GEMS FROM JEREMIAH (44) Prophetic Pain, part IV.2

 

     Everyone has their breaking point.  Everyone is vulnerable to psychological distress and the experience of doubt regarding the goodness of God and of life itself.  Jeremiah was indeed well acquainted with pain.  I believe that the “painful” tone of much of Jeremiah’s writing is that of a tired preacher, an exhausted messenger.  Think about it – Jeremiah warned his contemporaries (in vain) of coming disaster for 40 years, after which time Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed.  Not only was he called to deliver a message that no one wanted to hear, but Jeremiah also had to face hostile (and potentially deadly) opposition, even from those people closest to him.  As he experienced this solitary suffering, Jeremiah recorded 6 “lamentations”[1], i.e., 6 cries of distress to Yahweh, both expressing his anguish and requesting that God defend him and avenge him on his enemies.  These cries resemble those psalms in which a righteous, innocent person is unjustly persecuted by “wicked” people and pleads with God to take up their cause (e.g., Ps. 22).

     After an extended period of prophesying while people plotted to take his life (cf. 11.18-23; 18.23) and publicly threatened and shamed him (20.1-2), Jeremiah now utters the last and darkest of his prayers of lament (Jer. 20.7-18).  The lament proper is found in 20.7-10.  Few verses in Jeremiah have received more scholarly attention than 20.7, the issues of translation and interpretation being particularly acute.  Does Jeremiah accuse God of seduction and rape?  That is precisely the view of some scholars.[2]  However, the verb pth (i.e., “deceived” (NIV), “enticed” (NRSV)) only means “seduce” when used in explicitly sexual contexts (e.g., Ex. 22.16; cf. Prov. 1.10).  The verb hzq (“overpowered”) which can be translated to render 20.7 either as “you overpowered me and prevailed” or as “you were too strong for me and prevailed (ykl, occurs 4 times between vv. 7-11))”.  How then should 20.7a be understood?  While it is inappropriate to use sexual terms to translate pth and hzq here, the feeling of having been enticed/seduced/ deceived is similar.  There is a sense that someone has taken advantage of you, and, combined with the figure of strength here (hzq), your dignity and personhood have been violated.  An overall interpretation of v. 7 could be: “You drew me in and tricked me, Yahweh, and it worked.  You overpowered me, took advantage of my youthful naivete.  You were just too strong for me.  You won!”[3]

     Jeremiah is being ridiculed for proclaiming the word of the Lord, but he is unable to stop prophesying (20.9).  Yahweh “prevails” against Jeremiah through the word working in him like a fire.  His enemies seem to be prevailing against him.  Everyone is “prevailing”, except Jeremiah, who “powerlessly” proclaims the divine message in the face of his friends’ mockery.[4]  The language of 20.10 is identical to that of Ps. 31.13 (a classic lament; cf. Ps. 41.9), and here Jeremiah recounts in detail the pressure he is under.[5]  Jer. 20.11 contains an expression of confidence in God, the only ground on which complaint is possible.  Central to the divine word of promise is the assurance of God’s presence with the one in trouble (cf. Is. 41.10).  In this expression of confidence, we hear the final occurrence of the word “prevail”.  From the complaint against the Lord who prevails over him (v. 7), Jeremiah expresses his frustration at not being able to prevail over the Word that burns in him (9) and his fear that his enemies will prevail over him (10), now to assert, finally, his confidence that Yahweh will prevail over his enemies and deliver him (11).  That confidence is undergirded with an implicit declaration of Jeremiah’s innocence and righteousness.[6]  But we’re not out of the woods yet…

 

 


[1] “They seem to be the most direct, candid, and intimate prayers that we know about in the OT”: Brueggemann, Walter, A Commentary on Jeremiah, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998, p. 114.

[2] Cf. Brown, Michael L. “Jeremiah” in Longman & Garland, eds. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary 7: Jeremiah-Ezekiel, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010, p. 286; Brueggemann, Walter, A Commentary on Jeremiah, p. 181; Heschel, Abraham, The Prophets, New York: Harper Perennial, 1962, pp. 144-45.

[3] Brown, Michael L. “Jeremiah”, pp. 286-88.

[4] Miller, Patrick D. “The Book of Jeremiah” in The New Interpreter’s Bible: Vol. VI, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001, p. 727.

[5] Brown, Michael L. “Jeremiah”, p. 290.

[6] Miller, Patrick D. “The Book of Jeremiah”, p. 728.

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