the-bible-and-the-dead-sea-scrolls

CHARLESWORTH AND MCSPADDEN 331
Liturgical Formation
While discussions concerning history and prophecy have appeared frequently
in the secondary literature, the liturgical significance of Psalm
Pesher 1, and for that matter the pesharim, has not. One, and perhaps the
only, exception to this standard is the work of J. T. Milik. In an overlooked,
but provocative, statement, Milik observed that the pesharim represent
“ephemeral compositions preserved in the author’s own copy and
are to be connected with the exposition of the Bible that were given in
the sect’s meetings for worship.” 43 Milik’s claim is bold, affirming an
entrenched association between Qumran hermeneutics and liturgy.
Unfortunately, Milik presents no support for his assertion, sharing only
his view that public times of communal “worship,” i.e., liturgy, were the
most natural setting for “the exposition of the Bible,” the pesharim.
Since its publication, Milik’s statement has produced few adherents,
largely because it has gone virtually unobserved. This is not surprising
since a great deal of uncertainty continues to surround the issue of
“liturgy” at Qumran. For example, did the Ya4h[ad develop and possess a
standard form of liturgy? If so, on what occasions did it follow this
liturgy? How did the yearly renewal of the Covenant relate to other public
liturgical customs (cf. 1QS 1–2)? How and with what criteria can we
identify texts in the Qumran library as liturgical? Did not non-liturgical
texts sometimes obtain liturgical significance at Qumran, the antechamber
of heaven in which angels worshipped? What Qumran Scrolls are
most important as we seek to re-create and comprehend Qumran liturgy
and the phenomenology of worship at Qumran? 44 At present, questions
are far more abundant than answers, although recent work has demonstrated
an increasing scholarly interest in Qumran liturgical practices. 45
43. Jozef T. Milik, Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judea (trans. J. Strugnell;
SBT 26; Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1959), 41. M. Horgan (Pesharim, 3), also
notes Milik’s statement.
44. Explorations into the issue of liturgy have largely been beset by the weight of
anachronism. Often scholars have compared liturgy and liturgical themes at Qumran
with liturgical texts from Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity. It seems, however, that
those who study Qumran liturgy would do well to look at post-exilic biblical (e.g.,
Ezra, Daniel, Nehemiah) and pseudepigraphical liturgical texts that are roughly contemporary
to the Qumran corpus. See, James H. Charlesworth, “Jewish Hymns,
Odes, and Prayers,” in Early Judaism and Its Modern Interpreters (ed. R. A. Kraft and G.
W. E. Nickelsburg; vol. 2 of The Bible and Its Modern Interpreters; Atlanta: Scholars
Press, 1986), 411–36.
45. Among the numerous insightful studies, see the chapters by John J. Collins, Eileen
M. Schuller, and Robert A. Kugler in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. J. J. Collins and R.
A. Kugler; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000). The texts are conveniently collected in