GEMS FROM JEREMIAH (34) The Temple as political Tool, part I

 


A.                The nomadic God: Moses’ Tabernacle

 

     The prophetic tradition begins with Moses.  Yahweh liberated his people from pagan empire (i.e., Egypt) and constituted Israel as an alternative community of freedom and justice under his reign.[1]  Through the covenant, Yahweh entered into a relationship of solidarity with his people.  Yahweh is the God of freedom[2], i.e., he is both against all oppression/injustice and he is free from all manipulation – he is the sovereign God.[3]  It was ever Yahweh’s desire to live among his people; this was the raison d’être of the tabernacle (Ex. 29.42-46) in the wilderness and then Shiloh and later still, the Temple in Jerusalem.  The locus of Yahweh’s presence in the Holy of Holies was the ark of the covenant, which was alternatively described either as Yahweh’s throne or his footstool[4] (Ps. 99.1, 5).  Upon entrance into the Promised Land, the tabernacle was established at Shiloh (Jos. 18; 1 Sm. 1-5) and the liturgy was conducted by Aaronic priests.

 

B.                Consolidation: Solomon’s Temple

 

     The “city of David” had been chosen by Yahweh as the (final) place “where he would place his name”[5] (cf. 1 Kings 8.29; Jer. 7.12-14).  Once David had captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites, he brought the ark there and housed it in a “tent” (cf. 2 Sm. 6.12-19).  Yahweh had promised an eternal “house”[6] (i.e., dynasty) to David and had mandated David’s son to build a “house” (i.e., Temple) for him (cf. 2 Sm. 7).  Solomon had constructed the Temple next to his palace (cf. 1 Kgs 8) and had thus consolidated the seemingly indissoluble link between the Davidic monarchy and the cult of Israel’s God.[7]  Zion – the hill from which Yahweh would rule the nations through his anointed king (cf. Ps. 2) – was a bastion of Judah’s legitimacy and a guarantee of its invulnerability to any and all threats…or so the official propaganda would have it.[8]

     On Walter Brueggemann’s reading, the seeds of the (first) Temple’s demise were sown into its very foundation.  Solomon abandoned the radical socio-politico-theological revolution of Moses for an Israelite version of “pagan conventionality”[9], all done under the aegis of the national shrine.[10]  Solomon became the patron of Yahweh, and thus the God of freedom was domesticated and the king regulated accessibility to God, i.e., his sanctuary.  Yahweh was thus contained within a constrictive circle of palace, temple and capital.  Not only economically and politically, but also theologically, tenth-century monarchic Israel moved against the revolution for the freedom of God and the politics of justice and freedom.[11]  Throughout the history of the Judahite monarchy, the Temple would be co-opted for pagan cults and despite reform efforts by Hezekiah and Josiah, Yahweh’s “house” would be destroyed by the Babylonians in 587 B.C. along with the city of Jerusalem, whose inhabitants were exiled to Babylonia, all in fulfillment of the prophecies of Jeremiah.

 


[1] Cf. Richter, Sandra L. The Epic of Eden: A Christian Entry into the Old Testament, Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2008, pp. 175-76.

[2] Cf. Wright, Christopher J.H.  The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative, Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2006, pp. 265-88; Richter, Sandra L. The Epic of Eden: A Christian Entry into the Old Testament, Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2008, p. 174.

[3] Cf. Brueggemann, Walter, The Prophetic Imagination, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2018 [1978], pp. 5-19.

[4] Beale, G.K. & Mitchell Kim, God Dwells Among Us: Expanding Eden to the Ends of the Earth, Downers Grove: IVP, 2014, p. 63.

[5] The original “place” of centralized worship had been Shiloh (cf. Jer. 7.12-14).  Most critical scholars take the references to “the place” in Deuteronomy to refer solely to the Jerusalem Temple, while those scholars not bound to the dictates of higher criticism understand “the place” to refer to a series of exclusive shrines, culminating in the installation by Solomon of the ark of the covenant in the Jerusalem Temple: Waltke, Bruce K.  An Old Testament Theology, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007, pp. 488-89; cf. Hill, Andrew E. & John H. Walton, A Survey of the Old Testament, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2009 [1991, 2000], p. 176.

[6] Hb: bayit.

[7] Interestingly, one of Jeremiah’s ancestors, Abiathar, was banished to Anathoth (Jeremiah’s birthplace) by King Solomon, due to his having backed Adonijah, another son of David and a royal contender, during the struggle for the throne following David’s death (1 Kings 2.26-27; cf. 2 Sam. 8.18; 1 Kgs 1.19, 25).

[8] Cf. Brueggemann, Walter, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998, pp. 6-7.

[9] Cf. Beale, G.K. & Mitchell Kim, God Dwells Among Us: Expanding Eden to the Ends of the Earth, Downers Grove: IVP, 2014, p. 65 where it is claimed that at the time of Jeremiah, the Temple had itself become an idol for Israel!

[11] Cf. Ibid., pp. 28-35; cf. Richter, Sandra L. The Epic of Eden: A Christian Entry into the Old Testament, Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2008, p. 204.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A 40-DAY JOURNEY WITH THE KING: Lenten reflections from Mark’s Gospel (5)

Image
“A leper came to him begging him, and kneeling he said to him, “If you choose, you can make me clean .”   Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, “I do choose. Be made clean !” Immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean .   (Mk. 1.40-42)      Along with exorcisms, Jesus performs many healings of various physical ailments in the early chapters of Mark’s Gospel.   Jesus’ first healing is that of Simon’s mother-in-law (1.29-31).   With the restoration of the leper, we begin to understand the meaning of Jesus’ healings (and exorcisms).   The thrice-repeated word “clean” in the above passage reveals what is truly going on when the King restores the members of the people of God to wholeness.   Leprosy rendered its victim “unclean”, i.e., it proscribed that person from participation in the life of the community, of both civil society and the worship/litur...
Read more

The Protestant Reformation - good news?

Image
  The study of Reformation Europe makes many Christians wish that they had lived in the 16th century. Name 1) Some good reasons for not living in the sixteenth century and 2) Some ways in which we can live more deliberately as Christians today because of the events of that century. How should it and how should it not make a difference?    Some good reasons for not living in the 16th century include the climate of religious intolerance and violence.   Religious affiliation and observance were compulsory and imposed on the people by the state, especially it seems, in Protestant countries.   There was no freedom of conscience, except perhaps in England during the reign of Elizabeth, where the windows to people’s souls remained shut to the state, so long as they publicly conformed to the monarch’s religion (as enforced by parliament).   One may have thought that Luther’s appeal to conscience at the Diet of Worms would have inspired a broader and more sensit...
Read more

“Walking the tightrope” (St. Luke’s: Wednesday, August 22nd, 2018: Ez. 34.1-11; Ps. 23; St. Mt. 20.1-16)

Image
Ancient relevance.   Any conscientious catholic who has the habit of watching the news cannot help but notice a direct link between today’s first reading and what is going on in the Church these days.   Last week, a grand jury released a report detailing the results of their 2-year long investigation into dozens of clergymen who had abused upwards of 1,000 children in various dioceses in the state of Pennsylvania.   Every time cases of the abuse of children by priests and religious come to light, we are reminded that we live in a world – and are part of a Church – deeply infected by evil .   And of course, let’s not forget that the line between good and evil runs through each one of us (cf. Solzhenitsyn).   In today’s first reading, the prophet Ezekiel proclaims an oracle of judgment against the false “shepherds” of God’s “flock”.   Instead of caring for, protecting and nurturing God’s people , Israel’s leaders had exploited the people for their...
Read more