GEMS FROM JEREMIAH (56) sharing God's burden IV

 


“O Lord, you have enticed me,
    and I was enticed;
you have overpowered me,
    and you have prevailed.
I have become a laughingstock all day long;
    everyone mocks me.
For whenever I speak, I must cry out;
    …“Violence and destruction!”
For the word of the Lord has become for me
    a reproach and derision all day long.
If I say, “I will not mention him
    or speak any more in his name,”
then within me there is something like a burning fire
    shut up in my bones;
I am weary with holding it in,
    and I cannot.” (Jer. 20.7-9)

     We have seen that the God of Israel chooses certain creatures who “bear his image” to share his emotions – especially his pain – and to bend their backs under the burden that he carries, the burden of being the covenant God of a wayward, stiff-necked, obstinate, rebellious people (cf. Is. 65.2-5).  By becoming the divine husband of Israel, Yahweh had made himself vulnerable to rejection on the part of his chosen spouse (cf. Jer. 2—3; Hosea 1.1-3; Ez. 16).  In countless attempts to woo his bride back to him, Yahweh sent prophets who called Israel to repentance and renewed faithfulness to her God; these prophets then shared in Yahweh’s rejection by his people, as their message was greeted with contempt.  The prophets, beginning with Moses and culminating with Jesus, were the rejected messengers of the rejected God (cf. 1 Sam. 8.7; Mk. 12.1-12).  As the prophets are spurned by their own people, so Yahweh is abhorred by the people whom he had made his own (cf. Ex. 19.5-6; Dt. 7.7-10).

     To be a prophet meant – for all intents and purposes – to “be God” for the people of God (cf. Ex. 7.1).  He who speaks the word of God makes God present to his people.[1]  Rowan Williams speaks of those who “take responsibility for God”, for making God credible in the world (more often than not, through their suffering and death).[2]  Prophets were indeed such people.  The response the prophets elicited from the people of God was itself evidence, a demonstration to the people of the way they were treating Yahweh… Alas, the people of God routinely failed to recognize the face of their God in the anguished figures of his messengers.  If this people could give credit to a golden calf for their salvation from Egypt (cf. Ex. 32.1-4), how could they be expected to recognize the voice of Yahweh as their prophets pleaded, threatened, cajoled and denounced them time and time again?  The people of God proved itself, in the main, to be both blind and deaf, like the idols they so often worshipped in lieu of Yahweh (cf. Is. 6.9-10; Jer. 5.21; Ez. 12.2; Dn. 5.23; Hab. 2.18; Is. 44—46).

     The “identification” with Yahweh that the prophets underwent gave them great powers of intercession (cf. Ex. 32.7-14, 30-34).  When God threatened to annihilate his people, it’s as if He was asking his messenger, What would you do if you were me?  To be a prophet was to be called to love an unlovable people.  Yahweh loves Israel, even when Israel rejects him.  It is a commonplace that the Psalms are words spoken by humans to God, as opposed to the “word of God” addressed to humankind.  But if we read the Psalms, especially those where the Psalmist complains of being rejected and persecuted unjustly, as if they were the words of God, the Psalms take on a particularly “prophetic” character.  The prophets were called to give expression to the heart of God in human words. 

     Jeremiah, who prophesied 600 years after the time of Moses, discovered Yahweh to be Israel’s rejected husband, the ignored Father of the people of God (cf. Jer. 3.19-22).  Jeremiah was charged with the burden of being the last messenger, the one to deliver the final warning to God’s people before the ultimate judgment befell Israel.  Jeremiah would experience the protracted anguish of a loving God who must judge his people for her consistent infidelity and must share the torturous realization that the marriage of Yahweh to Israel had failed…  Yahweh told Jeremiah that it was no use interceding on behalf of the people; not even Moses could convince God to relent this time (Jer. 15.1-2).  Jeremiah’s pain upon witnessing the destruction of Jerusalem would be the pain of Yahweh, whose “house” was razed to the ground…[3]


[1] Cf. Abraham Heschel, The Prophets, New York: HarperCollins, 2001 [1962], p. 27.

[2] Cf. Rowan Williams, Tokens of Trust: An Introduction to Christian Belief, Louisville: WJK, 2007, pp. 20-26.

[3] By the Babylonians in 587 B.C.

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