content to examine. There is here, as in other psalms we have looked at, a dialogue between a discourse that speaks directly to YHWH and one that speaks of YHWH: vv. 1-6 speak of YHWH; vv. 7-9 speak to YHWH; v. 10 speaks of YHWH; vv. 11-12 speak to YHWH; and finally, v. 13 speaks of YHWH again. The fact that there is no non-supplicant voice that speaks in descriptive terms of YHWH may be explained by the fact that the supplicant plays the role of pedagogue herself. Along these lines, the allusion to living in the temple in v. 4 has prompted the suggestion that the psalmist in this case is a cultic functionary of some sort.56 Psalm 23, a psalm already alluded to as similar in form to this one, could likewise be understood as having been composed by a cultic functionary based on the allusions in vv. 5-6 to anointing and dwelling in the temple. Less hypothetical is an examination of the rhetorical interchange occurring between the voice of the supplicant and the didactic voice in v. 14. The notion of time dominates the language of Psalm 27. Throughout, whether in the sections voicing confidence, or those making a plea, the supplicant is implicitly and explicitly requesting that YHWH come to her aid and protect her from her enemies. These sentiments are voiced in language that employs verbs suggesting varying temporal realities.57 Verse 1 uses imperfects; v. 2 uses infinitives and perfects; v. 3 imperfects and participles; v. 7 uses an imperative and imperfects; v. 8 uses perfects and imperfects; and so on. The supplicant seems to be saying that YHWH has helped in the past, that YHWH is expected to help whenever needed, that 54. See Hayes, Understanding, p. 63. 55. Deissler, Die Psalmen, p. 110. 56. Hayes, Understanding, p. 73. 57. Gerstenberger, Psalms, pp. 124-25, briefly discusses the difficulties in determining tense in this psalm.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

63

she hopes that YHWH will help in the future. The chronological possibilities are nearly endless and make the task of translation and interpretation problematic. The only time in the supplicant's experience that YHWH does not seem to be of aid is in the current crisis (hence the necessity of a lament psalm). The tension that arises from the alternation between assertions of confidence in which YHWH is described as being always present (e.g. vv. 3 and 10) and the pleas that YHWH not hide his face, nor abandon the supplicant, is indicative of a high level of anxiety, and suggests that her assertions of confidence are less assured than they seem at first. This notion finds additional support when w. 5-6 are translated as an 'if.. .then...' clause. In any case, the many temporal ambiguities at play in this psalm provide a fitting context in which to read v. 14. The verb nip, used twice in this verse, is meant to allay the supplicant's anxiety as expressed through the use of ambiguous tenses and alternating moods. While the supplicant makes clear her desire for YHWH's immediate intervention on her behalf, the didactic voice counsels patience and courage. YHWH is indeed trustworthy, but cannot be expected to answer to a human's timetable. Psalm 28 v. la Of David. To you, YHWH, I cry; my rock, do not keep silence with me. If you are aloof from me, then I will become like those who go down to the pit. v. 2 Listen to my request for mercy when I call to you, when I lift my hands toward the innermost place of your sanctuary. v. 3 Do not drag me away with the wicked and workers of iniquity, who speak peace to their neighbors, while evil is in their hearts. v. 4 Pay them according to their work, and according to the evil of their endeavors, according to the deeds of their hands, pay them; Render to them their desert. v. 5 Because they do not discern the work of YHWH, the deeds of his hands,

64

God in the Dock He will tear them down, and not rebuild them. v. 6 Blessed is YHWH, for He has heard my request for mercy, v. 7 YHWH is my strength and my shield, in him my heart trusted. I was helped, and my heart will rejoice. With my song, I will glorify him. v. 8 YHWH is his strength, and a stronghold; A savior to his anointed is He. v. 9 Deliver your people, and bless your inheritance; tend and support them forever.

verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

lb-2 3-4

initial invocation petition oracular description ofYHWH's deeds (response to vv. 3-4) thanksgiving

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) didactic voice

deity (2ms) deity (2ms) human (3ms refto deity)

petitioner (Ics)

description of YHWH (response to vv. 6-7) final invocation for communal deliverance

didactic voice

human (3ms refto deity) human (3ms refto deity) deity (ms imv)

5

6-7 8 9

indeterminate

Notes on Structure. Psalm 28 is a lament of the individual. The communal element in evidence at the end of the psalm does not mitigate the overall individual tenor of the prayer.58 As with many other laments, the psalm begins and ends with discourse directed at YHWH. The end is characterized by the use of four ms imperative verbs, suggesting a later addition or perhaps a formalized final invocation spoken by someone other than the petitioner. The major didactic portion of the psalm is positioned centrally at v. 5. 58. Gunkel, Die Psalmen, p. 120, also holds this position. According to Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 129, the ending suggests a small-group service was incorporated into a larger cultic service. He posits a similar hypothesis for Pss. 9/10, 12 and 25.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

65

The psalm begins with an invocation directed toward YHWH by the supplicant. The invocation continues in v. 2 with a continued request of YHWH that the deity be present and hear the plea. A more specific petition begins in v. 3, where the activities of the wicked are described and the petitioner asks that YHWH acknowledge a distinction between the wicked and the petitioner. The second half of the plea (v. 4) also functions as an imprecation against the wicked. Throughout, the use of 1 cs pronouns makes the identity of the speaker certain. As well, the identity of the addressee is without doubt YHWH. The deity is mentioned by name in v. 1 and thereafter addressed with 2ms pronouns, or ms imperatives, as in v. 4. The discourse shifts in v. 5. YHWH is no longer addressed directly, but is spoken of. How to understand the nature of v. 5 directly depends on how the first word of the verse, and then subsequently the following imperfects, are translated. Although YHWH is no longer spoken to, but about, many still understand v. 5 as belonging to the discourse of the supplicant. If we translate '3 as the conjunction 'for', as many translators do,59 then the verse does appear to be the continuation of the supplicant's speech. Although he does not offer a translation, Gerstenberger's designation of this verse as 'motive' is an example of this line of reasoning. In this vein, the supplicant makes her petition and then offers YHWH a reason why the wicked should be punished: 'For they do not consider the Lord's deeds, the work of His hands.'60 However, if "3 is understood as a conjunction binding w. 4 and 5 together, it seems particularly odd that in the middle of one speech unit YHWH is addressed both directly and indirectly. Ascribing this switch to a whole new speech unit, or discourse, would solve the difficulty. In this case, a different translation of the conjunction might be in order, perhaps something along the lines of 'Because'. This would allow for the possibility of an entirely new discourse commencing at this point. How one translates the verbs in the second half of v. 5 also has a bearing on whether the verse should be designated an independent discourse. In other words, should DDHiT and D]T be translated as simple future imperfects, or as jussives? The latter would continue the petitionary tone of w. 3-4, but then, as already noted, we would have to explain why the supplicant switches from speaking to YHWH to speaking of YHWH 59. See, for example, the translation, TANAKH(Jewish Publication Society) and Weiser's commentary. 60. From the TANAKH.

66

God in the Dock

right in the middle of a speech unit that seems otherwise to be treating a single theme. If the verbs are translated as simple futures the verse seems to assume an authoritative tone that does not accord well the previous tone of the petitioner. Still, this option makes good overall sense once the option of an independent discourse is considered. In this case, then, v. 5 can be understood as a response to the supplicant's previous petition that YH WH 'pay them according to their work': 'Because they do not discern the works of YHWH, the deeds of his hands, He will tear them down, and not rebuild them.' All in all, internal grammatical evidence supports this translation over those that would suggest that v. 5 is a continuation of the supplicant's speech by smoothing out the transition that occurs from speech directed to YHWH to speech about YHWH. While the actual speaker behind this discourse cannot be known, it is clear that it serves a different rhetorical function than the previous discourse of the supplicant. This function will be explored in more depth in the notes on content. Because of the use of Ics pronouns, 'my', T, it is clear that vv. 6-7 mark a return to the supplicant's discourse. In the thanksgiving, YHWH is no longer spoken to directly. The supplicant's discourse has moved from prayerful petition to a declaration of YHWH's mercy. The lack of a personal element in v. 8 suggests that the psalm has once again moved away from the supplicant's discourse. YHWH is spoken of in the third person and there are no first person pronouns used. The phrase ID^'TiJ mrp has been translated variously as 'The Lord is the strength of his people';61 'The Lord is their strength';62 'The Lord is our strength';63 etc. 1Q"?, of course, cannot be assigned a person or number with any certainty, but most likely should be understood, in this context, as a third person pronoun attached to a preposition. A 3ms translation of this word—'to him'—seems to be the least popular. This surely has to do with the fact that it would be nearly impossible to make sense of this translation if it is assumed the supplicant is the speaker of this verse. To be sure, it is unlikely that the supplicant would be speaking of herself in the third person, and even less likely that she would suddenly be speaking of another individual altogether. Nevertheless, a dialogic reading makes it quite possible that the supplicant is the addressee, rather than the speaker. Furthermore, a 3ms translation makes sense when the rest of the verse is taken into consideration. The first and second parts of the verse are parallel 61. Following the LXX which preserves 'oz le 'ammo. 62. SoOa&TANAKH. 63. So Dahood, Psalms.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

67

and thus we should be able to get a clue to help assign 1D^ a person and number. Verse 8b reads 'A savior to his anointed is He'. Parallel to ift1? is the 3ms llYttfQ, 'his anointed'. Thus we have strong support for translating v. 8a as 'YHWH is his strength...'. And although it is true that a 3ms translation does not make sense within the discourse of the supplicant, it becomes perfectly reasonable if we are willing to assign this verse to a discourse distinct from that of the supplicant's. Notes on Content. Psalm 28 starts with a heartfelt cry to YHWH to hearken to the call of the supplicant. The technical, cultic language of v. 2 suggests that the prayer was made in the presence of the deity at the Holy of Holies.64 Implicit in the cry is a complaint against YHWH, an accusation that YHWH has abandoned the supplicant. The complaint is not straightforward, but hidden in a petition. Westermann calls this particular aspect of some lament psalms 'negative petitions'.65 At the outset of the prayer, the supplicant is clearly uncertain whether God will hear the plea or will rather pay no heed to the petitioner's suffering.66 As with many of the psalms we have already looked at, the main theme expressed here has to do with divine/cosmic justice, that is, the hope that the just will be dealt with mercifully and the wicked harshly. But, unlike other psalms sharing this same concern, nowhere in Psalm 28 is the terminology we would expect of psalms focusing on justice, words such as E3SEJQ or plK, for example. Nevertheless, the supplicant is calling God to act in a manner befitting the judge of the universe. This notion is expressed most pointedly in the petition of vv. 3-4. The supplicant implores God not to let her share in the fate of the wicked. Conversely, in v. 4, the supplicant asks God to recompense the wicked according to their deeds. In other words, the supplicant assumes an ethical universe, but believes that only through the just actions of YHWH can this worldview be realized. Implicit in this plea is an accusation leveled against God that the deity does not always attend to his duties as judge. Verse Ib gives voice to this fear: 'If you are aloof from me, then I will become like those who go down to the pit.' Verse 5 serves as a response to this point of view—God will indeed punish the wicked, particularly because they do not take into proper account YHWH's deeds. The evildoers' deeds do not, apparently, accord 64. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 128. 65. Westermann, Praise and Lament, pp. 185-86. See also Ps. 27.9. 66. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 257.

68

God in the Dock

with YHWH's deeds, and that is their downfall. Rhetorically, v. 5 plays a didactic role in the psalm in that it instructs the supplicant (and probably a congregation) about one aspect of YHWH's attributes by means of a description of YHWH's activities vis-a-vis 'the wicked'. Additionally, though, this instruction also serves a prophetic function. In answer to the petition, it foretells the fate of the wicked. In this sense, it can be understood as an oracle, an oracle spoken not in the voice of the deity directly, but perhaps emanating from a cultic liaison. If read this way, the change in tone that occurs at v. 6 is understandable. Those who read v. 5 as belonging to the discourse of the supplicant are at a loss to explain the switch from petition to thanksgiving. Both Gerstenberger and Weiser, for example, postulate a possible oracle or theophany to explain the change in mood, but one that ostensibly occurs outside the transmission of the psalm as it has been handed down.67 There is no need to search so far for a justification for the change in mood; as has been argued, the promise of v. 5b serves this function well: 'He will tear them down and not rebuild them.' In response, the supplicant sings the praises of YHWH. The uncertainty expressed in the early part of the psalm has given way to the absolute certainty that God has indeed heard the supplicant's prayer. This conclusion is supported by the use of perfects (UQD; 1TO3; TTITU]) in vv. 6-7. Interestingly, the oracular promise does not directly address the supplicant's plight, whatever that might be, but it seems to be enough that YHWH has attended to the plea: 'Blessed is YHWH, for He has heard my request for mercy.' Beyond that, the supplicant may also be rejoicing in the fact that the wicked will be punished. In v. 5, there is no allusion to the supplicant's actual plea to not be counted among the evildoers (v. 3). Apparently, the promise that the wicked will receive due recompense is enough reassurance to the supplicant that he or she is not to be among them. As was argued in the notes on structure, v. 8 should be read as referring to the supplicant rather than as being spoken by her. This verse offers something of a commentary on what has transpired thus far in the psalm 'narrative'. The supplicant invoked and then petitioned YHWH, was answered and subsequently responded with joy to the oracular discourse. The didactic voice of v. 8 interprets for the audience the meaning of what they have observed—YHWH has paid heed to his 'anointed one'.68 The lesson is that, by extension, YHWH pays heed to the needs of all of his

67. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 257; Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 129. 68. Probably evidence that this psalm was originally linked to the monarch.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

69

chosen ones. The final verse invokes YHWH to do on a universal level exactly that which he has done for the supplicant. Psalm 31 v. 1 For the leader. A psalm of David. v. 2 In you, YHWH, I seek refuge; never let me be ashamed; in your justice, deliver me. v. 3 Incline your ear to me; In haste, deliver me. Be a rock of strength for me, a fortress to save me. v. 4 For you are my rock and my fortress; and according to your name, you lead me and guide me. v. 5 May you free me from the net they have hidden for me, for you are my strength, v. 6 Into your hand I entrust my spirit. You have redeemed me, YHWH, faithful god. v. 7 I69 hate those who attend to vanity, but I trust in YHWH. v. 8 I will exult and rejoice in your loyalty when you have noticed my affliction, have comprehended the troubles of my life, v. 9 and do not hand me over to the enemy, have made my feet to stand in a broad place. v. 10 Have mercy on me, YHWH, for I am in trouble. My eyes are wasted with grief, my soul and body, v. 11 My life is spent in grief; and my years in sighing. My strength falters because of my misery,70 and my bones waste away, v. 12 I am the scorn of all my foes, and moreover of my neighbors, and a horror to my companions. Those who see me in the street flee from me. 69. The LXX preserves 'you'. 70. Following the LXX.

70

God in the Dock

v. 13 I am put out of mind like a dead one; I have become like a useless instrument, v. 14 For I hear the whisperings of many, terror all about when they cohort together against me, plotting to take my life. v. 15 But I put my trust in you, YHWH; I said, 'You are my god.' v. 16 My fate is in your hand; save me from the hand of my enemies and pursuers, v. 17 Make your face to shine upon your servant. In your loyalty, save me. v. 18 YHWH, let me not be ashamed, for I have called you. Let the wicked be ashamed; let them be silenced in Sheol. v. 19 Let lips of deceit be stilled, those which speak arrogantly against the just, proudly and contemptuously. v. 20 How great is your goodness which you store up for those that fear you; that you do for those who seek refuge in you, in the sight of everyone. v. 21 You hide them in the covert of your presence, from the plots of men. You shelter them in a tent from contentious tongues. v.22 Blessed be YHWH for He has been exceedingly loyal to me, in a fortified city, v. 23 I had said, in my alarm, 'I am thrust out of your line of sight!' Yet you heard the voice of my supplications, when I cried out to you. v. 24 Love YHWH, all his loyal ones; YHWH guards the faithful, and requites those who act proudly, v. 24 Be courageous and let your hearts be strong, all you who wait for YHWH.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

71

verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2-3 4-7

invocation/initial plea personal affirmation of confidence

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

8-9 10-14

vow of praise

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

complaint/description of distress

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

15-19 20-21

petition

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

affirmation of confidence

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

22 23 24-25

hymn

petitioner (Ics)

human

thanksgiving

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

exhortation

didactic voice

human (mp imv)

deity (2ms) (v. 7-human)

Notes on Structure. Psalm 31 is an individual lament that exhibits every element, except perhaps one, considered possible for the genre. Depending on the version relied on for translating v. 11, the supplicant's discourse may or may not include a confession of guilt. The MT records: 'My strength falters because of my iniquity' (v. 1 Ic). 'Iniquity' seems rather out of place in the context, which is concerned to describe the details of suffering, not its cause. Furthermore, v. 14 blames the suffering on enemies, rather than the sufferer's own shortcomings.71 Most commentators note the disorderly poetic structure of Psalm 31. It is true that there seems to be no consistent metre. In addition, few scholars are able to locate any logic to the arrangement of content. Gerstenberger assesses the structure of the poem as having 'neither logical nor literary order'.72 He accounts for the state of chaos by describing Psalm 31 as a 'liturgical unit, with all the formal and substantial tensions characteristic of that genre'.73 This does not seem, in reality, to go very far toward explaining the seemingly haphazard arrangement. One area of difficulty seems to revolve around attempts to make chronological sense of the poem. The tenses seem to jump back and forth in such a way as to make it 71. Gerstenberger says the use of ''Dim marks 'the intrusion of a guilt-oriented theology' (Psalms, p. 140). 72. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 137. 73. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 137. The mixed generic character of liturgical psalms is what is referred to here. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 275, relies on an understanding of the psychology of prayer to explain the apparent lack of order.

72

God in the Dock

difficult to know if the supplicant is offering thanks for a prayer already answered (v. 22), vowing praise for future assistance (w. 8-9), or simply asserting confidence in the deity's assistance (w. 15-16).74 Verses 8-9, for example, might be saying that YHWH has already responded favorably to the supplicant's distress, but v. 10 launches into a detailed description of the affliction under which the supplicant is currently suffering. This particular difficulty is solved when v. 8 is translated as a promise of future rejoicing: 'I will exult and rejoice in your loyalty, when [Ids] you have noticed my affliction'. The following complaint seems less incongruent in this context. Excluding some generic irregularities, the general outline of the poem follows a logical thought-order: the early part of the psalm centers around invoking YHWH to act and complaint, while the latter half, as would be expected, is reserved for praise and thanksgiving. The movement from complaint to praise has led commentators to postulate an unrecorded favorable oracle.75 Not withstanding this possibility the text itself provides an appropriate transition from complaint to praise. Verses 20-21 differ from the expressions of thanksgiving or confidence that were heard earlier in the poem. Whereas previously the rejoicing contained a personal note, the praises in vv. 20-21 do not refer exclusively to the supplicant's situation, but generalize about YHWH's saving activities. In that sense they have a didactic quality. Most didactic generalizations refer to YHWH in the third person, but w. 20-21 continue the supplicant's direct address to the deity. The portrayal of YHWH's characteristics, unbounded by time or circumstance, gives way to the particular hymnic expression of gratitude (vv. 22-23) for acting toward the supplicant in a way consistent with the characterization of YHWH voiced in vv. 20-21. Thus, although not expressed in third person language, w. 20-21 may serve the same rhetorical function as an oracle; or it could even be the DV addressing YHWH. They may be described as a liminal interlude—not petition, but not thanksgiving either. In any case, the sweeping descriptions in vv. 2021 mark a transition between pain and joy, sighing and rejoicing. In vv. 22-23 there is an obvious shift away from complaint and petition. Having been heard by YHWH, the supplicant is now free to rejoice in the deity's loyalty. Rather than praising YHWH directly, the supplicant first sings YHWH's praises to a non-divine audience. The use of first person 74. Insofar, of course, as prefix and affix forms have any relationship to tense. 75. According to H. Gunkel, Die Psalmen, p. 131, an oracle delivered by a priest must have intervened between w. 19 and 20.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

73

pronouns makes it clear that this discourse belongs to the supplicant. Then in v. 23, she turns back to the deity and admits to having been concerned that things might not have gone so positively. Blaming YHWH directly rarely makes its way into the Psalter, and the voicing of such a complaint in the form of a report may be a remnant from a time when undiluted complaint against YHWH had more currency.76 Verse 23b suggests that the trouble is behind the supplicant: 'I had said, in my alarm, "I am thrust out from your line of sight!" Yet you heard the voice of my supplications, when I cried out to you'. This confession is particularly telling in that the majority of the poem is adamant about expressing only confidence in YHWH. Any show of doubt has been squelched and could only be inferred from the almost overly vehement way in which the votes of confidence are declared (vv. 4-7, 15-16, 20-23). Finally, the didactic section (vv. 24-25) seems to sit outside the main flow of action. It shifts away from both the direct discourse of prayer, as well as from the specifics of the supplicant's case. Plural imperatives move the discourse into an entirely new arena in which an audience is given a summary appraisal of the preceding oration. The main themes of the entire psalm are recapitulated in a condensed form, not unlike the 'moral of the story' we are accustomed to in fairy-tales. The themes of loyalty and protection, pride and recompense permeated the psalm and are, in the end succinctly reiterated—YHWH guards the faithful and requites those who act proudly—for the sake of the audience. The final verse seems somewhat anti-climactic and not specifically tied to the content of Ps. 31 (see Psalm 27.14). It may have been a standard literary or liturgical final blessing or exhortation. Notes on Content. The majority of Psalm 31 belongs to the discourse of the supplicant; the didactic interjection comes only at the end, and there does not seem to be any tension between the two discourses. The interjection summarizes and concludes; it does not contend with the worldview posited by the supplicant. There is no back and forth as commonly found in other dialogic psalms, where the two discourses seem to wrestle over theology and worldview. Verse 24 begins with direct instruction, in the form of an exhortation ('Love, YHWH, all his loyal ones') and is followed by descriptive cola meant to serve as motivation for the exhortation. YHWH is described as

76. Westermann, Praise and Lament, p. 185.

74

God in the Dock

one who takes care of his own ('YHWH guards the faithful'), so it is only right that 'his own', show him appropriate homage (nnK). The Hebrew for the 'loyal ones' (from 1DPI) and the 'faithful' (from ]DK) are interchangeable for the most part. The root IDfl occurs four times (vv. 8, 17, 22,24) and ]!DK twice (vv. 6,24). In every instance in which they occur in the supplicant's speech, they are employed to speak about the deity. Conversely, in the interjection, they are used to describe humans in relationship to YHWH. We are told in v. 24 that YHWH guards the faithful, but the flip side is that he 'requites those who act proudly'. The entire psalm is concerned with the issue of reward and punishment, the faithful versus the proud. Although she is never directly described as such, we are to consider the supplicant among the faithful. For example, in w. 6-7 and again in vv. 15-16 the supplicant alludes to the trust she has placed in YHWH and how she has committed her life to the deity. Furthermore, when in w. 20-21 she speaks in general terms about the reciprocal relationship enjoyed between YHWH and those that trust in him, she surely counts herself among this circle. All this adds up to one more psalm that is concerned first and foremost with the issue of justice, and specifically, YHWH's role in its administration. In this context one would expect some allusion to guilt or innocence on the part of the supplicant, but there is no such discussion. In addition to this, it is Gerstenberger's opinion that the psalm lacks, as well, any reflections on a covenant or moral code.77 Perhaps not explicitly, but certainly the notion that loyalty and faithfulness deserve the same in return testifies to a reliance on straightforward, if somewhat unsophisticated, moral standards. As with many other psalms, we are here confronted with a concern for justice and ethics, but it is on a uniquely personal level that these issues are addressed, as evinced by the use of the word 'trust' throughout, as well as the many ways in which YHWH is described as the supplicant's 'strength', 'rock', 'fortress'. Putting aside the issue of guilt or innocence, the supplicant's discourse is concerned simply to convince YHWH to act on her behalf because she 'trusts' YHWH, because she is one of YHWH's faithful. In other words, YHWH is being induced to act on account of some prearranged agreement, not because abstract issues of justice are at stake. YHWH as ruler and judge of the universe are not what is at issue. Rather, YHWH as participant in a covenant of mutual responsibility is appealed to. Psalms 7 and 9 serve as a good contrast to

77. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 140.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

75

this approach. They certainly deal with YHWH's duties to his 'chosen', but on a more universal level they are interested in issues of cosmic justice: the wicked must be punished not only because they are attacking the petitioner, but because they subvert the cosmic order. In this view YHWH protects the oppressed (Ps. 9.10) against the enemies, not just the supplicant's personal enemies. And YHWH judges the world (9.6, 9) not simply the players within the narrow purview of the supplicant. In Psalm 7 the supplicant asks that YHWH, the one who judges the peoples (v. 9a) judge her according to her (the supplicant's) integrity (v. 9b), not simply because they have a contract requiring YHWH's assistance. The ethos propounded by the supplicant's discourse in Psalm 31 may be too subtle to allow any certainty, but the didactic interjection cuts through the nuances and makes explicit the point put forth throughout the psalm— that those who share in some kind of covenant with YHWH can depend on his assistance in time of trouble. Along these lines, YHWH is described as 'faithful' (v. 6), 'loyal' (v. 8; 17.22), 'my god' (v. 15). Issues of morality take a back seat when it comes to the realities of covenant duty. The discourses in conversation in this psalm seem to agree on this point, for the most part. As we have seen with other didactic interjections, v. 24 projects great confidence that YHWH will meet the supplicant's expectation. The supplicant's discourse, on the other hand, admits more doubt in YHWH's compliance with the implied covenant, but is no less convinced that he should comply. Psalm 55 v. 1 For the leader, with stringed instruments. A Maskil of David. v. 2 Give ear, God. to my prayer. Do not hide from my supplication; v. 3 Attend to me and answer me. I am restless in my lament, and I moan v. 4 because of the voice of the enemy before me, the oppression of the wicked; for they cast upon me iniquity, and in anger they persecute me. v. 5 My heart writhes within me, and the terrors of death have fallen upon me. v. 6 Fear and trembling come upon me, and horror covers me. v. 7 I said, 'Who might give me wings like a dove, [that] I might fly and be at rest.

76

God in the Dock v. 8 I would surely flee far away; I would lodge in the wilderness. sela. v. 9 I would soon find a refuge for myself, from the sweeping wind and the tempest.'

v. 10 Confuse, O lord, divide their tongues, for I have seen violence and contention in the city. v. 11 Day and night they encircle it upon its walls; trouble and mischief are in its midst. v. 12 Disaster is in its midst; oppression and fraud do not depart from its square. v. 13 For it is not an enemy who reviles me; I would bear that. Nor is it one who hates me that magnifies himself at my expense; I would hide from him. v. 14 but it is you, a man my equal, my companion, my friend, v. 15 We took sweet counsel together; we used to walk in the house of God together. v. 16 He will set death™ against them; they will go down to Sheol alive. For wickedness is in the midst of their dwelling place. v. 17 As for me, I will cry to God, and YHWH will save me. v. 18 Evening and morning and noon I will complain and moan, and then He will hear my voice: v. 19 'Deliver my soul in peace from the battle against me, for many stand against me.' 9

78. Splitting niD^ intofllQ D*1^ seems to make more sense than the given qere

mo fcw. 79. The difficulty in making sense out of the tenses in vv. 17-19 has been one of the main reasons that so many scholars consider this psalm illogical and its parts disconnected. Whether or not to translate the first two verbs in v. 18 as durative past, on the one hand, or to translate them as present or future seems somewhat up for grabs at this point. M. Dahood argues for the former noting the propensity Semitic poetry has for using imperfects to refer to past time. This certainly alleviates any difficulty the perfect, ilTS, might pose otherwise. I opt for M. Buttenwieser's explanation of the precative perfect. In this scheme, HIS should be understood as expressing a wish that is expected to come to pass (M. Buttenwieser, The Psalms [LBS; New York: Ktav,

3. Establishing the Dialogue

77

v. 20 God hears; and the one enthroned from of old afflicts them in whom there is no change, and who do not fear God. v. 21 He stretches out his hands against those at peace with him. He broke his covenant, v. 22 His talk was smoother than butter, but war was on his mind. His words were more soothing than oil, but they were drawn swords. v. 23 Cast your burden upon YHWH, and He will sustain you. He will never let the just one stumble*® v. 24 You, O God, will send them down to the pit of ruin, —men of blood and deceit, they will not live out half their days— I trust in you. verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2-3a 3b-9 10-12 13-15 16

invocation complaint petition/complaint complaint description of fate of the wicked petition

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) didactic voice

deity (ms imv) deity (implied) deity (ms imv) human (2ms) human (3ms refto deity)

petitioner (Ics)

human (3ms refto deity)

20 21-22

description of YHWH complaint/description of enemy's transgression

didactic voice petitioner(?)

23

exhortation to trust

didactic voice

human (3ms refto deity) indeterminate (deity and human) petitioner (2ms)

17-19

1969], pp. 18-25). Waltke and O'Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, pp. 494-95, cite 20 uses of the precative perfect in the psalms. 80. Dahood, Psalms, 1,29 translates as 'Your provider is the Most High Yahweh, your Benefactor who will sustain you; Never will he allow the just man to stumble'. His arguments for doing so (see also Psalms p. 38) are sound. The didactic tone is maintained, and the evidence that the supplicant might be the addressee is multiplied by the repointing of ~[ 7^i~I.

78

24

God in the Dock YHWH and motivation (response to vv. 2-9) affirmation of confidence

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

Notes on Structure. A lament of the individual, Psalm 55 has an unusually complex structure. In the above chart I have attempted to minimize the number of divisions, but it proves impossible to be very successful in that regard and still preserve the integrity of the text's movement. Many commentators have noted the psalm's lack of cohesion and logical progression. Much of the difficulty revolves around how to handle the issue of tense in vv. 17-19. These verses all deal with the theme of confidence in YHWH, but in terms of grammar, the verbal shifting from imperfects in v. 17 to imperfects followed by a waw-conversive in v. 18, and finally to perfects in v. 19, has stymied many. In addition, the treatment of the enemy throughout the psalm, in both a generalized and a quite particular, personal manner, has prompted some to assume corruption and/or significant redactional activity. It is true that vv. 13-15 and 21-22, with a tone more personal and specific than usual, seem anomalous in this regard, and the text would read smoother if they were omitted. Still, reading the psalm as consisting of two main discourses—the chaotic, desperate discourse of the supplicant and an ordered, confident didactic discourse—helps make some sense of what otherwise seems a jumble of thoughts. As typical for laments, the psalm opens with an invocation to YHWH and moves into a complaint. Verses 7-9 are considered part of the complaint for the reason that speech about the relative safety of the 'wilderness', a region notorious in the Hebrew Bible for its dangers, only serves to emphasize the dire straits in which the supplicant finds herself. Discussion of the enemy is given unique treatment in this psalm. The enemy is spoken of from three different perspectives: (1) In v. 4, the enemy is described generically, not unlike the enemy is described in the majority of lament psalms, as a personal threat to the supplicant. (2) In w. 10-12 the enemy is seen as a threat to the entire fabric of society, without mention of the specific threat felt by the supplicant. This observation led Mowinckel to designate this psalm a national psalm of lamentation in the form of an Ipsalm.81 But if the individualistic outlook of the psalm as a whole is kept in mind, such a designation becomes unnecessary. (3) In vv. 13-15 the enemy is in fact described in unusual detail and very much in relation to 81. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, I, p. 219.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

79

the supplicant, as a friend. Poignancy of this type is unusual—it is rare in psalms for anyone but the deity to be the recipient of the supplicant's direct discourse. The combination of perspectives is not necessarily mutually exclusive, but neither need it be flattened out as Weiser does, his position being that the petitioner is regaled by enemies, but that the worst of them is a friend.82 The juxtaposition of these approaches to the theme of 'the enemy' serves to heighten the tension and magnify the sense of chaos that dominates the psalm. The point is not to determine the precise nature of the enemy, but rather to perceive the situation as the supplicant does— the enemy is all around. Her personal experience of a friend-turned-traitor is only one element in a world turned upside down. The complete abstraction of the enemy in vv. 10-11 makes this clear: 'violence and contention' encircle the city. The first possible didactic discourse does not occur until v. 16. The fate of the wicked is the main theme, but YHWH is alluded to as the one who will bring about this fate. Rhetorically, it reads as a response to the petition and complaint that precedes it. In v. 10 the supplicant makes a request regarding the wicked (by implication) and then complains of the activities of the wicked. Reading the verbs in v. 16 as prophetic futures, the supplicant is assured that YHWH will deal appropriately with the wicked. The second didactic discourse occurs in v. 20, after the rhetoric of chaos has been thoroughly laid out. God is spoken of in the third person in a discourse that resonates order and reason, causing it to stand out in an otherwise disorderly context. Rather than reading it as an alteration in tone within one and the same discourse, the poem flows more smoothly when v. 20 is read as a response to what has come before, the general invective against enemies (vv. 4.10-11), and more particularly as a response to the expression of longing in vv. 17-19. In v. 19, the petition ends with HTS, a precative perfect that functions as a request to secure the deity's intervention ('Deliver my soul...'). In response, v. 20 begins with the assurance that 'God hears'. Echoing the didactic interjection in v. 16, the rest of v. 20 responds reassuringly to the theme that dominates most of the psalm—the fate of the enemies. God is described as one who punishes those who do not mend their ways and who do not fear God.83 Oddly, the psalm then ostensibly jumps back to a description of the enemy (vv. 21-22). The description of a deceitful friend is reminiscent of the description of the enemy in w. 13-15. Immediately following is 82. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 419. 83. This verse is fairly hopelessly corrupt, but the gist is nevertheless discernible.

80

God in the Dock

another didactic speech. It is fairly certain that v. 23 should not be assigned to the discourse of the supplicant. In the first place, the assurance with which this discourse speaks of YHWH's reliable character—'He will never let the just one stumble'—is out of step with the despondent speeches made earlier in the psalm by the supplicant. In the second place, the 2ms pronominal particles suggest that the supplicant herself is the recipient of the instruction ('Cast your burden...'; 'He will sustain you..:). The final verse returns to direct prayerful discourse, and echoes the theme and tone of v. 16, the initial didactic interjection. Notes on Content. Embedded in the initial invocation and complaint is what Westermann calls a 'negative petition' or 'hidden lament' against God.84 'Do not hide... Attend to me and answer me' (vv. 2b-3) carries the implication that the supplicant's trouble comes from YHWH's lack of attention. Furthermore, the use of four imperative constructions in this verse suggests desperation on the part of the supplicant, who seems to lack confidence in YHWH's responsiveness (cf. Pss. 27 and 28, where this is stated more explicitly). Implied in many individual laments is a frustration with the enemies' ability to act with impunity.85 Whereas in many communal laments the complaint is more explicit —'How long...?' 'Why... you...?' etc., according to Westermann, in the individual lament the force of the complaint has been mitigated over time as the complaint merged with the petitionary form. This is significant in the case of Psalm 55 because the supplicant takes absolutely no responsibility for the threatening situation in which she finds herself. The enemies are to blame, of course, and because YHWH is supposedly the only one capable of defeating them (the supplicant voices a wish to flee from her troubles, but she never mentions defeating her enemies herself), he, too, holds some responsibility. If the supplicant bears no blame for her situation, then it is natural to turn to the deity to correct what is otherwise obviously some kind of cosmic blunder. In the complaint section (w. 3b-9), the supplicant goes on to present her case before YHWH. She describes herself as oppressed by the wicked and in the throes of death; whether the latter should be taken metaphorically or not, she perceives her situation as desperate, so much so that if she could she would fly away from her home and, paradoxically, seek refuge in the 84. Westermann, Praise, p. 185. 85. Westermann Praise, p. 194.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

81

wilderness. After making her case, the supplicant presents her request in v. 1 Oa, followed by more reasons why the deity should acquiesce to her plea. Unlike the previous complaint section, though, the entire city is threatened in vv. 10b-12. Ironically, violence and contention circle its walls in place of the sentinels who normally would. Not only are the borders of the city threatened, but so is its core, symbolized by the use of the term 'square', the place where commerce functioned. Altogether, the imagery is evocative of the rending of the fabric of society. From this very broad, inclusive description of enemies, we jump immediately to a detailed and personalized description. Verses 13-15 paint, in vivid strokes, the enemy as a former friend. Within the supplicant's discourse there occurs two more cases of similarly alternating descriptions: in w. 21-22 the singular enemy is again described in a fairly detailed manner, and lastly, in the final affirmation of confidence (v. 24), plural, nondescript enemies again are the focus of imprecatory-type language. The oscillation between these widely divergent descriptions of the enemy in the same psalm function rhetorically to establish a textual backdrop of utter chaos against which the supplicant can more effectively make her plea. And extra-textually, a scene of havoc-in-the-streets is evoked by the alternating descriptions of the enemy/enemies. In this situation, YHWH must step in, for the sake of both the individual and the community.86 Against this backdrop the didactic interjections operate as a balm. Verse 16 promises the demise of the enemies. The straightforward lesson that comes out of v. 20a ('God hears') acts as a corrective to the supplicant's implicit expression of doubt about YHWH's willingness to respond (w. 2b-3). Verse 20b-d responds to the concern about the enemies and the wicked, though it never explicitly uses the words 'wicked' or 'enemy'. Put colloquially, its essential message is that God is eternal and in control, and will requite those who neither obey him nor recognize his majesty. Although coming right on the heels of yet another discussion of the enemy, the final didactic interjection (v. 23) is not concerned with the issue of the enemy per se. Rather, it is the rhetorical flip side of the previous instructional discourses. In other words, it focuses on the just rather than the godless. Cast your burden upon YHWH, and He will sustain you. He will never let the just one stumble. 86. This is contra Westermann [Praise, p. 193], who seems to consider Ps. 55 a lament of the individual, but also says that in individual laments, the enemies only threaten the supplicant.

82

God in the Dock

The voicing shift that occurs at this verse has been noted before. Gunkel commented that the vestiges of a priestly oracle are still discernible, although it was his opinion that in its present form it should be understood as a self-admonition.87 While it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the supplicant was talking to herself, it seems an explanation that goes to unnecessary lengths to maintain a monologic reading. Hayes believes v. 23 should be attributed to a priest who, speaking to the worshipper, offers words of encouragement and direction.88 While the former didactic discourses deal with one of the two primary issues addressed by the supplicant, v. 23 focuses on the supplicant herself and reassures her that she has nothing to fear, that YHWH will 'sustain' her. Furthermore, in response to the supplicant's hidden complaint (vv. 2b3), the didactic discourse assures her that YHWH takes care of the just, in general. Taken together, then, the three didactic interjections cover the gamut of issues addressed in this psalm—YHWH's faithfulness and the justice of his actions toward both the enemies and the supplicant. In short, the message is one we have heard numerous times in the didactic portions of other dialogic psalms: YHWH is holding the moral reins of the universe. The world is under the control of a judicious deity. The didactic interjections are spare; they make very basic claims about YHWH's actions vis-avis the just and impious. The simplicity of the assurance balances the complexity and disorderliness of the supplicant's discourse. The dissonance between the tone of the supplicant's discourse and the DV is striking and represents a dialogue in which basic issues of theology—YHWH's power, human versus divine responsibility, YHWH's role in the ethical structure of society, etc.—are presented and argued, but never fully resolved. In v. 24 there is no evidence that the prayer has been answered, only promises toward that end in w. 16,20 and 23. Still, the supplicant's final discourse mirrors the faith in YHWH expressed in the didactic discourses. Throughout the psalm it is clear that the fate of the supplicant depends on the destruction of the enemy, and in the final verse, confidence in such an outcome replaces doubt. It seems the lesson of v. 16, in particular, has been internalized. Psalm 102 v. 1 A prayer of the afflicted, when he is faint and pours out his lament before YHWH. 87. Gunkel, Die Psalmen, p. 238. 88. Hayes, Understanding, p. 63.

3. Establishing the Dialogue v. 2 YHWH, hear my prayer; and let my cry come to you. v. 3 Do not hide your face from me; in the day of my trouble, turn your ear to me; on the day I call, answer me swiftly. v. 4 For my days evaporate like smoke, and my bones are burned like a brazier, v. 5 My heart is scorched and withered like grass, so that I forget to eat my food, v. 6 Because of the sound of my groaning, my bones cling to my flesh. v. 7 I am like an owl in the wilderness, like a bird of prey in the desolate places, v. 8 I am on guard; I am like a lone bird on a house top. v. 9 All day long my enemies taunt me; Those who deride me make oaths against me. v. 10 For I eat ashes as bread, and mingle my drink with tears, v. 11 On account of your fury and your wrath, you have lifted me up and thrown me down, v. 12 My days are like a shadow in the evening; I am withered like grass, v. 13 but you, YHWH, are eternally enthroned, your memorial goes on from generation to generation. v. 14 Surely you will arise and take pity on Zion, for it is time to show her compassion; indeed the time has come. v. 15 For your servants delight in her stones, they have compassion on her dust, v. 16 The nations will fear the name of YHWH, and all the kings of the earth, your glory. v. 77 Because YHWH will rebuild Zion, will appear in his glory, v. 18 [because He will] regard the prayer of the destitute and not spurn their prayer, v. 19 let this be written down for a coming generation, that people yet to be created might praise Yah. v. 20 Because He looks down from his holy height, YHWH looks upon earth from heaven, v. 21 to hear the groans of the prisoner, to loose those condemned to death,

83

84

God in the Dock

v. 22 his name will be proclaimed in Zion, his praise in Jerusalem, v. 23 when the people gather together with the king to serve YHWH. v. 24 He drained my strength along the way; He shortened my days, v. 25 I say: 'My god, do not take me away in the midst of my days, when your years last generations!89 v. 26 Of old you established the foundation of the earth; the heavens are your handiwork, v. 27 They will perish, but you will endure; they will all wear out like a garment; you change them like a garment and they pass away, v. 28 But you are the same, and your years will never end. v. 29 May the children of your servant dwell securely, and may their seed be established in your presence.' verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2-3 4-13 14-16

invocation complaint affirmation of confidence description of YHWH's saving action complaint petition (vv. 25, 29) motivation/praise (vv. 26-28)

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics) petitioner

deity (2ms and imv) deity (2ms) deity (2ms)

didactic voice

human (3ms refto deity) deity (2ms) deity (2ms)

17-23

24 25-29

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics)

Notes on Structure. Psalm 102 is clearly a psalm of lament. It abounds with complaint language. Scholars are divided, though, over whether it should be designated a communal or individual psalm. It starts off sounding like an individual lament, but the discussion of Zion in the middle of the psalm has led some to stress its communal aspects.90 Others have 89. The quote may end here. The options will be discussed in the subsequent textual notes. 90. For example, Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, I, p. 219, classifies it as a national psalm of lamentation in the form of an I-psalm.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

85

explained the discrepancy as arising from the conflation of two separate psalms, or from the later addition of vv. 14-23. Without the allusion to Zion contained in these verses, though, the psalm turns out to be a lament that is unusually heavily weighted on the side of complaint. Furthermore, without the central section, there is no affirmation of confidence, nor much of an element of praise.91 The superscription is unique. It indicates that at some time in its evolution this psalm was used by common people who were suffering from some affliction and sought relief in the presence of YHWH.92 The psalm itself begins typically with a call to YHWH (vv. 2-3). YHWH is addressed directly, ms imperatives comprising the bulk of the address. Here again (as in Ps. 55), is the element that Westermann calls the hidden complaint: 'Do not hide your face from me...' But in this psalm the complaint goes on to become much more explicit. Verses 4-13 express in passionate, first person language the supplicant's plight. It is assumed that YHWH is still being addressed although the deity is not mentioned again until v. 11. At that point there is nothing 'hidden' about the complaint: 'On account of your fury and your wrath, you have lifted me up and thrown me down.' This is one of the few psalms in which a complaint against YHWH is made so forthrightly. Contrary to the typical divisions made by commentators and translators,93 v. 13 should be read with w. 4-12 rather than as part of the affirmation of confidence that follows. Verse 13 serves to strengthen the impact of the complaint against YHWH by contrasting the shortness of the supplicant's day with YHWH's longevity: 'My days are like a shadow in the evening...' (v. 12a) 'but you, YHWH, are eternally enthroned...' (v. 13a). In w. 14-16 subject matter shifts, but not voicing. YHWH is still the direct recipient of the address (except 16a), but the topic is no longer the suffering of the petitioner, but of Zion. Conversely, in v. 17 the theme of Zion continues, but the voicing shifts. In w. 17-23 YHWH is spoken of in the third person, in hymn-like language, and there is no longer any direct evidence for assigning the supplicant to the role of speaker; there are no 1 cs pronominal suffixes, either possessive or subjective. The personalized tone of the psalm has been abandoned temporarily for the purpose of 91. Such a negative psalm is certainly not unheard of (see Ps. 88), but it is unusual. 92. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, I, p. 77, and II, p. 9, claims this lament was originally for the use of royalty and other VIPs and only later came to be democratized. 93. Thus the RSV; NRSV; TANAKH;NEB; etc. Also Gunkel,Die Psalmen,pp. 43637; Weiser, Psalms, p. 654; Dahood, Psalms, III, pp. 8-9, etc.

86

God in the Dock

interjecting a more dispassionate, although no less forceful, discourse on the nature and saving activities of YHWH. The supplicant's specific case is not addressed, though we are told that YHWH listens to the prayers of the destitute (v. 18), an assertion that could offer encouragement to the supplicant. Still, it seems that YHWH's rebuilding of Zion, not his redemption of the supplicant, is the motivation for the praise that permeates this section. And then, as if the previous hymn never occurred, the supplicant's complaint is continued in v. 24 and finishes the psalm. Discussion about, rather than to, YHWH continues briefly in v. 24, as the supplicant repeats the complaint lodged previously in vv. 11-12—her days are being shortened by YHWH. The supplicant's discourse then moves back into direct dialogue with the deity when the supplicant quotes her own speech to YHWH. Should we read the Ics imperfect of ~ID& as recounting a past plea, or does it insinuate an ongoing petition? Since there is no indication in this psalm that the petitioner's problems have been rectified, it seems logical to envision the petition voiced in w. 25-29 as ongoing. There is no grammatical, nor any other, reason for limiting the quote to v. 25 (though whether one does so or not has little impact in terms of the dialogic reading being explored here). The direct discourse continues, and although vv. 26-28 constitute praise of a sort, they also serve, as did v. 13, an integral function in the complaint. Once again, YHWH's immortality is contrasted with the supplicant's foreshortened life. The fact that this juxtaposition occurs twice suggests that it is a purposeful rhetorical tactic employed to encourage YHWH to see the unfairness of the situation being endured by the supplicant. Atypically, the final verse is well connected to the discourse that precedes it, both grammatically and thematically. YHWH is the direct addressee and the mention of progeny accords well with the overall theme of longevity. Notes on Content. As touched on above, the didactic interjection is out of step with the central theme of the rest of the psalm, both in terms of grammar and content. YHWH as the redeemer of Zion is the message propounded by the didactic discourse in contrast to the supplicant's concern about YHWH's lack of mercy regarding her personal suffering. Verses 14-16, which contain references to Zion, function as a transition to the didactic portion. Other than the change in subject, there is no indication that vv. 14-16 do not belong to the supplicant's discourse. YHWH continues to be the recipient of direct discourse, but the subject is no

3. Establishing the Dialogue

87

longer the supplicant's personal distress. The dialogical structure of the book of Lamentations may offer a useful comparison by which we can attribute the lament in vv. 4-13 to Zion personified.94 This seems corroborated by the fact that the didactic interjection functions as a response to the concern about Zion's fate. On the other hand, the fact that the didactic interjection does nothing to mitigate the force of the complaint that comes at the end of the psalm seems to suggest that we are dealing with two separate concerns. In response to the concern expressed in the immediately preceding verses, v. 17 includes an assurance that YHWH will rebuild Zion. The remainder of the didactic section offers a vision of a Zion in which praise will be offered to YHWH once again in thanks for his redemptive acts on behalf of Zion and the people who worship there. This vision of YHWH contrasts starkly with that offered in the complaint and petition sections. In vv. 4-13 YHWH is described as one responsible for the dire straits in which the supplicant (Zion?) finds herself, but in the didactic portion, the assertion is made that YHWH 'regards the prayers of the destitute' and hears 'the groans of the prisoner'. There is no evidence in the supplicant's discourse that the message of the didactic discourse has been accepted. Until the end, YHWH continues to be the focal point of blame. Perhaps on account of the emphasis put on YHWH's culpability, the role of the 'enemies' is downplayed (referred to only in v. 9). The contrast between vv. 12 and 13 helps to paint YHWH as a deity lacking generosity—the supplicant's days are passing quickly, while YHWH's stretch on without end. The didactic section is sandwiched between two complaint sections. Only in the didactic discourse is praise to be found. Unlike many psalms of lament, there is no vow of praise,95 and the only elements of praise have been shown to belong in fact to the rhetoric of complaint that they accompany (vv. 13, 26-28). Westermann corroborates this conclusion when he 94. See particularly Lam. 1 with its many voicing shifts between personified Zion who speaks directly to YHWH, and another voice, which plays a narrator's role and speaks of both Zion and YHWH in the third person. Deissler, Die Psalmen, III, p. 51, points out the parallel between Lam. 5.19 and Ps. 102.13, but notes that in the context of Lamentations it belongs to the Klage and in Ps. 102 it is part of the thanksgiving. But, as has been pointed out above, v. 13 should not be considered an expression of praise per se. A separate study of Lamentations as liturgical performance would probably shed light on the multi-voiced phenomenon found in many psalms. It is very possible that what occurs in Ps. 102 is the later superimposition of Zion onto the supplicant of a pre-exilic lament originally composed for a different purpose. 95. Westermann, Praise, pp. 66-67.

88

God in the Dock

recognizes vv. 26-28 as motivation meant to compel YHWH to act.96 Although the language of vv. 26-28 do contain hymnic elements ('Of old you established the foundation of the earth...') that could be understood as having a mitigating effect on the intensity of the complaint, they speak mostly of the deity's creative power and endurance (typical of many hymns), not of his mercy or sense of justice as so many other lament psalms do. This combined with the utter lack of penitential language97 in the psalm leads to a picture of the supplicant's discourse that is fairly unremitting in its description of YHWH as a deity who uses his power to oppress. Weiser's view of the supplicant as embodying a 'humble submission to God's judgment' as well as a 'contrite heart' seems overly pious.98 The ethical worldview reflected in many of the dialogic laments studied thus far is absent from Psalm 102. The supplicant does not call on YHWH's sense of justice (though she certainly appeals to YHWH's sense of mercy) to right her despicable situation. She does not ask YHWH to requite the wicked and reward her innocence. She simply appeals to the most base notion of fairness—YHWH has so much and she has so little, thus it is unfair that the deity use all his limitless power to limit the supplicant's meager life. In the end, the petition is left open, unanswered. Although the didactic interjection attempts to deflect the harshness of the complaint, it cannot be silenced and gets the last word. Psalm 130 v. 1 A song of ascents. From the depths I call to you, YHWH. v. 2 Lord, hear my voice; Let your ears be attentive to the sound of my supplications. v. 3 If you keep account of sins, Yah, my lord, who could stand? 96. Westermann, Praise, pp. 66-67. See also Broyles, Conflict, p. 14. H. Fisch, Poetry with a Purpose: Biblical Poetics and Interpretation (1SBL; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988), believes that prayer does cause YHWH to do what he wouldn't do otherwise. 97. It is curious that Ps. 102 is one of the church's penitential psalms. It attests to the church's skill in reading the Christian theology ofmea culpa into Scripture where it does not exist. 98. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 653. Similarly, he reads the renewed lament in v. 24 as the supplicant humbling himself willingly in the knowledge that despite his lament he may hereafter praise God's eternal rule (p. 655).

3. Establishing the Dialogue

89

v. 4 But with you there is forgiveness, so that you may be revered. v. 5 I wait for YHWH; my soul waits, and for his word I hope, v. 6 My soul hopes for the lord more than watchmen for the morning, watchmen for the morning. v.7 Hope, Israel, for YHWH, for with YHWH there is loyalty and with him is great redemption. v. 8 He will redeem Israel from all its iniquities. verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

lb-2

invocation

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms and imv)

3-4

complaint/petition

petitioner

deity (2ms)

5-6

affirmation of confidence

petitioner (Ics)

human (3ms ref to deity)

7-8

exhortation/description of YHWH

didactic voice

human (3ms ref to deity)

Notes on Structure. Psalm 130 is an individual psalm of lament, with many of the telltale generic elements in evidence in this short psalm, but these elements are expressed in such a way that they are difficult to delineate one from the other. Unique in this case, however, is the lack of an obvious complaint element. An individual lament psalm completely devoid of a complaint is nearly unthinkable." Once again, we are compelled to turn to Westermann's notion of a hidden complaint. As he points out, Psalm 130 is as much a psalm of confidence as it is a lament.100 In other words, Psalm 130 is an example of the historical transition individual psalms of lament went through, moving away from the typical formal expressions of a lament while still preserving the tone of such.101 Clearly, 99. Westermann, Praise, p. 171. 100. Westermann, Praise, p. 80. 101. According to Westermann, it was not until the postexilic period that the lament, or complaint portion of lament psalms almost completely disappeared (Praise, p. 80).

90

God in the Dock

a situation of distress motivates the psalmist, but there is no explicit description of the trouble, not even an explicit confession of sin underlying the trouble, only the assertion that all people sin: 'If you keep account of sins, Yah, my lord, who could stand?' (v. 3). Implied is the idea that the supplicant is burdened by her sin, but also because YHWH is withholding forgiveness. Also lacking in this psalm is the petitionary element. In fact, there is no explicit request of any kind, except in the formal invocation that simply opens the communication with the deity.102 The supplicant does not ask YHWH directly to forgive her sin, only reminds him of his power to do so. The use of implicit, or 'hidden' language makes it difficult to break Psalm 130 into constituent parts. Verses 3-4 can be read both as complaint (i.e. that no one stands a chance without YHWH's mercy) and petition (a request for forgiveness is implied). But they also serve as motivation for a response to an implied request. In w. 5-6, the supplicant no longer addresses YHWH directly. A human audience is the recipient of what seems to be an affirmation of confidence.103 In most of the laments we have looked at, though, this element is addressed in second person language directly to the deity. Furthermore, compared to other expressions of confidence, this one lacks conviction. It is more a statement of the supplicant's current status, emotionally and pragmatically, vis-a-vis her complaint. Here also may be inferred a hidden complaint, similar to what Westermann frequently observes in the invocations, that is, the expression of disappointment in the lack of response thus far. The final strophe switches voices entirely. No longer is the supplicant identifiable as the speaker, and the addressee is Israel. The use of a ms imperative exhorts Israel to 'hope' for YHWH, while vv. 7b and 8 offer a rationale for doing so. Many scholars point to these final verses as evidence that an individual psalm was transformed into a communal one at some later date.104 Reading dialogically makes this distinction unnecessary. An individual lament need not preclude the inclusion of broader participation, or at the least, a broader audience, if we think in cultic terms. An individual lament may occur within a communal context in which the supplicant's condition serves as a lesson for all. 102. Gunkel, Die Psalmen, p. 561. 103. Deissler, Die Psalmen, p. 165. 104. So Westermann, Praise, p. 255. Dahood, Psalms, III, pp. 234-36, is an exception. He reads v. 7 as a 'stereotyped formula employed when a hortatory formula was needed'.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

91

Notes on Content. Psalm 130 is one of the church's seven penitential psalms. The Psalter contains very few psalms of actual repentance,105 and I would argue that, like Psalm 102, this psalm lacks a strong penitential element. Verse 4 is less a confession of sin than the assertion that sin is a condition of human life and that if YHWH did not take pity on those that sinned, no one would stand a chance. In terms of content, the final verses, 7 and 8, anchor the entire psalm by bringing together the themes expressed throughout the supplicant's discourse. After the invocation, the remaining six verses form a broad chiasmi verses 3-4 speak of sin and forgiveness; vv. 5-6 are concerned with waiting and hoping in YHWH; v. 7a reiterates the issue of hope; and vv. 7b-8 finish out the psalm by echoing the concern about forgiveness first raised in vv. 3-4. Thus, within the didactic interjection are contained the main themes of the psalm rephrased into the language of exhortation and promise. Verse 7a explicitly responds to the longing expressed by the supplicant in w. 5-6 by affirming the position of hope (the verb ^fT is used in vv. 6 and 7) and waiting the supplicant has assumed, and extending it to include all Israel. In this way, the supplicant is held up as an example to the entire community. The lack of strong confidence demonstrated in the supplicant's discourse is countered by the DV's absolute confidence in procuring a positive response from YHWH. Whereas in v. 4, the supplicant says, 'there is forgiveness' with YHWH, the didactic discourse in v. 7 proclaims 'and with [YHWH] is great redemption', and then the assurance is added that YHWH is also loyal (IDPI). In other words, not only is redemption an attribute of YHWH's, but there should be no concern that he will not apply that attribute to the situation at hand.106 More than most of the dialogic laments at which we have looked, the two primary discourses contained in Psalm 130 support and confirm one another's position rather than act in tension. There is some difference in their perspectives, but it is only a matter of degree. The supplicant naturally assesses the situation from a personal point of view: she is suffering and feeling alone and unsure of her future. The didactic discourse, on the 105. Westermann, Praise, p. 274. 106. Although he seemingly attributes w. 7-8 to the supplicant, Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, pp. 128-29, detects the slight discrepancy between vv. 5-6 and 7-8 when he notes the deep longing expressed by the supplicant in the former stanza, and then claims the longing is somewhat mitigated by the supplicant himself in the latter stanza where he expresses confidence that his lament will be heard.

92

God in the Dock

other hand, operates from an outsider's point of view, and so is in a better position to assert an objective confidence. In v. 5, the supplicant specifically is awaiting YHWH's 'word' ("1131). At the close of the psalm, the petition remains open, but perhaps in the instructive discourse of w. 7-8 is finally heard the 'word' for which the supplicant longed. 2. Analysis of Dialogic Thanksgiving Psalms Although Psalms 30 and 32 are not usually regarded as lament or complaint psalms, they are both multi-voiced and contain a vivid reminiscence of a complaint that has been answered. Furthermore, Psalm 30 provides an opportunity for some ANE comparative analysis, and Psalm 32 has a uniquely didactic thrust to its overall tenor. These factors will help round out the study. Psalm 30 v. 1 A psalm. A song of the dedication of the temple. v. 2 I will extol you, YHWH, for you lifted me up, and did not allow my enemies to rejoice over me. v. 3 YHWH, my god, I cried to you and you healed me. v. 4 YHWH, you lifted my soul up from Sheol; You have preserved me from descending to the pit. v. 5 Sing to YHWH, his pious ones, and give thanks to his holy name, v. 6 For his anger is finite, but his goodwill is limitless. Weeping will tarry a night, but in the morning, rejoicing. v. 7 When at ease I said, 'I shall never be shaken.' v. 8 YHWH, by your favor, you caused my mountain to stand strong; you hid your face, I became frightened: v. 9 'I call to you, YHWH, and to my lord I appeal: v. 10 what profit is there in my blood? In my descending into ruin? Will dust praise you? Will it proclaim your truth? v. 11 Hear, YHWH, pity me; YHWH, be my help.' v. 12 You turned my wail into dancing,

3. Establishing the Dialogue

93

you loosed my sackcloth, and you clothed me with joy. v. 13 On account of that, [my] glory shall sing your praise, and not be silent. YHWH, my god, forever I will give you thanks. verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

2

thanksgiving report of deliverance

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics)

call to praise description of YHWH's attributes account of former complaint report of deliverance vow to offer praise

didactic voice didactic voice petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms) deity (2ms) human (mp imv) human (3ms refto deity) deity (2ms)

petitioner (Ics) petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms) deity (2ms)

3-4 5

6 7-11 12 13

Notes on Structure. Psalm 30 is an individual psalm of thanksgiving that contains a fairly complete psalm of lament (w. 7-11), followed by a traditional thanksgiving/vow of praise encountered in most lament psalms (w. 12-13).107 This would account for the seemingly repetitious nature of the thanksgiving (or 'declarative' or 'narrative' praise)108 portion of the psalm, found in vv. 2-4 and then again at the end of the psalm. These two sections are inversely related. Verses 2-4 start with praise followed by the motivation; vv. 12-13 starts with the motivation for praise and then makes a vow to that effect. A vow opens up the psalm, and with the vow in v. 13b, the psalm is brought full circle. The only didactic interjection in the psalm begins with the voicing shift at v. 5. YHWH is no longer being addressed directly, but rather the faithful are being enjoined, through the use of mp imperatives ('Sing!', 'Give thanks!'), to praise YHWH. This makes it clear that at some point in its history the psalm was performed in a communal setting. Verse 6 provides 107. Pss. 28.6; 31.22; etc. 108. These are Westermann's terms for the types of praise encountered in thanksgiving psalms and hymns. 'Declarative' praise is introduced by a voluntative ('I extol you, YHWH') and is usually found in thanksgiving psalms. 'Descriptive' praise is usually introduced by an imperative and is generally found in hymns (Praise, pp. 111-12; see also Weiser, The Psalms, pp. 71-80), though both can occur in thanksgiving psalms.

94

God in the Dock

a reason for the injunction of v. 5, beginning with the word ""3. YHWH's attributes are then described—YHWH's anger is short lived, but his goodwill is abundant. This interjection, while resonating with the theme of the petitioner's narrative (the abatement of YHWH's disfavor), does not make any direct reference to the supplicant's situation. The level of abstraction makes it particularly apt for a general audience. On the other hand, it is possible to read ]" *T (v. 6b) as referring to the supplicant and her specific situation: 'In the evening, he lies down weeping, but in the morning, rejoicing.' This is problematic in that the most immediate referent for 'he' is the mention of YHWH in v. 5. Of course, even in the abstract, the discourse can still be read in terms of the supplicant's experience, the level of abstraction serving to make what was personal more universally accessible. Verse 7 moves back to direct discourse. The supplicant recounts for YHWH (and the audience) the history of what led her to this act of praise. Verses 7-8 echo the theme of v. 6 and personalize it. YHWH's temperament is the subject in both cases. Worth noting, though, is the fact that the supplicant's experience of YHWH's temper as expressed in w. 7-8 relates inversely to that described in the second half of didactic interjection (v. 6). Whereas the didactic discourse explained that YHWH's anger is soon displaced by his favor ('For his anger is finite; his goodwill is limitless. ..'), the supplicant's discourse describes an opposite experience, one in which YHWH's favor is finite ('When at ease I said, "I shall never be shaken". YHWH, by your favor, you caused my mountain to stand strong; you hid your face, I became frightened'). Although v. 9 is part of the recollection of the supplicant, the use of imperfect verbs makes the complaint seem more immediate. Most translations do not have the supplicant quoting herself until v. 10. In fact, after v. 8 we are audience to, ostensibly, the exact words of the complaint ('I call to you, YHWH...' [invocation]), 109 rather than a recitation of the activity of lamentation by the supplicant ('I called to you, YHWH..,'). Furthermore, it would not be inappropriate to include v. 12 within the quote as well. It is common for lament psalms to include a movement from petition to praise. The close relationship between laments and thanksgiving psalms is evident in the double role—an ending to a thanksgiving psalm as well as to the psalm of complaint embedded within it—played by vv. 12-13.

109. Many individual laments start in just such a manner. See, for example, Ps. 28.1.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

95

Notes on Content. There is no way, grammatical or otherwise, to be definitive about the identity of the speaker in w. 5-6, but a close look at the rhetoric of this passage in light of its context can help us to understand what role it plays in the psalm. Sing to YHWH, his pious ones, and give thanks to his holy name. For his anger is finite, but his goodwill is limitless. Weeping will tarry a night, but in the morning, rejoicing.

The supplicant's discourse both agrees and challenges this message, though the latter relationship is only implied and needs to be teased out. On the one hand, the view of YHWH expressed in vv. 5-6 is in perfect accord with the view expressed in the supplicant's praise discourse (w. 24, 12-13). On the other hand, there is some discrepancy in worldview between the supplicant's discourse of complaint and the instructional discourse. In the complaint (w. 7-11), the supplicant neither acknowledges her guilt nor pleads her innocence. There is no attempt to make sense of the state in which she finds herself. The only possible explanation given is found in the verses leading up to the complaint, and those offer no more explanation of the supplicant's troubles than that YHWH hid his face from the supplicant for no apparent reason. Some commentators point to v. 7 as providing an explanation for the trouble that befell the supplicant. Mowinckel, for example, describes the supplicant's description of her prosperity as 'sinful' self-assurance.110 But this seems an explanation based on undue piety. The supplicant's sentiment seems rather a straightforward acknowledgment of the good fortune of having YHWH in one's corner. There is no indication that YHWH hid his face because the supplicant thought her good fortune would continue indefinitely. In the complaint itself, unlike most of the complaints we have looked at thus far, the supplicant makes no attempt to appeal to YHWH's sense of justice, nor even his mercy, but rather to his need for acclaim: 'What profit is there in my blood? In my descending into ruin? Will dust praise you? Will it proclaim your truth?' (v. 10). She uses plain common sense to persuade YHWH to come to her aid; the essential message is, 'If I die, you lose out as well, YHWH'. 110. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 35.

96

God in the Dock

Not even the thanksgiving portion of the supplicant's discourse praises a god who acts out of justice or mercy. Praise is offered because it was part of the bargain, as v. 13 makes clear with its use of ]U!2^: 'on account of YHWH's answering the plea of the supplicant, praise will be offered, not because of any inherent quality of justice exhibited by YHWH. There is no sense that the supplicant is indignant or bitter about this fact, she is simply reflecting a theological position based on her quid pro quo experience of the world. This pragmatic worldview permeates the majority of the prayer, but the hymnic portion of the psalm (vv. 5-6), occurring right before the complaint, nuances the supplicant's message. Heuristically, these verses can be understood as serving two different roles in the psalm. First, if understood as the words of the supplicant herself, they must be seen as displaying an ironic tone. In w. 5-6, YHWH is to be praised because his wrath is short lived and his favor is forever. In -light of the message that immediately follows in w. 7-8—it is rather YHWH's favor that is undependable; it seems the morning only brings the withdrawal of his face—how can vv. 5-6 be taken as anything other than tongue-in-cheek, at least if we are to believe that they stem from the same source responsible for the rest of the psalm? An alternative would be to read vv. 5-6 as emanating from a different source, one which works to contradict, or at least mitigate, the implicit worldview propounded in the complaint section. Most commentators acknowledge that the form of praise used in w. 5-6 differs from the form of praise used in the rest of the psalm, namely, in w. 2-4 and 12-13. Westermann calls vv. 5-6 descriptive praise, that is, praise that 'summarizes, brings together and describes'.111 This type of praise 'looks beyond one saving deed to the total activity of God' and often has a didactic quality.112 Verses 2-4 and 12-13 he calls 'declarative praise', praise that is case specific. In regards to Psalm 30, Gerstenberger draws attention to the wisdom-like quality of w. 5-6 by describing them as consisting of two 'proverbial sayings'.113 In Psalm 30, these two types of praise differ not only in form, but in content and function. The 'total activity of God' expressed in w. 5-6 is not a logical extrapolation from the experiences recounted by the supplicant's discourse. Verses 2-4 and 12-13 praise a deity who has asserted his power seemingly capriciously—out of 111. Westermann, Praise, p. 111. 112. Westermann, Praise, p. 111. 113. Gerstenberger, Psalms, pp. 134-35.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

97

a desire to be praised—and without any evidence of justice. In light of this basic understanding of YHWH, vv. 5-6 make the most sense when understood as an interjection, providing a nuance to the supplicant's discourse and offering a more favorable view of YHWH. A commemorative stela from Egypt is strikingly similar in form to Psalm 30. It is one of the few prayers outside of Israel that demonstrates voicing shifts and didactic content similar to the biblical phenomenon.'14 Content, as well, shows many parallels, but the way in which the material is arranged results in very different ethical pictures being painted by the two hymns. The dedicator of the stela is listed as Nebre, a worker in the Theban necropolis who lived during the reign of Ramses II (1292-1225 BCE). He erected the stela in thanksgiving for the recovery of his son from an illness, supposed to be due to his having stolen (or somehow mishandling) a cow belonging to the god, Amun. I will make him hymns in his name. I will give him praise up to the height of heaven. And over the breadth of the earth. I will declare his might to him who fare down-stream, and to him who fare up-stream. You art Amun, the Lord of him that is silent, Who comes at the voice of the humble man. I call upon you when I am in distress; and you come that you may save me, That you may give breath to him that is wretched. That you may save me that am in bondage. He [apparently Nebre] made hymns to his name, Because of the greatness of his power; He made humble entreaties before him, In the presence of the whole land, For the draughtsman Nekhtamun, Who lay sick unto death, Who was (under) the might of Amun, through his sin. I found that the Lord of Gods came as the North-wind... That he might save the draughtsman, Nekhtamun...

He said: Though the servant was disposed to do evil, Yet is the Lord disposed to be merciful. 114. I was unable to find any Mesopotamian prayers that fit the profile under consideration in this study.

98

God in the Dock The Lord of Thebes passes not a whole day angry: His wrath is finished in a moment, and nothing is left. The wind is turned to us in mercy, Amun turns with his air. I will make this memorial in your name, And establish for you this hymn in writing upon it.

For you did save me the draughtsman, Nekhtamun... The similarities between this hymn and Psalm 30 have long been recognized. Furthermore, the structure of this composition compares closely with a number of other psalms investigated in this study. Of particular interest is the alternation between speaking directly to the deity and speaking indirectly of the deity. And in terms of our interest in didactic interjections, the fifth stanza is noteworthy. It is difficult to know who is speaking, since a previous portion of the text is broken, but the similarity to the didactic discourse found in Psalm 30 is salient: Though the servant was disposed to do evil, Yet is the Lord disposed to be merciful. The Lord of Thebes passes not a whole day angry: His wrath is finished in a moment, and nothing is left.

and For He is angry but a moment, and when He is pleased there is life. Weeping may linger for the night, but at dawn there are shouts of joy (30.6).

Not only does the voice in the Egyptian hymn seem to be other than that of the petitioner, who was readily recognizable in the previous stanzas, but the moral and ethical tone of the interjection provides a crucial point of comparison with Psalm 30. The Hymn of Nebre contains explicit allusions to sin: 'Who was (under) the might of Amun, through his sin.' And 'though the servant was disposed to do evil...'. Amun is praised for showing mercy to a sinful subject. In Psalm 30, the inclusion of the supplicant's previous complaint mitigates any possible sense of penitential reflection. YHWH is praised in Psalm 30 because the supplicant promised such if YHWH would cease to be angry. In fact, the overall tone of most Mesopotamian and Egyptian prayer seems to be more penitential than biblical

115. A. Erman, Ancient Egyptian Literature (LAE; New York: Benjamin Blom, 1971), pp. 310-11.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

99

laments.116 Nebre's stela is also important to this study as evidence that didactic elements in multi-voiced psalms are likely an early component of cultic poetry, rather than a late wisdom addition. Psalm 32 v . l Of David. AMaskil. Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered over. v. 2 Blessed is the person to whom YHWH imputes no guilt, and in whose spirit there is no deceit. v. 3 While I kept silent, my bones wasted away, through my groaning all day long, v. 4 For day and night your hand was heavy upon me. My life force was diminished as in a summer drought. sela. v. 5 I acknowledged my sin to you, and my iniquity I did not cover up. I said, 'I will confess my transgressions to YHWH'; and you forgave the iniquity of my sin. sela. v. 6 On this account, all the pious will offer praise to you at a time of enlightenment. Surely then a flood of great waters will not approach that one. v. 7 You are a hiding place for me, you preserve me from trouble; you encompass me with ringing shouts of deliverance.

sela.

v. 8 I will enlighten you and teach you in the way which you should go. I will offer counsel with my eye upon you. v. 9 Do not be like the horse or the mule, without understanding, decked with bit and bridle else it not keep near you. v. 10 Many are the torments of the wicked, but the one who trusts in YHWH is surrounded by faithfulness. v. 11 Rejoice in YHWH and exult, just ones; shout for joy, all upright in heart. 116. This is a casual observation made through perusing a number of collections of ANE prayer.

100

God in the Dock

verse

nature of discourse

speaker

addressee

lb-2

proverbial prologue

didactic voice

human (ms)

3-5

account of complaint, repentance, and deliverance

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

6-7

thanksgiving

petitioner (Ics)

deity (2ms)

8-10

instruction/proverb

didactic voice

11

exhortation

didactic/choral voice

human (masc. sg and pi), human (mp imv)

Notes on Structure. Psalm 32 is a thanksgiving psalm with a confessional element. The designation 'thanksgiving psalm' certainly reflects the overall thrust of the psalm, but otherwise there are a number of generic anomalies. It does not open with a typical invitation to give thanks, but rather with proverbial phrases rarely encountered in the Psalter.117 Likewise, because of the allusion to instruction in v. 8, this psalm is frequently categorized as a wisdom psalm.118 The acknowledgment of YHWH's saving deeds is not as prominent as might be expected in a thanksgiving psalm. Gerstenberger counts only v. 5b in this category.'19 The two halves of the psalm (vv. 1-7, 8-11) are quite distinct in terms of both style and tone. The early part of the psalm, except for the introductory material, is personal and heartfelt; the latter part of the psalm employs proverbial language that abstracts a lesson from the example recounted in the early part of the psalm. And although the content is comparable, in the second half of the psalm it is so generalized as to be appropriate to any number of contexts. The petitioner's voice is fairly clear in this psalm. It comprises the bulk of the early part of the psalm, coming on the heels of an introductory section that foreshadows the main theme of the psalm (forgiveness of sin). Verses lb-2 have no telltale pronouns or verbal constructions that would 117. ButseePss. 1.1; 41.2; 119.1-2; 128.2. 118. For example, see Weiser, The Psalms, p. 281. Maskil in the superscription is another factor pointed out by those seeking to align Ps. 32, with the wisdom tradition (see Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 141; Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 209). Also, Seybold, Introducing the Psalms, p. 149, points to the psalm's didactic impulse. 119. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 141.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

101

indicate a particular speaker or addressee. The petitioner's voice is recognizable in the discourse addressed directly to YHWH (vv. 3-7). This discourse is surrounded by instructional discourse in vv. 1 -2 and 8-11. As in Psalm 30, there is an account of the time of trouble and its resolution (vv. 3-5). The petitioner confesses her transgression and then testifies to YHWH's goodness in forgiving her. The psalm begins with an 'ashre clause that leads many to draw links between this psalm and wisdom literature. As Perdue shows, 'ashre is indeed reminiscent of wisdom materials, but, as he goes on to point out, it is possible this term and the style of pronouncement had its origin in the cultic practice of curses and blessings.120 The proverbial-style discussion of teaching found in the latter half of the psalm (v. 8) fits another criterion of those wishing to establish the existence of wisdom influences in the psalms. It is generally understood that the wisdom influence in the Psalter is late, but as the Egyptian stela of Nebre demonstrates, sapiential language may have been a component of cultic activity from the beginning. Either v. 8 serves to introduce the upcoming instruction and vv. 9-10 comprise the actual teaching, or vv. 8 and 9 together are setting up the instruction that only occurs in v. 10. In any case, in v. 9 a mp audience is exhorted not to be stubborn, and what follows in v. 10 is purely didactic in style and content: 'Many are the torments of the wicked, but the one who trusts in YHWH is surrounded by faithfulness.' Verse 11 may be considered part of the instructional section, but it is more likely a standard choral exhortation, not exclusively linked to this particular context. The voicing shift in v. 8 is not discernible grammatically, leading most scholars to identify no shift in discourse. Indeed, the pronouns used to mark the speaker and addressee remain the same in v. 8. Gerstenberger acknowledges that the text probably was used in congregational settings 'as lecture or prayer, with various reciters', but he makes no attempt to identify different speaking parts.121 We must turn to content to determine whether it is legitimate to recognize a new discourse here. Notes on Content. Based solely on content no one supposes that the addressee in v. 8 remains the same, that is to say, is still YHWH. While YHWH is sometimes the recipient of a direct command to make himself 120. Perdue, Wisdom and Cult, p. 361. Such reasoning makes it difficult to understand exactly how he can be sure that Ps. 32 emanates from wisdom circles, and not cultic. 121. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 143.

102

God in the Dock

present to the petitioner, he is never the object of edification. Some commentators claim it is the same speaker re-orienting herself toward the congregation and offering them instruction. Using the form of a didactic exhortation and speaking in a much more restrained fashion, the poet now turns to the community of the godly ones... It accords with the style of the epigrammatic sayings of the Wisdom writers that the psalmist used the word 'you' in addressing them, as indeed his attempt to make the truth of his experience clear to them by using parables (v. 9) and proverbs (v. 10) throws into relief, in sharp contrast to the direct character of the first part of the psalm...122

In this case, the extreme divergence in style between the two halves of the psalm is wholly acknowledged, and yet there is no suggestion that two different discourses might be operating. If the stylistic discrepancy is not enough evidence, three other factors mitigate against reading the two parts as a unified speech unit: first, the 2ms object pronominal suffix in v. 8 suggests the intended target of instruction is an individual ("|IT32?K); and, secondly, although less persuasive, it seems unlikely that the one who was just forgiven for wrongdoing could embody enough authority to presume to teach anyone else.123 A third option assigns YHWH to the role of instructor,124 but the mention of YHWH in the third person in v. 10 would make this awkward. Furthermore, it is clearly not an oracle, the form that we expect YHWH's word to take in psalms and prophets. Still, this option has the benefit of at least offering an explanation for the radical shift in style at v. 8. In v. 9 a 2mp audience (-"mPT^N) is addressed, but the object at the end of the verse lapses back into singular address ("p ^N). What are we to make of a plural addressee bounded front and back by singular addressees? Perhaps this rhetorical strategy indicates the teaching is to be understood as directed toward the individual penitent primarily, but meant also to have an impact on the congregation witnessing the ritual. Determining the referent for the 2ms pronouns proves a significant dilemma if it is not to be 122. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 286. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 137, also reads v. 8 as the petitioner. 123. Perdue, Wisdom and Cult, p. 300, translates v. 8, 'I shall give counsel concerning my iniquity.' There is little support for this emendation except the desire to flatten the dialogic tenor of this psalm so that it meets Perdue's need to read only one voice in a psalm written by a member of the wisdom elite for the purpose of educating students. 124. So Kraus, Psalmen, I, pp. 405-406; Delekat, Asylie, p. 74.

3. Establishing the Dialogue

103

understood as the supplicant. And in terms of speaker, it seems reasonable to suggest that the only one in a position to dispense the instruction in such a manner would be a third participant (besides supplicant and audience) in the worship service, a cultic functionary, perhaps. Style is not the only way in which the supplicant's discourse (vv. 3-7) and the final didactic discourse differs. The theology of sin and repentance, which is made explicit in the discourse of the supplicant ('I acknowledged my sin to you.. .and you forgave the iniquity of my sin'), seems nonexistent in the final didactic discourse (vv. 8-10), which echoes the standard biblical understanding of justice—the wicked can expect torment, those who trust YHWH will enjoy favor (v. 10).125 The didactic prologue (vv. la-2), on the other hand, closely parallels the supplicant's story that follows, but it deals with the issues of sin and forgiveness more abstractly than did the supplicant's discourse. Unlike the guiltless stance taken by the supplicant in most dialogic psalms, in Psalm 32 the supplicant takes nearly all the responsibility for her woes on herself: 'While I kept silent, my bones wasted away, through my groaning all day long' (v. 3). But in the next verse, the supplicant claims that YHWH is secondarily responsible for the suffering. It is the deity's hand who oppresses the supplicant until she confesses her guilt. Contrary to many of the DV's studied thus far, the didactic discourses in Psalm 32 make no allusion to guilt, but do concur with the supplicant's discourse on the notion that a right relationship with YHWH leads to happiness. The psalm finishes with a very generalized exhortation that echoes the tone of the introductory verses. In sum, the psalm is framed by general praises of YHWH expressed didactically. The body of the text is composed of the specific testimony of the petitioner. Assigning responsibility to one voice for the divers roles played by different discourses diminishes the impact a more dialogically dynamic reading provides. And because Psalm 32 may offer the best example of instruction aimed specifically at a supplicant, it better assists our understanding of the didactic function of cultic literature.

125. As Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 143, points out, this theology follows the myopic line of Job's friends in their understanding of Job's situation.

Chapter 4 STYLISTIC AND THEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DIALOGIC PSALMS

It has now been demonstrated that a voicing shift does indeed take place in a number of lament psalms, and furthermore that this grammatical phenomenon is accompanied by a rhetorical shift toward a didactic emphasis, whether in the form of imperative instruction or indicative instruction. While these two elements are observable in every one of these psalms, there is little else of obvious similarity among the group. Before moving on to more theoretical matters it might prove useful to organize the findings to this point. To begin this analysis charts will provide the opportunity to see the data accumulated thus far laid out in a systematic fashion. The first chart will deal only with grammatical data. Data concerning content will be documented in a later chart. The main goal of the first chart is primarily to present the grammatical and stylistic characteristics of the distinction between imperative and indicative interjections such categories as 'Person, Number, Gender', 'Mood' and 'Position' will be instructive later when it becomes important to make whatever conclusions possible about setting. For example, an interjection that is addressed to a masculine plural audience will be one piece of evidence toward reading even individual laments in a public cultic context. Contiguous verses that make up a didactic interjection will be treated as a whole even when individual verses within the interjection contain different stylistic elements. The differences will be accounted for in the chart by listing all the characteristics contained in the interjection in the order in which they occur without indicating to which verse they belong precisely (e.g. 32.8-10). The parenthetical information in the charts does indicate some level of interpretation regarding content, but this is the most useful place to make these comments and they do bear on structural issues. Psalms 30 and 32 are psalms of thanksgiving rather than lament, but are included here because they will occasionally be

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

105

alluded to for clarification of certain points. Throughout the subsequent analysis didactic interjections will be italicized. Grammatical and stylistic data for didactic interjections P/N/G

Mood

Position

Style

4a

mp

imv

mid

exhortative (descriptive)

5-6

mp

imv

mid

exhortative

9a

3ms

ind

mid

descriptive (responsorial)

lOb

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive (responsorial)

12-14

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive

15-17 3ms (ref to enemy)

ind

latter

descriptive

Psalm Vv.

4

7

9

12

25

8-10

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive (responsorial)

12-13

mp

imv

mid

exhortative (descriptive)

16-19

3ms (ref to deity and wicked

ind

latter

descriptive

4-5

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive (responsorial)

7

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive (responsorial)

8-10

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive (responsorial)

12-14

3ms (ref to deity and pious)

ind

mid

descriptive

27

14

ms

imv

end

exhortative (refrain)

28

5

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive (responsorial)

8

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

latter

descriptive (responsorial)

God in the Dock

106 31

55

24

mp

imv

latter

exhortative (descriptive)

25

mp

imv

end

exhortative (refrain)

16

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive

20

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

descriptive

23

ms

imv

latter

3ms (ref to deity)

ind

mid

exhortative (descriptive) descriptive

102

17-23

130

7-8

ms

imv

end

exhortative (descriptive)

30

5-6

mp

imv

mid

exhortative (descriptive)

32

lb-2

3ms

ind

begin

descriptive (proverbial)

2ms

ind imv ind

latter

exhortative and descriptive

8-10

mp(s) 3ms (ref to pious) a. P/N/G = Person, Number, Gender b. ind = indicative; c. imv = imperative

It seems the simplest delineation of types of didactic interjections is derived in relation to the category 'Mood', and by extension, 'Style'. Generally speaking, the shifts in voicing take two forms: from a first common singular speaker to (a) an unidentified speaker who speaks in the third person indicative about YHWH, or (b) an unidentified speaker who uses masculine singular or plural imperatives. The former offers no clues regarding audience, the latter minimal clues. The majority of interjections occur in the indicative mood and are the most easily recognizable as didactic compared to those that occur in the imperative. Imperative interjections can still be understood as didactic insofar as the definition of such is extended into the area of instruction voiced in the form of a command. The indicative interjections are mostly concerned with describing attributes of YHWH or a person's fortune in relation to YHWH's attributes, while the imperative interjections rarely describe YHWH directly, but rather exhort people to some action based on YHWH's attributes. For

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

107

example, at the end of Psalm 31, the 'loyal ones' are exhorted to 'Love YHWH' because he guards the faithful and punishes the proud. Interjections of this sort will, when necessary to the analysis be referred to as 'direct instruction', insofar as they are requests explicitly directed to a particular audience. Didactic interjections that are expressed in the indicative mood, although implicitly directed at a particular audience, are usually more generalized descriptive statements and are meant to edify without requiring any specific action on the part of the audience other than acceptance of the message, and thus will occasionally be referred to as 'indirect instruction'. 1. Indicative Interjections in Psalms of Lament Of the 23 didactic interjections found in lament psalms, 15 occur in the indicative mood. They are found in Pss. 7; 9; 12; 25; 28; 55; and 102. All of these interjections are found in the body of the psalm, unlike the imperative interjections that are frequently found at the end of the psalm (and at the beginning in the case of the thanksgiving Psalm 32). Nearly all of the indicative interjections contain third person references to the deity. For example: God is a just judge... (7.12). YHWH abides forever... (9.8). Good and upright is YHWH... (25.8).

A few contain references to the enemy or wicked one(s) (Psalm 9) and/or the pious or faithful (Psalm 25): The wicked will be turned toward Sheol, all the nations which forget God (9.18). Who is it who fears YHWH? That one will be shown which path to choose (25.12).

The reason so few of these didactic interjections refer to the enemies or the pious has to do with the fact that comments regarding these figures are usually found within the supplicant's discourse. Within this category, there are two subdivisions: (1) interjections that appear to be closely connected to their context, to the point of sometimes seeming to be a response to the preceding discourse of the supplicant; (2) those whose connection is less explicit. The former have been indicated under the heading 'Style' with the word 'responsorial' in parentheses. Stylistically, this phenomenon has some similarities with the poetic con-

108

God in the Dock

vention of parallelism, with the difference being that each half of the parallel unit is expressed in a different voice, creating a sense of dialogue. In terms of multi-voiced religious literature, meant to be performed liturgically, antiphony may be a more apt description of this stylistic feature. But for the time being, the use of'responsorial', with its liturgical overtones, but its lack of a precise form, probably best captures the essence of the relationship between the supplicant and the DV in these examples. As the lack of previous scholarly attention attests, this relationship is not obvious unless one is sensitive to the notion of multiple voicing in these psalms. One of the more clear-cut examples, however, can be found in Psalm 25, in an interchange regarding the teaching of YHWH and its attainment: v. 4 Make known to me your way, YHWH, teach me your paths, v. 5 Lead me in your truth and teach me; for you are the god of my salvation. I wait for you all day. v. 7 ... as befits your goodness, YHWH. v. 8 Good and upright is YHWH, therefore He guides sinners in the way. v. 9 He leads the humble in judgment; He teaches the humble his way. v. 10 AH the paths of YHWH are steadfast truthfulness for those who keep the decrees of his covenant.

The concerns of the supplicant are expressed in the form of a request. The DV expresses the same concerns, but in the form of a statement, or response, no longer directed prayerfully toward YHWH, but toward a human audience. YHWH's goodness, path, teachings, truth, and way are the concern of both discourses. The second subdivision lacks this direct connection to the supplicant's discourse. It is not the case, however, that the interjections that have not been labeled as 'responsorial' have no connection with their context, only that there is less sense that the two discourses are in direct dialogue. In Psalm 55, for example, the various parts of which seem quite disconnected, the didactic interjections seem to have little or no connection to the discourses that precede them. Although the angry tone of the interjections do match in intensity the frustrated and fearful tone of the supplicant, and they do seem to share a basic theme—a concern with the fate of the wicked—little else connects them.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms vv. 13-15

109

For it is not an enemy who reviles me; I would bear that. Nor is it one who hates me that magnifies himself at my expense; I would hide from him. but it is you, a man my equal, my companion, my friend. We took sweet counsel together; we used to walk in the house of God together (vv. 13-15). He will set death against them; they will go down to Sheol alive. For wickedness is in the midst of their dwelling place (v. 16).

While v. 16 is loosely connected to the former verses, the generalized content, as well as the change in number from singular to plural object, precludes the possibility of considering this section as a dialogue, strictly speaking. On the other hand, if the standards of establishing a responsorial relationship are loosened, v. 16 could be read as a response to the supplicant's earlier discourse: Confuse, O lord, divide their tongues, for I have seen violence and contention in the city. Day and night they encircle it upon its walls; trouble and mischief are in its midst (vv. 10-11). He will set death against them; they will go down to Sheol alive. For wickedness is in the midst of their dwelling place (v. 16).

When set side by side, the similarities between these two passages become obvious, as does a sense of dialogue or response. In this arrangement, vv. 13-15 might be understood as an insertion, interrupting the dialogical flow. Being sensitive to the presence of more than one voice in this case helps makes sense of what has often been perceived by scholars as a lack of orderly structure in this psalm. As can be seen in these brief examples, the difference between those interjections that might be considered 'responsorial' and those that might not is subtle. The stylistic element of repetition, in conjunction with the concomitant voicing shift, observable in all of these psalms allows for the possibility of hearing a dialogue in most psalms containing didactic interjections.1 1.

H. Gunkel and J. Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms (trans. J.D. Nogalski;

110

God in the Dock

In sum, indicative instruction in multi-voiced psalms occurs in the 3ms form in which YHWH is referred to in descriptive terms. (In a couple of cases, where the wicked or pious are referred to, something regarding the qualities of YHWH is still implied.) Some of these descriptive interjections can be understood as comprising a fairly direct response to the requests or complaints made in the supplicant's discourse. Others are less directly related, but a dialogic relationship is still discernible. 2. Imperative Interjections in Psalms of Lament Those instances of instructional interjection that do not occur in the indicative occur instead as imperatives and thus take the form of commands or direct instruction. Unlike the indicative instructional units, in which the audience, from a grammatical viewpoint, is completely anonymous, the imperative interjections at least offer a clue, albeit a slight one, regarding the audience to whom they are directed. Rather than speaking in a general way about YHWH, these interjections speak directly to either a ms or mp audience about how to behave in light of certain qualities of YHWH that are either implied in the direct interjection itself,2 or mentioned in a juxtaposed indicative interjection, the latter providing an explicit reason for acting in accordance with the injunction given. For example, in Psalm 4, the DV offers guidance which implies YHWH's equity and trustworthiness: Tremble and sin not; speak in your heart, upon your bed, and be silent. Offer offerings for justice, and trust YHWH (vv. 5-6).

But in Psalm 9, the injunction is conjoined with explicit reasons, voiced in the indicative, for obeying the command: Sing praise to YHWH, who dwells on Zion; For He avenges blood... (w. 12-13). Mercer Library of Biblical Studies; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998), p. 96, believed it was customary for priests or some other cultic functionary to 'respond', as a representative of God, to the community's complaint. This facet of the communal complaint genre is a development of the function of the oracle, the remnants of which can be seen, to a lesser or greater degree, in a few psalms (e.g. 12.62 etc.), prophetic speeches (e.g. Isa. 26.8-14a; Jer. 14.2-10; etc.), and prose works (e.g. 2 Chron. 20.3). Gunkel, however, does not make a connection between this observation and the phenomenon of voicing shifts in general. 2. Of course, this does not preclude the possibility that female addressees were included.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

111

The conjunction ^3 in this case acts as a transition to a descriptive indicative interjection that is nevertheless integrally connected to the imperative discourse. Sections that follow this pattern are categorized in the chart as 'exhortative (descriptive)', indicating that their primary clause occurs as imperative instruction, but that their secondary clause takes the form of indicative or descriptive instruction, which provides incentive for the carrying out of the injunction. These two types of interjections occur almost exclusively in the body of the psalm, with the exception of Psalm 130, where an exhortation exhibiting descriptive qualities comprises the final two verses. There is one other type of imperative instruction that is neither pure exhortation (as in Psalm 4) nor exhortation juxtaposed with descriptive elements (as in Psalm 9). Psalms 27 and 31 contain imperative interjections that are nearly identical to one another and are positioned at the end, rather than in the body, of their respective psalms. They have no particular connection, in terms of content or style, to the psalms in which they occur, being rather quite general injunctions calling for courage and patience. Wait for YHWH; Be courageous and let your heart be strong. Wait for YHWH (27.14). Be courageous and let your hearts be strong, all you who wait for YHWH (31.25).

Other than incidentals, the only difference between these two imperative didactic interjections is in the number of the imperative, the former being voiced in the singular and the latter in the plural. It is highly unlikely that two such similar exhortations were composed as original endings for these psalms, but rather bear witness to the stylization psalms underwent in their long history of transmission. They are probably an example of one of several refrains that were popular at some point in Israel's cultic history. Still, the fact that they are distinguished at all, if only in the particular of 'number', suggests that there was some intentionality behind the assignment of refrain in these cases. Both are affixed to primarily first person discourses, which is assumed to belong to the supplicant. This observation provides parameters for the conclusions we can draw regarding social context as well as rhetorical intent. In either case the speaker of the refrain could arguably be the supplicant herself, or as is suggested in this study, some other speaker, but the addressees clearly differ. In the case of Psalm

112

God in the Dock

27, the use of masculine singular imperatives allows for the possibility that the DV is responding directly to the supplicant. In fact, this seems the most likely scenario, since it would be hard to envision a situation in which a supplicant would offer encouraging words to a specific spectator. If we were to take v. 14 as emanating from the supplicant herself, to whom could we suppose she is speaking? An audience of one seems improbable, and in any case, why would the supplicant address this person in exhortative tones? This is a minor but clear-cut example of how monologic readings of many psalms just do not satisfy. Psalm 27 may provide the clearest example of the remnant of an actual dialogue, stylized as it may have become over time and repeated liturgical usage. In the case of Psalm 31, however, the possibility that the supplicant herself is responsible for the final exhortation is increased. The fact that a plural exhortation is appended to an individual psalm can only be explained by the presence of an audience greater than the supplicant alone, which suggests that even individual laments were conducted in a larger communal context.3 Whether it is the supplicant or someone else with didactic intentions that addresses this audience cannot be known with certainty, but the change in not only voice, but in overall tone suggests a different rhetorical impulse at work, at the very least. Gunkel recognizes this when he allows for the possibility that 27.14 and 31.25 are remnants of priestly admonitions and words of comfort that were once a part of the cultic system to which individual laments belonged.4 Furthermore, the content suggests we are dealing with a different persona than the one supplicating. But discussion of audience and content lead into issues of life setting that are better left to a later section. 3. Content Data for Didactic Interjections The chart below extracts the interjections in full from their context so as not to complicate the analysis by allowing the supplicants' discourses to 3. Although they offer no systematic treatment of voicing shifts, Gunkel and Begrich, Introduction to the Psalms, pp. 45-47, make mention of the issue of refrains in their discussion of Hymns. In Ps. 8 for example, they recognize the phenomenon of alternating voices, that of the individual pray-er (vv. 4-9), and a choir (w. 1-3; 10), which is responsible for what they understand as the refrain portion of the psalm. Gunkel and Begrich offer no grammatical argument for their conclusions, but seem to take them as self-evident. 4. Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms, p. 126.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

113

confuse the material under examination. Following the didactic interjection^) of each psalm is a summary of their teaching. The summary focuses on what the interjection teaches about YHWH, in other words, the theology and/or worldview of the DV. Psalm 4 v. 4a

But know that YHWH has set apart [sets apart—Dahood] the devout for himself.

vv. 5-6

Tremble and sin not; speak in your heart (contemplate) upon your bed, and be silent, sela. Offer offerings for justice (for a just outcome), and trust YHWH.

Theology. YHWH's faithful who perform the appropriate cultic acts can depend on a positive outcome to their situation. Psalm 7 v. 9

YHWH arbitrates between the peoples

v. 1 Ob

The one who tests the thoughts and emotions is a just god

v. 12-14 Go d is a just judge, but a god who is indignant every day. If one does not turn back then He whets his sword, He has bent his bow and readied it. And He has readied for himself instruments of death—He has made arrows into burning ones. vv. 15-17 Observe! He pledges iniquity, and conceives trouble, and gives birth to falsehood. He has dug a ditch and hollowed it out, and fallen into the pit he made. His trouble will return on his own head and upon his scalp his violence will descend.

Theology. YHWH is a just judge of an ethical universe, ensuring that one reaps what one sows.

114

God in the Dock Psalm 9 vv. 8-10 But YHWH abides forever, establishing his throne for judgment. He judges the world injustice; He adjudicates between the peoples with fairness. YHWH is a fortress for the oppressed; a fortress in times of distress. vv. 12-13 Sing praise to YHWH, who dwells on Zion; declare among the peoples his deeds. For He avenges blood: He has remembered them; He has not forgotten the cry of the afflicted. vv. 16-19 The nations have sunk in the pit they made,. In the net which they hid, their foot is caught. YHWH is known by the judgment He executes. By the work of his own hands, the wicked one is snared. The wicked will be turned toward Sheol, all the nations which forget God. For not forever will the needy be forgotten, nor the hope of the afflicted perish forever.

Theology. YHWH is the just and eternal judge of an ethical universe, rewarding the good and punishing the wrongdoer. Psalm 12 vv. 4-5

YHWH will cut off all flattering lips, the tongue speaking grandiosely, those who say, 'By our tongue we will prevail; our lips are our own, who is lord over us?'

v. 7

The promises of YHWH are pure promises; silver purged in an earthen crucible, refined seven times.

Theology. YHWH's promises are reliable; he can be trusted to act justly, punishing the proud and faithless.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

115

Psalm 25 vv. 8-10 Good and upright is YHWH, therefore He guides sinners in the way. He leads the humble in judgment; He teaches the humble his way. All the paths of YHWH are steadfast truthfulness for those who keep the decrees of his covenant. vv. 12-14 Who is it who fears YHWH? That one will be shown which path to choose. His soul will lodge in goodness; His progeny will inherit the land. The counsel of YHWH is for those that fear Him; and His covenant mil be made know to them.

Theology. YHWH gives guidance to sinners who fear him and keep his covenant. Psalm 27 v. 14

Wait for YHWH; Be courageous and let your heart be strong. Wait for YHWH.

Theology. YHWH can be counted on when in need if one is patient and courageous. Psalm 28 v. 5

Because they do not discern the works of YHWH, the deeds of his hands, He will tear them down, and not rebuild them.

v. 8

YHWH is his strength, and a stronghold; A savior to his anointed is He.

Theology. YHWH is just, requiting wrongdoers and rewarding his anointed. Psalm 31 v. 24

Love YHWH, all his loyal ones; YHWH guards the faithful, and requites those who act proudly.

116

God in the Dock

v. 25

Be courageous and let your hearts be strong, all you who wait for YHWH.

Theology. YHWH deserves adoration because he is just, requiting according to deserts. Psalm 55 v. 16

He will set death against them; they will go down to Sheol alive. For wickedness is in the midst of their dwelling place.

v. 20

Go d hears; and the one enthroned from of old afflicts them in whom there is no change, and who do not fear God.

v. 23

Cast your burden upon YHWH, and He will sustain you. He will never let the just one stumble.

Theology. YHWH is a just judge, requiting according to deserts. Psalm 102 vv. 17-23 Because YHWH will rebuild Zion, will appear in his glory, [because He will] regard the prayer of the destitute and not spurn their prayer, let this be written for down for a coming generation, that people yet to be created might praise Yah. Because He looks down from his holy height, YHWH looks upon earth from heaven, to hear the groans of the prisoner, to loose those condemned to death, his name will be proclaimed in Zion, his praise in Jerusalem, when the people gather together with the king to serve YHWH.

Theology. YHWH hears and rescues the downtrodden. Psalm 130 vv. 7-8

Hope, Israel, for YHWH, for with YHWH there is loyalty

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

117

and with him is great redemption. He will redeem Israel from all its iniquities.

Theology. YHWH is loyal and will save sinners. Psalm 30 vv. 5-6

Sing to YHWH, his pious ones, and give thanks to his holy name. For his anger is finite, but his goodwill is limitless. Weeping will tarry a night, but in the morning, rejoicing.

Theology. YHWH's anger is brief; his goodwill limitless. Psalm 32 vv. 1 -2

Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered over. Blessed is the person to whom YHWH imputes no guilt, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.

vv. 8-10 / will enlighten you and teach you in the way which you should go. I will offer counsel with my eye upon you. Do not be like the horse or the mule, without understanding, decked with bit and bridle else it not keep near you. Many are the torments of the wicked, but the one who trusts in YHWH is surrounded by faithfulness. v. 11

Rejoice in YHWH and exult, just ones; shout for joy, all upright in heart.

Theology: YHWH's forgiveness brings repentant sinners great joy, while the wicked (those who don't follow YHWH) are tormented. 4. Thematic Categories of Didactic Interjections The content of the various didactic interjections varies widely in particulars, but there are many, especially thematic, similarities. The following analysis will be broken down into four categories. The scheme is intended

118

God in the Dock

simply to distill out the essence of the doctrine being expounded, so as finally to make theological comparisons between the supplicants' and the DVs' discourses. Theological analysis will rely to some extent on the dialogical model developed by Walter Brueggemann for doing theology. The first category will discuss the 'type of instruction'. This designation is related to the previous grammatical category 'Mood'. The focus in this section will necessarily not be an examination of mood per se but rather a content-based reappraisal of the distinction between imperative and indicative interjections. Rather than strictly utilizing the criterion of mood, this inquiry will use content to suggest that the two subdivisions have some implications for understanding the audience to which these interjections were directed, as well as the divers rhetorical techniques used to pass on instructional material. In other words, imperative instruction will be described as 'direct' in terms of its audience orientation. Likewise, indicative instruction will be described as 'indirect'. It should also be noted that the term 'content' is not entirely apt here, as stylistic considerations, too ethereal to pin down, are often as much in play as contentbased details. Since it does not serve the purpose of this study to draw such fine distinctions, it is more helpful to stick to the broad categories of grammar and content and press the data into one or the other. The second category, 'subject of instruction', will ponder who is the main subject being described. Although our primary interest is in how YHWH is depicted, it is not always done directly. Sometimes the subject is 'the wicked' or 'the pious'. In those cases, it is usually still possible to extricate a lesson about the deity, as frequently the characterizations of these humans are drawn in reference to divine attributes. After determining whether YHWH or someone else is the main subject or theme of the discourse, thirdly, the nature of the description of YHWH will be probed. Insofar as YHWH is described, on which order of attributes—actions or being—does the portrayal concentrate? In fact, didactic interjections frequently depict YHWH in terms of the deity's actions—either prior or hoped for—rather than the deity's essence or being. Of course, these activities can eventually be translated into essential attributes, such as 'just' or 'powerful'. After the constituent data have been weighed, a theological point of view can be deduced. This theology or worldview will be distilled from the sum of the didactic interjections in any given psalm, and subsequently used to contrast and compare the theologies of the supplicant and DV. The tension between the two voices observed in the exegetical portion of this study will be revisited, with the goal of more

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

119

systematically explicating the phenomenon. Rather than simply noting the discordance as it occurs in individual psalms, the group as a whole will be the focus of attention, and conclusions will be drawn for the type, where possible. Type of Instruction Didactic interjections, which in the grammatical analysis were broken down according to imperative and indicative forms, can be broken down into 'direct' and 'indirect' types, based on their content. In 'type of instruction' the two classifications (grammatical and content) overlap to a large degree. For instance, in Psalm 4, the two interjections are classified as 'direct'. In grammatical terms, it is the imperative that determines the classification: Tremble and sin not (4.5a).

In terms of content, though, it is the fact that clearly a particular person (or persons) is being addressed. The possessive use of the pronoun 'you' is one indicator of this: Speak in your heart, upon your bed, and be silent (4.5b).

But since grammar and content both point in the same direction, the distinction is not especially helpful in this case. It is the same case with the indirect interjections. Grammatically, 'indirect' is determined by the indicative mood. Many of the psalms considered indirect in terms of content also happen to occur in the indicative mood. For example, Ps. 7.9, 12 are indirect in the sense that they simply 'indicate' aspects of YHWH, and no particular audience can be discerned (except within the context of the entire psalm where it was earlier suggested that the supplicant may be being addressed). YHWH arbitrates between the peoples (7.9). God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant everyday(7.12).

The admittedly somewhat obvious point trying to be made is that in these cases content follows grammar—in psalms that employ the indicative as the mood of their principal verb, the message type is a general one, in which universal claims about YHWH are made, ostensibly catholic in their validity. In other words, these proclamations are theological in the broadest possible sense, perhaps even doctrinal. In any case, because of their generalized nature, the indirect interjections are a better indicator of the

120

God in the Dock

ethos that permeated the cult. Whereas theological speculation based on direct interjections requires abstracting from a specific situation or exhortation. Still, the categories direct and indirect are not aligned in terms of grammar and content in every case. Psalm 32.8-9 employs the indicative mood but is plainly aimed at a particular audience: / will enlighten you and teach you in the way which you should go. I will offer counsel with my eye upon you. Do not be like the horse or the mule, without understanding, decked with bit and bridle, less it not keep near to you.

Verses 8-9 contain only indicative verbs, but the use of second person pronouns leaves no doubt that it is conveying a particular communication, intended for a specific audience. What follows in v. 10 is very similar in form and content to the indirect interjections found in other psalms (see, for example, Pss. 25.12-13; 31.24b): Many are the torments of the wicked, but the one who trusts in YHWH is surrounded by faithfulness (32.10).

The message is generalized, and taken out of context it would be impossible to determine whether or not a specific audience is intended. The proposition that these verses should be assigned to a voice separate from the rest of the psalm has already been made in Chapter 3. The fact that vv. 8-9 make it clear that a particular audience is being addressed, and that apparently the lesson being alluded to therein follows in v. 10, may perhaps help make the point for the rest of the dialogic psalms that instruction is indeed one of the primary aims of these pieces of poetry, even in those cases where second person discourse (as in 32.8-9) is not juxtaposed to the didactic element (v. 10). Reading such didactic interjections monologically creates the odd situation in which ostensibly the supplicant, in the midst of supplication, either switches into a pedagogical role, or as many form-critical scholars have suggested, suddenly expresses confidence in YHWH. This paradoxical juxtaposition is exemplified in Psalm 7: Let the wickedness of the evil ones cease, and establish the just. God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant everyday(7.10a, 12).

Plea is countered with confidence in this chiasm. This apparent reversal in tone has always intrigued scholars, but it can be rather easily explained

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

121

with a dialogic reading. If it is fairly unequivocal that the aim of the speaker of 32.8-9 is to instruct, and furthermore that v. 10 comprises that instruction, then since v. 10 shares so many stylistic qualities with indicative (indirect) interjections found in other psalms, it is plausible that these other interjections were composed with the intention of serving a didactic purpose as well. It may be significant that every direct interjection, with the exception of those that have been previously described as 'refrains' and Ps. 4.5-6, is juxtaposed to an indirect interjection. For example (indirect portion is underlined): Love YHWH, all his loyal ones; YHWHeuards the faithful and requites those who act proudly (31.24).

Thus a reason is always supplied for following the injunction, suggesting a rhetorical attempt to 'make a case'. Psalms of lament include a certain amount of persuasion in terms of the supplicant's need to motivate YHWH to act appropriately. Here we see the concomitant device that seeks to persuade a human audience that YHWH deserves the offering of praise that is being required of them. The relationship is somewhat circular, but exhibits a certain logic when considered dialogically. A monologic reading requires a suspension of logic that would demand consistency from the supplicant. How could it be that the supplicant both expresses doubt by including motivational clauses in her plea and at the same time is motivating others with doubt-free language to praise YHWH? It is possible that the supplicant is simply employing reverse psychology on the deity, or that she is suffering from multiple personality disorder, but it seems more plausible, not to mention rhetorically more effective, to read two discourses in interaction with one another, the result being that there are no gaps of logic in this rhetoric. At the same time that it is being implied that the deity is in need of some persuasion, it is being asserted by a second discourse that there is no room, or need, for doubt concerning YHWH's response. All the bases are covered—space is provided for the expression of doubt, but this 'counter-testimony' is quickly integrated into the larger 'testimony' of Israel by the inclusion of the DV. Testimony and countertestimony are terms applied by Walter Brueggemann in his recent theological opus to describe the dialogical manner in which Israel talks about YHWH. Testimony represents the 'standard' view, the official doctrine, so to speak. Israel's testimony asserts a cosmic order. Countertestimony arises when Israel experiences dissonance between the norma-

122

God in the Dock

live testimony and actual experience.5 Psalms of lament, and particularly those containing two voices, embody most strikingly Brueggemann's theology of disputation.6 Direct and indirect are two sides of the same coin—wherever we hear direct instruction the reasons behind its declaration can usually be inferred, and are often presented in the indicative mood. Likewise, all indirect instruction implies a command to offer to YHWH what is due a deity who embodies these qualities. Whether literally or merely rhetorically, this affirming discourse comes in response to the discourse of doubt that propels the psalm. A distinct audience is more discernible in direct interjections, but even in instances of indirect instruction, a response is required; in both cases large issues are being disputed that impact (or are meant to) Israel as a whole, and require from the community a stance, visa-vis the testimony. The nature of the 'large issues' will be more fully considered in the section on theology. The attention given to audience in this section also helps highlight the pedagogical function of cult as opposed to assuming that sapiential circles solely operated in this arena. Psalm 32.8 offers a rare example in the Psalter in which we hear a voice unambiguously addressing an individual without employing the imperative. This teacher-pupil type of presentation has led many to label this a 'wisdom psalm', assuming a categorical difference from other psalms not so designated. Stylistically, Psalm 32 may differ in some of its parts from other thanksgiving and lament psalms, but in terms of content this psalm delivers a message not unlike the other psalms under consideration here. And its shifts in voicing, which have been another factor in categorizing it as a wisdom psalm,7 are not uncommon among laments, as this study has shown. The actual instruction, when the speaker finally gets to it, corresponds thematically to the didactic elements seen in many dialogic psalms. What we may be catching sight of is the idea that cult was engaged in an educational enterprise of its own, and that to distinguish between wisdom and non-wisdom psalms may be assuming a rigidity of form that never existed.8 The point is not to claim that the category 'wisdom psalm' is entirely specious, but to demonstrate 5. Theology of the Old Testament, pp. xv-xviii. 6. We will return to a consideration of Brueggemann's dialogical distinctions in the theology section of this chapter. 7. Murphy, 'Classification', p. 162. 8. See Buss, Biblical Form Criticism, pp. 360-65, for a reappraisal of the classic form-historical position that forms were originally clearly distinct from one another.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

123

just how blurry the line might be.9 In his study of prose prayers in the Hebrew Bible, J. Corvin argues the thesis that one of the main purposes of institutional prayer (oral prayer that has been written down and coopted for community use) was pedagogical. The primary value of this type of prayer lies in the impact it has on the community of worshippers. As opposed to the efficacious function of prayer, he calls this aspect 'effective'. The former is meant to effect a change on the deity; the latter is meant to effect a change on the community.10 So, while cultic literature included stylistic details that are more usually attributed to sapiential literature, there may be no reason to think it wasn't an intrinsic part of cultic practice to espouse motifs usually assumed to belong to wisdom circles. Perdue, in contrast, tends to regard Psalm 32 as a wisdom 'poem' rather than 'psalm', not intended originally for cultic use. His judgment is based in part on the use of 'sapiential motifs' such as the dichotomy between the wicked and the righteous; the notion of just retribution meted out by YHWH, the judge; and the interpretation of suffering as caused by sin.'l As this study has shown, these motifs can hardly be regarded as the sole possession of the 'wise'. The relationship between cult and wisdom literature may have been much more organic and fluid than is usually suggested.12 That the cultic domain

9. Murphy, 'Classification', pp. 162-63, argues that Ps. 32 does indeed qualify as a wisdom psalm, but his entire explanation is an exercise in how difficult it is to make such a distinction. 10. Corvin, 'Stylistic', pp. 100-105. Mowinckel notes this same dynamic in his study of thanksgiving psalms (Israel's Worship, II, p. 32). 11. Perdue, Wisdom and Cult, pp. 299-300. Murphy, 'Classification', pp. 159-60, also lists these as indicators of a wisdom psalm. But Murphy notes that there is no reason to disconnect psalms evincing these traits from cultic venues. 12. E. S. Gerstenberger suggests j ust such a situation when he points out that there are psalms (not considered wisdom) in which we find homiletical texts containing torah instruction. Gerstenberger suggests that the shift toward instructional elements in the Psalms became especially noticeable in the exilic-postexilic period (although he recognizes that didactic elements could already be observed in the family thanksgiving psalms of the pre-exilic period) when family religion 'gave way' to congregational organization (note Ps. 50). The exilic community, being an exclusively religious community organized around YAHWEH and his torah, had a much greater need for divine guidance ('The Book of Psalms: Composition or Collection?', public lecture at Princeton Theological Seminary, 12 November 1998). Engnell, 'Book of Psalms', p. 99, seems to be on the right track in denying altogether the existence of a category of wisdom psalms, though some of his reasons for doing so might not have been sound.

124

God in the Dock

may have always been explicitly involved in the education of Israel might render a distinction between wisdom and non-wisdom prayers unnecessary. Perhaps it would be useful to adopt Brueggemann's synthesis that psalms be understood as wisdom 'performed'.13 This analysis may suggest that even indicative interjections were actually intended (at least originally) as instruction for a particular audience (either the supplicant or a wider audience, or both). Perhaps this was only the case during an oral stage of this literature, and when laments came to be written down they lost clear signs of alternating voices, and thus their instructional thrust was lost, to a large extent, as almost all aspects of the psalm came to be read as emanating from one, primarily supplicatory, voice. Even if we cannot posit an oral stage, the rhetorical significance of recognizing and highlighting the dialogic quality of this literature leads to some interesting and overlooked theological and sociological conclusions. Subject of Instruction While the previous discussion touched on audience as a locus for better understanding the dialogic nature of these psalms, 'subject of instruction' is concerned with content, more properly. Here we ask, Who is being described by the DVs? In most cases YHWH is the explicit focus of the instruction. In some, however, the lesson focuses on the pious or wicked.14 Psalms that witness directly to an aspect of YHWH include 4.4a; 7.9,1 Ob, 12-14; 9.8-10, 12-13; 12.4-5, 7; 25.8-10; 28.5, 8; 31.24; 55.16, 20, 23; 102.17-23; 130.7-8; 30.5-6. In these cases, the DV uses mostly active verbs and adjectival constructions to produce imagery and metaphors typical of Israel's dominant speech about God. YHWH abides forever, establishing his throne for judgment (9.8). YHWH arbitrates between the peoples... (7.9). As pointed out in the exegesis of Ps. 30, the Nebre stela offers evidence that laments contained didactic elements early on. 13. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 688. 14. Many different terms are used for these characters: pious, anointed, faithful, loyal, one who fears YHWH, etc.; or wicked, nations, one who does not fear God, and many other more drawn-out descriptions of those who cannot be counted on YHWH's side. Among those counted with the pious should also be included the oppressed, afflicted, needy, et al.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

125

God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant everyday (7.12). YHWH guards the faithful, and requites those who act proudly (31.24b).

These discourses focus on YHWH, but in the last example we see that YHWH is described in terms of the impact his character has on others. There are psalms where these 'others' are the focus of the instruction rather than YHWH. In Pss. 25.12-14 and 32.10, the one who fears YHWH is characterized: Who is it who fears YHWH? That one will be shown which path to choose. His soul will lodge in goodness; his progeny will inherit the land. The counsel of YHWH is for those that fear him; and his covenant will be made known to them (25.12-14). Many are the torments of the wicked, but the one who trusts in YHWH is surrounded by faithfulness (32.10).

Psalms 7 and 9 describe the fate the wicked:15 Observe! He pledges iniquity, conceives trouble, and gives birth to falsehood. He has dug a ditch and hollowed it out, and fallen into the pit he made. His trouble will return on his own head and upon his scalp his violence will descend (7.15-17). The nations have sunk in the pit they made. In the net which they hid, their foot is caught. YHWH is known by the judgment He executes. By the work of his own hands, the wicked one is snared. The wicked will be turned toward Sheol, all the nations which forget God. For not for ever will the needy be forgotten, nor the hope of the afflicted perish forever (9.16-19).

Note that in 9.17 the instruction reverts back to direct description of YHWH. Whether focusing on YHWH, or focusing on the wicked or pious, 15. Psalm 32.10 could also be included here.

126

God in the Dock

information about the party or parties not included in the main thrust of the discourse can be inferred. In 9.8-9, for example, no mention is made of the wicked or pious, but knowledge of their fate is easily retrievable: But YHWH abides forever, establishing his throne for judgment. He judges the world in justice; He adjudicates between the peoples with fairness.

Surely an Israelite audience would grasp the implication that YHWH's justice translates into concrete acts of requital for or against the pious and wicked respectively, entirely contingent on what they deserve. Likewise, when it is said of the wicked, 'His trouble will return on his own head...' (7.17a), there is no question that the audience is to come away comprehending YHWH's role in the retributive system. As Weiser has noted, what we are witnessing here is God's hidden providential rule, that is, God's justice causes sin to pass judgment on itself.16 Studies on wisdom literature have yielded the observation that YHWH is often not the principal subject of sapiential discourse, but at the same time, this literature clearly has theological goals. As a matter of fact, one of the elements that separates the more purely wisdom literature from the liturgical literature of the psalms is the portrayal of the 'hiddenness' of God in the former.17 If a focus on the human players in the God-human relationship is a hallmark of wisdom literature, then it is understandable that psalms that manifest this characteristic are sometimes considered to have borrowed from wisdom literature, if not actually to have been written as wisdom poetry from the start. Portions of Psalm 25 are occasionally treated in this manner:18 Who is it who fears YHWH? That one will be shown which path to choose. His soul will lodge in goodness; his progeny will inherit the land (vv. 12-13).

The rhetorical question that begins v. 12 is characteristic of wisdom literature (cf. Prov. 23.29). The rest of the psalm seems to share qualities 16. Weiser, The Psalms, p. 139. 17. See Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, Ch. 9, especially pp. 334-5 8 for a discussion of the way in which wisdom is a revision of the exuberant godcentered speech of the Psalms and other biblical literature. 18. See Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms, pp. 297-98.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

127

with both wisdom and 'typical' psalmic poetry. By the measure of the 'subject of instruction', Pss. 7.15-17 and 9.16-19, quoted above, might be likened to wisdom poetry, but as far as I know, never have been. The only real difference between Psalms 7 and 9, and 25 occurs in the tense. Psalm 25.12-13 employs almost exclusively the future tense, whereas 7 and 9 employ a diversity of tenses, including the future. The criteria for making distinctions between wisdom and more traditional liturgical psalms seems rather arbitrary, but there is no reason to insist that borrowing did not take place, probably proceeding in both directions. In any case, even insofar as there are distinct stylistic differences between dialogic psalms and wisdom poetry, they both share didactic rhetorical goals. And it is significant that at least one of the psalms almost universally considered to have emanated from wisdom circles, Psalm 32, is still characterized by a shift in voicing, something not shared by wisdom literature, and an element which suggests a performative or liturgical setting. In the case of these psalms, an affinity with wisdom literature does not preclude the probability that they were well integrated into cultic worship from the start. The next step would then be to suggest that one of the primary social functions of cult was to provide a didactic service to the community, and not only in the general sense that psalms tend to contain information from which theological lessons can be gleaned, but in the case of dialogic lament psalms, we may be talking about a much more explicit function. In sum, didactic interjections can have as their main subject of contemplation either YHWH or one or both of a category of humans differentiated by moral qualities into 'good' and 'bad'. When humans are the primary subjects, the psalm may assume a wisdom tenor. In either case, theological edification is the objective, and the presence of more than one voice suggests a performative setting such as cultic venues would have provided. Description of YHWH Regardless of the primary focus of the DV, the intent is to transmit information about Israel's deity to Israel. Descriptions of YHWH divide into two types: (1) those that concentrate on YHWH's attributes (being, essence); and (2) those that concentrate on actions. The former is accomplished by the use of adjectives and nominal sentences, the latter by the use of verbs, usually quite robust verbs. In these psalms, and indeed throughout the Hebrew Bible, the predominant means by which YHWH is

128

God in the Dock

characterized is through the use of verbs.19 YHWH 'sets apart' (4.4a), 'arbitrates' (7.9), 'tests' (7.10b), 'judges' (9.9), 'avenges' (9.12), 'guides' (25.8), 'sets death against' (55.16), 'requites' (31.24), and so on. Active verbs are by far Israel's (and the psalmist's) preferred method by which to paint a vivid picture of its god, a god who, above all else, 'acts'.20 And in the context of a lament psalm, the DV's message is that YHWH is a god who will act for the supplicant specifically: Cast your burden upon YHWH, and He -will sustain you. He mil never let the just one stumble (55.23).

Sometimes the message is only implied: Wait for YHWH; Be courageous and let your heart be strong. Wait for YHWH(27.14).

Brueggemann discusses the way in which Israel uses 'verbs of transformation' as its primary mode for talking about YHWH. He demonstrates that the fundamental rubrics under which the verbal utterances can be catalogued describe YHWH as one who 'creates', 'makes promises', 'delivers', 'commands' and 'leads'.21 This emphasis on verbs of positive transformation belies the evidence of dialogic lament psalms. In these, the instructional discourses include a significant number of verbs having to do with the punitive elements of YHWH's activity. In his sub-delineations of YHWH as the god who commands, Brueggemann does touch on the issues of justice and order, and by implication suggests that YHWH requites according to a universal system of ethics, thus punishing and rewarding accordingly.22 In multi-voiced laments this characterization is sometimes expressed explicitly: 19. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, pp. xv-xviii, 145. Brueggemann puts the stress on a theology of utterance (and response). In other words, YHWH is only known through what is said about YHWH. Insofar as a theological reality exists its measure can only be taken discursively. 20. Despite its drawbacks for doing current theology, von Rad's work on YHWH as a god who acts ('The Form-Critical Problem of the Hexateuch' in The Problem of the Hoyateuch and Other Essays [New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966]) is still one of the seminal statements on this issue, and his basic articulation of YHWH as a god of action, even with its outdated emphasis on history, remains valid. 21. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, Ch. 4. 22. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 181. In Chapter 11 of

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

129

YHWH guards the faithful, and requites those who act proudly (31.24b). He will set death against them; they will go down to Sheol alive (55.16a).

The message is that YHWH will act for the supplicant, but it is taken for granted that sometimes that activity will, and should, involve violence against those perceived by the supplicant (and community) as a personal or public threat. These verses do indeed employ 'transformative' verbs, but to assess them positively requires seeing only from the perspective of the supplicant. (But since we don't possess a record of the 'enemy's' discourse, this is, of course, the only perspective available to us.) Nominal sentences are less often used to describe YHWH. But when they do occur, they seem to reflect an attempt to draw abstractions from the verbal narration.23 That is not to say that verbal descriptions precede, in any actual chronological manner, the nominal or adjectival portrayals, but rather indicate a rhetorical supremacy. Biblical literature witnesses to Israel's preference for portraying YHWH's historical involvement. In the interjections themselves, though, it is interesting to note that specific expressions of YHWH's deeds are sometimes preceded by a generalized statement of YHWH's qualities: God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant everyday. If one does not turn back, then He whets his sword (7.12-13a). Good and uprisht is YHWH, therefore He guides sinners in the way (25.8). for with YHWH there is loyalty, and with him is great redemption He will redeem (or redeems) Israel from all its iniquities (130.7b-8). Theology of the Old Testament, Brueggemann discusses Israel's testimony regarding the way in which YHWH interacts negatively with YHWH's people; how, for instance, YHWH abrogates, or at least neglects the covenant. This does not, however include a discussion of necessary negativity, that is, punitive actions that must be taken to maintain world order. 23. In Brueggemann's (Theology of the Old Testament, p. 123) discussion on an aspect of Foucault's linguistic observations, it is noted that even in nominal sentences there can be discerned a hidden verb. In our case, the only verbs that are hidden in Israel's nominal testimony are those describing YHWH's positive traits.

130

God in the Dock

In these cases the nominal utterances (underlined) set up the recital of YHWH's deeds. The two types of descriptions are clearly meant to be read in tandem. The two halves of Ps. 25.8 are joined together by the use of the conjunction ]D ^U. In Psalms 7 and 130 the two halves are joined together thematically by the notions of requital and redemption, respectively. The gist of all three seems to be, 'This is the essence of who YHWH is, thus you can expect these actions of him as a result.' Although it is only made explicit in the example drawn from Psalm 28, one can read an implied 'therefore' between the two halves of the discourses in Psalms 7 and 130 as well. This didactic approach seems particularly appropriate in a psalm of lament, suggesting that a particular concern is being responded to. This is no mere recital of YHWH's deeds or attributes, no mere theoretical exercise, rather a particular complaint is met with the assurance that YHWH's being and deeds are inextricably linked, thus ensuring the plaintiff that YHWH is not only capable of transformative action, but executes as well. Other examples of nominal sentences offer a depiction of YHWH or a particular aspect of YHWH without any reference to action juxtaposed: YHWH is a fortress for the oppressed; a fortress in times of distress (9.10). The promises of YHWH are pure promises (12.7a). All the paths of YHWH are reliable and true... (25.10a). YHWH is his strength and stronghold; A savior to His anointed is He (28.8). For His anger is finite, but his goodwill is limitless (30.5b-6a).

It seems nominal renderings of YHWH are focused on the positive, nurturing aspects of YHWH, whereas the verbal depictions do not hesitate to speak of a deity who rages and reproves. Isolating the nouns and adjectives in the above example accents this point: 'fortress', 'pure', 'reliable', 'true', 'strength', 'stronghold', 'savior', 'finite', 'limitless'. The only possibly negative attribution, 'finite', is used in a predicate relationship to qualify an unpleasant quality. Apparently Israel was uncomfortable abstracting from the harsher verbal recitations of YHWH's characteristics. So, while the psalmists can admit that YHWH acts 'badly', it does not follow for them that YHWH is bad. Westermann concludes that biblical laments are not 'statements but petitions and dialogic speech... The

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

131

complaints say nothing about the essence or character of God.'24 It is true that complaints lack essential discourse about YHWH. Discourse that abstracted from descriptions of YHWH's negative activities would have crossed the line into blasphemy. Consider Psalms 44 and 88, two of the most unrelentingly negative psalms in the Psalter. Both are single-voiced and emanate from the supplicant wholly. In Psalm 44 there is some recognition of a discourse like the DV (w. 1 -8), but Psalm 88 is devoid of any discourse that propounds Israel's standard theological 'testimony'. Even in these examples, though, neither discourse goes so far as to describe YHWH's essence in negative terms. YHWH has 'rejected' (44.9); 'scattered' (44.11); 'crushed' (44.19); 'forgotten' (88.5); 'afflicted' (88.7); 'hidden His face' (88.14), but YHWH is not 'one who rejects', 'one who scatters', 'one who is not present', etc. Despite the lack of a DV, Psalms 44 and 88 are not blasphemous discourses. This same reluctance to abstract negative aspects from verbal descriptions is found in the lamentations of Jeremiah, as well as the book of Lamentations. In Jer. 11.19, Jeremiah laments that he was 'led' by YHWH as a lamb to slaughter, but in the following verse, Jeremiah uses an adjective to describe YHWH as 'just'. Similarly, but in reverse order, in 12.1 Jeremiah begins by describing YHWH as just, but in v. 2 he accuses YHWH of 'planting' the wicked so that they may take root. The adjectival abstractions do not logically follow from the predicative descriptions. In 15.18 Jeremiah does use adjectives to speak of YHWH as deceitful and unreliable, but nevertheless, the prophet shies away from using them in a direct one-to-one relationship, opting instead for a metaphoric comparison. YHWH is described as 'like' (1Q3) a deceitful and unreliable body of water. Furthermore, he is these things to Jeremiah, specifically, rather than in any universal sense. Finally, in what is probably his most powerful and poignant complaint, Jeremiah in 20.7 claims YHWH 'seduced' him and 'prevailed' over him. But in the following theological abstraction, he describes YHWH as an awe-inspiring warrior (20.11), uttered in the context of speech about YHWH's saving ability. Lamentations 1 and 2 teem with verbs used to recount YHWH's violent acts against YHWH's own people: YHWH 'cruelly punishes' (1.5), 'abandons' (1.14), 'treats with scorn' (1.15), 'treads upon' (1.15), 'overwhelmed' (2.2), etc. But in the midst of such evidence of injury, the poet in 1.18 proclaims 'YHWH is just'. In an arrangement comparable to Jer. 24. 'The Complaint against God', in T. Linafelt and T. Beal (eds.), God in the Fray (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1998), pp. 233-41, esp. p. 239.

132

God in the Dock

15.18, YHWH is described in a nominal sentence as 'enemy' (Lam. 2.5). But once again, a direct correspondence is avoided. YHWH is like 0*3) an enemy. This disparity is echoed in the psalms, but an important difference should be noted—the verbs of aggression that are used of YHWH in the psalms have to do primarily with YHWH's violence against the perceived enemies of the supplicant. The inconsistency between YHWH's actions as described and the concomitant abstraction of those actions is more discordant when both types of description emanate from the same source, and when that source is also the object of the predicates (in these cases the source would be Jeremiah or personified Zion). This is rarely explicitly the case in the psalms. However, when we consider the supplicant's voice as this source, we find that there is very often at least an implication that YHWH's actions imply a disposition of ill will toward the supplicant. Your face, YHWH, do I seek. Do not hide your face from me; Do not thrust away your servant in anger (27.8b-9a). Give ear, God, to my prayer. Do not hide from my supplication; Attend to me and answer me (55.2-3a). You hid your face, I became frightened: I call to you, YHWH, and to my lord I appeal (30.8b-9a).25

These complaints might be described, a la Westermann, as 'hidden'. In other words, rather than protest that YHWH is hiding himself or thrusting the supplicant away, in the first example the supplicant expresses what amounts to the same, by phrasing it in the form of a negative request. The implication, however, is that YHWH is, in actuality, hiding, thrusting away, and failing to attend and answer. And in the case of Psalm 102, the negative description of YHWH's acts against the supplicant is quite explicit: On account of your fury and your wrath, you have lifted me up and thrown me down (102.11).

The tension between the supplicant's experience of YHWH and the didactic reassurances was discussed in the course of the exegesis of individual psalms, and need not be rehearsed again here, except to note that no 25. Although Ps. 30 is a thanksgiving psalm, the portion within it that recalls the supplicant's earlier complaint is apt here.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

133

matter what the source of the discourse, deeds and essence as ascribed to the deity are not always compatible within a given text. While Israel's recital of YHWH's deeds can run the gamut, what gets distilled out of that recitation does not always coincide with experience. The result is a disputatious discourse, to some degree, but a sense of dissonance can be kept to a minimum by reading dialogically, in contrast to a monologic reading, which would demand that the experience and subsequent description of YHWH by one and the same source would be at odds. Still, disputation is the hallmark of lament theology. Testimony and countertestimony work together to produce a dynamic, complex and unfinalized portrayal of the god of Israel. 7. Theology Brueggemann has centralized Israel's lyric tradition for doing theology. This is apparently a result of his contention that 'much of Israel's sense of who Yahweh is arises from and is generated by worship of a regularized, stylized kind, and not by history'.26 It is in worship that Israel performed Torah, which provides the basis of their covenantal union. The psalms, in particular were the location of this praxis: 'Thus we may propose, with particular reference to the Psalms, that the Jerusalem temple was the locus of dramatic activity whereby all of life—cosmic, political, personal—was brought under the rule of Yahweh.'27 As will be suggested, it is especially that aspect of the covenant that addresses the issues of obedience and retribution, as articulated most definitively in the Deuteronomistic portion of Torah, which are reflected and disputed in the dialogic psalms of lament. Brueggemann's processual theology provides a convenient template by which to assess the theological components of multi-voiced psalms. Brueggemann's sensitivity to the dialogic quality of the Hebrew Bible's talk about God allows for truer, if more inconclusive, statements regarding Israel's experience of its god than do thematic theologies. [The] focus on the processive, interactionist modes of assertion and counterassertion not only allows for a plurality of voices that together constitute and construe the theological substance of Old Testament theology. It also allows for profound conflict and disputation through which Israel arrives at its truth-claims.28 26. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 650. 27. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 661. 28. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. xvi.

134

God in the Dock

As was discovered in the exegetical section, psalms of a dialogic quality are especially prone to 'conflict and disputation' and must not be read as making a monolithic proclamation about the divine in Israel's midst. The theology of the lament psalms is fraught with tension and incongruity. Unlike the hymns and thanksgiving psalms, the way in which the laments speak about God does not lend itself to a one-dimensional theology. It is a theology of paradox, and perhaps it is these discourses of humans addressing themselves to God in a time of need that come closest to Israel's most authentic experience of its deity.29 The supplicant's voice testifies to experiences of YHWH that raise doubts about Israel's normative theological position,30 as it is most consistently expressed in Deuteronomic literature, for example. Dialogic psalms of lament give voice to these doubts, but also insist on letting the normative voice respond, and usually have the final say. According to Brueggemann's alignment, a study of the theology of these psalms should begin with an account of the way in which they contribute to Israel's 'testimony'. By attending exclusively to the didactic interjections of lament psalms (as was laid out in the previous chart) we are treated to a fairly consistent theological point of view, one which, according to Brueggemann, accords well with a particular metaphor employed in Israel's testimony, that is, the proclamation of YHWH as judge.31 The designation 'judge' is one of the 'images of governance' that tend to dominate Israel's theological speech.32 Other metaphors that fall 29. This is counter to T. Fretheim's reluctance to use psalms for theological reflection. He contends that words spoken in the heat of the moment should not carry as much theological weight as carefully thought-out words. He prefers to privilege reflective theological statements, such as the creeds ('Some Reflections on Brueggemann's God', in T. Linafelt and T. Beal [eds.], God in the Fray [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1998], pp. 24-37, esp. p. 36). 30. It should be noted that although the claim is being made that the DV represents Israel's 'normative' theological position, that does not mean that the supplicant's position is somehow outside the 'norm'. Israel apparently viewed complaint and lament as part of its traditional theological discourse, as well. Normative in this case should be understood as the 'standard testimony' in the sense that Brueggemann intends. In other words, the DV's assertions about YHWH are in normative agreement with the majorityof claims the Hebrew Bible makes about YHWH. 31. See also R.N. Boyce, The Cry to God in the Old Testament (SBLDS, 103; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988), on this theme. 32. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 233. A. Laytner, Arguing, pp. xv-xviii, emphasizes the use of the metaphor, 'judge' by Israel's psalmists, to speak of YHWH. To bolster this observation, he foregrounds one particular meaning of the

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

135

under the category of 'images of governance' are 'king', 'warrior' and 'father'. All of these terms are closely related, and sometimes choosing one as descriptive of Israel's talk about God in a particular context may seem somewhat arbitrary. In terms of this study, YHWH's duty as judge sometimes demands that he act with the physical brutality of a warrior to right a wrong, or with the counsel of a father. YHWH as king is, of course, the ultimate image of governance, and judge can be seen as one aspect of that leadership role. Still, in these psalms, the excessive use of such terms as C3SIDQ, plH, etc. determines the course of theological inquiry and compels the priority of 'judge' over the other terms. In multi-voiced psalms, the DV describes YHWH as judge in either direct nominal terms, or implies as much through the use of predicates. As will be seen, 'judge' is not the only metaphor evoked, but it dominates the discourse of these particular psalms. Only Psalms 7 and 9 speak in a direct manner of YHWH as judge: God is a just judge (7.12). He judges the world injustice (9.9a).

In each case the root CDSCJ is used, first as a noun and then as a verb. Integral to the definition of judge is the notion of justice, and accordingly a form of the root pliJ qualifies the designation of judge in both of these examples. Psalm 4 alludes to YHWH as one who does p"TiJ: Offer offerings for justice (a just outcome) (4.6).

In this case, YHWH is not the focus of the discourse, and the supplicant seems to have an active role in procuring justice, but still the implied expectation is that YHWH will rule on the matter at hand in accordance with justice. The testimony of all three of these didactic discourses is that YHWH is in charge of an ethical universe. In both Psalms 7 and 9 YHWH's judgeship translates to a well-ordered creation in which the wicked ones' punishments grow organically from their deeds: Observe! He pledges iniquity, and conceives trouble, and gives birth to falsehood. He has dug a ditch and hollowed it out, and fallen into the pit he made. His trouble will return on his own head and upon his scalp his violence will descend (7.15-17). root "?"?2, 'to adjudicate'. In other words, YHWH is both defendant and judge in the lawsuit language of biblical laments.

136

God in the Dock The nations have sunk in the pit they made. In the net which they hid, their foot is caught (9.16).

In both cases, however, the structure of the psalm implicates YHWH in the system of retribution.33 The verses of Psalm 7 noted above are preceded by the observation that YHWH's justice goes hand in hand with a retributive aspect: God is a just judge, but a god who is indignant everyday (7.12).

And in the case of Psalm 9, v. 16 is immediately followed by a similar proclamation: YHWH is known by the judgment He executes. By the work of his own hands, the wicked one is snared (9.17).

Particularly in the latter example, with its tight juxtaposition of w. 16-17, Israel's testimony makes clear that YHWH is ultimately responsible for the ethical system that seems to pay according to deserts. There are other psalms that can be considered as employing the 'judge' metaphor, although they focus on the executive qualities of YHWH's governance. These psalms would probably more appropriately belong in Brueggemann's 'YHWH as warrior' category, but even Brueggemann acknowledges that the traits that accompany this designation might be understood as aspects of God's adjudicatory responsibilities, rather like the executive branch of the U.S. government being that which executes the rulings of the judiciary. So, although the terms used in many psalms to describe YHWH might move away from what is usually associated with juridical obligations, the underlying message about YHWH remains essentially the same. That is, as a judge, YHWH is responsible for maintaining order,34 but correspondingly, that responsibility often requires a violent response.35 Brueggemann explains: 'Yahweh as warrior is the one who, as a judge committed to a rule of law, acts to stabilize, maintain, or 33. This is against K. Koch's observation that, although a system of retribution is evident throughout the Psalter, it is by no means clear that YHWH has a part in that system. ('Is There a Doctrine of Retribution in the Old Testament?', in J.L. Crenshaw [ed.], Theodicy in the Old Testament [IRT, 3; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983,pp. 5787) 34. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 234. 35. Brueggemann, in his discussion of YHWH as judge, notes that 'there is indeed a potential for severity and fierceness in Israel's rhetoric' in this regard (Theology of the Old Testament, p. 237).

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

137

implement that rule...' (emphasis mine).36 To highlight as clearly as possible the connection between YHWH the judge and YHWH the judge who executes, the rather loaded term 'executioner' will be used here. It is to be taken strictly as 'the one who executes'. The didactic interjections that fit into the executioner category are found in Psalms 12, 28, 31 and 55. What distinguishes these from Psalms 4, 7 and 9 is primarily the focus on the executive aspects of YHWH's adjudicatory activities. It is almost as if these psalms depict YHWH, the judge, post-ruling at a point when he proceeds to carry out his decision: YHWH will cut off all flattering lips, the tongue speaking grandiosely (12.4). Because they do not discern the works of YHWH, the deeds of His hands, He will tear them down, and not rebuild them (28.5). YHWH guards the faithful and requites those who act proudly (31.24b). He will set death against them; they will go down to Sheol alive. For wickedness is in the midst of their dwelling place (55.16a). God hears; and the one enthroned from of old afflicts them in whom there is no change, and who do not fear God (55.20).

What strikes one immediately in these verses is the profusion of aggressive verbs: God 'cuts off, 'tears down', 'requites', 'sets death' and 'afflicts'. What does not appear here is vocabulary based on the roots DSt2 and plU. But insofar as YHWH's chief duty as judge is to ensure that goodness is rewarded and wickedness punished, YHWH the executioner, as depicted in these interjections, is still YHWH the judge. The theology in which YHWH is a judge who executes justice has been described as the 'doctrine of retribution' by many, particularly in connection to Deuteronomistic thought and late wisdom piety. In this case the testimony regarding retribution concentrates on YHWH's punitive actions (except in Psalm 12, which extols YHWH's protection of the faithful as well), and in the lament

36. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 241.

138

God in the Dock

psalms this is indeed one of the principal roles assigned to YHWH; but even so, the converse can be assumed—the deity who punishes wrongdoers also protects the lowly and pious. Still, it just so happens that protection seems often to take the form of crushing the one(s) who is perceived as a threat to the pious. Expressions that concentrate on YHWH as the one who lifts up rather than tears down are, as would be expected, given fuller articulation in the thanksgiving psalms. All in all, a retributive theology permeates the didactic elements of these psalms.37 This doctrine expounds the same lesson expressed in much of proverbial literature, that is, it proclaims a blessing for those who live righteously, and a curse for those who do otherwise. Gunkel sees this element cropping up in only a few psalms, most plainly in Psalms 1,91, 112 and 128, which he describes as wisdom poems.38 Psalms 1,112 and 128 all begin with an 'ashre-clause and speak in fairly practical terms about the benefits bestowed on the one who walks in the way of the Lord: that one will have wealth (Ps. 112), a good wife (Ps. 128) and bring forth fruit (Ps. 1). These do indeed sound quite proverbial. Psalm 91, by contrast, has a loftier and more reassuring tone, similar to what we have witnessed in the didactic interjections of multi-voiced lament psalms. It speaks of deliverance from enemies and of YHWH as a refuge: 'He will deliver you from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence' (v. 3). If this psalm counts for Gunkel as a wisdom poem, it is hard to see why the psalms dealt with in this study would not fall into the same category. The didactic goals, expressed largely against a backdrop of retribution, of Gunkel's wisdom poems are obvious, but as has been demonstrated in this study, many lament psalms share the same aim. The absence of 'ashre clauses and rhetorical questions in many of these psalms does not mitigate the basic similitude.39 By claiming that the thoughts and forms of wisdom literature did also

37. Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms,p. 296. As Laytner, Arguing, pp. xix, 27-28, 31, points out, the doctrine of retribution is at the heart of biblical lament literature in general. Even the complaint portions assume the doctrine as integral to cosmic and covenantal order. 38. Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms, p. 296. 39. In fact, the 'ashre clause may not be as indicative of wisdom influence as is usually assumed. As mentioned in chapter 3, Perdue has noted that 'ashre may actually be a loan word from cultic to wisdom circles, rather than the other way around. It may originally have been invoked in the cultic practice of blessings and curses (Wisdom and Cw//,p. 361).

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

139

penetrate the lyric genres (those psalms that he does not consider strictly wisdom) as well, Gunkel himself softens his distinctions.40 He notes that even individual lament psalms, such as 25 and 31, parallel wisdom's interest in the doctrine of retribution. In Psalm 25 this influence can be perceived in the portion of the psalm Gunkel describes as 'thoughts of comfort', otherwise known for the purposes of this study as the didactic interjection (w. 12-14):41 Who is it who fears YHWH? That one will be shown which path to choose. His soul will lodge in goodness; His progeny will inherit the land. The counsel of YHWH is for those that fear Him; and His covenant will be made known to them.42

'Thoughts of comfort' suggests a rhetoric of response, unless we make the dubious assumption that the supplicant is comforting herself in the third person. Hence, the notion shows some recognition of the dialogic nature of those psalms that contain wisdom-like components in what is essentially supplicatory language. It is this observation that distinguishes didactic, multi-voiced psalms from their theological counterparts in Proverbs. Otherwise, at least thematically, there is not as great a difference between the message of Proverbs and the message of many psalms as one might be led to believe by concentrating on formal differences. Whereas the book of Proverbs is a 'sustained reflection' on life as Yahweh's ethically reliable and insistent creation,43 the Psalter is an 'unsustained' or emotional reflection on these same matters.44 In comparable ANE literature the line between the two seems equally blurry. Attention has been called, for example, to the didactic elements of the Mesopotamian 40. Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms, p. 297. 41. Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms, p. 298. 42. As Gunkel and Begrich (An Introduction to the Psalms, p. 298), note, components that are usually attributed to wisdom genres stand out in particular psalms through the use of third person speech to speak about YHWH, thus abandoning the form of prayer. 43. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 688. 44. Perdue, Wisdom and Cult, p. 346, notes that both wisdom and psalmic literature is concerned with order, most often expressed in terms of truth and justice. The difference in perspective, though, is that wisdom is more explicitly concerned with keeping people in order, and laments are more concerned with keeping the deity on track, in terms of his covenantal obligations. (As will be argued in chapter 5, the laments have a concern to maintain social order, as well.)

140

God in the Dock

theodicy, 'Man and his God', although most would agree that its generic designation is 'lament' or 'complaint'.45 One difference between the psalms under consideration and their proverbial counterparts is that much of the book of Proverbs presents the doctrine of retribution unimpeded by a countervoice. The doctrine is expounded monologically and dominates the discourse in every way: Observe, the just man will be recompensed on earth, how much more the wicked and the sinner (Prov. 11.31). The reward of humility and the fear of YHWH are riches, honor, and life. Thorns and snares are in the way of the crooked man; he that guards his soul shall be far from them (Prov. 22.4-5).

These examples could be multiplied many times. The worldview presented here, one that expounds an ethical universe, is met with a countervoice in many lament psalms. In fact, for heuristic purposes, dialogic didactic laments could be characterized as protest prayers (countertestimony) into which proverbial statements (testimony) have been interjected. The complaint represents Israel's right and responsibility to protest its innocence, even in the face of powerful testimony that affirms a doctrine of retribution.46 Although it can be perceived in many psalms of lament, the phenomenon of claim and counterclaim is most transparent in the structure of multi-voiced psalms. In these, we can imagine, even if we cannot prove, the existence of a dispute taking place between the supplicant whose belief in an ethical universe has been shaken of late and the DV, who reassures and comforts by reiterating standard doctrine, often couching the notion of retribution in terms that the supplicant wants most to hear, that is, as an attack on the supplicant's enemies. If, for example, Proverbs, as well as the hymns of the Psalter, are examples of Israel's main testimony about the ways of God in its midst, and psalms like 37 and the book of Ecclesiastes represent countertestimony, the dialogic lament psalms bring the two voices together and act as a vehicle for processing and eventually resolving (or that at least is surely the intention) the supplicant's doubt. The keepers of Israel's moral and ethical well-being understood that life presented many opportunities to question the dominant testimony, as well 45. G. Mattingly, 'The Pious Sufferer: Mesopotamia's Traditional Theodicy and Job's Counselors', in W. Hallo (ed.), Bible in Light of Cuneiform Literature (ANETS, 8; Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1990), pp. 307-30, esp. p. 309. 46. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 471.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

141

as the importance of providing an arena for the working out of disillusionment that arose from such experiences.47 If the orderly functioning of society (and by extension, the cosmos) depended on universal assent to standard doctrine, it was necessary for the powers-that-be, as represented by official institutions, to acknowledge at least tacitly that the doctrine sometimes failed to explain adequately everyday injustices. Dogged defense of a monolithic theology would result in a deteriorating legitimacy. Israel's acknowledgment of this process has probably contributed to the Bible's longevity as an authoritative text. The fact that the doctrine of retribution can be seen in a number of laments and not only in the so-called wisdom psalms suggests a broader generic provenance for this doctrine than Gunkel (and others) assume.48 R. Albertz argues that this doctrine gained dominance in pious upper class circles and was expressed in godly wisdom literature.49 In this way of thinking, the book of Job represents the eventual disillusionment of this class and their attempts to work through their suffering. As Brueggemann notes, 'the Book of Job seems to protest against the theodic settlement of either Deuteronomy or proverbs or the world that both literatures reflect and advocate'.50 According to Albertz this crisis occurred late, sometime in the fifth century, and was the outgrowth of tensions between pious upper classes who returned from exile and those who did not keep to a strict YHWHistic faith. The literature they produced to deal with this crisis, which manifested itself as a crisis of faith, included not only proverbs, but also wisdom psalms that involved the cult in the attempt to win converts over to their theological viewpoint. The psalms explicitly employed for this purpose were 37; 49; 52; 62; 73; 94; 112. In these psalms the composers 'conceded the seductive fascination' that the position of the wicked exercised.51 These psalms give voice to and then counter the doubt that was creeping into the hearts of the pious. While these psalms do indeed seem to be addressing some sort of crisis of faith, and do as well voice their doctrine in language reminiscent of proverbial literature, it is 47. In like manner, Mattingly, 'Pious Sufferer', p. 310, says that the Babylonian poem 'The Pious Sufferer' was written to forestall resentment and ward off potential disillusionment with the divine order. 48. Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms, pp. 293-94. 49. R. Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion, II (OIL; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994), pp. 501-502. Albertz calls the rather late inclusion of the doctrine of retribution into wisdom literature 'theologized wisdom' (p. 513). 50. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 386. 51. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 502.

142

God in the Dock

not the case that this tension cannot be perceived in many psalms of lament that are never identified as being of a wisdom sort. Based on the evidence presented in the exegesis section, it seems reasonable to suggest that this tension was an ongoing issue for ancient Israel. Rather than arising during a particular postexilic crisis, it seems better explained as an integral and longstanding part of the community's self-reflection, although it may have become a more self-conscious reflection over time. It may be the case that the particular psalms that Albert/ alludes to are late productions, but if so, they are only building on a foundation of testimony and countertestimony that seems to have been a part of Israel's earliest cultic life.52 The psalms that Albertz cites expect YHWH to act the part of just judge and executioner, even in the midst of evidence to the contrary. Dialogic didactic laments that show no obvious signs of late wisdom influence expect the same. The Deuteronomistic theology of retribution that became dominant and exercised such sway over much of biblical literature, and apparently the worldview of Israelites, sets people up for disappointment, while at the same time, so long as it can maintain leverage, is a useful tool for controlling social chaos. As P.D. Miller has noted, Deuteronomy uses motivation clauses to get the people to do what is right, 'for I the Lord your God am a jealous God'; 'and the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name'; 'that your days may be long in the land'. For YHWH's part he will be available when called upon: 'For what other great nation has a god so near to it as the Lord our God is whenever we call to him?' (Deut. 4.7).53 Lament psalms also rely on a rhetoric of persuasion, but the primary goal 52. Perhaps we are witnessing a development that Albertz himself alludes to. He posits that originally God's protection was rooted in creation theology, not conditioned on obedience per se. But with the advent of the Deuteronomistic agenda in biblical literature, God's blessing becomes dependent on observance of the laws. Perhaps the tension existing in complaint psalms between the supplicant and the DV, in which the supplicant assumes no blame and requests justice, reflects this earlier dynamic. As this Deuteronomistic influence increased, in what was probably a move to maintain a logical theological system, penitential psalms begin to take precedence over complaint. Psalm 1 sets this tone, which only adds to the overall tension of the Psalter, wherein the psalms that don't accept the retribution notion seem more strident in their complaint—the DVs seem to reflect the move to maintain coherence between these complaint psalms and the overall Deuteronomistic shift. H.G. Reventlow, Gebet im Alien Testament (Stuttgart: W. Kolhammer, 1986), pp. 256-86, notes the chronological movement the lament psalms made away from complaint. 53. P.D. Miller, 'Deuteronomy and Psalms: Evoking a Biblical Conversation', JBL 118 (1999), pp. 3-18, esp. pp. 8-9.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

143

rather is to induce YHWH to do what is right.54 The nearness of YHWH seems to be the central issue in Deuteronomy, as well as psalms of lament. In the former it is asserted that YHWH's nearness is reliable. But the prayers of the people sometimes suggest that YHWH is not keeping his part of the bargain: 'Your face, YHWH do I seek. Do not hide your face from me' (Ps. 27.8b-9a). What Deuteronomy asserts as 'constitutive of the very nature of God' the Psalter calls into question. The Deuteronomic voice is a 'settled' theological voice, whereas the prayers of the Psalter give us 'the cries of individuals whose trust in the Lord is confessed but whose condition in life is incongruent with such a life of trust'.55 The Psalter does not disagree with Deuteronomic options, but it lets into the conversation voices that would not be (and are not in Deuteronomy) heard so clearly otherwise. In accord with Brueggemann's scheme, what we have here is a dialogic relationship of the testimony/counter-testimony variety.56 Deuteronomy assumes a court of appeal in the midst of Israel's lawbook ('For what other great nation has a god so near to it.. .whenever we call to Him?'), but only in the Psalms do we witness what goes on in the courtroom.57 This cry, this expression of disappointment sometimes bordering on despair, is just the leverage needed to keep Deuteronomistic theology viable as the basis of a worldview or theology. Otherwise, the reverberation caused by the clash of doctrine and experience would shatter the foundation of Israel's faith.58 The conversation that Miller recognizes as taking place between Deuteronomy and the Psalms is carried on as well solely within some psalms themselves. It is most explicitly expressed in (lament) psalms that have been recognized as displaying more than one rhetorical voice. The 'settled' theological voice that Miller attributes to the Deuteronomic theologian is echoed in the DV. This is not to make the claim that it is a Deuteronomic voice per se we are hearing, but rather the general authoritative tone and message resonates on the most basic level with that which we hear in Deuteronomic literature. It is the voice that posits a consistent,

54. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 473, contends that although YHWH is completely capable of acting in transformative ways, his doing so often depends on the 'triggering power' of the human agent. 55. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 5. 56. What Brueggemann calls 'counter-testimony' Miller calls a 'counter-voice'. 57. Miller, 'Deuteronomy and Psalms', p. 8. 58. The next chapter will discuss the basic mechanics of this operation in terms of ritual theory.

144

God in the Dock

present, and just deity—'YHWH guards'; 'God hears'; 'with YHWH there is loyalty'—overseeing human affairs. Conversely, in many psalms of lament we confront a countervoice that casts doubt on the authoritative position—'When I call answer me, God'; 'Help, YHWH!'; 'Lord, hear my voice'—making it clear that YHWH's presence is not a given. In the course of these psalms, the tension is either resolved, as when the supplicant turns to thanksgiving or praise (e.g. Pss. 4; 7; 28), or it is left hanging as when the supplicant closes her prayer by reiterating her petition or complaint (e.g. Pss. 9; 25).59 Given the fact that so many of the psalms fall somewhere between complete resolution and ambiguous irresolution, it is unclear whether these two poles signify any meaningful difference. The fact that the two voices are brought together in dialogue at all seems most significant. The enduring power of lament psalms in Israel's theological discourse surely has to do with the people's impulse to let these two worldviews stand side by side. Providing a venue in which to vent frustration and fear, but making sure it is heard in connection with standard theological testimony, is an ingenious way of maintaining a society's theological balance through the tricky tight-rope walks one is forced to make in a naturally and politically volatile atmosphere. Cynicism (such as is heard in Ecclesiastes) untempered by such stabilizing notions as the doctrine of retribution leads to despair which in turn leads to social chaos. Likewise, the belief in simple causality blindly accepted can eventually result in a complete breakdown of faith, also finally leading to despair. The psalmists have provided a psychologically astute, emotionally sensitive, theological discourse that has resonated through centuries of individual experience. A doctrine of retribution is largely absent from the interjections in Psalms 25,27,102 and 130. These depart significantly in their metaphoric declaration from those that utilize 'images of governance'. The DVs in these psalms lack metaphoric specificity. (Nor do the images assigned to the supplicant's voice suggest a specific metaphor that would fit under governing images.) Only the interjection in Psalm 25 uses terminology that suggests any type of particularity. The interjections in Psalms 27, 102 and 130 do not fit well into any precise theological categories. YHWH as 'savior', in a general sense, best reflects the content. The refrain in Psalm 27.14 in particular gives us very little to go on. The assumption is that of YHWH as a generic savior figure. 59. In many of the psalms it is difficult to make this determination because they end with the DV, and the last word heard from the supplicant is ambiguous.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

145

The DV in Psalm 102 on the other hand, contains significantly more content, but provides little more that specifies the type of savior YHWH is. YHWH rebuilds Zion, hears prayers, and releases prisoners, a rather disconnected series of activities that are best captured by the basic terms 'savior' or 'redeemer'.60 Likewise Psalm 130: Hope, Israel, for YHWH, for with YHWH there is loyalty and with Him is great redemption. He will redeem Israel from all its iniquities (130.7-8).

YHWH will redeem, but how this is to be accomplished is not mentioned. In the case of Psalms 27, 102, and 130 YHWH is perceived as one who saves from either sin or physical distress (which may result from sin). This is not to suggest that YHWH is not also described in terms of his saving qualities in the interjections which fall under the category 'images of governance', but there the combination of descriptions coheres into a consistent metaphor, one that lends itself to the application of a precise appellation, 'judge'. A retributive theology is downplayed in this group of psalms. Psalm 25 is the exception, where the wisdom-like qualities of vv. 12-14 lend it such a flavor: Who is it who fears YHWH? That one will be shown which path to choose. His soul will lodge in goodness; His progeny will inherit the land. The counsel of YHWH is for those that fear Him; and His covenant will be made known to them.

Echoes of Deuteronomic notions of ethical cause and effect are in evidence here. Still, what separates this psalm from the psalms that were treated under 'images of governance' is the picture of YHWH that is evoked as well as the nature of the retribution depicted. Because the requital is expressed in positive terms only, YHWH's judge- or executioner60. These reflections may fit under Brueggemann's category of YHWH as the god who 'delivers', except that Brueggemann seems mostly to be referring to Israel's deliverance out of Egypt as remembered in Exodus and Deuteronomy (Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 173-76). The difficulty is that he seems only interested in YHWH's saving activity as exerted for Israel as a community. No mention is made of delivering or redeeming from individual sin, for example, the desire for which is expressed in Ps. 130. Still, a few of the verbs he discusses in this section are in use in Pss. 27 (BET), and 130 (THS).

146

God in the Dock

like qualities are mitigated. Goodness will earn its reward, but no mention is made of the fate of the wicked. This metaphoric testimony is similar to Brueggemann's depiction of Israel's verbal discourse, which recounts stories of YHWH's activity as 'one who leads'.61 While this notion of leading often leans in the direction of bold, high-risk leadership, as when YHWH led Israel out of Egypt, often 'the imagery bespeaks tenderness, gentleness, and attentiveness', as it does here: Good and upright is YHWH, therefore He guides sinners in the way. He leads the humble in judgment; He teaches the humble His way. All the paths of YHWH are steadfast truthfulness for those who keep the decrees of His covenant (25.8-10).

In generalized terms, this statement about YHWH summarizes the position of all DVs—YHWH is steadfast and true to those who deserve it, that is, those who keep the covenant. But from the supplicant's standpoint it is YHWH who has failed to uphold the agreement.62 The majority of DVs in multi-voiced lament psalms respond to the supplicant's petition with an assertion based on a worldview of ethical retribution.63 But, when read closely, the supplicant's voice in most dialogic laments (except those few that are clearly penitential) questions this very assertion: 'YHWH, my god, if I have done this, if there is iniquity in my palms...' (7.7). The supplicant offers no admission of guilt. Her theological position is the same as the DVs, but she comes at it from a different angle. Her experience of YHWH has not aligned with her expectations. This seems to be the common problematic behind all of the supplicants' protestations. So, while the supplicant doubts and hopes simultaneously, the DV simply asserts. A relationship analogous to that of a patron and client seems to lie at the base of these supplications in which YHWH is prodded toward upholding his side. Juridical metaphors for YHWH make sense in this context. Justice—whether the request for or the assurance of—is the beginning and end of these psalms. Doing justice in these cases usually means punishing wrongdoers. Insofar as Psalm 25 fits the patron/client model, it can be seen as the amiable counterpart to its more aggressive peers. 61. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 201-204. 62. Brueggemann discusses Israel's countertestimony about YHWH's unreliability extensively (Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 373-99). 63. See Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 378-79.

4. Characteristics of Dialogic Psalms

147

The remaining psalms, 27, 102 and 130 fall outside of the retribution model entirely, although there are basic similarities. As with the other psalms, there is some expectation of response on the part of the deity, but it does not seem to be predicated on contractual expectations per se. In other words, as with Psalm 25, YHWH's mercy, rather than justice, is evoked by the supplicant and promised by the DV: Surely you will arise and take pity on Zion, for it is time to show her compassion. YHWH will rebuild Zion (102.14a, 17a). Hear my voice, YHWH, when I cry; show me compassion and answer me. Wait for YHWH; Be courageous and let your heart be strong; Wait for YHWH(27..7,14). If you keep account of sins, Yah, my lord, who could stand? Hope, Israel, for YHWH, for with YHWH there is loyalty, and with Him is great redemption (130.3, 7).

Although Psalm 102 may be alluding to the fall of Jerusalem and subsequent exile, which came to be interpreted in the light of the doctrine of retribution, within the boundaries of the psalm itself, such language is lacking. In fact, these psalms seem to have little interest in the issue of retribution. Accordingly, the psalmist in Psalm 130 contradicts the basic tenets of retribution—she asks YHWH to ignore wrongdoing and forgive. Mercy, not justice; clemency, not requital are the divine qualities being invoked in these examples. In Psalms 27 and 102, compassion (Dm) and graciousness (pU) are expressly requested. Overall, dialogic lament psalms posit an ethical worldview in which a just deity presides over the universe as judge, and sometimes as enforcer of those judgments. While this basic assumption lies at the heart of both the supplicant's discourse and the DV, both attest to different experiences of this metaphoric representation of YHWH. Brueggemann's delineations of Israel's theology into the categories of testimony and countertestimony serve as a useful heuristic blueprint for understanding the function of the differing voices within these psalms. Israel's normative testimony asserts

148

God in the Dock

and affirms the picture of YHWH as a deity in control of an orderly creation. The DV testifies to this portrayal, and it is this discourse that seems to set the overall tone of these psalms. The supplicant's discourse offers a revised vision of reality, but is clearly oriented in relation to the dominant testimony of the DV, first, by disputing it, then either by accepting or rejecting its urgings.64 As Brueggemann notes, the Hebrew Bible in its final form was put together as a response to the Babylonian Exile in order to exhibit and explore the tension between verbal testimony and circumstance.65 Insofar as this is true, the inclusion of dialogic lament psalms in the canon was essential.

64. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 376, 471. Brueggemann rightly notes that Israel's tradition of complaint as rehearsed in complaint psalms is not an act of unfaith, but an act that demands justice on account of faith. 65. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 74.

Chapters SOCIO-RITETORICAL CONTEXT

Whereas the previous chapter was devoted to stylistic and theological observations, this chapter concentrates on the rhetorical and anthropological orientation of the texts, including the process by which the theology got articulated, so some of the same ground will be covered from a different angle of the texts. Reading a text for clues to its ideological and social setting is the goal. Following this, some historical conclusions will be explored. The recorded discourses of a society are rich with information that points toward their ideological genesis. The ideological backdrop of these discourses can then help toward situating them pragmatically. M.M. Bakhtin's socio-linguistic approach to texts is ideal for charting the course from discourse to social structure. Bakhtin commentators K. Clark and M. Holquist speak of Bakhtin in this regard: 'The way discourse is ordered in a given society is the most sensitive and comprehensive register of how all its other ideological practices are ordered, including its religion, education, state organization, and police.'1 Bakhtin' s concern with the way in which dialogic discourse in particular is a direct (albeit profoundly complex) projection of a given culture's social dynamics—the way in which a society reflects and shapes its ideology and practices through its discursive interactions—should go a long way toward illuminating the rhetorical puzzle of multi-voicedness as it appears in certain lament psalms. The questions then to be asked in terms of this study are: What institutions (or other subjects) might these psalms be a register of? Under what ideological presuppositions did these institutions operate? How did the ideologies operating respectively in these particular institutions interact and/or conflict with one another, or those outside the institutions? What can we leam about hierarchical social ordering in ancient Israel? How were interinstitutional (or institution 1. K. Clark and M. Holquist, 'A Continuing Dialogue', Slavic and East European Journal 30.1 (1986), pp. 96-102.

150

God in the Dock

versus personal/subjective) ideological conflicts resolved? In what way might these psalms have been formative, rather than simply reflective, of society? And, less historically, How does reading dialogically enhance our experience of reading and reading ourselves into psalms of lament? Answering many of these questions will require refining our understanding of the institution of cult in ancient Israel. 1. Defining 'Cult • 2 This chapter explores the ways in which multi-voiced psalms reflect and construct culture, and since it is assumed that psalms did this largely through their articulation in cultic processes, the assumptions this study makes about cult should be clarified. Finding consensus on what is meant by 'cult' has been a notoriously elusive goal for scholars of religion. It is a nebulous construct, to be sure, but some broad parameters can be sketched. It seems that for Mowinckel, if a psalm's setting cannot be connected to the temple, it is not to be considered 'cultic'. For example, ordinary daily rituals were excluded from the cult even if religious specialists were involved.3 Still, he could connect most psalms to temple worship. Reflecting on the notion that individual laments are the most likely candidates for a non-cultic setting, he says: [SJuch a 'non-cultic' theory has no sense, as long as even a private individual had to bring his offering to the Temple in order to be cleansed from his illness...and likewise would probably also bring his thanksgiving offering and sing his thanksgiving psalm there afterwards.

Gunkel seemed to hold the same view of cult, but since it seemed unlikely to him that the individual laments (or thanksgivings), with their personal, emotive language, could have anything at all to do, in their extant form, with the temple and the sacrificial cult, he chose to read them as non-cultic.5 Instead, he believed they emanated from private pious 2. I was greatly assisted in hammering out these parameters through conversations with Erhard Gerstenberger and Martin Buss. Although, in the end, I disagree with them on a few minor matters, they have largely shaped my thinking in this area. 3. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 11. 4. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 19. 5. Gunkel and Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms, p. 125. Though the connection between individual laments and sacrifice has been severed in extant examples, Gunkel believed, like Mowinckel, that in their original form this connection existed.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

151

circles, usually consisting of poor, oppressed laymen.6 Both Gunkel and Mowinckel insisted on a temple-reliant cult. On the contrary, cultic activities may take place in far less grand settings. Officially (or socially) recognized ritual can also be understood as belonging to the realm of cult even if performed in a more intimate setting, as may have been the case for very sick individuals. In such a case, a cultic functionary could have been brought to the house to assist with the ritual, or it could have been carried out by family members. Because Mowinckel's definition of cult does not include this possibility, he seems sometimes to be straining to fix more intimate or private psalms within the cult. On the other side, because Gunkel's definition of cult also precludes the possibility of a smaller scale venue for ritual activity, his only option is to characterize most individual psalms as non-cultic. Gunkel's and Mowinckel's narrow understanding of cult seems odd, since, as M. Buss points out, a sphere of private cult was fairly universally acknowledged at the time of their work.7 Buss himself takes a structural approach to understanding cult, eschewing a focus on the factual data that can be collected about the activities cult practice manifests. For example, there is no such entity as 'the cult', 'for cult is not a mere fact, though all its parts are factual data... Cult is a pattern of facts which have a reasonable connection with each other in the mind and attitude of the person who stands within it.'8 This approach 6. GuakslandBegrich,AnlntroductiontothePsalmti,pp. 127,151. The frequent mention of enemies and righteous versus unrighteous in the psalms led Gunkel to postulate the existence of internecine fighting among the Israelites, between the rich and the poor, the unjust and just. These poor ostensibly had limited access to the temple and its benefits. Mowinckel countered by asserting that the language Gunkel claimed indicated inner Israelite conflicts really pointed to national interests. In other words, the 'enemies' were not personal, but national foes. Similarly, the unrighteous were those nations who made life difficult for Israel. Thus, psalms using terminology of this type were voiced in a cultic context in which the people as a whole (the righteous) called upon YHWH at the temple to save them from the unrighteous. Both theories rise or fall on the understanding of certain terms read within particular historical contexts. For Gunkel, reading many of the I-psalms against a postexilic backdrop, the righteous were those mistreated members of a reconstituted society whose voices we also hear in Neh. 5, for example. For Mowinckel, reading the majority of psalms against a pre-exilic backdrop, during the monarchy, the righteous were the people of YHWH, the citizens of the king, who found themselves in conflict with hostile nations. 7. Buss, Biblical Form Criticism, p. 464. 8. Buss,'Meaning', p. 317.

152

God in the Dock

allows Buss to loosen the traditional connection made between cult and temple, or state, ritual. Cultic 'ritual goes on not merely at the great festivals but throughout the year (perhaps every day) at the sanctuaries'.9 Ceremonies that could be considered cultic might also take place at home, regularly or at times of crisis. Furthermore, cult carried out on a family level doesn't prevent the possible involvement of religious functionaries. A sharp dividing line simply cannot be drawn between private and public cult, as Van der Toorn has recently confirmed for Mesopotamian religious practice.10 Even private cultic activity draws on the symbolic universe of the society in question. Many events that are experienced on an individual level are significant for the community as a whole. In this vein, Buss mentions the corporate significance of an act as private as circumcision. A more apt example in terms of this study is the connection he draws between lament psalms and private cult. Those too sick to come to the temple to make their plea to YHWH would still have drawn from the corpus of existing laments as part of a healing ritual. In this way the psalms 'are neither tied to the great festivals nor free from the poetic process of the professional singer or composer'.11 It seems that, for Gunkel and Mowinckel, the real distinction is between 'official' religion (i.e. national and temple-centered) and unofficial religion (i.e. a type of 'folk' religion). They probably should not have used the term 'cult' at all. If we accept a broader definition of cult, we can allow that many psalms truly dealt with individual concerns and at the same time involved cultic rituals. Using traditional form-critical tools, in addition to sociological understandings of ancient societies, Gerstenberger is a firm proponent of cultic interpretations of the Psalter, but is free from Gunkel's and Mowinckel's myopic notion of cult.12 Although he recognizes that the psalms have undergone many mutations for use in ever-changing contexts, understanding their cultic use should be the primary hermeneutical task of interpreters. According to Gerstenberger, the very reason the psalms were collected in the first place was liturgical. As the population was mostly illiterate, the most logical reason for putting together a written collection would have 9. Buss, 'Meaning', p. 319. 10. Van der Toorn, Family Religion, pp. 94-95. 11. Buss,'Meaning", p. 321. 12. The following review is drawn mostly from Gerstenberger, Psalms, introduction and 1. See also his Der bittende Mensch (WMANT, 51; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980).

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

153

been for the use of cultic officiants. This understanding is analogous to that posited for the collection of priestly writings in the Pentateuch referring to sacrificial practices. For example, he believes that book 1 of the Psalter, Psalms 3—41 (which includes over half of the psalms examined in this study), was originally an early handbook for officials entrusted with small-scale rituals. This would help explain the preponderance of personal laments located in this section of the corpus. As previous scholarship attests, the individual psalms, both lament and thanksgiving, have given form-critical scholars who are interested in ascertaining context the most difficulty. Reconstructing large-scale festivals based on comparative evidence to account for communal psalms proves to be a relatively simple task, if for no other reason than the ancient world preserved better records of its official cultus than of the rituals practiced by its citizenry. In light of this, Gerstenberger's work is all the more significant for the emphasis he places on locating the life setting of individual psalms. By understanding cult in a more comprehensive way, Gerstenberger is able to find a middle ground between Gunkel's notion that most individual psalms were composed by individuals for their own personal use and Mowinckel's attempt to locate a large number of the psalms, including what he calls national psalms of lamentation in the I-form, within an annual festival. Gerstenberger focuses on cultic activity outside the purview of the official temple cultus, in other words, on family rituals that are descended from long-standing traditions circulated among kin groups. Most previous psalms scholars, following in Mowinckel's footsteps, believed that the royal, or official, cult was primary and that rituals practiced at the smaller family level were derivative born of a democratization of the official cult. Gerstenberger persuasively argues the opposite. Small group practice was primary, establishing its forms and ceremonies long before a centralized state had gained hegemony over the lives of its 'citizens'. R. Albertz's research on family versus official religion resonates with much of Gerstenberger's work. He argues that, even after the rise of YHWHism, 'the central religious experiences of Israel had no decisive significance for the religious life of the Israelite families'.13 When he applies this theory to the psalms, and laments in particular, he notes very little interest in the history of 'corporate' Israel: [Tjhe main elements [of the individual psalms of lament] already go back to the period before the state, as is shown not least by the close correspondence between their word-fields and the predicative elements of personal 13. Albertz, History, p. 95.

154

God in the Dock names. Here, too, the history of the people appears very rarely and usually as an afterthought... That makes it clear why family piety can largely dispense with borrowing from Israel's specific historical experiences of liberation: the individual's relationship with God has its own, independent basis; it is deeply rooted in the creaturely sphere, in creation, and therefore is not at all connected with Israel's historical experiences of God.14

Thus, family religion is not dependent on the temple cultus. In Gerstenberger's view, the official cult is actually derivative, having borrowed its rites from the practices of the people who eventually came together to create a state.15 Gerstenberger applies this understanding of small-scale ritual to individual psalms and concludes that many have their origin in family services, usually conducted ad hoc, but employing traditional rites and prayers. For instance, when a person fell ill, the family members would perform a ritual, probably in the home or a small, local sanctuary, and facilitated most likely by a lesser cultic functionary. If the sick family member recovered, the family arranged a thanksgiving ceremony (zebah hattoda).16 After the establishment of an official religion, the prayers that accompanied these rituals would have made their way into the temple cult and eventually would have been written down. While I concur with Buss's and Gerstenberger's more inclusive understanding of cult, I do not agree that cult includes private home rituals that had no concrete connection (e.g. the use of an officially produced or sanctioned genre to structure the event) to official or 'state' ritual practice.17 In the same way that I cannot designate private prayer (which is too susceptible to innovation and ritual fluidity) as a cultic activity per se, I cannot so designate other mostly private religious practices. I am drawing a distinction between 'pre-state' family religion and 'cult' (which includes family and state rituals evincing some kind of symbolic and pragmatic connection to one another). Private rituals, on the other hand, which utilized sanctioned forms and rituals (e.g. lament genres and their accompanying rituals), involved a community of some sort, and perhaps 14. Albertz, History, p. 95. 15. But he acknowledges that personal religion probably does show signs of state influence later when the two realms were regularly impacting one another. 16. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 101. H. Avalos, Illness and Health Care in the Ancient Near East: The Role of the Temple in Greece, Mesopotamia and Israel (HSM; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), concludes that eventually the temple came to serve only a thanksgiving purpose. 17. See Buss, Biblical Form Criticism, pp. 383-86, for a useful and concise construal of this complex issue.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

155

included cultic functionaries as presiders, deserve to be called cultic.18 Canonical psalms clearly represent a point in transmission history in which even individual psalms that may have originated in family cult have become connected to state cultic practice. It may be the case that nearly all non-individual, religious activity, whether inside or outside the temple precincts, partook of'official' forms of expression. This would be akin to a modern family gathered for a meal before which they say grace together. Undoubtedly, that prayer would include traditional forms of invoking the deity, learned and passed down through the generations, or through church participation. In just this vein, Van der Toorn argues that, even on the family level, religious activity was conducive to compliance with culturally accepted codes of behavior.19 Insofar as his sensitive understanding of cult is correct, Gerstenberger has delivered us from the either/or position in which many scholars have found themselves, that is, either the individual psalms can be located in the temple cult, or they must have been composed completely divorced from the cult. Gerstenberger does not stray in the least from interpreting the psalms as cultic compositions, but he offers us another venue in which to place the cultic practices of ancient Israel. Of additional significance for this study is his view on wisdom psalms, which neither Gunkel nor Mowinckel believed were composed for cultic purposes. Even these Gerstenberger believed to have originated as liturgic pieces. Thus the distinction usually made between cult and wisdom is further blurred.

18. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 661, also takes this position, believing that even the most private ritual activity probably involved officially sanctioned rituals and genres. 19. Van der Toorn, Family Religion, p. 94, states, 'Although it can be plausibly argued that personal religion in the modern sense of the word did not exist in early Mesopotamia, individuals were personally involved in the religion of the community. They constructed their personal identity in large measure upon the beliefs and values of that religion. Family religion provided, in addition to a corporate identity, the elements of an individual identity by offering the Babylonian a religious interpretation of biographical data and by holding out a certain code of behaviour. One might refer to these facets of family religion in traditional terms as its theology and its ethics: Babylonian family religion was indeed sustained by certain beliefs and supposed to validate certain moral values. Rooted in the milieu of the family, these beliefs and values provided meaning and orientation for the individual and allowed him to conceptualize a personal identity'.

156

God in the Dock

2. Bakhtin and Socio-rhetorical Criticism Although Bakhtin has primarily been embraced by scholars for his literary critical insights, much of his work addressed larger philosophical questions. This is not the venue for reviewing in depth his potentially paradigm-altering insights on questions of philosophy or linguistics, but a brief outline will help focus on Bakhtin's importance to this study.20 One of Bakhtin's basic philosophical enterprises was to unite aesthetics to ethics. His ways of reading texts were integrally connected to ways of relating— interpersonally and socially.21 For Bakhtin, 'reality is utterly, fundamentally, relational' and texts should be read in a way that reflects this reality.22 This seems a particularly pertinent concern to conscientious biblical scholars and teachers who are interested in rejuvenating Scripture's flagging moral power in its modern context. More immediate in terms of this study is the fact that his reading strategies never lost sight of contextual issues while avoiding the 'scientific' excesses of positivistic approaches. Thus, Bakhtin provides textual scholars with a method of research that gleans the best from those approaches dedicated to probing either synchronic or diachronic inquiries exclusively, a method of critical analysis that Holquist describes as a 'historical poetics'.23 The work of Bakhtin and his colleagues shows a frustration with the systematic theories of poetics, largely indebted to Saussurean linguistics, that were consuming literary scholarship early in the twentieth century (and beyond). Where Saussure, in a quest to articulate a science of language that went beyond traditional philological interests, focused on the smallest semantic unit, the 'word' (langue) as the means for understanding language, Bakhtin held that the 'utterance' (to be somewhat equated with 20. There are many fine introductions to Bakhtin's work. Besides primary resources, I relied most heavily on G. Morson and C. Emerson, Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990); M. Holquist, Dialogism: Bakhtin and his World (NACC; London: Routledge, 1990); and S. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997). 21. B. Green, Mikhail Bakhtin and Biblical Scholarship: An Introduction (SBLSS, 38; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000), p. 2.1 am indebted to Green's work for much of my basic understanding of Bakhtin's approach to texts and society, as well as its import for biblical studies. 22. Green, Mikhail Bakhtin, p. 18. In this, Bakhtin seems thoroughly indebted to Martin Buber's philosophy of I-thou relationality. 23. Holquist, Dialogism, p. 108.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

157

Saussure'sparo/e), its boundaries usually marked by a change of speaking subjects, was the primary unit of speech communication. The word as decontextualized symbol does not carry much useful information according to Bakhtin. The utterance (which can include anything from a word to an entire novel), however, with all its messiness, is the unit of language that possesses real semantic significance.24 Bakhtin's impatience with formalism manifested itself in an interest in the novelistic genres, an area of literature considered by most formalists to be mundane and a lower order of literature than poetry. According to Bakhtin, a good piece of prose has much more to teach us about ourselves and the culture in which we are embedded than any piece of poetry, no matter how expertly crafted. (And this is what mattered most to Bakhtin; abstract knowledge divorced from real life phenomena was gratuitous knowledge.) The reliability of this mirror on culture emanates from the very structure of the novel itself, mainly the way in which it can effectively echo the complex interaction of discourses that make up a given culture. This is generally accomplished through the speech of characters; whether engaging in mono- or dia-logue, a well-drawn character will reveal his or her 'own inner conflicts',25 which are a reflection of the broader social dialogue being carried on by the many different voices or discourses of which it is constructed. He called the many discourses, or languages, 'heteroglossia' and the way in which they interact 'dialogism'. A good novelist, such as Dostoevsky (Bakhtin's favorite subject), could recreate the dialogism inherent in society through the words of his or her characters. Out of every contradiction, it seemed that Dostoevsky tried to create two persons, to dramatize the contradiction (this is analogous to my method of reading psalms—out of conflict I delineate two voices to better understand the dynamics of that conflict).26 In other words, these characters live dialogically through their own inner conflicts, through interaction with one another and interaction with the narrator. Such characters are imbued with the sense of being largely independent of their creator. Their thoughts and words seem to arise spontaneously, rather than as imposed 24. M.M. Bakhtin, 'The Problem of Speech Genres', in C. Emerson and M. Holquist (eds.), Speech Genres and Other Late Essays (UTPSS, 8; Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1986), pp. 60-102, esp. p. 81. SeealsoVice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 55. 25. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin. p. 57. 26. Vice Introducing Bakhtin, p. 57; M.M. Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics (ed. C. Emerson; THL; Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), p. 28.

158

God in the Dock

from authorial heights. Such characters are rich with potential, and their beingness never seems predetermined. Heteroglottic languages may be characterized by dialect, economic position, ideology, profession, etc.27 This can also include different genres, such as a newspaper, letter, song, etc. Or, heteroglossia can include different national languages within the same culture.28 When these categories interact in a text the result is dialogism: 'They all know of each other's existence, are changed by and react to each other.'29 This notion of 'alterity' is key to Bakhtin's usage of the term dialogic. For example, dialogue itself, as rendered in a novel, is not necessarily dialogic unless the way the utterances interact causes a transformation in the discourses. The two must anticipate and respond to one another's speech, not merely transmit. On the meta-level, dialogue must not merely represent the author's singular point of view on a subject, but must be open to influence and change. Hermeneutically, meaning must be sought for not in the words of each discourse, but in the place where the two clash and transfigure one another. It is analysis of exactly this disordered linguistic territory that formalists have tended to shy away from. Where formalists sought to restore order in places where chaos had impinged, Bakhtin understood chaos as a natural state and systematization as an imposition. In terms of genre, for example, Holquist articulates a frequent jab Bakhtin aimed at the formalist agenda, while conceding the organizational necessity of form: The fixative power of such centripetal forces is what enables sense to be made out of the flux of experience. But the authority that enables such fixity is not real, or at least not real in the same way that variety, change, all those heteronomous effects which Bakhtin labels centrifugal forces, are real. They are given, whereas systematic claims to stability never exist as a given; their existence must always be made up, conceived.30

27. Feminist scholars have pointed out Bakhtin's omission of gender as a culturally significant aspect of a heteroglottic society. On this, seeVice, Introducing Bakhtin, pp. 3-4, for a brief discussion of the issues. Vice herself tries to introduce gender into her explication of Bakhtin's basic categories. 28. M.M. Bakhtin, 'Discourse in the Novel', in M. Holquist (ed.), The Dialogic Imagination (UTPSS, 1; Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1981), pp. 259-422, esp. p. 275. 29. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin,pp. 19, 52. See also Bakhtin, 'Speech Genres', pp. 69, 95, and 'Discourse', p. 280. 30. Holquist, Dialogism, p. 147.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

159

Accordingly, novels (at least the most sophisticated among them) provided Bakhtin with the most reliable chronicle of authentic social intercourse, which in turn reflected larger cultural processes and relationships.3' Heteroglossia, when structured into a text, expresses the 'differentiated socio-ideological positions of the author amid the multiple voices of his epoch'.32 As is suggested by the political tone of this description, doublevoicedness results not in peaceful coexistence, but in a clash of discourses: 'Dialogized heteroglossia' refers to the combative relations different languages enter into when they come into contact, most clearly perceptible in a text. The socially varying values and accents of novelistic languages result in unevenness, unstable positions, shifts up and down a hierarchy worked out in the novel itself, and dialogically related to external linguistic hierarchies.33

These 'combative relations' arise because a power diffential exists between every language. A. White makes explicit how this discrepancy manifests itself in heteroglottic discourse: Languages are socially unequal, heteroglossia implies dialogic interaction in which the prestige languages try to extend their control and subordinated languages try to avoid, negotiate, or subvert that control.34

As we will see, the relationship between the DV and the supplicant can be characterized in this way. When the DV is viewed as a 'prestige language' (its theological normativity suggests such), the supplicant is placed in a position of subverting and negotiating the DV's power. It is my contention that there is an uneven distribution of power between the voices in dialogic psalms, and the intention of the DV is at the controlling end of that power differential. This understanding has been implicit in the work of most scholars who offer theological interpretations of lament psalms that favor the position represented in this study by the DV. One way of looking at this (though not at all the way it has been construed by the 31. Of course, for Bakhtin, dialogic operations did more than merely chronicle a given state, it was in them as well that one should seek to understand the metamorphoses that languages historically undergo. Synchronic analyses are inadequate gauges of the way in which languages are constantly being modified in accord with changing environments. 32. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 300. 33. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 49. See also; Bakhtin, 'Discourse', pp. 273,293. 34. A. White, 'Bakhtin, Sociolinguistics, Deconstruction', in Carnival, Hysteria and Writing: Collected Essays and an Autobiography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 123-46, esp. p. 137.

160

God in the Dock

scholars just referred to), is to note that, while the supplicant may give a nod (at the least) to the DV's position (through praise, confidence, etc.), the DV never acknowledges the validity of the supplicant's articulated experience. The supplicant's alternative, marginalized viewpoint is given, in the context of a lament genre, a chance to be heard, but to be heard fully, its message must be brought into relief. Dialogic criticism, with its attention to individual voices (and their interaction, of course), is helpful in this pursuit. In the previous chapter, we discussed in some detail the content of the DV's discourse in theological terms; this chapter is more concerned with how that theology is deployed in ways that turn out to act as controlling mechanisms on the utterance as a whole (i.e. the entire psalm), and what generalizations might be derived about Israel's social dynamics from those mechanisms. At the other end of the dialogic spectrum we find monoglottic languages (or what Bakhtin also called 'unitary language'), that is, languages in which only one voice is present, or in which the 'weaker' languages are so subsumed or oppressed they have no social significance.35 These may be understood in terms of White's 'prestige languages', where the sheer power of their social position silences other languages. They can also exist in an ideologically isolated universe (which in a modern western context is hard to imagine), perhaps as in the case of a cult group with no significant external contact. Literarily speaking, this phenomenon is represented by single-voiced authoritative texts. Although it is hard to tell from his scant comments, it seems Bakhtin considered the Bible the authoritative text, and as lacking any affinity with novelistic discourse.36 Although he accepted that biblical texts could be employed as one voice within a broader dialogic discourse, he seemed to hear the Bible's voice as permitting no challenge to its worldview.37 It was for him a closed, homogeneous discursive world (which is true insofar as the biblical message is filtered only through the structures of orthodoxy). Bakhtin's views of the Bible— apparently developed from his Russian Orthodox background—took shape in a different paradigmatic universe from that in which twentieth and twenty-first century (western) biblical scholars operate.38 35. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 368. 36. Green, Mikhail Bakhtin, p. 15. 37. Green, Mikhail Bakhtin, p. 15. Against this, although it is uncertain to which texts he is referring, Bakhtin commented that the New Testament is essentially dialogic. 38. Green is not the only biblical scholar who disagrees with Bakhtin in this regard; it does not need to be said that many scholars over the past two decades have treated

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

161

That aside, his observation that some languages are single-voiced and possess an unbreachable supremacy is useful in considering the characteristics of the contentious voices delineated in Chapter 3 of this study. It suggests that the conflict manifested within dialogically inflected psalms may be a result of a clash between more and less powerful—not just ideologically different—discourses, and that the more powerful may be so dominant (i.e. authoritarian and unyieldingly rigid in their conceptual proclamations) that the text supports a purely monologic reading. And certainly, a truthful dialogic reading of lament psalms should reveal that the worldview of the DV (in support of God's irrefutable justice) does set the fundamental tone for the psalms in question. Even in a context that permits challenging voices to air (as does the lament genre), monoglossia will try to reassert itself;39 its very nature is to subsume and systematize opposition and disorder, Bakhtin describes this impulse as 'centripetal', whereas he calls the push toward linguistic diversity 'centrifugal'.40 In spite of Bakhtin's somewhat myopic view of the Bible as espousing a monoglottic discourse, lament psalms, more than most (any?) other biblical genres, should be celebrated for articulating theological paradoxes, rather than a monolithic point of view. Still, one might wish, in terms of modern democratic impulses, that the DV didn't overwhelm the supplicant's voice as much as it does. Many scholars have bought into the centripetal tendencies of lament psalms and interpreted them as theologically monoglot. For example, in a recent commentary, K. Schaefer says the following in his introduction: 'The connection between misfortune and guilt is a constant in the psalms...'41 A close reading reveals very little the Bible 'novelistically', employing methods largely developed in the field of literary criticism. Among those specifically employing Bakhtim'an strategies are R. Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronomist: A Literary Study of the Deuteronomic History (New York: Seabury Press, 1980), and Samuel and the Deuteronomist (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989); C. Newsom, 'Bakhtin, the Bible and Dialogic Truth', JR 76.2 (1996), pp. 290-306, and 'Response to N.K. Gottwald, Social Class and Ideology in Isaiah 40-55', Semeia 59 (1992), pp. 73-78; K.M. Craig Jr, Reading Esther: A Casefor the Literary Carnivalesque (LCB1; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995), and A Poetics of Jonah: Art in the Service of Theology(Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1993); Green, Mikhail Bakhtin; W. Reed, Dialogues of the Word: The Bible as Literature According to Bakhtin (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993). 39. White,'Bakhtin', p. 150. 40. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', pp. 272-73. 41. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. xxxvii. Otherwise, Schaefer shows quite a bit of sensitivity to the rhetorical implications of voicing changes.

162

God in the Dock

admission of guilt in the supplicants' recital of their suffering, but many scholars seem unduly influenced by the DV's persuasive point of view. In this study, I have tried to avoid this propensity to merge voices, and to see what new meanings emerge from maintaining their uniqueness, while still reading them in dialogic relationship to one another. Still, the Bible's centripetal tendencies can be read in Bakhtin's explanation of how monoglottic social discourses operate: The victory of one reigning language (dialect) over the others, the supplanting of languages, their enslavement, the process of illuminating them with the True Word, the incorporation of barbarians and lower social strata into a unitary language of culture and truth, the canonization of ideological systems...all this determined the content and power of the category of 'unitary language'.42

It will be suggested that the DV displays similar proclivities by the way in which it asserts rhetorical dominance over the supplicant's discourse. This is not to say the relationship between the two discourses should only be assessed in negative terms. Insofar as the supplicant received 'satisfaction' (cathartic or otherwise) within the lament ritual, it can be construed as 'successful' and as serving a beneficial societal function. Still, the goal of this chapter is not so much to assess the psalms effectiveness from the point of view of the ancient participants as to chart the power relations between the two, and from this perspective the delineation of voices within complaint genres takes on a more negative spin. It is this notion of ideological friction and its genetic relationship to theological discourse in the Hebrew Bible that can be of assistance in understanding the social-rhetorical context of double-voiced lament psalms. It is not the case that many laments that show no overt signs of more than one voice could not also be plumbed for dialogic interaction—for, as Bakhtin notes, even monologues can be dialogic insofar as the speaker incorporates more than one point of view or linguistic position into his own discourse—but in terms of making a preliminary dialogic analysis of the psalms, it seems more expedient to start with the most obvious representatives of the phenomenon.43 The different rhetorical and often 42. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 271. See also Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 71. 43. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, pp. 91 -102, discusses how voicing shifts can be an example of dialogic discourse. In her examples, the voicing shifts clearly occur within one speaker's speech, but for the purpose of highlighting the dialogic quality of certain lament psalms, it seems helpful, if rather artificial, to discuss the voicing shifts in terms of different speakers. In dialogic-critical terms, it makes little significant difference, whereas in terms of historical setting, the distinction becomes more meaningful.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

163

conflictual positions that were explicated in Chapter 3 and from which were subsequently drawn theological observations in Chapter 4 have an identifiable ideological foundation outside the text. Holquist comments on the connection between literary art and life: Dialogism... resists being confined to any exclusively 'literary' application. Indeed, the fixity of boundaries between 'literary' and 'extra-literary' discourse is precisely what it questions... In light of dialogism, literature can never be completely disentangled from its capacity to serve as a metaphor for other aspects of existence.44

Bakhtin is careful not to draw a direct link between the way heteroglossia is represented in texts by a given author (in this case, Dostoevsky) and that author's worldview in the general sense; it is his/her artistic perception of reality. Still, Bakhtin believed that there is a link between worldview as artistically represented and an author's abstract worldview. In sociological terms, heteroglossia 'represents the co-existence of... contradictions between.. .different socio-ideological groups',45 and as this struggle gets artistically represented in dialogically alive texts, we can infer its presence.46 This historical reality cannot of course be pinned down with any detailed certainty, but a broad ideological map, as well as a schematic of hierarchical relations, can be sketched. Ritual theorists can serve to undergird this endeavor, especially those associated with the functionalist school. The oft-noted limitations of this viewpoint will be taken into consideration, but it is only their basic observations about ritual and its relationship to society that interest us, and these continue to be employed in considerations of ritual practice.47 Beginning with Durkheim, many anthropologists and religious studies specialists developed theories that proposed that ritual activities sometimes reflect social relationships and help reinforce social cohesion by reconstituting (or reframing) hierarchical boundaries (e.g. van Gennep), and sometimes by cathartically playing out conflicts only to resolve them (e.g. Gluckman). As will be shown, the psalms in question appear to function in both ways. Generically, they employ status quo forms through which to engage and 44. Holquist, Dialogism, p. 107; see also Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 111. 45. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 291. 46. Bakhtin, Problems, p. 29. 47. In general terms, one has to be cautious not to be overly reductionistic in the way in which biblical discourse and social relations are correlated. The relationship is extremely complex and the data scant; conclusions can be drawn in only the broadest possible strokes.

164

God in the Dock

resolve their ideological 'quarrels', but the conflictual nature of those quarrels can also be understood as serving a cathartic—this is not meant to preclude the efficacy of the ritual—function for the supplicant (and the participating audience as well). The main corrective to functionalism as proposed by later practice theorists was to recognize that ritual does much more than merely reflect cultural processes, rather it shapes them in a very essential way: Even as ritual and ritualization offer ways by which to narrate 'who we are' and 'where we belong', orient persons and communities in relation to one another, orchestrate passages through human existence, and integrate the human and cosmic, biological and social orders, ritual and ritualization construct an argument for a way of being and for knowing ourselves in the world.48

The 'practice'49 of ritual, whether verbal or corporeal, the very embodiedness of it, constructs social relationships as well as the symbolic cultural universe in which the participants live.50 C. Geertz was one of the first anthropologists to call attention to this dynamic. As Bell summarizes his position: 'The symbols of religious beliefs and the symbolic activities of religious ritual constitute a system of values that acts as both "a model of the way things actually are and "a model for" how they should be.'51 Along these lines, we may view the psalms as involved in constructive— not merely reflective—endeavors, and in some way produced for such constructive purposes, even if not entirely consciously: In religious belief and practice a group's ethos is rendered intellectually reasonable by being shown to represent a way of life ideally adapted to the actual state of affairs the world view describes, while the world view is rendered emotionally convincing by being presented as an image of an actual state of affairs peculiarly well-arranged to accommodate such a way 48. E.B. Anderson, 'Practicing Ourselves: Liturgical Catechesis as a Practice of the Theonomous Self (PhD dissertation, Emory University, 1997), p. 130. 49. 'A practice is a pattern of meaning and action that is both culturally constructed and individually instantiated'. See R. Chopp, Saving Work (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995), p. 15. 50. I am very indebted to C. Bell's work in this area. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992) lays out her theories as a practice theorist; and Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997) is an overview of the field of ritual studies. 51. Bell, Perspectives, pp. 66. Find C. Geertz's full discussion of this famous formulation in The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), pp. 87125.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

165

of life. This confrontation and mutual confirmation has two fundamental effects. On the one hand, it objectivizes moral and aesthetic preferences by depicting them as the imposed conditions of life implicit in a world with a particular structure, as mere common sense given the unalterable shape of reality. On the other, it supports these received beliefs about the world's body by invoking deeply felt moral and aesthetic sentiments as experiential evidence for their truth.52

Of course, this proposition presupposes a cult-historical reading of the psalms. That is, it assumes that the lament psalms in question were part of a ritual, a religious 'practice', that there were ritual activities, probably including sacrifice, which at one time accompanied the recitation of a given lament. F. Lindstrom has recently studied, in part, the connection between lament psalms and the cult, and has proposed that such words as 'refuge', 'strong tower' and 'shelter of your wings' allude to the temple (for similar allusions and other references to the temple, see at least Pss. 9, 25,27,28,31 ).53 He concluded that the psalms are cult-centered, and that the temple is where YHWH and humans meet for regeneration. Psalm 4 also retains traces of this setting, with its talk of offerings and other seemingly ritual activities. Over time, the ritual activity fell out of use and all we are left with is a record of the verbal portion of the rite. It is not of primary interest to this study to try to reconstruct the precise dimensions of these rituals (as Mowinckel and others were interested in doing), but only to accept as a working hypothesis that some type of ritual was indeed intended to accompany the lament psalms at their inception. There is no way of knowing how far the received texts have moved from their original ritual life, but it seems safe to assume that they at least preserve the essence of the ancient discourse, both in form and content. Besides, all we need to appreciate is that most psalms had cultic connections,54 and that this relationship constituted them as 'official' (i.e. created and/or used to reflect and uphold the ideology of those holding religious power) discourses, to aid in our analysis of how they operated culturally. 52. Geertz, Interpretation, pp. 89-90. 53. F. Lindstrom, Suffering and Sin: Interpretation of Illness in the Individual Complaint Psalms (ConBOT, 37; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1994). 54. Mowinckel is obviously the dominant figure in the development of this hypothesis. B. Ollenburger, Zion, City of the Great King: A Theological Symbol of the Jerusalem Cult (JSOTSup, 41; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987), has reviewed MowinckePs evidence and concurs with his conclusions. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 655, does as well, but is not much interested in the details of the festival that dominated MowinckePs work.

166

God in the Dock

3. Dialogism and Psalms Because this study deals with what is essentially a poetic genre, Bakhtin's claims about poetry, as well as his focus on the novel, need to be addressed. Like the verbal counterparts of most ritual, lament psalms are highly formal discourses, which comprise some of the most obviously poetic genres in the Bible. In using Bakhtin to interpret psalms, one immediately collides with his bias against the more poetic forms of literature. Bakhtin considered poetry (including epic) the least dialogic form of utterance. This disposition seems to arise from Bakhtin's beef with the formalists with which he was in conversation. Their devotion to poetry as having higher aesthetic value than narrative grated against Bakhtin's more prosaic sensibilities. According to Bakhtin, the language the poet uses belongs utterly and completely to himself; in other words, the poet employs no alien voice that could challenge his unitary worldview, and this lack of self/other orientation impairs any hope of genuine reflexivity.55 Poetry in this sense is purely an aesthetic form with no meaningful connection to the heteroglottic reality of social processes. As a result, the single vision characteristic of poetic forms is particularly fertile ground for abuse of socio-linguistic (and hence political) power: ...the language of poetic genres, when they approach their stylistic limit, often becomes authoritarian, dogmatic and conservative, sealing itself off from the influence of extraliterary social dialects. Therefore such ideas as a special 'poetic language', a 'language of the gods', a 'priestly language of poetry' and so forth could flourish on poetic soil.56

To what degree multi-voiced lament psalms should be read as authoritarian and dogmatic ('language of the gods') will be discussed shortly; for the time being we need to reconcile Bakhtin's view of poetry as monologic and the assertion being made here that at least some psalms can be interpreted in light of his assertions about dialogic literature. To judge from the several studies that have been done on poetry utilizing Bakthin's methods (perhaps 'approaches' is a more accurate

55. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 285. 56. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 287. Bakhtin, in a footnote to this section, acknowledges that he is advancing as normative the 'extreme to which poetic genres aspire'. In reality, poetic genres are rarely so free of features typical to prose genres. From this I take it that likewise poetic genres are not all examples of purely monologic discourse.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

167

term), Bakhtin may simply have been wrong.57 Vice notes that Bakhtin can in fact be very helpful when read in reference to poetry.58 In his understanding of the one-to-one correspondence between the poet's language and self, she suggests that Bakhtin 'seems to be making the common error of reading a poet's lyric persona biographically'.59 Or, in T. Todorov's words, Bakhtin seems to suggest that 'the poem is an uttering act, while the novel represents one'.60 Another explanation for Bakhtin's hostility to lyric poetry proposes that his aversion arises not out of the particulars of the genre itself, but rather in its reception as a superior form by classical stylistics.61 This aside, Bakhtin himself sometimes cites poetic works to make his points about dialogism,62 and furthermore indicates that, once we start thinking in dialogic terms, 'we will discern features of lyric poems previously overlooked', a truism to which this study attests.63 Still, even where Bakhtin acquiesces to the notion that heteroglossia can enter the lyric genres, it is not 'on the same level as the "real language of the work" '.64 As Bakhtin explains: This does not mean, of course, that heteroglossia or even a foreign language is completely shut out of a poetic work... [Hleteroglossia (other socio-ideological languages) can be introduced into purely poetic genres, primarily in the speeches of characters. But in such a context it is objective. It appears, in essence, as a thing, it does not lie on the same plane with the real language of the work: it is the depicted gesture of one of the characters and does not appear as an aspect of the word doing the depicting.65

In other words, dialogism may be present in poems, but only in its most basic form, such as the presence of a quoted voice in a single utterance. The introduction of a second voice in this case is still in the service of the poet's unitary language; it serves to express her and only her point of view: 57. As was so bluntly stated to me by B. Green (email correspondence, 1999). See Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, pp. 74-75, for allusions to some poetic studies utilizing Bakhtinian insights. 58. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 74. 59. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 75. 60. T. Todorov, Mikhail Bakhtin: The Dialogical Principle (THL, 13; Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 1984), p. 65. 61. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 76. 62. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 76. 63. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, p. 20. 64. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 77. 65. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', pp. 286-87.

168

God in the Dock Elements of heteroglossia enter here not in the capacity of another language carrying its own particular points of view, about which one can say things not expressible in one's own language, but rather in the capacity of a depicted thing. Even when speaking of alien things, the poet speaks in his own language.66

Many psalms function in exactly this way. For example, many laments quote the enemy, but only in the service of making their own theological claim. For many reasons, multi-voiced lament psalms should probably be understood as a crude form of dialogic discourse, but Bakhtin's argument may or may not be one of the reasons. On the one hand, if the laments are read as two distinct voices, placed side by side, as in dramatic presentations or as the assimilation of a direct quote into one person's speech (such as we see in Psalms in which the enemies words are presented as direct quotes: 40.15; 41.5, 8; 71.11, etc.), then there does seem to be some justification for assigning them a low position on the dialogic yardstick.67 But they just as easily can be read as the unmarked incorporation of one voice into the discourse of another, fully integrated, but wholly individual from an ideological standpoint. In one instance, a psalm might be read as the discourse of the supplicant into which the discourse of the DV (or official discourse) is interjected, alien but integral. In another instance, a psalm might be understood as official discourse (in terms of its manifestation as an official genre) into which a supplicatory element is introduced, again alien but integral to the integrity of the utterance. As a matter of fact, Bakhtin's technique of reading dialogically helps to resolve a quandary intrinsic to this study: whether to read the 'voices' in the given psalms as actual or rhetorical. In Bakhtinian terms, these categories rather miss the mark. What matters is the 'representation' of the other within a single utterance (which in this case is a complete psalm). Whether we read the psalm as one voice inserted into another's (e.g. the DV incorporated into the supplicant's primary discourse), or two voices inserted into the generic

66. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 287. 67. Bakhtin did not consider 'drama' a dialogic genre because the speaking person's discourse is not artistically represented by means of (authorial) discourse ('Discourse', p. 332). So long as discourse is represented by means of some 'other' discourse, it would appear to be dialogic according to most of Bakhtin's descriptions. See Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, pp. 91-96, for the way in which grammatical voicing shifts within a single discourse are representative of dialogism. See also Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, pp. 5-6 and V.N. Voloshinov, Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), pp. 135, 157.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

169

utterance of a lament psalm may not be important. In either case, there are psalms that are not immune to 'the presence of two voices within an utterance, without compositional markings', as Bakhtin implies for poetry in general.68 Present in these psalms are multiple languages, even if not multiple speakers. The extent to which actual speakers were at one time responsible for the different voices will be explored briefly in the last chapter. Whatever the degree of dialogic interaction assigned to these psalms, there is little doubt that, in spite of their lyric form, they are genuinely dialogical, in fact the very existence of 'complaint' alongside 'words of confidence' or 'recitation of saving deeds' in the lament genre predetermines to some extent a dialogic reading. Another argument against reading the psalms as a sophisticated example of Bakhtinian dialogism is exemplified in the history of scholarship on the Psalter. Even on the most basic level, dialogism as dialogue, the presence of more than one voice in any psalm has rarely been acknowledged. Even W. Reed, who imposes a Bakhtinian reading of genre onto the Bible, and who furthermore describes wisdom literature as the most dialogic of all biblical genres, broadly speaking, makes a telling statement in this regard. For him, all psalms 'express the first-person view of a human individual' addressing God.69 And furthermore, this 'single human speaker carries the discourse through to the end, even though his stance and mood may change considerably in the course of the utterance.' What Reed and many other scholars seem to be succumbing to is the broad similarity of discursive style that is shared by supplicant and 'other', that and the fact that as readers we are unaccustomed to hearing multiple voices in a single utterance, unless grammatically marked somehow.70 In addition, the differing viewpoint of the supplicant is often framed in a hidden, rather than explicit complaint. Bakhtin's auditory sensitivity is helpful here. The shift, sometimes radical, in 'stance' and 'mood' does not naturally signify to us a shift in voice, but Bakhtin's idea that discourse, even a single utterance, is inherently made up of numerous social voices widens our perspective. Having said that, there is no question that it is hard to distinguish between voices in dialogic psalms because of their comparable style (marked by similarities in vocabulary and grammatical structure). There is no sign 68. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 77. 69. Reed, Dialogues, p. 63. 70. In actuality, the lack of grammatical markers indicating some kind of inserted discourse enhances the sense of dialogicality—these discourses are then to be read wholly in relation to one another rather than as merely juxtaposed.

170

God in the Dock

of, as in Dostoevsky's works, obvious borrowings from, and 'sidelong glances' toward, alien languages, whether they be distinguished by dialect, profession or economic position. Rather, the only signals available are 'stance' and 'mood' (and, of course, the grammatical voicing shifts already well documented). Where Reed speaks of stance, I want to insert the more Bakhtinian term 'ideology'. As was indicated in chapter 3, the psalm voices speak from differing points of view or life experiences. This goes against Bakhtin's rather circular argument against reading poetry dialogically: Behind the words of a poetic work one should not sense any typical or reified images of genres (except for the given poetic genre), nor professions, tendencies, directions (except the direction chosen by the poet himself), nor world views (except for the unitary and singular world view of the poet himself)... [emphasis mine].71

In fact, careful reading of certain psalms does indeed reveal conflicting worldviews. Mood, or perhaps better, tone is another criterion by which voices were determined in chapter 3. The supplicant generally speaks 'hotly', contrasted with the 'cool' and authoritative tone of the DV. While these measures are enough to posit a dialogic orientation for a number of lament psalms, it would be misplaced ambition to claim on their behalf much in the way of dialogic sophistication, but this has very little to do with their lyric form. Where form does enter the dialogic versus monologic debate is in Bakhtin's discussion of genre as that which controls the semantic parameters of speech possibilities.72 A genre is an overall way of conceiving of a specific conceptualization of a given part of reality.73 As a sociological construct it both abets and hinders communicative creativity. Without form, the content of our utterances would be meaningless—'In effect, the plan of the speaker can be realized only in his or her selection of this speech genre versus that one in any given instance'74—but at the same time there does not exist an infinite number of genres from which to choose; thus our freedom as individual speakers is limited. As the ritual specialist M. Bloch notes, what can be said is greatly restricted by how it must be said.75 It is, 71. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 296. 72. Holquist, Dialogism, pp. 64-66. 73. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, pp. 274-75. 74. Holquist, Dialogism, p. 65. 75. M. Bloch, 'Symbols, Song, Dance and Features of Articulation', Archives europeenes de sociologie 15 (1974), pp. 55-81; see esp. pp. 55-56.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

171

in fact, according to Bloch this restriction on linguistic expression that is one of the hallmarks of ritualized discourse, and that which ensures it its authority and legitimacy. And a ritual connected to the state's cult carries the additional authority of its officially sanctioned status (all rituals are sanctioned by some group, but not all are connected to ruling agencies). It is this formality of ritual (rather than actual content) that catches people up and transforms them. Whereas the formalists concentrate their search for meaning on the smaller constituent units of speech that make up the utterance, Bakhtin (and his colleagues, particularly P. Medvedev) stressed that 'only utterances have real meaning, one cannot speak of the meaning of particular parts' ,76 Utterances must take a form, and that form is a construct of social convention. This top-down approach kept Bakhtin's literary criticism firmly rooted in sociological soil, making meaningful interaction the provenance of culture as a whole. On the other hand, Bakhtin was careful not to stamp out the possibility for individual creativity in the formation of the utterance—creativity is bound up in the freedom to choose and manipulate a genre: The individual style of the utterance can be determined by its expressive side because the forms of communication are more open to play and intervention than the forms of language. Expressiveness is a different level of integration. Intonation, word choice, selection of a particular speech genre—all these are open to assimilation by individual speakers as a means for registering different values.

It is, however, still the case that genre practices a certain degree of hegemony over an utterance. Most genres are, by definition, authoritarian (even when not monologic) linguistic entities, particularly literary and religious genres.78 In fact, it is the genres of ritual that create and maintain a type of religious and socio-political authority known as 'traditional authority', according to Bloch.79 There are greater and lesser degrees of authoritarianism—the dialogic novel being less tyrannical than the lyric poem, for example—but all in all the very notion of genre indicates structure, systemization and boundaries. In this sense, the fact that psalmic prayer is formulated in terms of a cultic (read 'officially sanctioned') and 76. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, p. 273. 77. Holquist, Dialogism, pp. 65-66. 78. As Professor Buss pointed out to me, not all genres are intrinsically authoritarian, such as the universal genres of 'greeting', 'request', etc. 79. Bloch, 'Symbols', p. 71.

172

God in the Dock

poetic genre limits the freedom its description as dialogic might otherwise suggest. There are two voices operating, but they are confined by their genre in terms of how freely they can behave. As will be shown, the lament genre has a specific ideological agenda, and all voices contained within it are compelled, more or less successfully to be at its service. It is this formal imposition in combination with the shared discursive style of the two voices that, in my estimation, lures commentators to hear only one stance, that (ironically enough) of the DV. The primary voice may be identified as the supplicant, but the overall theological viewpoint is dictated by the DV. Hence, you never hear from scholars a focus on that aspect of the lament psalm that suggests that YHWH is unreliable, or unfair. Not that a focus on that aspect to the exclusion of the other is preferable, but the viewpoint of the supplicant can certainly be heard better than has often been practiced in modern theology. In other words, even though these psalms are designated by the term 'lament' or 'complaint', they are however generally interpreted in terms of their positive theological position (hope, faith, trust, etc.), which overwhelms and subsumes the voice of protest. This has much to do with the form itself—the way in which the protests are generally presented grammatically in the first and second person makes the supplicant's speech more personal, subjective, less authoritative. Conversely, the DV's viewpoint is expressed almost exclusively in the third person, lending it an air of objectivity and prestige. As Morson and Emerson report about highly authoritative utterances (of which they cite Scripture as an example), 'There [is] a tendency to 'depersonalize' and 'disembody' the authoritative figure's speech, so that it is not perceived as merely one person's opinion.'80 Applying a Bakhtinian reading to these psalms can help mitigate the effects of the generic straitjacket. Concentrating on individual voices teases out the presence of an ideological countertradition as the weaker voice is allowed a better hearing. This accords with the work of ritual scholars who focus on 'performance' rather than function. Their emphasis is on ritual as a medium for social change rather than merely static reflection.81 Construing of rituals as too highly structured and rigid (monologic) necessarily overlooks the dialogic, and hence creative, dynamic that might be involved in ritualized activity. As Brueggemann notes, along with the likes of Victor Turner and other ritual specialists, ritualized public presentation (in the form of testimony for Brueggemann) shapes and constitutes 80. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, p. 164. 81. Bell, Perspectives, p. 73.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

173

reality, 'it causes to be'.82 The degree of dialogism may be restricted by form, but lament psalms are one of the Bible's more creative genres in this respect, because the form itself requires the presentation of more than one point of view. The hierarchy of discourses implied in this discussion is another factor in the assertion that lament psalms are somewhat crude examples of dialogic literature. Bakhtin described the dialogic characteristics of Dostoevsky's work as 'polyphony', the most sophisticated rendering of dialogism conceivable. For a work to be polyphonic, not only must there be distinct voices put in conversation, but these voices must be able to wield equal measures of semantic power. They must be granted 'direct power to mean',83 so much so—and this is crucial—that even the authorial position must not be able to claim any kind of hegemonic hold over the presentation of truth. The centrality of the role of the author is awkward in a discussion of psalms. There is not any obvious authorial entity present (a characteristic common to ancient literature)—no narratorial voice, even. Rather, psalms seem like the straightforward reporting of performed discourse. But insofar as psalms are literarily preserved, a creative agent must lie behind the presentation, whether that agent be the pray-er himself or the elusive 'psalmist' (who is sometimes considered to be the one initiating the prayer, and other times a temple functionary, for example, a Levite whose job it was to produce liturgical texts). More abstractly, one could argue that the genre itself, the creation of a culture as a whole, represents the authorial intention. It is a shaper of discourse and, depending on its form and usage, it exercises more or less control over the contours of an utterance. An even bigger hurdle to overcome in discussing dialogic lament psalms as examples of polyphony has to do with the author's position and the implication that the confrontation over truth-claims that takes place in polyphonic discourse is a purely democratic one. Commentators concur on the centrality of this point. Morson and Emerson state that 'polyphony demands a work in which several consciousnesses meet as equals and engage in a dialogue that is in principle unfinalizable'.84 Sue Vice's description amounts to the same thing: 'In a polyphonic novel, characters are represented not as objects, who are manipulated and commented upon by an omniscient narrator, but as subjects, on an equal footing with the 82. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 121. 83. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, p. 239. 84. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, pp. 238-29.

174

God in the Dock

narrator.'85 It has become a well-known maxim that Scripture abounds with theological and political agendas. The accuracy of this opinion hamstrings our (intellectualist) attempts to 'liberalize' biblical texts and makes it particularly hard to read even the most dialogized parts as polyphonic in the purest sense of the term. Hebrew Scripture has some pretty strong opinions about its 'main character' and is not quick to allow divergent theological viewpoints to have their say in the record. Having said that, dialogic lament psalms deserve credit for allowing the individual to speak her experience in her own voice (of course, that is only the rhetorical setup in the preserved form of the psalm, but in any case the Ics speech represents the supplicant and was probably at least originally spoken by the same in a lament ritual). The unmerged combination of supplicant and DV reveals a truth that is in the end more dialogic than monologic, another criterion for determining polyphony. Opposition to the dominant discourse may be allowed only a constricted, controlled space, but it is enough space to be heard by ears 'tuned in' to it. One of Bakhtin's allusions to the book of Job supports the contention that Scripture is capable of dialogic reflection on truth. In speaking of Job's relationship to his creator (which Bakhtin likens to a character-toauthor relationship), he says, 'In its structure Job's dialogue is internally endless, for the opposition of the soul to God—whether the opposition be hostile or humble—is conceived in it as something irrevocable and eternal.'86 Job speaks his own experience, and God's response, though harsh, affirms the validity of Job's subjectivity. We can assume that God does not have the last say so long as Job has a voice. Truth is more than the monolithic theological construct endorsed by Job's dialogue partners. In this same way, the subjective experience voiced by the supplicant injects a degree of destabilization into Israel's normative doctrine as uttered by the DV. Although dominant, the DV's word is not the last so long as the supplicant has a voice. Whether or not we are justified in making polyphonic claims for dialogic lament psalms is debatable—it is doubtful that Bakhtin would—but the notion of polyphony and the extent to which the psalms share some of its characteristics help us comprehend more fully the nature of the truth embodied by lament psalms. What Israel tells us in these psalms is that its deity is beyond systemization and doctrine, that subjectivity does not necessarily belie the grounds for the faith that Israel professes, but that it 85. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 114. 86. Bakhtin, Problems, p. 280.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

175

lends that faith an air of integrity.87 Just as YHWH does not need a house in which to rest his head, he does not need rigid dogma to secure his divinity. Israel's god is holy, 'other', an essence that is diminished when theological speculation turned reified threatens to 'bring Him down to earth'. Only in texts with polyphonic tendencies can we catch of glimpse of the kind of truth Bakhtin saw as inherent in social reality, a messy and open-ended kind of truth. To the extent that lament psalms are polyphonic, each voice presents a viewpoint; orchestrated together they offer a verbal image of the contentious social dialogue taking place outside the text.88 4. Psalms and their Socio-ideological Context Bakhtin argued that only novelistic genres were capable of revealing the 'concrete social context of discourse'.89 But in his next breath he qualifies this position: Of course, even the poetic word is social, but poetic forms reflect lengthier social processes, i.e., those tendencies in social life requiring centuries to unfold. The novelistic word, however, registers with extreme subtlety the tiniest shifts and oscillations of the social atmosphere...90

This provides a caveat to our study that is well worth heeding. Dialogic psalms reflect in an aesthetic fashion only the broadest sociological contours. We can sift them for the tensions present in the fundamental ethos and theology of ancient Israelite culture, but not for minute ideological shifts in the social atmosphere. But then again matters of belief (theological impulses) are notoriously slow to change. After all, the tensions (theodicy, doctrine of retribution, etc.) I have foregrounded in this study remain to this day a part of theological discourse. Thus the sociological observations made in this study will naturally echo the essential, rather than particularized ideological categories that operated as a psycho-social backdrop for many biblical texts, over a broad period of time. To organize some of the more important points touched upon thus far, there are three distinct possibilities for reading multi-voiced lament psalms dialogically: (1) they may be read as two distinct voices within one utter87. A somewhat more negative corollary is the restriction placed by generic boundaries on the recital of experience—it doesn't take much pressing for experience to be assessed as blasphemous. 88. Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, p. 113. 89. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 300. 90. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 300.

176

God in the Dock

ance; (2) they may be read through the lens of the official genre in which they are manifested; that, the supplicant's voice may be read as expressed through the filter of the official point of view; and (3) the DV or 'official' position may be read as refracted through the supplicant's experience and expression. Any of these are workable as dialogic templates (and sometimes our discussion will of necessity blur the lines between them), but number 3 is the most amenable to our purposes. Number 1 comes too close to Bakhtin's understanding of drama, a discursive mode that to his mind too much lacked the quality of representation, being rather simple reportage, to qualify as dialogic. Besides, it assumes an equality between the two voices that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Number 2, while logically possible, is too counter-intuitive given the typical understanding of prayer, a category I wish to maintain in my reading. Number 3 has the advantage over number 2 in upholding a common-sense reading of the supplicant as the primary agent, and has the advantage over number 1 of encouraging a reading that takes into account the power dynamics operating between the two discourses. These distinctions have nothing to do with authoring or 'ownership'. They are simply made to set up my reading strategy. (Hence, it does not follow that the supplicant has 'control' of the discourse, and thus should be able to neutralize the DV's power.) A primary criterion for reading voices as dialogicized is responsivity. According to Bakhtin, in social discourse every utterance is shaped by the answer it anticipates: The word in living conversation is directly, blatantly, oriented toward a future answer-word: it provokes an answer, anticipates it and structures itself in the answer's direction. Forming itself in an atmosphere of the already spoken, the word is at the same time determined by that which has not yet been said but which is needed and in fact anticipated by the answering word.91

The responsivity of dialogic psalms has been alluded to throughout this study in the attempt to determine within them the existence of more than one voice. It was remarked, for example, that the voices in Psalm 7 might be read as if in dialogue with one another: SUP

Arise, YHWH, in your anger; lift yourself up against the fury of those vexing me. Rouse yourself on my behalf. Ordain fairness!

91. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 280, see also his Speech Genres, p. 95.

5. Socio~rhetorical Context

177

DV YHWH arbitrates between the peoples. SUP

Judge me, YHWH, according to my innocence and according to my integrity within me. Let the wickedness of the evil ones cease, and establish the just.

DV

The one who tests the thoughts and emotions is a just god (7.7-10).

But there is another, more significant, level of responsiveness that is suggested by Bakhtin's understanding of the concept, and that has to do with the shaping influence utterances have on one another. In dialogic speech, a speaker quite literally formulates her utterance according to the response she expects, taking up a particular orientation toward the addressee. There are two ways of conceiving of the dialogue partnership in the case of dialogic lament psalms. As prayer, the line of communication ostensibly flows from supplicant to God. In the rhetorical reality of the psalm, though, we rarely hear God respond, rather a human voice, the DV, interjects. In fact, the intentions of God and the DV can be considered to be largely in line (a unique exception to this notion would be the case of the dialogue partners in the book of Job, where one of the main rhetorical strategies was to align God with the voice of dissent, at least to some extent, rather than the voices expressing normative testimony). Keeping in mind throughout the following discussion that either addressee is possible will help explicate the notion of responsivity. Viewing the addressee as God leads to some interesting observations. As has been mentioned previously, the rhetorical task of the supplicant is to get God to hear and respond favorably to her request. Now we can notice more specifically how the supplicant shapes her request in response to God's response, and likewise the way in which the DV's discourse can be understood as a function of the supplicant's request, rather than a literally distinct voice. The supplicant incorporates the authoritarian voice of the DV into her prayer as a way of anticipating God's response to her complaint. The presence of the DV's discourse within the supplicant's plea serves to temper the negative orientation of the supplicant and give her 'case' a better chance of being attended to. (In this sense, the supplicant would hope to be spared the intimidating non-answer Job received to his unmitigated complaint.)92 This is still different from reading the entire psalm (or utterance) 92. Job rebelled strongly against the monologic voice of authority (represented by the friends), and in response was both rewarded and put in his place.

178

God in the Dock

monologically. It rather pays attention to the way in which different discourses or ideologies interrelate to create meaning; and it better maintains the integrity of the separate 'stances', especially that of the weaker, or more subjective voice, the supplicant, which is threatened with being consumed by the voice of objectivity. In this reading the supplicant is ingesting and re-articulating the normative theological testimony of her culture. She seems ever aware of the DV's presence and its probable response to her protest. The backlash is that the power of the DV's cultural status (which is reflected in the pedagogical constitution of its discourse) cannot but diminish the passion and intensity of the protest (consider how much more resounding the protest of Psalm 88—a psalm without any trace of the DV's point of view—seems). But not to incorporate this voice would risk appearing arrogant and the chance of going unheard. In these lament psalms, the sufferer expresses her experience partly through the language of authority,93 one that does not really share her worldview, at least insofar as her worldview is significantly shaped by the experiences of alienation and discord she is expressing. While the presence of the DV mitigates the force of complaint, in like manner the dialogic interaction of these two voices has a tempering effect on the DV, although not to the extent the more monolithic DV has on the supplicant's voice. These languages come to 'interanimate' one another, and the expressions of both experience (subjective) and dogma (objective) are altered in the process: To the extent that this happens, it becomes more difficult to take for granted the value system of a given language. Those values may still be felt to be right and the language may still seem adequate to its topic, but not indisputably so, because they have been, however cautiously, disputed.94

Altering the position of the supplicant is hardly necessary; her viewpoint is compromised enough, but we can see that even the hegemony of the DV is not unshakable. In the unmediated mouth of the Deuteronomist, the theological viewpoint of the DV might seem fixed, but related dialogically with the discourse of the supplicant its position is decentered, and we are left with an epistemologically open-ended discourse. Like Job, these psalms protest against the 'theodic settlement' of Deuteronomistic 93. More nuanced examples of this phenomenon might be single-voiced laments in which normative theological testimony is stated in the supplicant's first and second person discourse; but that analysis will have to await another study. 94. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, p. 143.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

179

theology.95 So, given the process of alterity and responsivity, who ultimately controls meaning in the complaint utterance? As the previous quote from Morson and Emerson suggests, the DV's value system might still be 'felt to be right', but within a supplicatory utterance, it is no longer taken for granted. In the presence of the supplicant's discourse, the DV is unable to articulate a monolithic position, try as it might, through the use of objective, hortatory language. Multi-voiced complaint psalms are particularly apt biblical examples of Bakhtin's notion of 'unfinalizable' discourse— two voices (testimony and countertestimony) come together, interact, are altered, but not merged; the 'dispute' is not resolved. Unfinalizability is one of Bakhtin's key philosophical concepts: Bakhtin advances the term unfinalizability as an all-purpose carrier of his conviction that the world is not only a messy place, but is also an open place... His paraphrase of one of Dostoevsky's ideas also expresses his own: 'Nothing conclusive has yet taken place in the world, the ultimate word of the world and about the world has not yet been spoken, the world is open and free, everything is still in the future and will always be in the future.'96

This rather idealized portrait of the world may be an overstatement when read with dialogic psalms in mind; the overriding ideology they espouse does not leave a lot of room for alternative stances. But perhaps more than any other texts in the Bible, they turn out to be genres full of semantic potential,97 and a place where a fuller theological picture of the Hebrew Bible can be drawn. As Brueggemann espouses, it is in the tension between core testimony and countertestimony, 'a tension which precludes and resists resolution', where the very core and substance of Old Testament faith resides.98 So, how in particular do dialogic psalms register ancient Israel's 95. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 3 86, makes this claim for Job and Proverbs. 96. Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, pp. 36-37. The quote is taken from Bakhtin's Problems, p. 166. 97. Even their structure affirms this reading. Many of these psalms (particularly those that do not end with an obvious refrain) conclude without any real closure expressed by the supplicant. Of course, read in their entire canonical context, the force of the centripetal pull of Israel's normative testimony is too great and they tend toward expressing a more monologic truth. 98. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 400.

180

God in the Dock

religious (and political) institutions? To start with, it would be a misrepresentation of the structure of Israelite society to treat the spheres of religion and politics as completely separate entities. Given the information available, it seems that, from the beginning of its history, the two shared an intimate relationship. Perhaps even to characterize the connection as a relationship puts more distance between them than actually existed. In preexilic times, the books of Samuel and Kings attest to religious leaders who exercised considerable authority in the political arena, and kings who presided at the temple in some capacity; and it appears to be the case that at some point in the postexilic period religious leaders became the sole native political authority. It seems fairly clear that religious figures were responsible for preserving the biblical record that has been handed down to us. Logically then, the record reflects their point of view. This is an oversimplification, of course. We have no way of knowing who 'they' were with any precision, and certainly 'they' were not a unified force who maintained a precise ideological solidarity throughout several hundred years. On the one hand, we can say what has often been said, that the biblical account reflects an official or religiously elite point of view, a view, for example, that grants no legitimacy to the practice of syncretism, which we are more and more sure was an integral part of the lives of much of Israel's population. 'Official' in this case would constitute a compromise position between the priestly and Deuteronomic traditions as hammered out in the formation of the Hebrew Bible." Priestly in the intent of maintaining cosmic order as conceived in the myth of creation recorded in Genesis (and alluded to in many psalms, particularly hymns). The Deuteronomic agenda, on the other hand, and its emphasis on Mosaic covenantal obedience have left its mark throughout the Bible. The entire history from Deuteronomy to Kings is a chronicle of disobedience and judgment. (Under this rubric, Brueggemann's observation that one of Israel's favorite metaphors for speaking about YHWH is as judge makes sense.) As has been extensively discussed, the Deuteronomic agenda aligns with the dominant rhetoric of the DV in a number of dialogic psalms. This is not to suggest a polar opposition in terms of power between the DV and the historical personage(s) (which is indeterminable in any case) behind the supplicant's voice. Rather it is to suggest a rhetorical dichotomy. While, it may be fairly safe to say that the position espoused by the DV represents an 'elite' point of 99. See Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 590; also Albertz, History, pp. 468, 481.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

181

view, whether or not the supplicants in early Israel were in reality the poor and afflicted (on a social level) is open to debate. The Bible is better than most tendentious documents for chronicling at least the echo of counter-traditions or testimonies (consider 1 Sam. 8's invective against kingship). While it is open to registering complaints against its human leadership, the Bible is less amenable to divergent theological viewpoints (as the vast majority of prophetic denunciations attests to). YHWH is Israel's supreme and sole ruler, just and powerful, and even the kings themselves must toe the theological line or incur the wrath of the guardians of the historical record. The belief in YHWH as sole and just ruler clearly served the purposes of the power s-that-be. But to the credit of the ancient redactors, the Bible refuses to shut out completely a tradition of protest that was aimed at dogmatic portrayals of YHWH (as attested to by the inclusion of such works as Ecclesiastes, Job and Lamentations). With this in mind, a rather naive dichotomy can be set up for heuristic purposes between the 'official', or dogmatic position, and a tradition of 'countertestimony', harking back to Brueggemann's terminology. To conceive of 'counter' in this case as 'opposite' would be to overstate the gap between it and the core testimony. Counter does not include idolatrous proclamations, but simply statements about YHWH that reject uncompromising attestations. The model that will be applied to the lament psalms that is most helpful for understanding the dynamic between these two positions is the one alluded to earlier (number 3) where a countervoice expresses experience contrary to normative testimony, but incorporated into this discourse is the official worldview. It should help our analysis to have a peg on which to hang our reflections about the nature of the official voice articulated in dialogic psalms: it shares Deuteronomic concerns (content) and is cultic (form). The broad connection between dialogic lament psalms and Deuteronomistic theology has already been remarked upon. And it needs to be remembered that cultic does not pertain exclusively to temple activity, and certainly not only to those events accompanied by sacrifice. In this case, the highly formalized structure of the psalms in question (and all psalms) points to their cultic connections. The DV therefore represents an official discourse whereby deuteronomic concerns intersect with cultic practice. The normative testimony of the DV holds power in dialogic lament psalms by means of grammatical, generic, and thematic strategies: (1) Grammatically, the shift from first and second person discourse to third person has the effect of depersonalizing and objectifying the DV's

182

God in the Dock

discourse. The result is an increase in rhetorical authority. These characteristics are hallmarks of what Bakhtin calls monologic languages, whose uncompromising positions exert a powerful ideological influence over a society. In the context of a lament psalm these characteristics exhibit a pedagogical quality. The DV in this context acts as a corrective (often a gentle, if firm, one) to the supplicant's experience of an unreliable deity. The DV generally translates this experience into issues of mere doubt and insecurities on the part of the supplicant, further subjectifying her understanding of her experience. SUP

My god, in you I trust—may I not be ashamed; may my enemies not triumph over me. Moreover, all who wait for you, let them not be put to shame; Let the frivolous deceivers be put to shame. Make known to me your way, YHWH, teach me your paths. Lead me in your truth and teach me; for you are the god of my salvation. I wait for you all day. Remember your compassion, YHWH, and your loyalty, for they are from of old (25.2-6).

DV

Good and upright is YHWH, therefore He guides sinners in the way. He leads the humble in judgment; He teaches the humble his way. All the paths of YHWH are steadfast truthfulness for those who keep the decrees of his covenant (25.8-10).

The beseeching tone of the supplicant is countered by the didactic, dispassionate and corrective assertion of the DV. The supplicant's doubts in this light seem rather frivolous. The DV only knows one language through which to speak its comfort, and that language is unbending and tends to stifle the full meaning of the supplicant's experience. (2) Generically, the DV's authoritative status is bolstered by the fact that the grammatical shift in voice takes place in the context of what is mostly a religiously conservative, standardized form of expressing complaint, developed, or at least sustained by and adapted for official cultic purposes. As Bloch maintains, certain 'forms' compel acquiescence to their agenda, or view of the world.100 The particulars of the lament genre orchestrate 100. M. Bloch, Ritual, History, and Power: Selected Papers in Anthropology (MSA, 58; London: Athlone Press, 1989), p. 208. Along these lines, as Green, Mikhail

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

183

power relations among its constituent discourses, but the general poetic style of the genre does so as well. As we have noted, Bakhtin held that poetry does the job of cultural, national and political centralization of the verbal-ideological world in the higher official socio-ideological levels'.101 This tendency toward centralization can be seen in the particular way the lament psalms consistently structure their discourses. For example, any suggestion of negative discourse about YHWH is always rendered in first person speech: Turn to me and show me compassion, for I am desolate and afflicted (25.16). Your face, YHWH, do I seek. Do not hide your face from me; do not thrust away your servant in anger (27.8b-9a). To you, YHWH, I cry; my rock, do not keep silence with me, then I will become like those who go down to the pit (28.1).

These implicit expressions of disappointment and doubt are never given the strength of objectivity the way positive discourse is. You would never hear, for instance, the following statement: 'There is reason to doubt the absolute reliability of YHWH's response, but He often comes through, so fear not.'

Now this may sound ridiculous to a well-trained scriptural ear, but it would surely be a more accurate reflection of any human being's lifeexperience, even the most pious. This mode of expression is simply not available within Israel's liturgical discursive world. The book of Job— where the friends' discourse aligns with the DV's—comes closer to striking a chord of this type, but in the lament psalm there just is not any room for this language. Another formal determinant of the supplicant's diminished status and the DV's heightened one, already indicated above, is in the tone of the complaint itself. It seems to be a generic imperative that the supplicant's complaint not be too assertive. It appears necessary that it be accompanied by an implied mea culpa, or at the very least, that it usually voice its position as a request rather than an assertion.102 In short, Bakhtin, p. 43, has noted, Bakhtin used the term genre for a way of thinking, rather than simply as a synonym for form. 101. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 273. 102. As has been alluded to often, Westermann described this stylistic feature as a 'hidden complaint'.

184

God in the Dock

the use of this specific genre by a supplicant for rectifying a disordered state of affairs comes with certain contingencies.103 There are fairly precise grammatical and stylistic norms that must be adhered to, and these in turn insure the DV a position of prestige in this context. Construing genre more broadly we might also consider how psalms as ritual contribute to the power dynamic, before moving on to strategy number 3. The pain being expressed in psalms of lament is seeking assuagement, not only to be fully heard. Stating her position is more than a matter of mere principle or ideological imperative for the supplicant; her suffering is real and desire for relief intense. Looked at from this angle, the DV's function is to assuage and soothe (rather than merely overpower and subsume!). As Blenkinsopp points out, the function of the priesthood consisted of more than the shedding of animal blood, they provided the people an avenue for 'emotional unburdening, and the satisfaction of some basic religious needs and aspirations'.104 Given the power of ritual in that cultural climate, the DV's attempts may have been very effective, as the thanksgiving portion of most laments attests. One way to conceive of the process is to overlay A. van Gennep's model for 'rites of passage' on the form of the lament psalm.105 Van Gennep focused on those rituals that accompanied life crises, making his work a suggestive dialogue partner for the lament genre. Life crisis rituals included a three-stage sequence: separation—transition— incorporation. The goal of this process was to move an individual to a new social status (from boyhood to manhood, for example), thus reforming in an orderly and structured way the hierarchical relationships of the people involved, but at the same time ensuring a reconstitution of the society's hierarchical structures, overall. In the lament psalm, the movement from illness to health, danger to well-being, might be understood in these terms. A structural comparison can be made between van Gennep's sequence and the standard movement of the lament genre: complaint—DV (words of confidence)—praise or thanksgiving. Seen side by side: lament psalm

van Gennep's rites of passage

complaint DV (words of confidence) praise or thanksgiving

separation transition incorporation

103. As M. Buss has noted, 'participation in ritual... presupposes a certain standard to which one must conform' ('Meaning', p. 321). 104. Blenkinsopp, Sage, p. 83. Professor J. Hayes has brought to my attention this pastoral aspect of the DV's role. 105. A. Van Gennep, Rites of Passage (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960).

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

185

This study has focused primarily on the transition stage (what Turner later called the 'liminal' stage), that stage represented in the psalm by the words of encouragement and instruction offered by the DV, which can be construed as the turning point in the psalms' 'mood' and 'stance'. From complaint to thanksgiving, something transformational occurs. Scholars have often posited a (usually) behind-the-scenes oracle for bringing the supplicant out of 'the pit', but in its place might also be posited the edifying words of the DV. For example, from Ps. 28.5-7: DV

Because they do not discern the works ofYHWH, the deeds of his hands, He will tear them down, and not rebuild them.

SUP

Blessed is YHWH, for He has heard my request for mercy. YHWH is my strength and my shield, in him my heart trusted. I was helped, and my heart will rejoice. With my song, I will glorify him.

Looked at purely rhetorically without any knowledge of the background ritual, the supplicant is, in this reading, 'realigned', so to speak, by words that reaffirm YHWH's sovereign and just rule. He is, to borrow van Gennep's terminology, (re)incorporated into a state of shalom, a position from which he can sing YHWH's praise in the fashion of normative testimony.106 While our experience often fails to conform to our expectations, ritualization is able to absorb and contain contradiction by assimilating conflict into what Bell explains as a semantic system, which, as evoked, 'is a closed and endlessly self-deferring circular system... [T]he hierarchical orchestration of the contrasts and deferrals generates the sense of a universal totality, a unified and authoritative coherence informing the whole scheme of things.' Bell calls this process 'redemptive hegemony', in which ritualization appropriates the hegemonic social order as a redemptive process and reinternalizes it,107 In this way ritualization connects one with a sense of place and empowerment. In terms of complaint rituals, this may explain how a genre that is so constrictive can 106. Corvin, Stylistic, p. 100, notes that the purpose of institutional prayer is to preserve wisdom and remove ignorance and error. 107. Bell, Ritual Theory, pp. 101, 110.

186

God in the Dock

also be seen as providing pastoral comfort. At this point, the voice of the supplicant and the voice of the DV merge, for all practical purposes. But there is not always a clear transition from complaint to praise, as the final verses of Psalm 27 attest: SUP. Do not hand me over to the will of my adversaries for false witnesses have arisen against me, as have those who breathe out violence. Were it not that I trusted to look upon the goodness of YHWH in the land of the living... DV.

Wait for YHWH; Be courageous and let your heart be strong. Wait for YHWH.

The supplicant is clearly not out of the woods yet, and the only words of comfort she receives from the DV instruct her to wait bravely. As a matter of fact, it is only in the final verse that we hear the DV at all; no edifying words are offered earlier to help effect a transition. Does this type of unfinalized ending indicate a failed lament ritual? Perhaps, if we understand 'effective' ritual as that which achieves transformation.l08 Less pessimistically, this psalm and others like it (e.g. 102; 130) may just be 'in progress', or perhaps the supplicant is not so easily brought over to the dominant point of view. In any case, clearly not all hope is gone, resolution has simply not yet been achieved. The DV's stabilizing presence can often be understood as the hinge between despair and joy. This testifies to the strength of Israel's normative statements (and the way they were actualized in ritual) about its god. Even if the DV's words effect a change in perspective or attitude, rather than actual situation, the prestigious position of its testimony is confirmed all the more, and social cohesion is gained (or regained), in accord with van Gennep's thinking. The status quo hierarchical relations are finally affirmed, even if along the way they are somewhat challenged and slightly destabilized.109 The notion that the declarations of the DV might only effect a change in attitude accords with M. Gluckman's notion that life crisis rituals work sometimes to achieve a cathartic affect on their participants. Gluckman is useful for his nuance of Durkheim's social cohesion model, in which 108. Bell, Perspectives, p. 74. 109. J.C. McCann, A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms: The Psalms as Torah (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1993), p. 86, notes that laments avoid a passivity that would merely reinforce the status quo.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

187

Gluckman concentrates on the presence of conflict rather than cohesion, and says that ritual exaggerates conflict in order to affirm unity in spite of the conflict.110 This parallels the dynamic observed above, that social hierarchies are both affirmed and challenged by the interaction of the two voices in dialogic laments. Because achieving social unity is actually so difficult, Gluckman proposed that rituals were in fact the expression of complex social tensions and social unity was simply a by-product.111 Although certainly unintentional, lament psalms evince a dynamic of this type. The social conflict between the supplicant's experience and the normative position of the DV is played out ritually, only usually to be resolved by the cultural and rhetorical influence of the DV. But in the process the supplicant has voiced her pain, and sometimes surely exaggerated it (e.g. talk of being in the pit of Sheol, etc.), attestations that could result in a type of cathartic release (for herself, but also for the audience who surely has lived through similar destabilizing experiences). According to Gluckman, social tensions are relieved by playing out the discontent that arises in societies with uneven power distributions (whether between haves and have nots, or men and women, etc.), but relief seems to come at the cost of maintaining those very same uneven power distributions. So, ritual exerts, in practice, the same types of restrictions discussed in terms of linguistic genres. Content is the third strategy by which the DV asserts its privilege over the supplicant's discourse. The DV relies on the vocabulary of what must have been Israel's governing theological testimony to shore up its authority. This testimony's main theme revolves around Israel's disobedience in the face of YHWH's hesed, or covenantal faithfulness. As in the Joban dialogues, the Deuteronomistic notion of a doctrine of retribution insists on the culpability of the one suffering. God's faithfulness and justice are unquestionable (hence the radicality of Job's declaration). These issues have already been fully covered in the preceding chapter, suffice it to say here that the use of metaphors, such as 'judge', in accord with Israel's dominant testimony, as well as the covenantal structure of Israelite society, legitimates the DV's point of view. In the end, the worldview of the DV dominates in these psalms. Although Brueggemann's opinion that 'we do not have a text in Israel which recites in normative, stylized fashion... God's indifference and 110. M. Gluckman, Order and Rebellion in Tribal Africa (Glencoe, NY: Free Press, 1963), p. 126. 111. Bell, Perspectives, p. 38.

188

God in the Dock

society's brutality'112 seems not altogether correct given my reading of lament psalms, he is right that there is something lost in the impulse toward systemization: The practical outcome of such a controlled, stylized recital is that the sponsors and advocates of the recital have the capacity to define social reality and the social position of other members of the community.113

According to Brueggemann, these 'establishment accounts' deny, disregard, or simply do not recognize the hard issues of theodicy.114 Brueggemann is primarily speaking of the historical psalms (78; 105; 106; 136), but his observations that they make two basic claims—God is good, and those who suffer must repent and they will be healed—are on target for most lament psalms. Furthermore, his observation that this worldview presupposes a world of'moral symmetry which is.. .non-negotiable', and that those who do not share this view are not given a voice,115 can be said of many psalms with the exception of those laments that confer the largest degree of autonomous agency on their supplicant's voice. At least in dialogic lament psalms the supplicant represents some attempt to counter the impulse toward defining social reality monolithically. This brings us to the way in which dialogic lament psalms provide a register of a tradition of countertestimony, or to put it more politically, (sanctioned) subversion. We cannot even attempt to put a name to the social entity responsible for this tradition; it is for our purposes, in any case, more of an ideological abstraction than an actual manifestation. One of the benefits of a dialogic reading is that it highlights voices that might otherwise go unnoticed, or be subsumed into the discourse of an other. Although we have seen the way in which the DV exercises control over the entire complaint, it is also clear that the influence of the supplicant is not negligible. Still, it may take a bit of super-human hearing to grasp the full implications of the supplicant's contribution to the total meaning. In terms of authority the supplicant's influence may seem rather puny, but in fact it is the insertion of complaint, however tentative and hidden, that opens up the otherwise monolithic message of the psalm, with the result that a dialogic, rather than monologic truth emerges. 112. Brueggemann, Abiding Astonishment (LCBI; Louisville, KY: Westminster/ John Knox Press, 1991), p. 50. 113. Brueggemann, Abiding, p. 47. 114. Brueggemann, Abiding, p. 48. 115. Brueggemann, Abiding, pp. 48-49.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

189

Witnesses, such as Ecclesiastes, Job and individual and communal laments, attest to the idea that in ancient Israel there was a more or less institutionalized culture of protest, even protest against God. Brueggemann uses juridical metaphors to make this point in terms of lament psalms: In the psalm of complaint Israel has momentarily wrested from Yahweh the initiative for the relationship. In the core testimony of Israel, Yahweh has held the initiative, and Yahweh's initiative has prevailed in the prophetic announcements. Here, however, Israel in trouble has learned that silent deference to Yahweh is costly. As a consequence, Israel breaks the silence, ends the deference, and claims rights over against Yahweh. Now Israel is the lead figure in the courtroom, and Yahweh is in the dock.116

This aside, it seems clear that laments are framed so as not to appear as true rebellion—their poetic and otherwise generic markings make them 'safe' for public consumption. The record of the sufferer's experience in Job and Ecclesiastes, on the other hand, has been described by Brueggemann as 'non-canonical'.117 By this he seems to mean that these texts lie outside any discernible normative Israelite tradition or genre, besides the general category of Wisdom. These genres stand alone for the most part, heightening the sense of rebellion they convey.118 Lament psalms on the other hand are part of a tradition that seems to have roots deep in established soil. So defiance is expressed in more subtle ways. What is rarely explicitly recognized, though, is that in laments the worship of God (by the supplicant) is subordinated to the worship of what God stands for.119 The supplicant is holding God to a standard. The DV focuses his emphasis on God as a fully realized embodiment of that standard (of course, the DV would not see it this way—God is God, he is not merely living up to some standard). Implied in the supplicant's discourse, though, is the notion that people have a right to rebel if God does not live up to this standard, which in this case would mean God is not practicing covenantal faithfulness. This constitutes an embryonic stage of the radical assertions 116. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 380; see also pp. 374-49 on psalms of complaint as models of countertestimony. 117. Brueggemann, Abiding, p. 51. 118. Outside the Bible, skeptical reflection is quite traditional among intellectual elites (e.g. in Babylon and Greece), even if not in religious circles. 119. This is not unlike societies that practice rituals in which the king, reminded that it is his office rather than his self that is sacred, is chastised in order to alleviate social tensions. Through these rituals it is clear that even those who are experiencing tense relations with the king still support the king. See Bell, Perspectives, p. 85.

190

God in the Dock

that are more fully articulated in Job. These protestations voiced against YHWH are not so radical as to suggest that he has failed his people in any ultimate kind of way. The subversive outbursts of the supplicant are still based on the conviction that God characteristically acts, but just has not done so in this case—so Israel's fundamental credo is kept intact, but the weight of culpability shifts. In most individual lament psalms it is God's neglect that is responsible for the misfortune befalling the supplicant, rather than the person's sinfulness (with the exceptions of penitential psalms).12° Thus 'Israel manages to issue complaint and expectant hope in the same utterance',121 but it is only Israel's vigorous countertestimony 120. Brueggemann, Abiding, p. 52. 121. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 376. Sacrificial theory can help us understand this peculiar orientation to YHWH. Insofar as lament psalms accompanied some type of sacrificial ritual, they uniquely represent the kind of paradoxical relationship the supplicant was sharing at a given moment with YHWH— one of expectation and disappointment at the same time. As Ps. 4 indicates, sacrifice may have been a constituent part of the complaint ritual. Sacrifice is often broken down into two different functions by scholars—disjunctive and conjunctive; or in more biblical terms, expiation and communion. In the former, the sacrificer is attempting to rid him/herself of something that she/he sees as causing his/her hardship (an evil spirit, sin, etc.). In the latter, the sacrificer is trying to unite with the divine in the hopes of bringing or maintaining good fortune (thanksgiving or peace offering). Whatever sacrifice accompanied lament rituals resists categorization in these terms. The supplicant was clearly trying to rid himself of an unpleasant situation, but at the same time, his plea is often that God hear him, or come closer, turn his face back toward him. Israel's monotheistic tendencies set up a situation in which the supplicant must choose to draw near to the one who is also often causing the problems. The supplicant does not want the spirit of God to move away, but rather if God would only come near, the suffering would cease. Along these lines, Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 660, notes that its God's absence that causes hardship. Sometimes, it is requested that God take away his anger or heavy hand, but this still entails drawing near, turning his face toward the supplicant in a beneficial rather than harmful way. God is not appeased in order that He relent, He is called on to uphold his end of a contract. This covenant demands a closely integrated relationship between Israel and its deity. Israel cannot disengage and wish or sacrifice away the cause of its problems, it must communicate, protest, repent, etc. God's complete sovereignty means Israel has nowhere else to go. We see this paradox at work most acutely in the Psalms and Job— the only hope of repair is to 'connect' with the source of suffering. Because they are forced to draw near to this god, and they of course only want to draw near to a good and just god, they are often forced to place the guilt on themselves, hence the penitential psalms. But in those cases where no guilt is confessed, the implication (and it is no more than that) is that the supplicant is YHWH's moral superior.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

191

that causes YHWH to 're-enact' the core testimony,122 As observed in chapter 3, there are those who suffer, but do not repent: 'YHWH, my god, if I have done this, if there is iniquity in my palms; if I have repaid evil to one at peace with me...' (Ps. 7.4-5a). This act of rhetorical turning the tables on the doctrine of retribution turns out to be the best way to keep issues of justice open. As Brueggemann has noted in this regard, the critique of the marginal 'wants to overcome the excessive claim of order that is articulated in the recital [of normative testimony] at the expense of the justice questions'.123 But a more radical attempt to do the same in a culture immersed in the theological grid of 'guiltpunishment-repentance-forgiveness' would fail (i.e. would never reach canonical status).l24 Failure in the context of a system as tightly structured as the biblical 'system' is would mean an attempt at individualization that completely removes the subject from the ideological system she inhabits. In these terms, there would be 'only one principle of cognitive individualization: error. True judgments are not attached to a personality, but correspond to some unified, systematically monologic context. Only error individualizes."25 A concrete biblical example of this process is provided by Brueggemann's notion of 'wrong speech'.126 Wrong speech is equated with the pervasive problem of idolatry attested to in Israel's record. In the prophetic corpus, in particular, we are treated to an array of episodes of wrong speech: Yet you say, 'How have we wearied him?' By saying, 'all who do evil are good in the sight of the Lord, and he delights in them'. Or by asking, 'Where is the God of justice?' (Mai. 2.17; emphasis mine).

In the mouth of the prophet the final quote of this verse is unquestionably blasphemous. But could he not be inveighing against Job? Or Qoheleth? Two heroes of the biblical corpus? And it does not take much imagination to hear this as the question behind the veiled complaint of the supplicant.127 But whereas the focus of Malachi's invective is in 'error', the supplicant maintains her status as one of 'the pious'. Why does the one testify to an absence of, and the other to an act of, faith? It may be because 122. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 377. 123. Brueggemann, Abiding, p. 56. 124. Grid taken from Brueggemann, Abiding, p. 50. 125. Bakhtin, Problems, p. 81. But see also Morson and Emerson, Creation of a Prosaics, p. 236, for a more thorough explication of this notion. 126. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 135-37. 127. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 378.

192

God in the Dock

the former represents linguistically and ritually unbounded testimony (note the difficulty in applying an accurate generic label to these texts), not merely marginal, as I have argued is the location of the supplicant's discourse. The supplicant remains within the system to question the system. The lament genre attests to a (probably unconscious) cultural understanding of this process. The need for a venue in which to express disillusionment and frustration was realized in a genre that exists at the nexus of issues of justice and the need for social ideological cohesion, a place where centripetal and centrifugal forces harmoniously interact to stabilize the system. In this way, the lament genre matches the quality of actual social speech (so long as it remains within proscribed parameters), in which every utterance 'serves as a point where centrifugal as well as centripetal forces are brought to bear'.128 From this perspective, laments are not countertestimony per se, they are Israel's routine way of resolving its ideological conflicts.129 Dialogic lament psalms also register the way in which Israel chose to reconcile the disparate elements in its midst. In dialogic terms, two voices come together and interact, simultaneously listening and responding to one another. But in the final analysis this genre falls short of Bakhtin's idealized understanding of dialogism, or polyphony. I have tried to highlight the dynamics by which the subjective viewpoint of the supplicant's voice has been compromised by the authoritarian tendencies of the DV. While Bakhtin's insistence that all linguistic construction is situational 'deprives the dominant angle from its claim to being natural and inevitable',130 it does not take enough into account the way in which in even dialogicized texts (as in real life) there is rarely an equal sharing of power between voices. A few feminist critics of Bakhtin emphasize this oversight. Their question is: 'How can one (individual or) group really relate to another without exploitation, dominance or annihilation?'131 Israel's cultic remedy for individual loss of orientation was to provide a ritual space within which the individual might try to have her wrongs redressed. The appeal, though, was highly circumscribed, and the encounter between

128. Bakhtin, 'Discourse', p. 272. 129. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 380. 130. Green, Mikhail Bakhtin, p. 39. 131. Green, Mikhail Bakhtin, p. 39. In her own appropriation of Bakhtin, Green gives credence to the feminist critique of Bakhtin's notions of dialogism and authoring. See also Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, pp. 3-4.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

193

voices anything but benign.132 In other words, within a dialogic lament the supplicant's discourse was not allowed any power to alter significantly the prevailing normative testimony. Just the opposite—the process was meant to retain the theological status quo.133 However, the DV's control of the lament genre is not uniform across the board. Psalms 44 and 88 witness to the genre's fluidity, as well as to Israel's willingness to permit within official discourse grievances against YHWH that push the limits of acceptable theological testimony. In these psalms the supplicant, rather than the DV, has control of the discourse. Their inclusion within the Psalter, juxtaposed to those psalms dominated by the DV, offered Israelites a fairly wide variety of expressive outlets, within cultic parameters.134 The comfort offered by the DV must sometimes have failed to persuade, and only lament or complaint, undiluted, could have satisfied some petitioners' deepest needs. Psalms 44 and 88 are exceptional within the Psalter, but they testify to the integrity with which Israel approached experiences that ran counter to its more 'comfortable' theological utterances. It is precisely psalms like 44 and 88 that open the way toward foregrounding the voice of dissent in dialogic psalms.135 5. Socio-rhetorical Conclusions Based on the discussion thus far, there are three possibilities for the social dynamics dialogic lament psalms might be reflecting. In terms of hierarchical relationships, the psalms could be a representation of (1) a society in which social institutions are somewhat fluid and open to divergent points of view, perhaps non-hierarchical; (2) a society in which rather monolithic authoritative structures are compelled to provide some official, structured space to alternative realities in order to retain their legitimacy; 132. Green, Mikhail Bakhtin, p. 39. 133. Laytner, Arguing, p. xx. 134. At the other end of the spectrum lies Ps. 37, which can be read as composed entirely of DV-like utterances. 135. D. Blumenthal, Facing the Abusing God: A Theology of Protest (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993), has focused on laments, and Ps. 44 in particular, as a way to make possible a continuing post-holocaust relationship with God. In light of the horror of such an event, complaint becomes perhaps the primary way to pray with integrity. His thesis, that God is sometimes abusive, accords well with my reading of some of the supplicants' experiences of God (though I would not make the claim that the supplicants' own reading of God accords with Blumenthal's quite modern psychological perspective).

194

God in the Dock

or (3) a society in which complaint had no official status; thus these psalms reflect purely personal expressions, voiced outside the official purview. Number 1, which posits a non-hierarchical social structure seems implausible given the evidence thus far provided by dialogic-critical means. It would mean defending the notion that dialogic lament psalms are folly polyphonous. Furthermore, based on what we know of ancient Israelite societies' hierarchical social structure (typical of the ancient Near East in general, in which society was stratified, with king at the top, slave at the bottom, etc.), this alternative seems implausible. Number 3, the notion that complaint could only flourish in private (or family) practices seems possible, but unlikely, given the highly stylized presentation of the lament psalm and its preservation by institutional powers. But even if the lament genre had its genesis, or primary expression, in private prayer, the dynamic in operation (insofar as it looked at all like the extant genre) could still be seen as reflective of the cultural 'argument' between official dogma and personal experience.136 In just such a vein, Van der Toorn argues that family religious practice in ancient Mesopotamia was in no way disconnected from larger social discourses.137 Even on the family level, veneration of the gods reflected the prevailing discursive structures and was conducive to compliance with culturally accepted codes of behavior. Number 2, which posits a rather authoritarian social structure that included highly circumscribed access to the official ideological discussion, seems most plausible. In the case of lament psalms, access is granted through generic means to transform a disordered situation to one of harmony, a goal that, even on the individual level, is for the ultimate benefit of the entire society. This situation pertains whether we are speaking of congregational or family ritual. In terms of the social function performed by lament psalms, a dialogic reading of them aligns with van Gennep's work on rites of passage: performance of the lament genre reconstitutes society's moral hierarchy; but it also destabilizes it enough that such discourses as the book of Job can come to seem 'safe' enough to achieve canonical status. This option also aligns with the option previously chosen for reading lament psalms dialogically—that the DV or 'official' position may be read as refracted through the supplicant's experience and expression. The supplicant voices his request/grievance through an officially ordained outlet, in which normative testimony about YHWH is 136. See Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 661. 137. Van der Toorn, Family Religion, p. 11. In fact, he claims that part of the function of Babylonian family religion was to reinforce collective identity.

5. Socio-rhetorical Context

195

ordinarily included, and thus becomes a part of the supplicant's discourse. Thus, both the needs of the individual and the needs of an ordered society are met through a cult devised to ensure societal stability. Bakhtin's method of reading helps the weaker voice have its say, and reading dialogically draws attention to the way in which the complaint manages to decenter the position of the DV. This process of alterity results in a dialogic rendering of truth, a truth that cannot be revealed without two or more voices brought together to 'quarrel'.138 The truth that emerges from this reading lies somewhere between the assertion that God is always faithful (and secondarily that blame must lie with the sufferer) and the suggestion that sometimes God is not reliable (and the suffering is not deserved). Engaging in a monologic reading of these texts would continue to privilege the dominant discourse at their center. So long as the DV is allowed to hold on to most of the power, there cannot be authentic relating between the two worldviews. It is then incumbent on the reader to wrest the DV's power away, by means of imposing on the psalm a dialogic reading. But the initiative in this direction was under-way long ago: because Israel refuses to be cowed by the awesomeness of its deity, nor the totalizing efforts of its more standard god-talk, the world created by these psalms is always 'dialogically open'.139 Along with the compulsory deprivileging of the dominant discourse represented by the DV, there is a concomitant refocusing on the supplicant's less influential discourse. Alternative viewpoints on YHWH can then take their place as fully valid theological reflection. And in terms of prayer explicitly directed toward YHWH the world then becomes ideally a creation of a free dialogic interchange between Israel and its god (not unknown in other biblical discourses, for example, Abraham and God considering the fate of Sodom in Gen. 18) rather than a top-down imposition. One can only hope that this kind of exchange between God and his creation might 'trickle down' into the social exchange between creature and creature. Israel's creation of a lament genre suggests an impulse, not fully realized, in this direction. It takes some effort, not to mention creativity, to appreciate the full force of the disempowered voice, but in the context of present biblical scholarship it is a worthwhile, if not imperative, assignment. Feminist biblical scholars have been embarked on this mission for some time now, with the result that the entire methodological paradigm has shifted toward an (ostensibly) more humane and 138. Bakhtin, Problems, p. 91. 139. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 379.

196

God in the Dock

relevant mode of inquiry. Previously, historiography has largely ignored the rhetoric of hurt and hope. 'In the scholarship of the last two generations, under the influence of von Rad, the canonical recital was presented with such singular focus that the dissent received almost no attention.' 14° Individual lament psalms offer reliable information about an aspect of Israel's experience of YHWH that should not be overlooked when trying to reconstruct Israel's story.141 The foregoing analysis may even provide the basis for a radical qualitative conclusion: in Bakhtinian terms, at least, dialogic lament psalms are of a higher order of socio-rhetorical discourse than hymnic or thanksgiving genres, in the sense that they possess more potential for diverse and inclusive construals of reality. Once again, Brueggemann makes a pointed statement in this regard: It may well be that the tradition of sovereignty and obedience is the predominant one in the biblical text, but it is not the only one. By itself, it is not the reason that the biblical tradition has continued to be compelling, authoritative, and endlessly pertinent to ongoing reflection about the character of humanity.142

Dialogic lament psalms bring together more cultural voices, which opens the door to possibilities of change and creativity. Such representation should be given a more privileged place in our own diverse discursive context.

140. Brueggemann, Abiding, pp. 41, 52. Although Westermann and Gerstenberger are rightly credited with trying to keep the rhetoric of dissent in focus. 141. See Brueggemann, Abiding, p. 57, for a broader application of this notion. 142. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 459.

Chapter 6 SOME CONTEXTUAL OBSERVATIONS AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

It is possible, but cannot be determined conclusively, that the doublevoicing of some lament psalms reflects a remnant of an actual dialogue rather than merely a rhetorical dialogism. In other words these laments could be construed as echoes of'scripts' of a sort, records that preserve a liturgical dialogue between the supplicant and a cultic functionary of some kind. The goal in the final section of this study is to explore possibilities for fleshing out what social role this functionary may have filled, and for suggesting possible ritual settings for dialogic lament psalms. The following analysis may turn out to be a merely heuristic exercise, but in that case it can still provide some grounding to our previous rhetorical-ideological observations. In any case, historical observations will be dealt with in only a cursory fashion simply in order to round out the analysis. More elaborate contextual analyses will have to await a future study. The very notion of a formal dialogue presupposes a ritual setting, whether that be connected to cultic venues of great prestige, like the temple, or merely the family cult. The fact that an instructional agenda seems to be a hallmark of the third person interjection should be an important datum for clarifying personnel issues. If, as has been suggested, the didactic voice represents a status quo or normative theology, then to answer this question we should look to members of those institutions that traditionally held the power to dictate belief. The obvious candidates would be connected to cult practice in some manner, the institution in which group identity was actualized and confirmed through congregational worship services of various kinds.1 The only cultic functionaries we are aware of who might have been in a position to expound didactic exhortations include someone of the priestly 1. Many scholars have substantiated Max Weber's claim that the priesthood in early Judaism established exclusive control over theology and ethics (Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (New York: Bedminster Press, 1968), pp. 425-26, 500-502.

198

God in the Dock

caste (Aaronide or Levitic), or perhaps a cultic prophet (as one who many have suggested might be responsible for uttering the oracular portions of ritual supplications). There is little clear evidence for speculating on just what the cultic duties of priests or prophets may have been (other than the obvious sacrificial duties of some of the priesthood). Chronicles suggests that Levites were responsible for many of the day-to-day functionings of the temple, including singing and incense burning, etc. There is no direct evidence of prophetic involvement in the cult, though Mowinckel mounts a good argument in favor of such.2 There is plenty of evidence in the Prophets that points toward prophetic involvement in oracular utterances, but these are by definition words of God directed toward humans. The type of discourse of primary interest to this study involves horizontal movement— words of instruction uttered by humans to humans—inserted into what is primarily vertical discourse, that is, human to deity. In terms of priestly options, the confusion about priests and Levites and their various cultic functions complicates the picture. This is not the place to rehearse all the arguments surrounding the evolution of the priesthood. It is probably safe to say that, as with any institutional entity, there was a hierarchy within the priesthood.3 It has been suggested that Israelite priests maintained a 'sanctuary of silence', meaning that sacrificial duties were carried on in silence, without any vocal accompaniment.4 This would preclude the use of lament psalms in association with the primary cultic activity of sacrifice. Because of Y. Kaufmann's contention that Israelite priests were not involved in any kind of activity that could be considered magical, such as any form of incantation, any priestly involvement in vocal worship. This conclusion is debatable (see Joel 1.13, is also precluded where complaint seems to be the provenance of those who also practice sacrifice),5 or perhaps, if 2. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, II, p. 53; see also Johnson, The Cultic Prophet. 3. At least in the postexilic period it seems fairly clear that the priesthood was divided into layers of authority and/or tasks, and according to Chronicles it was the Levites, in particular, who were responsible for the vocal (singing) portion of liturgical ceremonies. 4. See primarily studies by Y. Kaufhiann and I. Knohl. Y. Kaufinann, The Religion of Israel from its Beginnings to the Babylonian Exile (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960); I. Knohl, Sanctuary of Silence: The Priestly Tor ah and the Holiness School (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1994). 5. Mowinckel, Israel's Worship, I, p. 10, makes the case that psalms and sacrifice went together (including private offering). Lament psalms accompanied the private and congregational sin and purification sacrifices.

6. Some Contextual Observations and General Conclusions 199 accurate, accounts only for a time when castes of priests were battling for control of temple operations (i.e. postexilic rivalries—see Third Isaiah and Nehemiah). In that case we have to assume levels of priestly rank, and that only one class had power over sacrificial operations. They engaged in nothing else, while those of inferior rank, like the Levites, tended to supplementary tasks. In 1 Chron. 20.3-19 and Neh. 9.5, in fact, we have examples of Levites involved in a lament ritual. If this reflects reality, then it would seem prudent to focus our attention on the Levites as those most likely to be involved in lament rituals. On the other hand, since the history of the priesthood is so blurry, perhaps we can make no more than generalized comments about the personnel involved in the performance of lament psalms. In other words, we may have to make do with referring to the entire category of'priests', inexact as it may be. The situation is complex, and certainly evolved over time. Since the Psalter itself offers so few clues to its divers settings and the role of cultic functionaries in the performance of its prayers, it would behoove us to look to narrative portrayals of prayer to fill in the picture. One probably pre-exilic example of priestly involvement in individual laments can be found in 1 Sam. 1.9-2.10, Hannah's prayer. Gerstenberger is most likely correct that many lament rituals took place within family households with the help of a ritual expert, especially those rituals meant to alleviate the consequences of illness. Having said that it seems likely that most supplications were brought to a temple (or at least a local shrine) and presented before the deity. Examples from Sumerian and Mesopotamian prayer practices—in which letters of supplication were deposited at the house of the deity either by the supplicant him or herself or by proxy when the petitioner could not make the trip—support this view.6 But even if a lament ritual had to be carried out at home, we can assume that whenever possible cultic functionaries whose expertise was in this type of ritual would have been called upon to ensure maximum effectiveness.7 Consider in this regard the existence of Sumerian and Hittite lamentation priests.8 6. Van der Toorn, Family Religion, p. 83; Hallo, 'Individual', pp. 74-76. 7. For the notion that lament psalms were used in personal rituals conducted at home but presided over by cultic functionaries, see Gerstenberger, Der bittende Mensch, pp. 134-60; R. Albertz, Personliche Frommigkeit und qffizielle Religion (CThM, 9; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1978), pp. 25-27; K. Seybold, Das Gebet des Kranken inAlten Testament (BWANT, 99; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1973), p. 171. 8. Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 14, and Der bittende Mensch. Based on other

200

God in the Dock

The prayer included in 1 Sam. 1.9-2.10 can be useful for exploring the personnel issue, but a strong correlation between it and the psalms on which this study focused should not be drawn. Hannah's request does not correspond to the laments that have been highlighted in previous chapters. In other words, this prayer lacks a moral component to its claim—no suggestion of injustice on the part of YHWH; no suggestion of the supplicant's culpability, in terms of innocence or guilt; no claim against an 'enemy', etc. But Hannah's prayer does suggest that ideally petitions should be brought before the Lord at the temple and presented in the presence of a priest or cultic functionary. Hannah travels with her family to Shiloh for some type of annual festival. After consuming their sacrificial meal, Hannah 'rises up and presents herself before YHWH'.9 We are told that she prays and weeps while 'Eli, the priest' looks on from (the seat by the doorpost of thetempleof YHWH). The exactness of the depiction of his location suggests the technical nature of his position. Furthermore, the use ofindicates he is officiating in some type of ritual prayer ceremony, even if it be a relatively informal one.10 In other words, Eli is not simply 'hanging around' watching worshippers pray. A ritual setting also seems clear in that Eli expects Hannah to pray in a particular way—aloud, publicly.'' That she is breaking an established custom is reinforced by Eli's strong condemnation. Once she convinces him that she has been praying, Eli gives her an 'answer' not unlike in tone the interjections of the DVs: essentially he offers her assurance that YHWH can be trusted to answer her plea. The priestly response seems sufficient to alleviate her deep distress: she Mesopotamian parallels as well as evidence of the existence of Sumerian and Hittite lamentation priests (see P.M. Fales, 'Grain Reserves, Daily Rations and the Size of the Assyrian Army: A Quantitative Study', State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 4 [1990], pp. 23-34, esp. p. 30.), we can conclude that ritual experts guided lamentation (complaint) ritual (i.e. the Gala priesthood of Babylon). Incidentally, Mesopotamian national laments exhibit signs of voicing shifts/dramatic performance (see M.E. Cohen, The Canonical Lamentations of Ancient Mesopotamia [Potomac, MD: Capital Decisions, 1988]), usually between city god/dess and poet. Thus, voicing shifts in ANE lament literature are not unusual, but not close enough in form to the psalms studied here to be useful as a comparative tool. 9. The MT omits 'presents herself before YHWH', but the second half of v. 9 confirms that she is praying at the temple. 10. is often understood as a seat of judgment, the throne of the high priest or king. 11. Seybold, Introducing the Psalms, p. 82.

6. Some Contextual Observations and General Conclusions

201

departs, no longer wearing the same (presumably sad) face (1.18). Apparently she takes Eli's response as tantamount to an answered prayer. The aggregation of evidence is suggestive. Eli does not coincidentally happen upon a woman in prayer, but is an integral part of a prayer ritual in which he is expected to respond actively. This is a good example of how even the most private supplications could have had a public actualization. In confirmation of Eli's words of assurance, Hannah gives birth to a male child. Following the physical confirmation of her 'change efface', Hannah returns to the temple to make good on her vow to hand over her child to the temple. It is at this time that she offers up what seems a fairly generic thanksgiving prayer. Taking this evidence back to multi-voiced lament psalms results in some interesting structural comparisons. The movement of 1 Sam. 1.9-2.10 is from prayer (first person complaint plus vow) to interjection (YHWH spoken of in third person) to praise. This structure roughly parallels the movement studied in dialogic lament psalms. What is not, of course, included in the laments recorded in the Psalter is a narrative recounting of the actual resolution to the conflict that prompted the prayer. Commentators have often speculated on what prompts the switch in tone, an oracle, for example. A plausible alternative explanation is that most lament psalms are the record of the entire prayer process, from complaint to resolution to praise.12 Mesopotamian and Egyptian monumental records that memorialize an experience of prayer, answer and praise may be considered models for this thinking.B Hezekiah's prayer of thanksgiving in Isa. 38.10-20 is another example of the same.14

12. Psalm 88 is an obvious exception. 13. The stele of Nebre discussed in the exegesis of Ps. 31 in chapter three is an example. 14. In fact, the account of Hezekiah's distress, prayer and subsequent praise is structurally similar to Hannah's story. Hezekiah makes supplication to God, an intermediary interjects words of assurance, and subsequent to his recovery, Hezekiah praises YHWH. One obvious difference is that the interjecting voice belongs to a prophet, Isaiah, not a priest. Much has been written on the possibility of cultic prophets. There is very little biblical evidence for such. Suffice it to say that there was probably considerable overlap in the duties of priests and prophets. Ezekiel was a prophetic priest. Jeremiah may have been a priest as well. Samuel had priestly and prophetic duties. Pre-Islamic Arabic society included kahin, a functionary in whose person was combined the traditional roles of kohen and nabi (Blenkinsopp, Sages, p. 73). If any prophet had connections to the cult, Isaiah certainly did (consider the temple context of his calling in Isa. 6). If we accept Wilson's delineations, Isaiah was a

202

God in the Dock

It must be admitted that, in the case of Hannah's situation, priestly involvement is fairly limited. Eli's role is downplayed so as to highlight YHWH's role—the conversation is to be understood as occurring primarily between Hannah and YHWH. But why include Eli at all, in that case? It seems reasonable to presume priestly involvement in personal (though public) prayer. And more specifically, in terms of this study, we have some support for making a member of the priesthood responsible for the DV's discourse. In fact, Hannah's case may provide a model for the conversion from an oral stage of lament performance that was eventually transformed into a literary artifact without many lingering signs of its previous dramatic incarnation. Evidence based on the content of the DV's discourse has yet to be explored in terms of the personnel question. This element was thoroughly investigated in Chapter 4, but what light can that data shine on the possibility of priestly involvement in dialogic lament psalms? The most pertinent characteristic of the DV for our purposes is their didactic emphasis. The natural venue in which to search for instructional attributes is within sapiential circles, but there is evidence that priests were also invested with pedagogical obligations. When it comes to priestly responsibilities, the Bible is mostly concerned to lay out their primary temple duties, that is, those tasks that relate to performance of regular sacrifice. These duties range from dealing with instances of individual sacrifice meant to alleviate the effects of sin to instances of corporate sacrifice conducted on a cyclical or critical basis. Deuteronomy 33.10, however, sets the priestly duties of teaching and sacrifice side by side. Priests (Levitical) are specifically enjoined to teach torah, but they also seem to be required to make themselves available to answer questions and offer basic guidance (see Ps. 15; 1 Sam. 12.23; 2 Kgs 17.27; 20.2). Several allusions to teaching priests can be found in the prophetic books. In Jer. 18.18 and Ezek. 7.26 priests are connected with instruction, as opposed to the role of the prophet to mediate the word of God; and Mai. 2.7 and Hos. 4.4-6 suggests priests are responsible for teaching people God's way. Ezra is well known as both a priest and as someone who propounded Israel's story and law (Neh. 9). There is, as well, ample extra-testamental evidence, both from within and without Israel, of priests engaging in pedagogical duties.15 'central' prophet par excellence. The deciding factor might be, however, the fact that prophets were, almost by definition, responsible for relating divine discourse. In this study the human source of the third person discourse is what is being emphasized. 15. For example, J. Gray, The Legacy of Canaan (VTSup, 5; Leiden: E.J. Brill,

6. Some Contextual Observations and General Conclusions 203 The actual content of the instruction, or the way in which the priests imparted it has not come down to us, except in rare instances. Did priests hold 'Sunday school' classes? Perhaps they ran sapiential schools, in which case the priests would be coequal with the sages? Whatever the case, one natural venue for carrying out their pedagogical duties would be during those situations in which Israel came together as a congregation, whether to praise YHWH or cry for deliverance from some danger, during annual festivals or times of dire need. What better context for passing on teachings that reaffirmed communal identity and corporate belief?16 And even in regard to individual psalms, many of them clearly assume a congregational setting. Insofar as psalms made up portions of these liturgies, the third person interjections we have observed could plausibly have comprised some of the instructional content that was passed on by priests. Supplicants may have, like Hannah, brought their woes before the Lord during a larger festival and interacted with a priest (or Levite) as part of the redemptive process. In the case of lament or lament rituals, the twofold goal of the priest's interactions with the pray-er would have been to comfort and to realign experience with doctrine. Although not part of our central analysis, because it did not fit the primary category of prayer, Psalm 91 may be used to exemplify this proposition. This psalm, which Gerstenberger calls a 'sermon' or 'benediction'17 consists almost entirely of third person address in terms of its reference to the deity, but it is apparently directed to the supplicant. The supplicant delivers one line, seemingly at the prompting of the officiant, expressing his or her trust in YHWH. The didactic emphasis of the officiant's response is clear in both content and form. It teaches about YHWH, and stylistically it is apparently directed to an individual who is in need of comforting instruction. The 1965), p. 159, explains priests as custodians of traditions and experts on myths. The high priest in 'Gordon UH62' is said to 'teach' (Imd) a certain myth. According to M. Stone, 'Ideal Figures and Social Context: Priest and Sage in the Early Second Temple Age', in P.D. Miller, P. Hanson and S.D. McBride (eds.), Ancient Israelite Religion (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), pp. 579-80, in Aramaic Levi and Greek Levi in 'Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs' the priest is clearly connected to cultic matters, but the teaching of the Torah of God gets even more attention in some sections. In Greek Levi 13, the stress is almost exclusively on the priest's role in teaching the Torah. Sacrificial and pedagogical duties are both stressed suggesting that these two duties were intertwined in the role of the priest, not that one superseded the other. 16. Anderson, 'Practicing Ourselves', p. 24. 17. Gerstenberger, Psalms, II, p. 169.1 am very grateful to Professor Gerstenberger for allowing me to read his manuscript pre-publication.

204

God in the Dock

oracle at the end of the psalm suggests a cultic setting, and thus we may plausibly assume priestly involvement in the form of the voice behind the third person address. There is fairly unquestionable (if sparse) support for the involvement of priests in Mesopotamian individual lament rituals. In an individual prayer to Ninlil, the supplicant's voice alternates with a priest in the presentation of the appeal.18 The Ninlil Prayer is useful only in making the broadest possible comparisons; while the lament portion of the supplicant is quite similar to MT psalms, the priest's response has no didactic quality, and is for the most part just a reiteration of the supplicant's appeal. Still, the similarity in theme and tone to biblical lament psalms, in addition to its being an individual prayer, makes it suggestive for comparison. The proposal that priests might have had some involvement in individual biblical laments is strengthened. Needless to say, suggestions of this kind are more than a little speculative. The cultic context of most psalms can probably never be known for certain—neither the performers, nor the venue in which they were performed. The voicing shifts may represent only rhetorical and ideological movements, reflective of larger cultural impulses, not actual changes in speakers at all. But if they are based on real performances, then the priesthood, or some type of lesser cultic functionary, as the guardians of Israel's traditional theological testimony, may have been responsible for the normative testimony that comprises the core ideology of dialogic lament psalms. At the least, we can say that a dialogic reading of multivoiced laments highlights the instructional aspects of cultic prayer activity, which may have been a part of Israel's worship practices quite early on. 1. General Conclusions Ancient Israel structured much of its formal prayer dialogically. The plainest formal indicators of this structure are the shifts in voice that occur, a movement usually from first/second person to third person discourse— from speech directed to the deity to speech descriptive of the deity. Whether this structure reflects an oral stage in which the supplicant actually exchanged speech with another—perhaps a priest or some other cultic functionary—or whether the structure is merely a matter of formal and rhetorical considerations, is not hermeneutically determinative. In either case, reading dialogically as opposed to monologically opens up new 18. S. Langdon, Sumerian and Babylonian Psalms (ATLAMPP; Paris: Librairie Paul Geuthner, 1909), pp. 268-71.

6. Some Contextual Observations and General Conclusions 205 avenues of theological and socio-rhetorical inquiry in terms of psalms study. The fact that lament psalms take the form of a dialogue does not mean they merely presuppose an oracular dialogue (i.e. in response to a priestly word not presented directly, as some scholars have thought), nor are they only dialogical metaphorically (i.e., a combination of request and confidence/praise, as has generally been recognized without noting their actual dialogic form). They are rather intrinsically dialogic at the most fundamentally generic level. Close grammatical and thematic analysis of the elements that make up the form of these laments allows connections to be made between Israel's worldview and ethos, and the prayers that constituted their liturgical corpus, that have not been possible previously. The Hebrew Bible as a whole reflects a tension between Deuteronomic notions of cause and effect and (at least implied) experiences that thwart any such ordering system. The resolution (which does not necessarily imply a 'cure') of these tensions is necessary for the survival of any society. Ritual studies have shown that cultic practice is the primary nexus at which competing (or potentially so) worldviews are symbolically orchestrated. It is within ritual and its generic articulations that social tensions get played out. The voicing shifts that seem to be a generic feature of many lament psalms are a rather explicit example of the type of ritual 'dialogue' that is envisioned in many theories of ritual. Applying such notions to the psalms demands, of course, that we presuppose a cultic setting for their usage. The notion that most psalms were attached to cultic institutions at some point in their history has long been a tenet of psalms study, and an analysis of voicing in the psalms only bolsters such claims. Close examination of voicing phenomena makes it difficult to explain the nuances of person and number shifts except to posit a communal performance. But it is difficult to claim that voicing analysis can go much further than this in clarifying the contextual situation of lament psalms. It is certainly quite plausible that extant multi-voiced laments are the heirs of an actual 'script' of sorts, in which the supplicant made her appeal before an earthly representative of YHWH and engaged in some sort of religious performance meant to have efficacious as well as effective benefits. But the evidence for making a determination remains scanty. Of greater importance to this inquiry is the recognition of the ideological social dialogue that is surely mirrored in these psalms. Through close examination of the interaction between supplicant and DV one may learn much about the way in which Israel's religious leaders

206

God in the Dock

braced the 'standard' theological viewpoint in the face of contradictory experiences. As Foucault has taught, and Bakhtin has illuminated for the purposes of this study, this approach should not lead one to make a clear ideological distinction between the social forces that constitute the DV and those that constitute the supplicant. The ideological interplay at work is far more complex. Overly simplified, the supplicant is not 'oppressed' by the DV, nor is the DV brainwashing the supplicant into an acceptable theological position. The two together represent an interplay, a working out in tandem of the symbolic dissonance every culture experiences. Taking together the complaints of the supplicants of the laments, Job, Jeremiah, the 'blasphemers' quoted by the prophets, etc. insinuates the complex social and symbolic dynamics at work. Nothing less than the defeat of chaos and the triumph of order is at stake. The composers and editors of the lament psalms in particular, and the biblical texts in general, deserve credit for not allowing a monologic hegemony to prevail. With such high stakes, it must have been tempting. If they had succumbed, there is little doubt that the Bible would have lost social significance long ago. As it is, it is floundering; but perhaps if interpretive strategies cease to impose monologic understandings and allow the Bible to speak more freely in its own dialogic voice(s) more people can find a foothold 'between' its words.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahlstrom, G.W., Joel and the Temple Cult of Jerusalem (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1971). Albertz, R., Personliche Frommigkeit undoffizielle Religion: religionsinterner Pluralism™ in Israel und Babylon (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1978). —A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period (OTL; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994). Anderson, A.A., The Book of Psalms (London: Oliphants, 1972). Anderson, B.W., Out of the Depths: The Psalms Speak for Us Today (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974). Anderson, E.B., 'Practicing Ourselves: Liturgical Catechesis as a Practice of the Theonomous Self (PhD dissertation, Emory University, 1997). Anderson, G.A., A Time to Mourn, a Time to Dance: The Expression of Grief and Joy in Israelite Religion (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1991). —'The Praise of God as a Cultic Event', in Anderson and Olyan (eds.), Priesthood and Cult, pp. 15-33. Anderson, G.A., and S.M. Olyan (eds.), Priesthood and Cult in Ancient Israel(JSOTSup, 125; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991). Auffret, P., La sagesse a bati sa maison: Etudes de structures litteraires dans I'Ancien Testament et specialement dans les psaumes (Fribourg Suisse Editions Universitaires; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982). Avalos, H., Illness and Health Care in the Ancient Near East: The Role of the Temple in Greece, Mesopotamia, and Israel (HSM, 54; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995). Avishur, Y., Studies in Hebrew and Ugaritic Psalms (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1994). Bakhtin, M.M., 'Discourse in the Novel', in M. Holquist (ed.), The Dialogic Imagination (UTPSS, 1; Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981), pp. 259-422. —Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics (THL; Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984). —'The Problem of Speech Genres', in C. Emerson and M. Holquist (eds.), Speech Genres and Other Late Essays (trans. V.W. McGee; UTPSS, 8; Austin: University of Texas Press, 1986), pp. 60-102. Balentine, S.E., Prayer in the Hebrew Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1993). Balla, E. Das Ich der Psalmen (FRLANT 16; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1912). Barre, M.L., 'Hearts, Beds, and Repentance in Psalm 4.5 and Hosea 7.14', Bib. 76 (1995), pp. 53-62. Barucq, A., L 'expression de la louange divine et de lapriere dans la Bible et en Egypte (Le Cairo: Institut fran9ais d'archeologie orientale; Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1962). Bauman, R. (ed.), Folklore, Cultural Performance, and Popular Entertainments (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). Bazak, J., Structures and Contents in the Psalms (Jerusalem: Devir, 1984).

208

God in the Dock

Becker, J., Wege der Psalmemxegese (Stuttgart: KBW, 1975). Bell, C., Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). —Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). Bentzen, A., Introduction to the Old Testament (Copenhagen: G.E.C. Gad, 1961). Berlin, A., Poetics and the Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983). Beyerlin, W., Die Rettung der Bedrdngten in den Feindpsalmen der Einzelnen aufimtitutionelle Zusammenhdnge untersucht(FRLANT, 99; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970). Blenkinsopp, J., Sage, Priest, Prophet (LAI; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995). Bloch, M., 'Symbols, Song, Dance and Features of Articulation', Archives europeenes de sociologie 15 (1974), pp. 55-81. —Ritual, History, and Power: Selected Papers in Anthropology (MSA, 58; London: Athlone Press, 1989). Blumenthal, D., Facing the Abusing God: A Theology of Protest (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993). Bouzard, W., We Have Heard with our Ears, Oh God (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997). Boyce, R.N., The Cry to God in the Old Testament (SBLDS, 103; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988). Briggs, C.A., and E.G. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1960). Broyles, C.C., The Conflict of Faith and Experience in the Psalms (JSOTSup, 52; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989). Brueggemann, W., 'From Hurt to Joy, from Death to Life', Int 28 (1974), pp. 3-19. —Abiding Astonishment (LCBI; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991). —'Response to James L. Mays: "The Question of Context"', in McCann (ed.), Shaping of the Psalter, pp. 29-41. —Theology of the Old Testament (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997). Burkert, W., Greek Religion (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985). Buss, M., 'The Psalms of Asaph and Korah', JBL 84 (1963), pp. 382-92. —'The Meaning of'Cult' and the Interpretation of the Old Testament', JBR (1964), pp. 31725. —'The Study of Forms', in Hayes (ed.), Old Testament Form Criticism, pp. 1-56. —Biblical Form Criticism in its Context (JSOTSup, 274; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999). Buttenwieser, M., The'Psalms(LBS; New York: Ktav, 1969). Ceresko, A., 'The Sage in the Psalms', in Perdue and Gammie (eds.), The Sage in Israel, pp. 217-30 Chopp, R., Saving Work (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995). Clark, K., and M. Holquist, 'A Continuing Dialogue', Slavic and East European Journal 30.1 (1986), pp. 96-102. Clements, R., 'Interpreting the Psalms', in One Hundred Years of Old Testament Interpretation (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976). Clines, D.J., 'Psalms Research since 1955', TynBul 18 (1967), pp. 103-26. Cohen, M.E., The Canonical Lamentations of Ancient Mesopotamia (Potomac, MD: Capital Decisions, 1988). Collins, R., 'Decoding the Psalms: A Structural Approach to the Psalter', JSOT31 (1987), pp. 41-60.

Bibliography

209

Corvin, J., 'A Stylistic and Functional Study of the Prose Prayers in the Historical Narratives of the Old Testament' (PhD dissertation, Emory University, 1972). Craig, K.M., A Poetics of Jonah: Art in the Service of Theology(Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1993). —Reading Esther: A Case for the Literary Carnivalesque (LCBI; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995). Craigie, P.C., Ugarit and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983). Cronbach, A., 'The Social Implications of Prayer', in D. Philipson (ed.), Hebrew Union College Jubilee Volume (1875-1925) (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1925), pp. 483-512. Gumming, C., The Assyrian and the Hebrew Hymns of Praise (New York: Columbia University Press, 1934). Curtis, A., 'The Psalms since Dahood', in A. Curtis, G. Brooke and J. Healy (eds.), Ugarit and the Bible (Miinster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1994). Dahood, M, Psalms (AB, 16-17a; 3 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966-70). Deissler, A., Die Psalmen (3 vols.; WB, 1; Dusseldorf: Patmos, 1963). Delekat, L., Asylie und Schutzorakel am Zionheiligtum (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967). Dhanaraj, D., Theological Significance of the Motif of Enemies in Selected Psalms of Individual Lament (Gluckstadt: Augustin, 1992). Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W., Weep, O Daughter ofZion: A Study of the City-lament Genre in the Hebrew Bible (Roma: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1993). —'Tragedy, Tradition, and Theology in the Book of Lamentations', JSOT74 (1997), pp. 2960. Drazin, N., History of Jewish Education from 515 B.C.E. to 220 C.E. (Baltimore. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1940). Easterling, P.E. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy(New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Eaton, J.H., 'Hard Sayings' [Ps. 4: 6-7], Theology 67 (1964), pp. 355-57. —Psalms (London: SCM Press, 1967). —Kingship and the Psalms (SET; London: SCM Press, 1976). Eichrodt, W., Theologie des Alien Testaments (3 vols.; Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1933-39). Eissfeldt, O., The Old Testament: An Introduction (London: Basil Blackwell, 1965). Engnell, I., A Rigid Scrutiny: Critical Essays on the Old Testament (trans, and ed. John T. Willis; Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1969). Erman, A., The Literature of the Ancient Egyptians (trans. A.M. Blackman; London: Methuen, 1927). Fales, P.M., 'Grain Reserves, Daily Rations and the Size of the Assyrian Army: A Quantitative Study', State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 4 (1990), pp. 23-34. Ferris, P.W., The Genre of Communal Lament in the Bible and the Ancient Near East (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992). Fine, S. (ed.), Sacred Realm: The Emergence of the Synagogue in the Ancient World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996). Fisch, H. (ed.), Poetry with a Purpose: Biblical Poetics and Interpretation (ISBL; Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1988). Fishbane, M., 'Biblical Colophons: Textual Criticism and Legal Analogies', CBQ42 (1980), pp. 438-49. Flint, P.W., The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms (STDJ, 17; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1997).

210

God in the Dock

Flooysvik, I., 'When God Behaves Strangely: A Study in the Complaint Psalms', Concordia Journal 21 (1995), pp. 298-304. Fretheim, T., 'Some Reflections on Brueggemann's God', in Linafelt and Beal (eds.), God in the Fray (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1998), pp. 24-37. Gammie, J.G., and L. Perdue, The Sage in Israel and the Near East (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990). Geertz, C., The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973). Gerstenberger, E.S., 'Psalms', in Hayes (ed.), Old Testament Form Criticism, pp. 179-224. —Der bittende Mensch (WMANT, 51; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980). —Psalms (FOIL, 14; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988). Gillingham, S.E., The Poems and Psalms of the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). Girard, M, Les Psaumes: Analyse structurelle et interpretation (Paris: Cerf, 1984). Grabbe, L., Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages: A Socio-historical Study of Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1995). Gray, J., The Legacy of Canaan (VTSup, 5; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1965). Green, B., Mikhail Bakhtin and Biblical Scholarship: An Introduction (SBLSS, 38; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000). Green, M., 'The Eridu Lament', JCS 30 (1978), pp. 127-67. —'The Uruk Lament', JAOS 104 (1984), pp. 253-79. Greenberg, M., Biblical Prose Prayer (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983). Griffiths, A. (ed.), Stage Directions: Essays in Ancient Drama in Honour ofE. W. Handley (Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies Supplement, 66; London: Institute of Classical Studies, University of London School of Advanced Study, 1995). Gunkel, H., The Psalms (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967). Gunkel, H., and J. Begrich, Einleitung in die Psalmen (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1933). —An Introduction to the Psalms (trans. J.D. Nogalski; Mercer Library of Biblical Studies; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998). Gunn, G., Singers of Israel (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1963). Hallo, W.W., 'Individual Prayer in Sumerian: the Continuity of a Tradition', JAOS 88 (1968), pp. 71-89. Haran, M., 'Priest, Temple, and Worship', Tarbiz 48 (1979), pp. 175-85. —'Priesthood, Temple, Divine Service: Some Observations on Institutions and Practices of Worship', HAR 1 (1983), pp. 121-35. Harris, J.G., Prophetic Oracles in the Psalter (Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms, 1971). Hayes, J.H. (ed.), Old Testament Form Criticism (TUMSR, 2; San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1974). —Understanding the Psalms (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1976). Heaton, E.W., The School Tradition of the Old Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). Herdner, A., 'Une priere a Baal des Ugaritains en danger', CRAIBL (1972), pp. 693-97. Hoglund, K.G. et al. (eds.), The Listening Heart: Essays in Wisdom and the Psalms in Honor of Roland E. Murphy, O. Carm (JSOTSup, 58; Sheffield: JSOT Press,1987). Holquist, M., Dialogism: Bakhtin and his World (NACC; London: Routledge, 1990). Hooke, S.H., Prophets and Priests (IS, 3; London: T. Murby & Co., 1938). Home, T.H., Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures (4 vols.; Philadelphia: E. Little, 1827). Horsley, S., The Book of Psalms (London: F.C. & J. Rivington, 1816).

Bibliography

211

Jay, N., Throughout your Generations (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992). Jenson, R.W., 'Psalm 32', Int 33 (1979), pp. 172-76. Johnson, A.R., The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel(Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1944). —Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1967). —The Cultic Prophet and Israel's Psalmody (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1979). Judisch, D.M.L., 'Propitiation in the Language and Typology of the Old Testament', CTQ 48 (1984), pp. 221-43. Kaminsky, J.S., The Sins of the Fathers', Jud46 (1997), pp. 319-32. Kaufmann, Y., The Religion of Israel from its Beginnings to the Babylonian Exile (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960). Keel, O., The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms (New York: Seabury, 1978). Kim, Ee Kon, The Rapid Change of Mood in the Lament Psalms: A Matrix for the Establishment of a Psalm Theology (Seoul: Korea Theological Study Institute, 1985). Kimelman, R., 'Psalm 145: Theme, Structure, and Impact', JBL 113 (1994), pp. 37-58. Kingsbury, J.D. (ed.), 'The Book of Psalms: Studies in Tribute to James Luther Mays', Int 46 (1992), pp. 115-80. Knohl, I., Sanctuary of Silence: The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1994). —'Between Voice and Silence: The Relationship between Prayer and Temple Cult', JBL 115 (1996), pp. 17-30. Koch, K., 'Is There a Doctrine of Retribution in the Old Testament?', in J.L Crenshaw (ed.), Theodicy in the Old Testament fIRT, 3; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983). Kraus, H.J., Die Konigsherrschaft Gottes im Alien Testament (BHT, 13; Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1951). —Worship in Israel: A Cultic History of the Old Testament (trans. G. Buswell; Richmond: John Knox Press, 1966). —Psalmen (BKAT 15/1-2; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 5th edn, 1978). —Theology of the Psalms (trans. K. Crim; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986). —Psalms 1-59: A Commentary (trans. H.C. Oswald; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1988). —Psalms 60-150: A Commentary (trans. H.C. Oswald; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989). Kruger, P.A., 'Nonverbal Communication and Symbolic Gesture in the Psalms', Bible Translator 45 (1994), pp. 213-22. Kselmann, J.S., 'A Note on Psalm 4.5', Bib. 68 (1987), pp. 103-105. Kuntz, J.K., 'The Canonical Wisdom Psalms of Ancient Israel', in JJ. Jackson and M. Kessler (eds.), Rhetorical Criticism: Essays in Honor of J. Muilenberg (Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1974). —'Recent Perspectives on Biblical Poetry', RelSRev 19 (1993), pp. 321-27. Lanahan, W.F., 'The Speaking Voice in the Book of Lamentations', JBL 93 (1974), pp. 41-49. Langdon, S., Sumerian and Babylonian Psalms (ATLAMPP; Paris: Librairie Paul Geuthner, 1909). Laytner, A., Arguing with God (Northvale, NJ: J. Aronson, 1990). Leslie, E., The Psalms: Translated and Interpreted in the Light of Hebrew Life and Worship (Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1949). Levine, H., 'Dialogic Discourse of Psalms', in A. Loades (ed.), Hermeneutics, the Bible and Literary Criticism (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992). —Sing unto God a New Song: A Contemporary Reading of the Psalms (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995). Linafelt, T., and T. Beal (eds.), God in the Fray (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1998).

212

God in the Dock

Lindstrom, F., Suffering and Sin: Interpretation of Illness in the Individual Complaint Psalms (ConBOT, 37; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1994). Mannati, M, 'Sur le sens de min en Ps. 4.8', VT2Q (1970), pp. 361-66. March, W.E., 'Note on the Text of Psalm 12.9', VT21 (1971), pp. 610-12. Mattingly, G., 'The Pious Sufferer: Mesopotamia's Traditional Theodicy and Job's Counselors', in Bible in Light of Cuneiform Literature (ANETS, 8; Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990). Mays, J.L., 'The Question of Context in Psalms Interpretation', in McCann (ed.), pp. 14-20. McCann, J.C., 'The Psalms as Instruction', Int 46 (1992), pp. 117-28. —A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms: The Psalms as Torah (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1993). McCann, J.C. (ed.), The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter (JSOTSup, 159; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993). Mendelsohn, I. (ed.), Religions of the Ancient Near East: Sumero-Akkadian Religious Texts and Ugaritic Epics (New York: Liberal Arts Press, 1955). Meysing, J., 'Note d'exegese: une nouvelle conjecture a propos du Psaume 4', Revue des Sciences Religieuses 40 (1966), pp. 154-57. Miller, P.D., 'Psalms and Inscriptions', VTSup 32 (1981), pp. 311-32. —'Trouble and Woe: Interpreting the Biblical Laments', Int 37 (1983), pp. 32-45. —Interpreting the Psalms (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986). —They Cried to the Lord: The Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1994). —'Deuteronomy and Psalms: Evoking a Biblical Conversation', JBL 118 (1999), pp. 3-18. Miller, P.O., P. Hanson and S.D. McBride (eds.), Ancient Israelite Religion (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987). Mitchell, D., The Message of the Psalter: An Eschatological Programme in the Book of Psalms (JSOTSup, 252; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997). Morson, G., and C. Emerson (eds.), Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990). Mowinckel, S., 'Psalms and Wisdom', VTSup 3 (1955), pp. 205-24. —The Psalms in Israel's Worship (2 vols.; New York: Abingdon Press, 1962). —Religion and Cult (trans. John F.X. Sheehan, SJ; Marquette: Marquette University Press, 1981). Murphy, R.E., 'A Consideration of the Classification "Wisdom Psalms'", in J.L. Crenshaw (ed.), Studies in Ancient Israelite Wisdom (LBS; New York: Ktav, 1976). —'The Faith of the Psalmist', Int 34 (1980), pp. 229-39. —Wisdom Literature and Psalms (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1983). Neale, J.M., and R.F. Littledale, A Commentary on the Psalms: From Primitive and Mediaeval Writers (London: Joseph Masters & Co., 1884; repr., New York: AMS Press, 1976). Newsom, C., 'Bakhtin, the Bible and Dialogic Truth', JR 76.2 (1996), pp. 290-306. Niditch, S., Oral World and Written Word: Ancient Israelite Literature (LAI; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1996). Nilsson, M.P., Greek Popular Religion (New York: Columbia University Press, 1940). Oesterley, W.O.E., A Fresh Approach to the Psalms (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1937). —The Psalms (2 vols.; New York: Macmillan, 1939). Ollenburger, B., Zion, City of the Great King: A Theological Symbol of the Jerusalem Cult (JSOTSup, 41; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987).

Bibliography

213

Patton, J.H., Canaanite Parallels in the Book of Psalms (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1944). Perdue, L., Wisdom and Cult (SBLDS, 30; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977). Perdue, L., and J.G. Gammie (eds.), The Sage in Israel (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990). Perdue, L., B.B. Scott and W.F. Wiseman (eds.), In Search of Wisdom: Essays in Memory of John G. Gammie (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993). Perlitt, L., Bundestheologie im Alten Testament (WMANT, 36; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969). Person, R.F., 'The Ancient Israelite Scribe as Performer', JBL\\1 (1998), pp. 601-609. Peters, J.P., The Psalms as Liturgies (New York: Putnam's Sons, 1922). Polzin, R., Moses and the Deuteronomist: A Literary Study of the Deuteronomic History (New York: Seabury, 1980). —Samuel and the Deuteronomist: I Samuel (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989). Puglisi, M., Prayer (trans. B.M. Allen; New York: Macmillan, 1929). Pulleyn, S., Prayer in Greek Religion (OCM; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997). Raabe, P.R., Psalm Structures: A Study of Psalms with Refrains (JSOTSup, 104; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990). Reed, W., Dialogues of the Word: The Bible as Literature According to Bakhtin (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993). Reid, S.B. (ed.), Prophets and Paradigm: Essays in Honor of Gene M. Tucker (JSOTSup, 229; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996). —Listening In: A Multicultural Reading of the Psalms (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1997). Reif, S.C., 'Some Liturgical Issues in the Talmudic Sources', Studia Liturgica 15 (1982), pp. 188-206. Reventlow, H.G., Gebet im Alten Testament (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1986). Ringgren, H., 'Some Observations on the Text of the Psalms', Maarav 5-6 (1990), pp. 307309. Robert, A., 'L'exegese des psaumes selon les methodes de la "Formgeschichte Schule'", in R.M. Diaz (ed.), Miscellanea Biblica B. Ubach (ScDoc; Montiserrati, 1953). Sarason, R., 'Recent Developments in the Study of Jewish Liturgy', in J. Neusner (ed.), The Study of Ancient Judaism (New York: Ktav, 1991). Sarna, N., Songs of the Heart (New York: Schoken Books, 1993). Schaefer, K., Psalms (BO; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2001). Schmidt, H., Die Psalmen (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1934). Segal, R.A. (ed.), The Myth and Ritual Theory: An Anthology (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1998). Seux, M-J., Hymnes et prieres aux dieux de Babylonie et d'Assyrie (LAPO, 8; Paris: Cerf, 1976). Seybold, K., and U.B. Mueller, Sickness and Healing (trans. D.W. Stott; BBS; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1981). Seybold, K., Das Gebet des Kranken im Alten Testament (BWANT, 99; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1973). — Introducing the Psalms (trans. R.G. Dunphy; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1990). Sheppard, G.T., Wisdom as a Hermeneutical Construct: A Study in the Sapiential izing of the Old Testament (Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1980). —'Theology and the Book of Psalms', Int 46 (1992), pp. 143-55. Simon, U., Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms (SUNYSJud; Albany: SUNY Press, 1991). Simpson, D.C., The Psalmists (London: Oxford University Press, 1926). Smend, R., 'Uber das Ich der Psalmen', ZAW% (1888), pp. 49-147.

214

God in the Dock

Sokolow, M, 'Saadiah Gaon's Prolegomenon to Psalms', AAJR51 (1984), pp. 131-74. Stone, M., 'Ideal Figures and Social Context: Priest and Sage in the Early Second Temple Age', in Miller, Hanson and McBride (eds.), Ancient Israelite Religion, pp. 575-86. Stummer, F., Sumerisch-akkadische Parallelen zum Aufbau alttestamentlicher Psalmen (Paderborn: Verlag von Ferdinand Schoningh, 1922). Terrien, S., 'Wisdom in the Psalter', in Perdue, Scott and Wiseman (eds.), In Search of Wisdom, pp. 51-72. Todorov, T., MikhailBakhtin: The DialogicalPrinciple (TFIL, 13; Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984). Tromp, J., 'The Text of Psalm 130: 5-6', VT39 (1989), pp. 100-103. Tsevat, M., A Study of the Language of the Biblical Psalms (Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature, 1955). Tucker, W.D., 'Beyond the Lament: Instruction and Theology in Book I of the Psalter', PEGLMBS 15 (1995), pp. 121-32. Turner, V., The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1969). —From Ritual to Theatre (New York: Performing Arts Journal Publications, 1982). Urbach, E.E., The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1979). Van der Toorn, K., Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel: Continuity and Change in the Forms of Religious Life(SHCANE ,7; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996). Van Gennep, A., The Rites of Passage (trans. M.B. Vizedom and G.L. Caffee; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960). Vice, S., Introducing Bakhtin (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997). Voloshinov, V.N., Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (trans. L. Matejka and I.R. Titunik; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993). von Rad, G., The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (trans. E.W.T. Dicken; New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966). Waltke, B., and M.O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990). Weber, M., Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (trans. E. Fischoff et al; New York: Bedminster Press, 1968). Weiser, A., The Psalms (trans. H. Hartwell; OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962). Welch, A., The Psalter in Life, Worship and History (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1926). Westermann, C., The Psalms: Structure, Content and Message (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980). —Praise and Lament in the Psalms (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981). —'The Complaint against God', in Linafelt and Beal (eds.), God in the Fray, pp. 233-41. White, A., 'Bakhtin, Sociolinguistics, Deconstruction', in Carnival, Hysteria and Writing: Collected Essays and an Autobiography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 123-46. Whybray, R.N., Reading the Psalms as a Book (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996). Widengren, G., The Akkadian and Hebrew Psalms of Lamentation as Religious Documents (Stockholm: Bokforlags Aktiebolaget Thule, 1937). Williamson, H.G.M., 'Laments at the Destroyed Temple: Excavating the Biblical Text', BR 6 (1990), pp. 12-17. Wilson, G.H., The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (SBLDS, 76; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985). Wolverton, W.I., 'Sermons in the Psalms' [Pss. 78; 103; 106], CJT10 (1964), pp. 166-76. Wright, D., 'Ritual Analogy in Psalm 109', JBL 113 (1994), pp. 385-404.

INDEXES

INDEX OF REFERENCES

BIBLE

9.5

Old Testament Genesis

18

195

199

Psalms

1

22-24, 27,

33

1.1 2

138 100 18 153

4

33.10

142 202

1 Samuel 1.9-2.10

199-201

Numbers

6 Deuteronomy

4.7

1.9 1.18

8 12.23 2 Samuel 19.1

3-41

200 201 181 202

34

190 4.2

1,7,30-

32 4.3

1,30,31,

4.4-6

34 32

4.4 2 Kings 17.27 20.2

1,2,7,8, 33, 34, 40, 62,110, 111, 119, 135, 137, 144, 165,

4.4a

202 202

1,31-33 7,8,31, 32, 105, 113, 124,

4.7b 4.8-9

33 31

4.8 4.9 7

2,31,33 2,31 1,36,40, 47, 56, 74, 75, 107, 120, 125, 127, 130, 135-37, 144, 176

7.1

35 40 36

7.2-8 7.2-3

7.2 7.3 7.4-6 7.4-5a

7.7-10 7.7-8

191 35 35 35 177 36

7.7

35,37,40,

7.7c

146 41

7.9a

7.4 7.5 7.6

128 1 Chronicles 20.3-19

199

4.4b 4.5-6

2 Chronicles 20.3

110

4.5

31,32 8,31-33, 105, 110, 113, 121 1,31

4.5a 4.5b

119 119

4.6 4.7

2,31, 135 2,31,33

Nehemiah 5 9

151 202

35,37 35,39 36,40

7.8 7.9

35,37 35,37, 113, 119, 124, 128 36, 37, 40, 41,75,

105 7.9b

37,75

216 7.9b-10a 7.10 7.10a 7.1 Ob

7.11-12 7.11 7.12-17 7.12-14 7.12-13a 7.12

7.12a 7.12b 7.13-17 7.13-15 7.13 7.14 7.15-17

7.15 7.16-17 7.16 7.17 7.17a 7.18

8 8.1-3 8.4-9 8.10 9-10

9

God in the Dock

36,37,41,

9.2 9.3 9.4

120

9.5-7

36, 37, 40, 105,113, 124, 128

9.5

41,43 42, 44, 48 41,44,45,

9.6-7

47 44

36 35

38

41 41

41,47,75

35-39,41

9.6 9.7

40

9.8-10

42, 45, 47, 48, 105, 114, 124

36, 105, 113, 124

41

129

9.8-9

126

35,38-41, 107, 119, 120, 125, 135, 136 39,41

9.8

42, 45, 107, 124 42, 45, 75,

39

9.9 9.9a 9.10

38-40

39 36,38,39 36,38 36, 105, 113,125, 127, 135 36,38

39 36,38 36,38

9.11 9.12-13

9.12

112 112 112 112 64 1, 43, 44, 47, 50, 56, 60, 74, 107,110, 111, 125, 127, 13537, 144,

9.1

165 41

9.2-4 9.2-3

42,44 43,60

42, 46, 75,

9.13 9.13a 9.14-15

9.16-18 9.16-17 9.16 9.17

12.5 12.6

42, 43, 45-47 43, 46-48, 105, 110, 114, 124 42, 46, 48,

12.7a 12.8 12.9 12.12-14

42,46

46 43, 44, 46,

42-44 42,46 43, 47, 48, 105, 114, 125, 127

136

42 42

10

43,44

12-8b

49

42 43,47

48-50

49 49-52 48,50,51

51 49-52, 105, 114, 48, 50,

137 48 18,48,49,

51 50 49-52, 105, 114,

124 130 49,51 49,51,52

105 26, 202

20.7 21.9

18 18

23

61,62

23.5-6

62 26 26

24 24.3

45 22, 24, 27

25

1,54,55, 64, 107, 126, 127, 139, 14447, 165

25.1 25. Ib 25.2-7 25.2-6 25.2-3 25.2 25.3 25.4-5a

52 54 54 182 56 52 52 55

42, 136 42, 125, 42, 107

137 48

15 17 19

47 136

9.18 9.19 9.20-21 9.20 9.21

1, 14, 18, 27, 49, 64, 107,110,

124 12.4

12.7-9 12.7

48 9.14 9.15 9.16-19

12.1 12.2 12.2 LXX 12.2-3 12.3 12.4-6 12.4-5

130

128

126 36, 40, 50

128 135

12

217

Index of References 25.4 25.5 25.5a 25.5b-7 25.6 25.7 25.8-14 25.8-10

25.8

25.9-10 25.9

25.10 25.10a 25.11 25.12-14

25.12-13

25.12 25.13-14 25.13 25.14 25.15 25.16-21 25.16-20 25.16 25.17 25.18 25.19-20 25.19 25.20 25.21 26 27

53, 56, 57, 108 53, 57, 108 57 55 53 53, 108 54 54, 55, 105,115, 124, 146, 182 53,55, 107, 108, 128-30 56 53, 56, 108 53, 56, 108 130 53, 54, 56, 57 54, 57, 115, 125, 139, 145 120, 126, 127 53, 56, 107, 126 56 53 53 53, 54, 56 56 54,55 53, 183 53 53 56 53 53 54,56 45 1,60-62, 80, 111, 112, 144,

27.1-6 27.1 27.1a 27.1b-3 27.2 27.3 27.4-5 27.4 27.5-6 27.5 27.6 27.7-14 27.7-9 27.7 27.8-12 27.8 27.8b-9a

27.9 27.10 27.11-12 27.11 27.12 27.13 27.14

28

28.1 28.1a 28.1b 28.1b-2 28.2 28.3-4 28.3 28.4 28.5-7 28.5

145, 147, 165, 186 62 62 58 60 58,62 58, 62, 63 60 59,62 63 59,60 59,60 61 62 59, 60, 62, 147 60 18,59,62 132, 143, 183 59,67 59, 62, 63 62 59 59 59, 60, 62 18,59-63, 73, 105, 111, 112, 115, 128, 144, 147 1, 64, 67, 80, 107, 130, 137, 144, 165 65, 94, 183 63 67 64 63, 65, 67 64, 65, 67 63, 65, 68 63, 65, 67 185 63-68, 105, 115,

28.5b 28.6-7 28.6 28.7 28.8

28.8a 28.8b 28.9 30-32 30

30.1 30.2-4 30.2 30.3-4 30.3 30.4 30.5-6

30.5 30.5b-6a 30.6 30.6b 30.7-11 30.7-8 30.7 30.8 30.8b-9a 30.9 30.10 30.11 30.12-13 30.12 30.13 30.13b 31

31.1 31.2-3

124, 137 68 64, 66, 68 64, 68, 93 64 64, 66, 68, 105,115, 124, 130 67 67 64 1 28, 92, 93, 96-98, 101, 104, 124, 132 92 93, 95, 96 92,93 93 92 92 95-97, 106,117, 124 92-94 130 92-94, 98 94 93,95 94,96 92, 94, 95 92,94 132 92,94 92, 94, 95 92 93-96 92-94 93,96 93 62, 71, 73, 75, 107, 111,112, 137, 139, 165,201 69 71

218 31.2 31.3 31.4-7 31.4 31.5 31.6-7 31.6 31.7 31.8-9 31.8 31.9 31.10-14 31.10 31.11 31. lie 31.12 31.13 31.14 31.15-19 31.15-16 31.15 31.16 31.17 31.18 31.19 31.20-23 31.20-21 31.20 31.21 31.22-23 31.22 31.23 31.23b 31.24-25 31.24

31.24b

31.25 32

God in the Dock 69 69 71,73 69 69 74 69, 74, 75 69 71,72 69, 72, 74, 75 69 71 69,72 69,71 71 69 70 70,71 71 72-74 70,75 70 70, 74, 75 70 70,72 73 71, 72, 74 70,72 70 72 70-72, 74, 75,93 70, 71, 73 73 71,73 70, 73-75, 106, 115, 121, 124, 128 120, 125, 129, 137 106,111, 112, 116 27, 28, 92, 100, 101, 103, 104, 107, 122,

32.-5b 32.1-7 32.1-2 32.1 32.1a-2 32.1b-2 32.2 32.3-7 32.3-5 32.3 32.4 32.5 32.6-7 32.6 32.7 32.8-11 32.8-10

32.8-9

32.8 32.9-10 32.9

32.10

32.11 34 34.2-4 34.4 35.3 37

40.15 41.2 41.5 41.8 44 44.1-8 44.9 44.11 44.19 45

123, 127 100 100 101, 117 99 103 100, 106 99 101, 103 100, 101 99, 103 99 99 100 99 99 100, 101 100, 103, 104, 106, 117 15, 120, 121 15,99102, 122 101 99, 101, 102 99, 101103, 120, 121, 125 99-101, 117 23-25 25 23 18 24, 140, 141, 193 168 100 168 168 131, 193 131 131 131 131 18

48 49 50 52 55

55.1-21 55.1 55.2-9 55.2-3a 55.2 55.2b-3 55.3 55.3b-9 55.4 55.5 55.6 55.7-9 55.7 55.8 55.9 55.10-12 55.10-11 55.10 55.10a 55.10b-12 55.11 55.12 55.13-15

55.13 55.14 55.15 55.16

55.16a 55.17-19 55.17 55.18 55.19 55.20

26 24, 141 123 141 1, 10, 62, 78, 80, 81, 85, 107, 108, 137 10 75 78 77, 132 75 80-82 75 77,80 75, 78, 79 75 75 78 75 76 76 77,78 79, 109 76,79 81 81 76 76 77-79, 81, 109 76 76 76 76, 77, 79-82, 106, 109, 116, 124, 128 129, 137 76-79 76,78 76,78 76, 78, 79 77, 79, 82, 106, 116, 124, 137

Index of References 55.20a 55.20b-20d 55.21-22 55.21 55.22 55.23

55.24 60.8-10 60.12-14 62

62.1 62.6 62.9 62.10-11 62.12 66 66.16 71.11 73 76 78 88 88.5 88.7 88.14 89 91 91.3 91.14-16 93 94 102

102.1 102.2-3 102.2 102.3 102.4-13 102.4-12

81 81 77-79, 81 77 10,77 10, 77, 80-82, 106, 116, 124, 128 77,78,81, 82 18 17 18, 110 141 18 18 18 18 18 25 25 168 141 26 24, 188 85, 131, 193 131 131 131 18 138,203 138 18 14 141 1, 84, 87, 88,91, 107, 132, 144, 145, 147, 186 82 84,85 83 83 84, 85, 87 85

102.4 102.5 102.6 102.7 102.8 102.9 102.10 102.11-12 102.11 102.12 102.12a 102.13 102.13a 102.14-23 102.14-16 102.14 102.14a 102.15 102.16 102.16a 102.17-23

102.17 102.17a 102.18 102.19 102.20 102.21 102.22 102.23 102.24 102.25-29 102.25 102.26-28 102.26 102.27 102.28 102.29 105 106 108.8-10 110 111 112

118

83 83 83 83 83 83,87 83 86 83, 85, 132 83,87 85 83, 85-87 85 85 84-86 83 147 83 83 85 84, 85, 106, 116, 124 83, 85, 87 147 83,86 83 83 83 84 84 84, 86, 88 84,86 84,86 84, 86-88 84 84 84 84 24, 188 24, 188 18 18 24 23, 24, 138, 141 26

219

130.7a 130.7b 130.7b-8 130.8 132 136

26 22, 23, 27 100 26 24 138 100 1,89-91, 130, 144, 145, 147, 186 88 89 88 89-91 88, 90, 147 89,91 89-91 89,92 89,91 89,91,92, 106, 116 124, 145 89-91, 147 91 90 91, 129 89,90 18 188

Proverbs 11.31 22.4-5 23.29

140 140 126

Isaiah 6 26.8-14a 38.10-20

201 110 201

Jeremiah 11.19 12.1 12.2 14.2-10

131 131 131 110

118.27 119 119.1-2 122 127 128 128.2 130

130.1 130.1b-2 130.2 130.3-4 130.3 130.4 130.5-6 130.5 130.6 130.7-8

130.7

220 15.18 18.18 20.7 20.11

God in the Dock 131, 132 202 131 131

Lamentations 1 87, 131 131 1.5 1.14 131 1.15 131 1.18 131 2 131 2.2 131 2.5 132 87 5.19

Ezekiel 7.26

202

Hosea 4.4-6

202

Joel 1.13

198

Haggai 2.11

20

Malachi 2.7 2.17

202 191

INDEX OF AUTHORS

Albertz, R. 141, 142, 153, 154, 180, 199 Anderson, E.B. 164,203 Anderson. G.A. 33 Avalos,H. 154

Emerson, C. 156, 167, 170-73, 178, 179, 191 Engnell,!. 20,22,23 Erman, A. 98

Bakhtin,M.M. 3, 149, 156-63, 166-77, 179, 182, 183, 191, 192, 195,206 Balentine, S.E. 5 Bauman, R. 4 Begrich, J. 17, 19, 109, 112, 126, 138, 139, 141, 150, 151 Bell, C. 164, 172, 185-87, 189 Bentzen, A. 20 Blenkinsopp, J. 21,184,201 Bloch,M. 170, 171, 182 Blumenthal, D. 193 Boyce,R.N. 134 Broyles, C.C. 3, 43, 88 Brueggemann, W. 4, 118, 121, 122, 124, 126, 128, 129, 133, 134, 136, 137, 139-41, 143, 145-48, 155, 165, 172, 173, 179, 180, 187-92, 194-96 Buss, M. 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, 18, 20, 21, 44, 122, 150-52, 154, 171, 184 Buttenweiser, M. 76

Fales, P.M. 200 Fisch,H. 88 Fretheim, T. 134

Childs,B.S. 12 Chopp, R. 164 Clark, K. 149 Cohen, M.E. 200 Corvin,J. 6,24,25,123, 185 Craig, K.M. Jr. 161 Cronbach, A. 6, 7 Dahood, M. 53-55, 59, 66, 76, 77, 85, 90 Deissler, A. 12, 62, 87, 90 Delekat, L. 15, 102

Geertz, C. 164, 165 Gerstenberger, E.S. 15, 24, 26, 29, 31, 32, 36, 39, 43, 46, 49, 50, 54, 55, 58,60-62,64,65,67,68,71,74, 96, 100, 101, 103, 123, 150, 15255,161,196,199,203 Gluckman,M. 186, 187 Gray,J. 202 Green, B. 156, 160, 161, 167, 182, 192, 193 Gunkel, H. 9-11, 16, 17, 19, 29, 49, 54, 64, 72, 82, 85, 90, 109, 110, 112, 126, 138, 139, 141, 150-53, 155 Hallo, W.W. 2, 23, 26, 199 Hayes, J.H. 54-57, 62, 82, 184 Holquist,M. 149,156,158,163,170, 171 Hooke, S.H. 19 Home, T.H. 9 Horsley, S. 9-11 Jay,N. 4 Johnson, A.R. 19, 198 Kaufmann, Y. 198 Knohl,!. 198 Koch,K. 136

222

God in the Dock

Kraus,HJ. 15, 102

Robert, A. 12

Langdon, S. 204 Laytner, A. 24, 134, 138, 193 Lee, S. 9 Lindstrom, F. 165

Schaefer,K. 14, 161 Seux, M.-J. 46 Seybold, K. 3, 6, 7, 100, 199, 200 Simon, U. 13 Sokolow, M. 5 Stephen, L. 9 Stone, M. 203

Mattingly, G. 140, 141 McCann,J.C. 5,6, 12,24,186 Miller, P.D. 142, 143 Morson,G. 156, 167, 170-73, 178, 179, 191 Mowinckel, S. 6, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17-20, 24,26,29,49,78,84,85,91,95, 100, 102,123,150-53, 155,165, 198 Murphy, R.E. 55, 122 Newsom, C. 161 Niditch, S. 3 O'Connor, M. 45, 77 Ollenburger, B. 165 Perdue, L. 22, 101, 102, 123, 138, 139 Person, R.F. 3 Polzin,R. 161 Pulleyn, S. 44, 45, 60 Reed,W. 161, 169, 170 Reventlow, H.G. 142

Todorov, T. 167 Turner, V. 172 Van der Toorn, K. 60, 152, 155, 194, 199 VanGennep, A. 184-86,194 Vice, S. 156-59, 162, 163, 167-69, 17375, 192 Voloshinov, V.N. 168 von Rad, G. 128, 196 Waltke,B. 45,77 Weber, M. 197 Weiser, A. 15, 23, 39, 44, 50, 54, 55, 58, 61,65,67,68,71,79,85,88,93, 100, 102,126 Westermann, C. 4, 25, 26, 32, 54, 67, 73, 80, 81, 85, 87-91, 93, 96, 130-32, 183, 196 White, A. 159, 161 Wilson, G.H. 12,24,201