The Mystery of the Temple

THE MYSTERY THE TEMPI OR The Manner of God's Presence to His Creatures

from Genesis

to the

Apocalypse

YVES M.-J.CONGAR,

O.P.

THE NEWMAN PRESS WESTMINSTER

.

MARYLAND

This Translation o/'Lc Mysldre du Temple {Lcs ]t/itions du Cerfy Paris) was made by Reginald F. Trevett

NIHIL OBSTAT: HXJBERTUS RICHARDS, S.T.L., CENSOR DEPUTATtJS

r~.s.$.

IMPRIMATUR: E. MORROGH BERNARD VICARIUS GENERAT.IS \VESTMONASTERIi: DIE 12aOCTOBRIS 1961 The NIhll obstat and Imprimatur arc a detltiratiun fhat a book or pam/>fih*t i con^nleft'd to be free from doctrinal ir mot at terror, ff r.v //<>/ itnrlu"t.i I hut thos who have granted the JSlihil obstat ant/ Impiiniuuir tiwi'i* with the
stateiJHentf! e.\pt\'sst'f/>

Les Editions du Cerf 1958 Gates Ltd. 1962 English Translation
&

PRINTED IN OREAT BRITAIN

CONTENTS Page

FOREWORD

ix

Par 1 1

THE PRESENCE OF GOD

IN

THE OLD TESTAMENT

Chapter I,

II,

III.

THE PRESENCE OF GOD

THE TIMES OF THE PATRIARCHS

3

THE PRESENCE OF GOD AT THE TIME OF THE EXODUS AND IN THE LIFETIME OF MOSES

7

IN

THE PRESENCE OF GOD IN THE TIME OF DAVID AND SOLOMON. The Prophecy of Nathan and the Building 20

of the Temple

Explanation of the text the history of the prophecy to David in its twofold evolution: royal messiamsm, and God's Presence among his people, pp, 2532. The later history of Nathan's prophecy, pp. 32-49. The significance of the building of the Temple by Solomon, pp, 49-53. ;

made

IV.

THE PRESENCE OF GOD ACCORDING TO THE PROPHETS (A) The attitude of the prophets towards the Temple and

its

(B)

54

worship., p. 54

The historical mission and place of the prophets,

or the prophetic stage in the revelation of the mystery of the Presence of God, p. 61

V.

THE TEMPLE AND THE PRESENCE OF GOD IN THE DEVOTION AND THOUGHT OF THE JEWS The Temple after the exile. The restoration of Zorobabel and that of Herod, p. 80. Jewish devotion to the Temple, p* 83. Ideologies of the Temple, p. 90. Note on the problem of the exact site of the sanctuary in the temples of Solomon, Zorobabel and Herod, p. 101.

80

Contents

vi

Chapter Part II

THE TEMPLE OR THE PRESENCE OF GOD IN MESSIANIC TIMES INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

VL

JESUS

107

AND THE TEMPLE

112

(A) Jesus's devotion to the Temple, p. 112. (B) Jesus announces that the religious system of the Temple has come to an end and is replaced by himself in person:

L

In so far as the Temple was a hieron and the

place where men met God, p. 117. Mary's purification and the Presentation of Jesus in the Temple, p. 119. Jesus's purification 2.

in

of the Temple, p. 120.

In so far as the Temple was a naos or a place God dwelt, p. 129.

which

In his teaching on the Temple (naos) Jesus reveals that (a) the true Sanctuary is the Body of Christ; (b) it is so only after it has been destroyed and raised up again, p. 138.

VII

THE CHRISTIAN AND THE CHURCH AS SPIRITUAL TEMPLES St Paul: (a) The body of the Christian, the temple of the Holy Spirit, p. 153; (b) The Community or the Church as the temple of God, The Epistle to the Hebrews,

p. 157. p. 173.

St Peter: Christ; the faithful; God's plan; the position of the Eucharist and the hierarchical priesthood^ p. 175

The dimensions of the spiritual temple. The spiritual is corporeal and concrete: it is the Church, p. 188. The spiritual temple has its history, p, 192. The breadth and the depth of the spiritual temple, p. 197. The Apocalypse. The eschatological temple, p. 204. (A) God's Presence or God's temple during the history of the world (1. Earthly events. 2, The heavenly temple and its liturgy. 3. Relations between the heavenly temple and earthly history of the Church and temple

the world), p, 205.

1

51

Contents

vll

Page

The Presence and the temple in God's eternity (1. The assumption into and the fulfilment by Christianity of the Old Testament prophecies. 2. The new state and the transcendent consummation: (a) the new Jerusalem comes down from on high from God; (b) in eternity there is no temple other than God himself, (B)

p. 213.

CONCLUSION; The Economy of Providence and God's Presence in the World

236

Appendices I.

II.

III.

Chronology of events and texts concerning the Temple The Virgin Mary and the Temple

249

254

God^s Presence and his dwelling among men under the Old and under the New and definitive Dispensation

262

GENERAL INDEX

300

INDEX OF AUTHORS

317

FOREWORD Lay People in the Church we continually came upon the idea that the essential point of God's plan and the place of the faithful within it could be well formulated in terms of a temple built of 1 living stones, for God's whole purpose is to make the human race, created in his image, a living, spiritual temple in which he not only dwells but to which he communicates himself and in turn receives from it the worship of a wholly filial obedience. intended to develop this great, amazingly comprehensive and

IN

We

unifying theme by following the stages of its revelation and realization, the stages in fact of the economy of salvation ; this of course by means of a study of Scripture which, inspired as it is and guaranteed by God, provides the evidence of the economy of grace he has freely willed. This economy develops along a line which embraces the whole of history and the world itself. It had a beginning and It will have an end, It began as a seed and it will reach a fullness of growth, and the whole process is dominated by the Person of Jesus Christ. Hence the story of God's relations with his creation and especially with man is none other than the story of his ever more generous, ever deeper Presence among his creatures. This story therefore Is, up to a point, coextensive with that of humanity itself, we may even say with that of the world. So Holy Scripture not only speaks to us of God's presence In all things, It also shows us God bestowing his Presence on the iirst fathers of the race in a manner that we may almost call familiar* 2 However, it Is not this particular chapter in the history of the divine Presence that we propose to write, but rather those which begin with the positive, collective economy of salvation when Abraham was called. Genesis 1

See especially pp. 54,57,61,96, 102-3, 113, 119-20, 121, 154 n. 78, 198,405. Adam enjoyed the familiar Presence of God in a way which the biblical account scarcely allows us to imagine with any degree of precision, but it does suggest it in a remarkably expressive manner. We arc then told that two of the Patriarchs who died before the Flood "walked with God", Henoch (Gen. 5. 21-4) and Noe (6. 9); the text belongs to the Priestly Code (cf. also Gen. 17. 1 [Abraham], 48. 15 [Abraham and Isaac], Mai. 2. 6 [Levi]). The Yahvist tradition anthe Elohist account of the revelation of the name Yahweh when it ticipates attributes to Henoch the privilege of having been the first to invoke the name of Yahweh (Gen. 4. 26), This Patriarch, of whom nothing else was known, is represented in a unique way by biblical tradition as the type of man who is pleasing to God and who lives In heaven rather than on earth. See also Ecclesiasticus 49. 16; Heb, 11. 5-6. This is why after he had lived on earth for a shorter time than the othersmerely three hundred and sixty-five years -he was taken by 31

God

into his (heavenly) dwelling.

M.O.T.

I

*

Foreword

x

to note that God himearly Fathers of the Church liked of the order through which men the establish to worship self wished were to honour him. 4 God himself took the initiative in indicating to his the Patriarchs and the leaders of the people he had chosen to be 12.

I.

3

The

manner he wished

servant and witness, by what name and in what to be adored, where and under what conditions he would come and dwell in the midst of his people. Israel, realizing that the history of the world was essentially to be the history of God's Presence, and

conscious of the decisive character of his inspirations, saw in the himself the decisive points in the places where God had manifested existence and expansion of the whole of creation. This was the case with the stone of Bethel and the Temple of Jerusalem. It is this

God's own gracious initiative in establishing his Presence among and with men, which it is our task to study. a series It is divided into a number of characteristic stages forming shall we deal these With in a continuous process of development. of Like of developnumber every process in a corresponding chapters. ment this one has moments of anticipation arid fresh starts, David, for instance, anticipates the stage of the prophets, and Nathan's

positive story of

be understood in its prophecy, which was addressed to him, can only as anticipating further stages right up to seen when sense prophetic that of the New Testament. But, at the same time, David initiated the building of the Temple and so prepared the basis of the ritual to react but which worship against whose dangers the prophets were for several centuries beyond the prophetic nevertheless prevailed

stage.

The

reality

of his Presence in the messianic era, that is, the stage Son of God in whom and by whom

opened by the Incarnation of the

3 The first eleven chapters of Genesis give what we should call the natural of explanation of the creation of the world. In chapter 12 we see the ^beginning the story of the positive economy of election, of the Word and of faith, the story, that is of God's people to which the whole of the rest of Scripture down to the last chapter of the Apocalypse is devoted. Cf. Lay People fn the Church, p. 312, 4 passage from the prayer for the consecration of a bishop in St Mippolytus's you who dwell in the Apostolic Tradition, c. 3, reads as follows: "(0 Father) heavens and look upon what is humble, you who know all things before they come into existence, you who have determined the bounds of your Church by the word of your grace, you who have predestined the race of the just, the sons of

A

.

.

.

all eternity, you who have established leaders and priests and your sanctuary without men to serve it, you who have been pleased, since the foundation of the world, to be glorified by those whom you have chosen, pour out at this time the power that comes from you, the sovereign Spirit whom you have given to your well-beloved Son Jesus Christ and whom he has given to the Holy Apostles who built your Church to take the place of your sanctuary for ,". Cf, Sacrament Serapionte* the glory and the continual praise of your name n. 14. We have the impression that St Paul's speech at Athens was on the same lines: Acts 17.22-31.

Abraham, from have not

left

.

.

Foreword all

xi

the promises are fulfilled, is found in the Church. Hence we shall Church In accordance with the texts of the New Testa-

describe the

ment which present her to us as the spiritual temple of God. Not that the reader should expect to find in these pages a study of the nature of the Church, still less a complete treatise. Nor will he find a complete Christology in the section where we treat of Christ

who

precedes the Church as the messianic temple. To deal with these subjects would involve many other matters which the reader will find dealt with elsewhere the hierarchical structure of the Church, her sacramental life, etc. Abstraction, said the scholastics, is not a

form of

lying. It is permissible not to say all that can be said on a topic, but to deal with it from one particular standpoint. Like all God's purposes, which this story of God's dwelling with

men

expresses in one of their deepest and widest aspects, the story moves towards a definite end characterized by the highest 5 possible degree of inward religion. Its stages are those of this in-

itself

They move from things to persons, from moments of God's Presence to a Presence that is lasting, from

creasing inwardness. fleeting

the simple presence of his action to a vital gift, inward communication and the joy and peace of communion. Their final word is

a

God

all in all" (1

mighty" (Apoc. 21.

Cor. 22).

temple is the Lord God Ala divine story filling the religious

15. 18), "Its

Truly this

is

soul with love and strength! We hope that we shall not disappoint the expectations of souls such as these. Yet the circumstances and the manner in which this

study has been written its first outline goes back to lectures given during the Cours Saint-Jacques in 1947 have obliged us to be somewhat technical in our approach. Not that we can claim that we are capable of writing a study of the Scriptures by utilizing all the scientific resources of exegesis. Far from it. However, we have attempted to use a method that is valid from the point of view of exegesis and so historically accurate. Hence 9 we have, in the first place, followed a chronological order. This is why, since the readers for whom we are writing are not familiar with the chronology of biblical events and writings, we have provided in an appendix, a very brief chronological table. It is far from complete, limited as it to what is necessary in order to follow the story we shall recount. It makes no claim to give dates determined with absolute precision nor to pronounce on matters still open to discussion on various points between specialists. It is merely intended to offer a framework is

for a historical reading of the texts. 8

Cf. Vrate etfyusse rdforme dans

Pffiglise,

pp. 136 seq.

Foreword

xii

have also added a short explanation In the matter of the date at which the first six books of the Old Testament were composed and the use we have made of them. It is in this Appendix that the terms reader must look for the explanation and the reason for such are which tradition, Elohist as Priestly Code, Yahvist tradition,

We

Y

and E respectively, familiar letters P, are versed in these matters, but doubtless unknown to the majority of our readers. As our writing progressed, we moved away from the summary and generalized treatment we had first intended to use in this work tudes conjoint es promised in Lay People in the for the volume

sometimes referred to by the to those

who

Church, p. xxix. The present book on the theme of the temple was written at Jerusalem and acquired proportions and a method that decided^ us to contribution in the field of publish it separately as an independent du biblical studies, les Editions Cerf kindly agreed to include it in the Lectio divina series. The aim of this series is the same as our

a faithful and intelligent reading of Holy is, to promote that great undertaking, the Jerusalem Scripture. With this aim in view, conclusion. "We ourselves have a successful to Bible, has been brought this work that we dedicate the present study from much so profited

own, that

to

its

translators

friend,

and to the

man who

inspired the undertaking,

our

Fr Thomas Chifflot

Save where otherwise indicated, we have always quoted from the 6 text of the Bible de Jerusalem ( ~ BJ). word As a general rule, we have used the "Temple" (with a capital the same way as "the much in of Jerusalem, T) for the temple word is written elsewhere the whereas St of used is Paul, Apostle" with a small

letter.

7 will is obviously far from exhaustive, we However add in the text. successive in the found be quotations here a list comprising a few studies covering roughly the same ground as our own and also the full titles of certain works fairly frequently

The bibliography, which

quoted: 6 As the English

version of BJ is not yet in print, the translator has used Mgr Knox's translation of the Vulgate except where this version differs considerably from BJ. [Where two numbers arc used of a Psalm, the first refers to the Vulgato enumeration, the second to that of the Hebrew text-^TransIator.] 7 We were unable to use, for instance, the following foreign works; W* H. Dumphy, The Living Temple, Milwaukee, 1933; E. C, Dewick, The indwelling God, Historical Study of the Christian Conception of Immanence and Incarnation, London, 1938; A. Cole, The New Temple, London, 1950; Th. Hannay, "The Temple", in Scottish Journal of Theology, 3 (1950), pp, 278-87; H, Prey, Das Buck der Gegenwart Gottcs unter seiner Gemeinde. Kapitcl 2S-4Q des zweltcn Mose, Stuttgart, 1953. Occasionally though in fact, rarely wo have quoted at second hand.

Foreword J.

DANI^LOU, Le Signe du Temple on de

xiii

la Presence de Dictt (Coll,

catholiqite), Paris, Galllniard, 1942.

"Le temple du Dieu vivant'% in Pretre et Apotre Bonne Presse), 1947, pp. 103-5, 135-7, 166-9, 181-4. M. FRAEYMAN, "La spiritualisation de 1'idee du temple dans les H.-3VL FHRET, (Paris,

epitres pauliniennes'% in Ephemerides Theologtcac Lovanienses* vol. 33 (1947), pp. 378-412, published also in Analccta Lovansiensia Blblica et Orient alia. Series 2, part 5. J. PEDERSEN, Israel, ffs Life and Culture* 4 vols. in 2 books, London (O.U.P.) and Copenhagen, 1926, reprinted in 1946. W. J. PHYTHI AN- ADAMS, The People and the Presence. A Study of the At~one-ment, London, O.U.P., 1942.

M. SCHMIDT, Prophet und TempeL Erne

Studle

zum Problem

der

Gottesnahe im Alten Testament, Zollikon-Zurich, Bvangclischer Verlag, 1948.

H. STRACK and P. BILLERBECK, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch^ 5 vols. in 6 books, Munich, Beck, 1922-8. H. WENSCHKEWITZ, "Die Spiritualisierung der Kultusbcgriffe Tempel, Priester und Opfer ini Neuen Testament," in APFEAOS, 4 (1932), pp. 70-230 (also published as Beiheft 4 of this review, from which our quotations are taken). Y. M.-J. Cougar. Jerusalem, April-September 1954.

Part One

The Presence of God

in the

Old Testament

Chapter

1

THE PRESENCE OF GOD IN THE TIMES OF THE PATRIARCHS story of the Patriarchs which is for all practical purposes contained in that of Abraham and of Jacob-Israel for little is said of Isaac except in the story of his father and that of his son offers a kind of recurrent rhythm. God appears and intervenes in the life of ,the Patriarchs. These men, nomads or semi-nomads, meet God at such and such a place where they pitch their tent. They erect a stele or an altar, call upon God and offer sacrifice. Both on God's side and on that of Abraham and Jacob, there is a specific loyalty towards the most important of these places- Sichem., Bethel, Bersabee At the very beginning is the word from God which Abraham heard at Haran in the north of Mesopotamia: "Leave thy country behind thee, thy kinsfolk, and thy father's home, and come away into a land I will shew thee." Abraham set out for this Promised Land and entered it by the north road on his way from Damascus. 1 The first "appearance" of, or encounter with, God took place at Sichem at the oak of Mor6: **Here the Lord appeared to Abram, promising to give the whole land to his posterity and this appearance he commemorated by building the Lord an altar there" (Gen.

THE

.

.

.

12. 6-7).

He built another between Bethel and Hai (12. 8) and probably at each place where he camped on his way to the south. Later, when Abraham came up from the Negeb towards the north, he returned to this same spot in the neighbourhood of Bethel, "with the altar still standing there, as he had built it and there once more he invoked the Lord's name" (13. 4). He then went down towards Hebron and camped at the oak of Marnbre; "and there he built an altar to the Lord" (13. 18). Further south at Bersabee, he later planted a tamarisk and called upon Yahweh, "the Lord God eternal" (21. 32, 33). 1 Perhaps along the Jordan valley and the Ouadi Fr*ah. Abraham, as a breeder of small livestock, required a minimum of grazing and water, no more than 250 mm. of rain per annum. It is very interesting to note that Haran, then the road from Haran to Damascus and, in the Promised Land, the area in which lie the places where the Patriarchs halted (Sichem, Bethel, Bersabee, Hebron) are in a zone where the rainfall is from 250 to 500 mm. cf. R, de Vaux, "Les Patriarches h6breux et les decouvertes modernes", VII, "Le milieu social**, in Revue bibliqm, 56 (1949), pp. 5 seq, (rainfall chart, p. 13), :

The Mystery of the Temple

4 It is

His

certain that

God

is

7,

Abraham

did not yet

El Shaddai*

He

is

know

the

name of Yahweh.

in a real sense the

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob", the God who

lives

and

4t

God of who

acts,

intervenes decisively in the story of Abraham in order through him to inaugurate both the revelation and the realization of his economy of grace, whose history we shall attempt to trace from the stand-

point of God's Presence or dwelling among men. At the point we have now reached, God does not yet dwell among men. He docs not even announce his intention of doing so. He has not yet established his dwelling-place on earth. He is in heaven, he is the "Most High

God" invoked by Melchisedech (14.

18-20).

He

only reveals himself

he only "appears". 3 In the life of Abraham, Yahweh intervenes in a vision and makes his double promise of an inheritance and an heir (15), and this promise is accompanied by a covenant sealed during a sacrifice by Yahweh's appearance under the form of 4 fire. At the oak of Mambre, Yahweh shows himself in human form. He is one of the three men to whom Abraham offers hospitality. God is a passing "guest". But he remains for two days at least whilst the two other men go on to Sodom, and Abraham speaks to him with that familiarity full of both assurance and respect, which is revealed to us in the admirable scene of his intercession on behalf of Sodom (Gen. 18, Yahvist tradition). As Jacob's story unfolds, we see a similar pattern of relations with God. For the most part, the Patriarchs love to "consult Yahweh" in the same places (Gen. 25. 22). When the aged Jacob goes down into Egypt to be reunited to his son Joseph, he stops at Bersabee to offer sacrifices to the God of his father Isaac (46. 1). It was at Bersabee that Yahweh had appeared to Isaac in order to renew the promise. Isaac had built an altar there and had called upon the name

on

of

earth,

Yahweh

(26. 23-25).

Jacob does likewise at Sichern when he is on his way back from Paddan-Aram with Lia and Rachel and his flocks. He buys the piece of land where he pitched his tent and erects on it an altar which he calls "El, the God of Israel" (33. 18-20). But it is above all at Bethel that Jacob meets God, There he sees in a dream (28. 10-22) a ladder linking heaven and earth and angels going up and down it as a token of the familiar lasting relations between the Most High God and mankind. Hence Jesus, in order to show Nathanael that with his a

Gen. 17. 1 ; cf. 28. 3; 35. 11 ; 43. 14; 48. 3; 49, 25. The meaning of Ei Shadkki in dispute ("God of the Mountain *?). 3 If we may risk the comparison, somewhat as Jesus after his resurrection "appears" to his disciples, 4 See eh. 17 for the second account of the promise and of the covenant. In is

this chapter, there is

1

a shade less familiarity on God's part (the Priestly Code),

In the

Times of the Patriarchs

5

coming, we pass from prophecy

to the reality of God's (Jesus's) refers to Jacob's vision presence, (John 1.51). Jacob set up the stone that had been his pillow at the place of the vision and consecrated it with oil. It was to be the dwelling-place or house of God-El, beit-EI, (J and E traditions) derives from Jacob's act the name Bethel for the place that had apparently been previously known as Luz (35. 1). Later God would speak to Jacob saying: "I am the God of Bethel" (31. 13). He will invite to return there (35. 1). He will

and the Bible

Mm

show himself again

name El Shaddai (35. 11, Priestly obvious (and the text definitely gives this impression) that Jacob had there a very vivid experience of God's Presence, and the liturgy is not mistaken when it borrows from Genesis (28. 17) the words used at the dedication of a church. "What a fearsome place is this! This can be nothing other than the house of God; this is the gate of Heaven." Jacob's experience at Bethel stands as a type of the real Presence of God among men, Moreover it is marked by two characteristics whose union is typical of the Judeo-Christian religious economy, namely transcendence and proximity, or better, transcendence and communication. The God of Abraham and of Jacob is the Most High God but he is at the same time the God who comes to meet us and enters into our history. The Most High God is "my God", "the God of my salvation"., who casts his eyes on me and looks after me as if I were infinitely precious to him. The psalms are full of this twofold feeling. Better than all else they educate us in that sense of the two values of infinite respect and of tender confidence which determine the impulse of the religious soul and "our consciousness of God". From as far back as the age of the Patriarchs, God, at the very moment when he intervenes in their story and follows their only too human activities, reveals himself to them as the Most High God and inspires in them a religious awe and at the same time a feeling of his nearness to them. The Gospel, when its time comes, will reveal all the depth and truth of these two inseparable values which Jesus will bring together in his prayer with sublime simplicity. He will teach us to say "Our Father" but only by making us add at once "who art in Heaven", At one and the same time he will reveal to us that God is a Father in the mystery of his transcendent life and that by virtue of this very fatherhood of his, he communicates himself to men in a way we should never have dared to imagine. Distances are abolished, communication between heaven and earth is established in Jesus, the Code).

5

there under the

It is

Word made flesh. But Jesus in whom the two &

Verses 6a 9-13 and 1 5 belong to the Priestly the previous episode of the dream.

are joined

becomes the

Code (P) and are a duplication of

The Mystery of the Temple Inner principle of our own life and at the same time is for us an object of faith and adoration Ilu solus Altissimus, Jesu Christe* Between the two occasions when Jacob came to Bethel there comes the long episode of his twenty years of flight from Esau and of his years of service under Laban. It is on his way back from PaddanAram that there occurs the strange appearance of God at the ford of Jaboc (32. 23-31): as he is on the point of re-entering the land of promise, Jacob is assailed during the night by a man in whom he recognizes a divine manifestation. After he has wrestled with him the whole night he forces him to give him his blessing. This helps us to understand that there is no Presence of God unless God intends there to be one, unless he makes demands of us, unless too he puts us to the proof of suffering. Many of the appearances of God, and of the meetings of the Patriarchs with him throughout their history, are not purely "religious", their purpose is not personal communion and adoration, they are part of the "economy" by which God gives effect to his plan and his will. And for these men of faith, the will of God was made known in suffering. The theme of God as testing those who are near to him is one that constantly recurs in the

6

Scriptures.

6 *

This

is

expressly stated in Judith

8.

25-7.

Chapter

1

1

THE PRESENCE OF GOD AT THE TIME OF THE EXODUS AND IN THE LIFETIME OF MOSES are not concerned here with a straightforward factual is, with a reconstruction of facts based on documents that have been duly submitted to critical appreciation of their value as evidence for these facts. The documents available to us fixed the Mosaic traditions at a relatively late period.

WE

history, that

texts in which we read of God's "Dwelling-Place" or the tabernacle and the way in which it was constructed, the permanent presence of the Cloud above it and the exclusive service of the Levites, all these derive from the Priestly Code and their final written form is post-exilic. They are therefore direct expressions, from the historical point of view, of the priestly theology of the temple restored by ZorobabeL But this theology in the form in which Scripture has integrated it into itself is inspired so that it may tell us what God's purpose was in the Mosaic stage of his revelation and its realization. It is this purpose which we learn from Scripture taken as a whole and including other traditions that were fixed in more ancient times. shall therefore try (1) to analyse the data and the scriptural terms in which is defined the manner of God's presence during the Mosaic stage of the exodus; (2) to bring out their character and meaning.

The

We

The first datum is the religious personality of Moses together with the revelation and experience he had on Mount Sinai. This is the beginning of, and the motive force behind, all the rest. Moses, first in the scene of the burning bush where he was alone (Exod. 3), then after he had become the leader of the people as its guide and lawgiver^ had an exceptionally profound experience of the Presence of God as living and active and revealing his will in regard to Israel. This will, revealed by Moses, together with the two terms covenant and law which are its expression, formally constitutes Israel as a people and as the people of God. This experience of the Presence of God is linked in the case of Moses to two points of time or to two places Sinai and the desert. On Sinai **the mountain of God", God manifests himself in fire, thunder and earthquake, in a word we have here the first revelations of "the glory of God" (the Burning Bush

The Mystery of the Temple

8

1 gift of the Law). In the desert, we have Moses's visits to the "tabernacle" (the tent of meeting), his talks with God, God's manifestations in the "Cloud" or the "pillar of fire". 2 Thus the tabernacle is the place where it is possible to encounter

and the

Yahweh, Linked to the person and the mediation of Moses there is, therea Presence of God as conveying his wishes to his people, as guiding it and marching with it: "I will be with thee"(Exod.3, 12: JE), my presence shall go before thee" (33, 14; cf. 34, 9: J). So Moses sings after the passage of the Red Sea: 'Thy mercy had delivered Israel; thy mercy should be their guide; thy strong arms should Passage thy carry them to the holy place where thou dwellest people should have, and a home on the mountain thou claimest For thy own, the inviolable dwelling-place, Lord, thou hast made for thyself, the sanctuary thy own hands have fashioned The reign of the Lord will endure for ever and ever" (1 5. 1 3 and 1 7-1 8 J E slightly 3 altered), We have here the promise of a lasting dwelling of God fore,

.

.

.

!

;

among

his people.

The expression "thy

dwelling-place",

makhdn

point and in the 4 prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the temple, In the Canticle of Moses there is certainly a literary anticipation of this, but there is also an anticipation in his thought because, in the very profound experience Moses had undergone and in the history of the exodus, there was an initial manifestation of God's Presence and almost of

leshivtekhd, is

found in the Old Testament only at

this

we turn from the field of exegesis should say that for the first time the Holy Spirit came down on Moses and on the Israel of the exodus as upon a church (une premiere venue eccUsiale), for there is a striking his dwelling

among

to that of theology,

parallel

1

between the

his people. If

we

effects attributed

by the

New

Testament to the

Some

authors (von Gall, Eichrodt, von Rad) insist on the fact that; in the "Glory of God" is always linked to an external meteorological phenomenon (storm, etc.). This is certainly the case in Exod. 19. 16; Deut 33, 2; Judges 5. 4-5; Ps. 17(18); 28(29). 3-5; 67(68); 76(77), 17-21; 96(97). 35 and again in Hab. 3. 3, etc. Cf. also S. Grill, Die Oemtte^Theophanic itn A.T. /uvvr*fpre-exilic texts, the

ische Studie, 2nd edition, 1943, and in A. M, Ramsey, The Glory of God . London, 1949, pp. lOseq., for reconsideration of this interpretation. 2 Cf. Ex. 33, 7-11; Num. 11. 16-30; 12, 1-10 seq. these texts belong to the Yahvist-Elohist tradition. From the same tradition, see Exod, 16, 10 seq,; 29. 43: .

.

AH

Num. 8

14. 10; 17. 7 seq., etc. See also Lev. 26. 1 1-12 (P): "I will

make my dwelling among you, and never my love cast you off, still coming and going in the midst of you, 1 your God, and you my people." Cf. Num. 35. 34 (P). 4 shall

6.

3 Kings 8, 13 (30,39,43,39) and there is a parallel passage in 2 Paralip, 2 (21, 30, 33 9 39). The verb iashav originally meant to sit down, to be seated, and

so to dwell.

The Exodus and Moses

9

5 Spirit and those of the Presence of God during the exodus. Moses's personal role and Ms stupendous mediation were to pass away but the people which had been brought into being through him was to endure. It was therefore necessary that his experience should lose something of its individual nature and that there should be a certain institutional form, so to speak, of the Presence of God and the transmission of his will This fact, which leads to other aspects of Israel's life (cf. Deut. 18 for instance), will have its counterpart in the early days of the Church during the period of transition from the apostles themselves to the post-apostolic Church. The Jewish institutions are connected with Moses through a development of the terms or the realities by means of which the Presence or the dwelling (up to a point) of God among his people had been expressed. These

Holy

realities are

the following:

The Cloud^ We have seen that Moses encountered God in the tent of meeting and that when he did so the pillar of cloud hovered over the latter. Other texts belonging to the Yahvist-Elohist tradition (Exocl. 13.21 cf.Num. 12. 5; 14. 14; cf.Deut. 31. 15) orto thePriestly Code which links the Cloud to the tent or God's dwelling-place (Num. 9. 15 seq.; 10. 11-12; Ex. 40. 36-38: the last words in the book) show the Cloud as a presence and a permanent manifestation of God guiding Israel day and night. The last passage in Exodus (40. 34-35 P) shows the Cloud halting above the tabernacle, the first rough model for the Temple, and filling it in such a way that not even Moses could enter. The Temple not only succeeds Moses, ;

:

it

also transcends him.

The Cloud

is

1 always linked to a manifestation of God.

It

5 There is a great deal of work to be done on this subject. We can only give a few indications here: Guidance: the rdle of the Cloud during the exodus (Num. 9. 15 seq.,, etc.) and of the Holy Spirit in the Acts. Indwelling (this is said of the Holy Spirit; we are the temple of the Holy Spirit). Baptism "in nube et in marl" (L Cor. 10. 2); "in aqua et Spiritu" (John 3. 5, etc.). The transformation of the face of Moses in the presence of the Glory of God (Exod. 34. 39: P); so too is the Christian transformed by the Lord who is Spirit (2 Cor. 3. 7 to 4. 6). Finally, just as the Glory of God triumphed not only over Moses but also over Israel, when God vindicated himself at the Waters of Rebellion (Num. 20. 7-13: cf. the note in the Jerusalem Bible on v. 13), so too the Holy Spirit in order to vindicate Jesus triumphs over the world and over the apostles' hesitations (John 1 6, 8-1 1 and M. F. Berrouard, "Le Paraclet deTenseur du Christ devant la conscience du

16. 8-11] in Rev. Sc.phi. theol, 33 [1949], pp. 361-89). Cf. also 13, n. 8. the Cloud cf. Oepke, art. v&p&q in the Tkeol Worterb. z. N.T., t. 4,

croyant" [John

Mow p. 8

On

A

pp. 907-12; H. Riesenfeld, J&us transfigur^ (Acta Semin* Neatest Upsala., 16), Copenhagen, 1947, pp. 133-45 (this study labours under a somewhat exaggerated tendency to discover symbols and references to public worship). 7 Cf. A, Feuillet, "Le Fils de 1'homme de Daniel et la tradition biblique", in Rev. bibl, 60 (1953), pp. 170-202: cf. pp. 187-8.

The Mystery of the Temple

10

both presence and transcendence, it presupposes that God comes down to earth but that he & in heaven. This is why in Jewish and then Christian eschatology the cloud is the sign of heaven de8 scending to earth or of a return to heaven. This twofold movement materializes in Jesus Christ and this from the moment of his coming among us in the flesh (John 1. 51 with its reference to Gen. 28. 10-17). Again this is why the Cloud veils God's presence even while

signifies

manifests it. The critics agree in acknowledging the authenticity of the words spoken by Solomon in the form of a rhythmic poem when Yahweh takes possession of the Temple: "Where the cloud is the Lord has promised to be" (3 Kings 8. 12). It expresses the idea of the transcendence of God who, even when he becomes present and remains so, yet does not forsake the order of his being which is above all things. The word used in this passage, *<2 raphdl, almost always means "dark cloud". 9 The Cloud in which God comes to his people and reveals himself, also envelops his transcendence. In a passage which hymns this transcendence, St Paul also writes that "God's

it

dwelling is in unapproachable light" (1 Tim. 6. 16). The Glory is a reality closely allied to the Cloud. In a sense, it is the same thing. Hence, the passages which mention the Glory are often combined with those that mention the Cloud. 1 Yet there are certain slight differences in meaning. The Cloud is rather the phenomenon in and by means of which the Glory is revealed (cf. Exod. 16. 10; 40. 34 seq,; P).The Glory is in a sense nearer to God: "Give me the sight of thy glory," asks Moses (Exod. 33. 12-23 J slightly :

The identity between Yahweh and his Glory is more marked than that between Yahweh and the Cloud; cf. Lev. 9. 4 and 6. Moreover, when the Glory is not God himself or one of his personal attributes but only his visible manifestation, it may include the Cloud altered).

although

it

surpasses

it.

It is

a fuller manifestation

(cf.

Deut

23

5.

seq.) and often characterized by a sudden burst of flame either in order that God's sovereign presence may be revealed (Exod. 19. 16 8 Cf. Dan. 7. 13 (Cf. 4 Esdr. 13. 3); Mt. 21. 27; 24. 30 with the note in the Jerusalem Bible; 26. 64; Mk. 13. 26, and for the return to heaven, Mt. 17, 5; Mk. 9. 6; Acts 1. 9. Cf. Apoc. 10. 1 14, 14. 8 Cf. Deut 4. 11; 5. 19; Jer. 13. 16; Isa, 60. 2; Ezech. 34. 12; Joel 2. 2; Soph, 1. 15; Ps. 96(97). 2; Job 22. 13seq,;38.9(cf. M. Schmidt, Prophet und Tempel ., p. 231, n. 11). But the word usually used for "cloud" is Yman; see for instance ;

-

3 Kings

.

8. 10, etc.

x

Thus, for example, Feuillet in the article quoted previously, pp, 200-201. On the Glory (Kabod; d6%a), cf. G. Kittel, art, M(a in TheoL Wartsrh* z. M71, t. 2, JAHWEH und seine Bcdeutung ftir pp. 237-41: E. Stein, Der Begriff die alttestestamentL Gotteserkenntnis^ Emsdetten, 1939; Riesenfeld, J&ws tmnsfigurd, pp. 97-114 (bibliogr.; the same remark as above) ; Eichrodt, Theologte des A.T., pp. 9 seq.; G. R. Berry, "The Glory of Jahweh and the Temple**, in Journal of Biblical Literature, 56 (1937), pp. 115-17.

KBO>

R

The Exodus and Moses

1 1

seq.; Lev. 9. 23-24), or else to announce or execute punishment: Lev. 10. 1-3; Num. 14. 10; 16. 19 seq.; 17. 7 seq. In his glory, his Kabod, Yaliweh makes his transcendent Majesty his Presence visible to men by means of a phenomenon of light connected with some sacred reality Mount Sinai (Exod. 24. 1 5-1 7 P), the tabernacle (Exod. 29. 42; Num. 14. 10; 16. 19and42[Heb. 17. 7]; 20. 6: all these passages belong to the Priestly Code), and later, the Temple (3 Kings 8. 10-11; 2 Paralip. 5. 13-14; 2 Paralip. 7. 13). This manifestation of God, confined during the period of the exile and of the Temple to the chosen people, will later be spoken of by the prophets as destined to "spread wide as earth" ; the book of Numbers

and

:

:

2 (14. 21) already says this and uses the present tense. The link between the glory of and his presence and dwelling among his people, clearly shown as it already is in the Bible at the

God

was stressed by the fact that the same Greek word to both the biblical term kabod, glory and to the $o|a corresponded

stage of the exodus,

Aramaic or Mishnaic Hebrew word shekinah, presence, indwelling. 3 This latter word is not found in the Bible but played a great part in Rabbinical theology. Moreover, the LXX translated the Hebrew verb shakanfto dwell, by KaraaKrivoftv, whilst the corresponding noun GKyv/ji tent, dwelling-place, was used to translate either the Hebrew word for the tent of meeting (cf. below), or again the Aramaic further reason for this is that there is a similarity and shekinah.* a resemblance in sound between the two words sklne and Sekinah* 7 It has been pointed out that these ideas of glory and indwelling are found again in the prologue of St John's Gospel where they are used of the Incarnate Word: 6 Myog cret/> ey&ero Kal laKrjvcoaev Iv v/dvy Kal lOeacfd/tsOa vf/v d6av a&rov (John 1. 14).

A

.

Jesus

the true temple (2. 19 seq.)

is

.

.

.

.

.

We shall return

to this later.

9

no mention of this in the Yahvist tradition. In the Elohist and Deuteronomic traditions, Moses is accustomed to go to the tent of meeting and to speak there with God. As we have seen, on these occasions the presence of God The

tent

of meeting^ ohelmo'ed. There

is

a

Cf. for the prophets, Isa. 6. 3; 40. 5; 59. 19; 60. 1 seq.; Ps. 56(57). 6, 12; Hab. 2. 14; etc. M. Ramsey, The Glory of God and the Transfiguration of Christ, London, 1949, pp. 20 seq. and below, pp. 12, 17-18, 93-94. 4 It is used, e.g., in Exod. 25. 8; 29. 45; Lev. 26. 11, 12.

71(72). 19; 3 Cf. A.

fi

6

op. cit^ p. 25. Cf. Black, An Aramaic

Ramsey,

Approach to the Gospels and Acts. Other examples of kind of assonance which doubtless influenced the choice of words are: Qahai txxfai
memra 7

gfjfut.

La Bible et FEvangile. Le sens de FEcriture: du Dieu qui parle au homme (Lectio divina, 8), Paris, 1951; F. M. Braun, "In Spiritu et

L. Bouyer,

Dieu fait

veritate", in

Revue thomiste, 1952, pp. 246 seq. (who gives further

references).

The Mystery of the Temple

12

is made manifest through the Cloud: cf. Exod. 33. 7 seq. Thus the emphasis here is on Moses and his relations with God. In the Priestly Code, on the other hand, the emphasis is on the tent itself which is also called the Dwelling-place (cf, below). Although the tent was called the tent of meeting as though the people were to assemble 8 there, the people did not in fact enter it. It was the place where Yahweh was consulted and in which he uttered his oracles. 8* It

was also, or rather became in the priestly tradition, the place in which the ark of the covenant was kept. It is doubtless for these two reasons (oracles: the ark of the covenant) that the LXX translation of *ohel mo'ed, tent of meeting, is
Ark means

(Tent, Tabernacle) of the Testimony. To testify (verb *ud) in Hebrew to express a wish. witness is a man who ex-

A

who

what he would like done, and this statement corresponds to (or contradicts, and then he is a false witness) his wish or the positive assertion he makes on the matter in regard to which he is testifying. God's will for his people had been expressed in the Ten "Words", the juridical basis of the Covenant. The Commandments were initially known as the Testimony. This word was presses a wish,

states

42 (P): the expression 'ohel mo'ed is characteristic of the Code. Mo'ed means a fixed time, an epoch, a meeting (hence a rendezvous, such as that granted to Osee, 12, 10). 8a Cf. Exod. 33.7 seq.; Num. 1.1 ;7, 89; lU6seq.; 14. 10; 20. 6seq.; Lev. L 1. 9 Cf. R. Asting, Die Verkundigung des Worths im Urchrtstmtum, dargestittt an dmBegriffen "Won Gottes", "Evangelium" und "Zeugn&\ Stuttgart, 1939, Cf. Exod. 25. 22; 29.

Priestly

p. 566.

The Exodus and Moses then extended to the whole

1

3

Law

of God, the written code handed Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and later still, to the law of God in the most general sense, that is, the revelation of his plan and his will communicated through the prophets (cf. for instance, Jer. 44. 23). x

down by Moses and

fixed in the text of

Hence the Ark was

also called the

Testimony

either, in the first

2 place, because in it Yahweh revealed his will and uttered his oracles, or because later the tables of the law given to the people through

the instrumentality of Moses were preserved in it (Deut. 10. 5). The Ark therefore contained the Testimony properly so called and in its

permanent form. But it was believed that God revealed himself (by making known his will) "from that throne of mercy, between the two cherubim that stand over the ark of the Testimony" (Exod. 25. 8 22). This was the place where he dwelt. He sat (verb shakav; cf. p. 8, note 4) above the cherubim of the ark. That is why the ark will later be called God's footstool (1 Paralip. 28. 2; Ps. 98(99). 5; 131(132). 7. Cf.

below, p. 66, n.

1.)

Tables of the Testimony, 4 Ark of the 6 7 Tabernacle of the Testimony, Testimony, Tent of the Testimony.

Hence the expressions 6

Now that we have analysed the data and the terms defining the Presence of God at the time of the exodus, we may attempt to descry the principal characteristics and the meaning of this Presence. In the miracles of the exodus and in the stupendous manner in which God was present in the Cloud, there was an element of im~ permanence. The Cloud, like the manna, ceased to exist when the Israelites reached the frontiers of the Promised Land. 8 The Presence continued in the ark and later in the Temple which in1

On

these points, see R. Asting, op. cit., pp. 496 seq.; cf. B. F. Westcott, to the Hebrews, p. 237. Cf. Asting, op, dL t p. 497 (with references to other works). *Cf. Num. 7. 89; Lev. 16. 2; 1 Kings 4. 4; 2 Kings 6. 2; 4 Kings 19. 15; Paralip. 13. 6; Isa. 37. 16; Ps. 17(18). 11; 79(80), 1; 98(99). 1; Ecclus. 49. 8; all

The Epistle B

1

3. 2 (LXX); Dan. 3. 55 (LXX); Heb. 9. 5. The verb shakav means to lie down, to be lying down. Sometimes it is active and takes the accusative, as if God dwelt in the cherubim. On the cherubim, cf. Gen. 3. 24; Exod. 25. 18, together with the notes in the Jerusalem Bible. Cf. Apoc. 4. 6 (the cherubim are $a). * Exod. 3L 18a; 34. 29; etc. (Priestly Code). Cf. Exod. 25. 16, 21; 32. 15; 34.

Hab.

29; 40. 20; Lev, 16. 13. 8 Exod. 25. 22; 26. 33 seq. ; 27. 21 ; 30. 6, 26; 39. 35 ; 40. 3, 5, 21 ; Num. 4. 5 ; 7. 89; Jos. 4. 16 (Priestly Code). 6 Ex. 38. 21; Num. 1. 50, 53; 9. 15; 10. 11; 17. 22, 23; 18. 2 (Priestly Code);

2 Paralip. 7

24, 6.

As we have

seen, this is the expression used in the Septuagint to translate *ohet mo'ed, the tent of meeting. 8 useful parallel can be drawn with the beginnings of the Church. Here again the Holy Spirit played a part similar to that of the Cloud (above, p. 9,

A

note

5).

The Mystery of the Temple

14

directly succeeded the "tabernacle" (tent) of the desert. The tabernacle was constructed In accordance with a model from heaven, It

wasand

the

Temple

after

it

would

bea

kind of sacrament of

the heavenly temple, the only perfect one in which God dwells in the full sense of the word. God is transcendent, he dwells in heaven. He has no abiding place here in his earthly temple, except through his

Name and

Power. 1 It is important to determine in what sense there was and in what sense there was not a local presence of God in the tent or the ark and later in the ark and the Temple. There was a certain local presence. God was there, since he acted and manifested his will there, God really sat upon his throne above the cherubim* We find Ezcchiel shows us with astounding realism Yahweh leaving his dwelling-place in the Temple (Ezech. 9. 3; 10. 18 seq.). But he is not locally present absolutely speaking as were the pagan gods represented in their idols. In the first place, there must not and there could not be any pictorial 2 representation of God: Exod. 20. 4 seq.; 32; Deut. 5. 8-10/ But above all, Yahweh is the mighty, the living God who intervenes and acts here below but who is not bound to any particular place. The gods of paganism were bound to particular places and, generally speaking, their powers were confined to them. There was a god of this spring, that tree, a god who cured men of such and such a disease in such and such a place, etc. 3 But Yahweh is the one, omnipresent and all-sovereign God. It may be that at the time of the exodus we find explicit statements concerning only the worship of the one God whilst monotheism as a doctrine appears later in the form of an explicit theology. Yet the wry fact of the deliverance "in manu forti" from Egypt (the plagues, the passage of the Red Sea), and the fact of the exodus, loudly proclaim that Yahweh reveals himself and acts everywhere. It is no mere chance that the other great man who prayed on Sinai, the prophet Elias, the heroic champion of the uniqueness and the sovereignty of Yahweh, exercised his ministry beyond the frontiers of Israel, just as the God of Israel sought his people in a far place and revealed himself to them outside the Promised Land* It is of the nature of Yahweh to be transcendent, spiritual, to possess 9

his

25. 9, 40; 26. 30 (P); Wisdom 9, 8; cf. Acts 7. 44 and above all Heb. 8, This is the openly expressed theology of the book of Kings: 3 Kings 8* 27, 30 seq. (Solomon's prayer); cf, 8. 16 together with the note in the Jerusalem Bible;

Exod.

1

cf. 11, 36. a

Glory of God has become physically visible and God himself though not abolished, has been altered, we hope to show elsewhere, either when dealing with the transfiguration of Christ

How,

since the

has put on our

flesh, this stipulation,

or with the question of images. 3

1

See, for instance, 18 seq., 147-8.

Fr

Heiler,

La prtere. French

translation. Paris, 1931. pp.

The Exodus and Moses

15

sovereign and universal power, and not to be bound to any particular place. Yet, in a sense, his Presence is localized above the cherubim and in the tent (the temple). The truth is that where his people is, there is Yahweh. He marches with them. As we have seen, the passages conveying the priestly tradition are relatively late and read back into the tent in the desert a Levitical theology of the 4 temple. The Yahvist and Elohist traditions have less to say about a stable and, as it were, an institutional Presence, than about a

Manifestation of

God

to Moses, his servant, in the tent of meeting.

more pure and more ancient version that we also meet in the admirable words of Nathan's prophecy (2 Kings 7. 5-7; text below, p. 24. Its meaning, brilliantly and prophetically restated by It is this

Nathan, is that God dwells, not in one particular place, even a temple, but among his peopled We shall find this truth repeated and ^expanded by the New Testament: God's temple is his people. But* we have still a long way to go before we reach this conclusion. God is in the midst of Israel because Israel is his people, and in order to make Israel his people. His presence is active and commanding among them, and this follows from the nature of God and from his revelation of himself to Moses when he appeared to him in the bush on the Mountain of God "I will be with thee . . ." (Exod. 3. 12). Then, when Moses asked God his name, the answer came "I am who 1 am" or "I am he who is" (v. 14) 6 but also for the word is exactly the same as in v. 12 "I shall be what I shall be", and this will be clear to you from what I shall do and from the manifestation of my will to you, God is there to act and to make known his will; he is in the midst of his people and with them so as to fulfil his 7 undertaking to lead them to the Land of promise, :

;

*

But even here there are expressions of the 4

essential idea.

Thus

in

Exod. 25.

me

a sanctuary, so that I can dwell among them" ; 8, we read *I mean them to build this is a passage belonging to the Priestly Code and it uses the word miqdas, which ,

suggests the idea of a building.

6 Cf. W. J. Phythian-Adams, The People and the Presence: A Study in the At-one-ment, London, 1942, pp. 12-17. 6 In the original, this second phrase is "Je suis celui qui sufs". Obviously, this is far nearer the mystery of absolute being. If we say "I am he who ft" there still remains a suggestion that God is an object, whereas he is the absolute SUBJECT and there can be no meeting with him as with a mere object of our knowledge. are only in so far as our being is received from him. Translator's note. 7 These active, militant signs of God's Presence are underlined in Deut. (1. 30, 42; 7. 21 ; 31. 3) and in Josue (3. 10; 6. 23, 3, all passages of Yahvist or Elohist tradition). The book of Josue is hardly aware of the aspect of worship or of any other save a militant Presence (it is by the power of Yahweh linked to the ark that Israel crosses the Jordan and captures Jericho). The only mention of the "house of God" found in this book (9. 23: JE) concerns the service of the Gabaonites. The passage dealing with the altar across the Jordan (22. 9-34) is from the Priestly Code.

We

The Mystery of the Temple

16

This Presence of "consecrates".

It is

God

holy and confers holiness or rather it word since it avoids the amwhich awakens in our minds the idea of is

better to use this

biguity of an expression inner moral sanctity, giving a special character to the persons who receive it and giving it to them as persons. But the Israelites continue that to be full of all kinds of uncleanness (cf. Lev. 16. 16). The truth is as a people, considered as the totality his God dwells

among

people

which has been the object of his choice, rather than in the soul of any individual person. St Cyril given member of his people, of any given the spiritual (pneumatic) not was "Israel wrote: Alexandria of . Those who of God, God did not dwell in them dwelling-place lived before the Incarnation did not share in the

.

Holy

8

Spirit",

that is a very developed theological formula which presupposes the difficult question of grace before the coming of Christ has been discussed and resolved, or rather the question of the extent to which and the way in which the Holy Spirit was given before Christ. St Cyril also wrote, in connection with the temple, that the prophets received sufficient light from the Holy Spirit merely to enable them to understand the future of the economy of salvation, whilst the

This

faithful possess the Holy Spirit as a guest who dwells within "hence we are called (in the Scriptures) temples of God, whilst

never

known

that

them; it was

any of the holy prophets was called a temple of

1

God". At this point we shall not go into the question of the grace received the conby the just in the Old Testament. We shall merely summarize clusions that emerge from our inquiry. There was never any question of the Holy Spirit or of God taking up his dwelling in souls as persons who are his temple. His presence is a collective one and is conferred on his people as such, 2 It is not so much an indwelling of souls as a presence which guides men and strengthens them so that they may implement a plan which is God's. It is certainly true that one of the characteristic affirmations made from the time of the exodus onward is that Yahweh is an accessible God, The very words "tent of meeting" or "tent appointed as a meeting place" (Deut. 21. 14) express the fact of accessibility. Deuteronomy, whose religious feeling is so like that of Jeremias, loves r. in Genes., 1,5; P.O., 69, 233 A. See below. Appendix 3. In Joannis Ev. lib, 5: P.O., 73, 757 B, Cf. Tcrtullian, De Pudfa 6, 17. 2 This obviously does not prevent a man like Moses from being a friend of God's in a sense so deep that few souls have equalled it. Scripture itself praises him as "a man of God" (Deut. 33. 1 [N.B. Knox translates "God's servant"]), who had seen God face to face (34, 10) and spoken to him face to face (Num. 12. 1-8), "well loved by God, well loved among men" (Eccius, 45, 1; cf. Judith 8.

1

9

23), etc.

The Exodus and Moses

17

to insist on this characteristic: "No other nation has gods that draw near to it, as our God draws near to us whenever we pray to him" 3

Yet, the mediation of Moses is essential receives the law, intercedes, obtains forgiveness, is told in the tent of meeting what God wishes to be done, judges, provides water, manna or various other types of food, All Israel's relations with its God exist through the mediation of (4. 7; cf. 4. 29,

throughout.

He

33~34).

it is

who

.

.

.

Moses. 4 One of the merits of the Priestly Code is that it declared from the beginning that God had promised to dwell with his people "And I will dwell in the midst of the Israelites, and be their God; and they shall know me for the Lord God that rescued them from the land of Egypt, so as to abide among them, their Lord and their God" (Exod. 29. 45-6), and there is the passage in Lev. 26. 11-12 which, together with Ezech. 37. 27, the Jews loved to quote as a promise of :

the messianic temple: 5 "I will make my dwelling among you, still coming and going in the midst of you, I your God, and you

people." This theme

is

.

.

.

my

taken up again by the prophets of the post-

exilic restoration. 6 It is

obvious that there

is

a development from the appearances

that were characteristic of the epoch of the Patriarchs to the permanent dwelling of God among his people in the Mosaic period, when

he marches "in person" with them and is himself their strength and through a presence which is already in some sense abiding. Yet we are still far from the indwelling that will result from the realities and the gifts of the messianic era. Newman speaks of an intermittent presence of God, for instance in miracles and in prophecy. It would seem characteristic of the epoch of the Patriarchs (and of the situation of a man like Balaam) up to the time of the exodus. 7 The position is already quite different in the Mosaic period. Yet Newman adds that even in the theology of the shekinah, God has no real union with his temple the position is similar their guide

:

8

Cf. Exod. 33. 16; 34. 10 (Yahvist tradition); 2 Kings 7. 23. See in particular Exod. 19. 3b-8; 20. 18-22 (cf. Gal. 3. 19). When Moses had died the need of a mediator continued in the Old Testament; cf. Deut. 18. 6 Cf. L. Cerfaux, La thfologie de rglise suivant S. Paul (Unam Sanctam, 10), Paris, 1942, p. 125; M. Fraeyman, in Ephem. Theol Lovan., 23 (1947), p. 391 4

(quotation from the Book of Jubilees,, 1, 17), 8 Joel 2. 7; Ezech. 43. 6 seq.; 48. 35; Aggaeus

2.

4-5; Zach.

2. 9,

14-17;

8. 3,

etc. 7

Cf.

Num. 22 and 32 (Yahvist-Elohist tradition). Balaam seems to have worGod El (Num. 23. 22; 24, 4, 8, 16) or El Shaddai (24. 4), or El Elidn

shipped the (24. 16).

We

to be back in the epoch of the Patriarchs or, if we prefer, practising the religion of the Western Semites, as it was before revelation.

Balaam was the Mosaic

seem

still

1

The Mystery of the Temple

8

to that of a Nestorian system, that

is,

there

is

a presence but no

8 ontological union.

In fact, if we examine the historians of Judaism, we find that the shekinah adds to the idea of a presence that of a connection with a place 9 and, in this respect, is akin to an indwelling. But we should say that the indwelling in question does not imply a genuine and com-

immanence, since God is present to manifest his will, to support, and command, and not in order to communicate himself personally or to give inner gifts to the soul 1 This is the root of the matter. God does not dwell fully and perfectly among his people because he is not yet fully given or communicated to

plete

strengthen, guide

them.

But it becomes increasingly certain that he planned to do this. In relation to this plan, the Mosaic stage is of decisive importance. It has become a commonplace to say that the events of the exodus type, that is they were an initial carrying into or a preliminary sketch of what God was later to do, of what fundamentally he will always do, for us. With this in mind, we are thinking above all of the exodus proper, the Paschal deliverance from servitude, the long journey across the desert, the manna and the water from the rock, the entry into the Promised Land. We should think too of God's dwelling among his people, of the tent of meeting, of the Cloud. In the analysis we have made, we have not concealed the debt the information we have on this subject owes to the theology of the temple as it was elaborated in the Levitical and priestly tradition. But long before any priestly tradition or any post-exilic ideology came into existence, there were the facts of the exodus, the religious personality of Moses and his decisive role as mediator. There was the experience of the desert bound up with the tent of meeting, with

had the value of a effect

8

Cardinal Newman, "Christ" (Sermons). "This Hebrew word (Shekinah) should be translated by indwelling rather than

It indicates that God takes up his abode in some given place and dwells there. Whilst the word 'presence' does not imply any place, any attachment, any preference, Indwelling* presupposes that there has been a choice of a place in which to remain." ML-J, Lagrange, Le judo-fame avant Jfous-Christ* Paris, 193 1, p. 446.

by presence.

1 "The Shekinah, certainly is a sign of God's corning and of his presence, yet nothing allows us to say that it implies his immanence. The opposite is true, since this personification of God's presence, although not an intermediary agency, yet tends to emphasize the distance between him and man and to diminish the dangers or the impropriety of a direct contact with him. The face of the Shekinah can be seen but not God. The proselyte is not brought into touch with God, he is placed beneath the wings of the Shekinah" Lagrange, op. r//., p. 450. "It must not be forgotten that the normal expression is: the face of the Shekinah, that is, the Shekinah is a light which illumines, not an interior grace which sanctifies"

(p. 451).

The Exodus and Moses

19

the Presence of God above the tent or the ark. These facts lead to new stage in the history of God's Presence among his people, and for all the time that was to follow, they would have the value of a type. The future would, in fact, seize on this value and

a

develop

it.

M.O.T.

2

Chapter III

THE PRESENCE OF GOD IN THE TIME OF DAVID AND SOLOMON THE PROPHECY OF NATHAN AND THE BUILDING OF THE TEMPLE the period of the Judges, which lasted for 160 or 180 years (from about 1220 to 1040 B.C.), the ark was at Bethel (Judg, 20. 27). Neither the Israelites nor the Judges seem to have bothered a great deal about it. The ideal of one unique sanctuary did not exist at that period and it was to be a long time before 2 3 1 it did. Yahweh is consulted. Yahweh (or his angel) intervenes. He it is who fights for Israel and gives Israel the victory. 4 are dealing here with military values rather than with those of religion and of forms of worship. The new idea of the "spirit of Yahweh", which we now see appearing, is of the same kind. The point is that a man is suddenly in the grip of a force which makes him a powerful instrument for some military enterprise and yet leaves him on the same moral plane as before. It does not dwell in him, in order to bring into an intimate relation of communion with God. 5 Moreover, the Judges are men of war or charismatic liberators whom God raises up and whom he uses. The logic of the "event", as understood by K. Barth and J. L. Leuba, has never been so well verified. This situation was to continue, in many respects, under Saul, who was as much the last of the Judges as the first of the kings. Saul too is seized by the spirit of Yahweh but not so much for a warlike as for a prophetic purpose. This new phenomenon should be noted, Yahweh. is consulted. 7 There is no question of any single sanctuary,

DURING

We

Mm

1

Cf. Judg. 6. 24; II. 11

;

17 (the story of Michas); 18. 30 seq. (the children of

Dan). Cf. Josue 24. 26. s Judg. 1. 1; 4. 8 (and the note s

4 6 6

in BJ); 18. 5; 20. 18, 23. Judg, 2. 1;6. 11; 9. 22; 13.3. Judg. 4. 8; 5 (the canticle of Dcbbora); 6. 16; 7. 18. Judg. 3. 10; 6. 34; 11. 29: 13. 25; 14. 6, 19; 15. 14. 1

Kings

10. 10; 11. 6; cf. 19. 20, 21, 23.

The

spirit

of

Yahweh withdraws

replaced by an evil spirit also sent from Yahweh: 16. 14; 18. 10 to 19. 9. Pedersen (Israel, II pp. 43-6) also notes that Saul's place is in the line of the Judges rather than in that of the newly established kingship. 7 1 Kings 10. 22; 14. 18, 36; 23. 2, 9 seq.; 28. 6; Yahweh continues to be consulted in David's time: 30. 8; 2 Kings 2. 1 ; 5, 19, 23; 21. 4; 1 Paraiip. 14.

from Saul and

is

MV,

10, 14,

The Prophecy of Nathan

and

sacrifices are offered in various places. 8

that the ark plays

21

What

is

so striking,

no

greater part under Saul (cf. I Paralip. 13. 3). It was first at Silo, not in a tent but in a building. 9 It was thither that the Israelites, doubtless remembering how, at the time they is

passed over Jordan and stood before Jericho, the ark had brought them victory, went to fetch this their guarantee of safety, after their defeat (1 Kings 4. 3). But in this self-seeking movement Yahweh saw that the pure faith of Josue was missing. The ark was captured by the Philistines and placed as a trophy in the temple of Dagon (4 and 5). "The splendour had passed away from Israel" (4. 21-2). In the temple of Dagon and among the Philistines, the ark proved itself

a source of disasters. Seven months later it was sent back to the Israelites together with an offering to make amends. The ark reached Bethsames, and was then housed at Cariathiarim, where it was to remain for a long time without anyone apparently bothering about it. Even Samuel, whose vocation originated in the near neighbourhood of the ark, from within which it would seem God had called him (1 Kings 3. 3), does not seem to have been at all anxious on its account. The religious revival he instigated and inspired some twenty years after the return of the ark was not centred on the latter (2 Kings 7. 2 seq.). There was all the more reason therefore why Saul never at any time showed any thought for the ark. warrior and a liberator in the manner of the Judges, he was fundamentally not very religious in the sense in which religion is genuinely a matter of faith, and he exhibited little concern for God himself. Under David there was a change (about 1010 B.C.). His political

A

sense and, at the same time, his very profound and sensitive religious led him fairly soon to turn his attention to the ark.

spirit,

His political sense was not some sordid calculation but providentially atune to God's plans for his people and in keeping with the new stage Israel was to live through. If we are to understand this we must remember what Israel's situation was. The stories of the march and the camps of the exodus, above all those of the settling in the Promised Land and the conquest of it under Josue, then the incessant struggles in the time of the Judges, show that Israel was far from being a united people. Each tribe lived its own life in its own territory. The people's unity was merely that of autonomous and sometimes rival groups. It only took effective shape when faced with an immediate and common peril, on the plane of military operations, 8

Samuel

9. 12); there

Masphath (7. 7 seq.; 10. 17), at Ramatha (7. 17; was a place at Bethel where Yahweh was worshipped (10. 3), and at

offers sacrifice at

Gilgal near the Jordan (10. 8; 11. 15). Cf. again 14. 35 (Saul); 16. 2; 20. 6. 9 1 Kings L 3 and 7 (note in BJ).

The Mystery of the Temple

22

or else in the worship of Yahweh. In reality the real principle of among the tribes was their recognition of the same God together with their common origins and their common blood. M. Noth has made an excellent analysis of this situation and has com1 pared the system with that of the Greek amphictyonic towns. Among the eleven tribes (Levi had no territory or life of its own),

unity

Juda, from which Simeon was practically indistinguishable since it shared roughly the same territory, had had from the outset a fairly characteristic

life

of

its

own. 2 David had

first

been proclaimed

king at Hebron where he reigned for seven years to all intents and purposes over Juda alone. The northern tribes remained for a long time faithful to Saul's descendants (cf. 1 Kings 2. 12-32; 3. 1) and it was only after the latter were practically exterminated and Abner murdered, that the North recognized David (2 Kings 5. 1-3). In spite of a unity whose centre was David's royal person and soon after, his capital and the dwelling-place of Yahweh, the differences between north (Israel) and south (Juda) remained and were responsible for the inherent and continual threat of a breach, which became a fact after the death of Solomon. 3 Once the North had recognized him as king, David could not maintain his capital at Hebron. The capture of Jerusalem on the border between Juda and Benjamin gave him a capital which could be a centre of unity, rather as the Memphis of Pepi I had proved a suitable capital for northern and southern Egypt. Having made Jerusalem "the city of David", the king of all Israel had to turn his attention to the transfer to the new centre of unity of the worship of Yahweh, which was, or at least could and ought to be, the concrete symbol of the very principle underlying this unity, a principle which, as we have seen, was religious. The transfer of the ark to Jerusalem was certainly an act of political significance 4 and it is 1

M. Noth, Das System der zwdtfStamm Israels Stuttgart, 1930. The Judeans had lived apart under the Judges (Juda and Simeon do not figure in the canticle of Debbora: Judg. 4 and 5) and under Saul. Cf, J, Pedersen, >

2

London, 1940, III-IV, pp. 6-7, Cf. J.-L. Lcuba, "Le dualisme Israel Juda: Expos6 d'histoire et dc th into whose hands he placed his life for him to direct as a whole and in every detail* Israel, 3

WV,

The Prophecy of Nathan

23

not easy to imagine that this aspect of the matter escaped David's notice.

For a man like David, however, the religious motive was paramount, all-inclusive and absolutely pure. We have only to read the accounts of his life for direct evidence of this. In them David appears from beginning to end as a man who loves Yahweh and whose devotion to him is of incomparable tenderness and purity. His dance before the ark, when he brought it from Cariathiarim to Jerusalem, daughter Michol, a woman with very little religious sense, the pain he felt on hearing her mundane comment, reveal in all their shining splendour the deep religious feelings with which he his reply to Saul's

performed this act and established the ark, for so long neglected, in the midst of his people in that predestined city Jerusalem 6 which from then onwards would deserve to be called the Throne of Yahweh (Jer, 3. 17), Yahweh-is-there (Ezech. 48. 35), City of Yahweh, Sion dear to the Holy One of Israel (Isa. 60. 14). It is at this juncture that we meet the prophecy of Nathan, one of

most important passages in the Scriptures and the starting-point of the Messianism which is linked with the person of David. There is one circumstance that should be noted immediately, since it is of great importance if this episode is to be understood. And we the

shall return to

it later.

The

perpetuity promised to David's line

is

inseparable from the transfer of the ark to Jerusalem, which now becomes God's dwelling-place. It is essential to print this great passage here and it will be useful to give it in the two versions that have come down to us, the one from 2 Kings and the other from

Paralipomena.

6

8 It is probable that It was in the near neighbourhood of Jerusalem that Melchisedech "king of Salem" had met Abraham and given him his blessing Jewish tradition used in certain passages of the Bible (2 (Gen. 14. 17-20), Paralip. 3. 1) but which is no more than a probability, placed the site of the Temple itself on the mountain in the land of Clear Vision to which Abraham had come to sacrifice Isaac: cf. L. H. Vincent, "Abraham a Jerusalem" in Revue biblique, 58 (1951), pp. 366-71. 8 See also in addition to the various allusions we shall mention, Ps. 88(89) which according to Kessler (Die Psalmen) and Briggs (The Psalms), in loc., dates from the last years of the Judean monarchy. See below, p. 33, note 6. Books and articles on the subject in addition to those quoted below, p. 26 and p. 33, note 8, Chr. Dieckmann, Die erste Weissagung vom Davidssohn, Leipzig, 1903 (Catholic); L, Rost, Die Ueberlieferung von der Thronnachfolge Davids (Beitr. z. Wiss. v. A. u. Mr., 3, Folge, H. 6). Stuttgart, 1926, pp. 47-74 (Protestant, historical and critical); H. M. F6ret, "L'6conomie providentielle dans la tradition biblique", in Forma Gregis, Dec., 1950 ("Le cycle de David. Grandeur proph6tique et messianique de David") and Dec. 1952~Jan. 1953 ("Lemessianisme davidique"}: a historical study of great religious and theological depth, in which there is special emphasis on the place and the part played by sin. These are central in the mystery of David's descendants with whom Nathan's prophecy is concerned.

A

:

The Mystery of the Temple

24 2 Kings 7 king had

own

now

1

a palace of

his

and the Lord kept him safe, on every side, from all his enemies. ^Whereupon he said to the prophet Nathan, Here am I dwelling to dwell in,

house all of cedar, while God's ark has nothing better than curtains of hide about it! 3 And Nathan answered, Go thy own way, fulfil thy

am

own

2 And Nathan own purpose;

purpose; the Lord is with thee. But that same night the divine word came to Nathan, 5 Go and give my servant David a message from the Lord: 6 Dost thou think to build a house for me to dwell in? House was never mine, since I rescued the sons of Israel from Egypt; still in a tabernacle, a wanderer's home, I came and went. 7 This way and that the whole race of Israel journeyed, and I with

them; now to this tribe, now to that, I gave the leadership of the rest, and never did I reproach any of them for not building me a house of cedar. a This message, then, thou wilt give to my servant David from the Lord of

Out in the pasture-lands, where thou wast tending the sheep, I sumhosts:

moned

thee away to bear rule over my 9 people Israel; go where thou wpuldst, I was ever at thy side, exterminating thy enemies to make room for thee, granting thee such renown as only

comes 10

to

the

greatest

on

earth,

my

people are to have a settled home, taking root in it and remaining in undisturbed possession of it, no longer harassed by godless uas they have been ever neighbours, since I first gave Israel judges to rule them. No longer shall thy enemies trouble thee; and this too the Lord promises, that he will grant thy line continuance. "So, when thy days are ended, and thou art laid to rest beside thy fathers, I will grant thee for successor a son of thy own body, estab-

Henceforth

lished firmly on his throne. 18He it is that shall build a house to do name honour. I will prolong for ever his royal dynasty; he shall find in me a father, and I in him a son.

my

I4

lf

he plays

me

false,

be sure

a palace of his

he said to the prophet Nathan, here I dwelling in a house all of cedar, while the ark that bears witness of the Lord's covenant has nothing better than curtains of hide to cover it!

in a

4

Paralip. 17

'Now that David had own to dwell in,

answered, Fulfil thy the Lord is with thee. 3 But that same night the word of the Lord came to Nathan, 4 Go and give my servant David a message from the Lord: Not thine to build me a house 6 to dwell in. House was never mine, since I rescued the sons of Israel from Egypt; still in a tabernacle, a wanderer's

home,

I

journeyed

this 6

way and

Now

to this that, ever at Israel's side. ruler, now to that, I gave the leadership of people Israel, and never did

my

reproach any of them for not building a house of cedar. 7 This message, then, thou wilt give to my servant David from the Lord of Hosts: Out in the pasture-lands, where thou wast tending the sheep, I summoned thee away to bear rule over my people 8 Israel; go where thou wouldst, I was ever at thy side, exterminating thy enemies to make room for thee, granting thee such renown as only comes to the greatest on earth. ^Henceforth my people are to have a settled home, taking root in it and remaining in tindisturbed possession of it, no longer harassed by godless neighbours, w as they have been since I first gave Israel judges to rule them. Now, I have crushed all thy enemies, and this too thou must know, that the Lord means to grant thy line continuance. "So when thy days are ended, and thou hast become part of thy race, I wilt grant thee for successor a son of thy own body, established firmly on his throne," He it is that shall build me a house. I will prolong for ever his royal dynasty; **he shall find in me a father, and I in him a son. I

me

I will

punish him; ever for man the rod, ever for Adam's sons the plagues of 15 but I will not cancel my mortality; merciful promise to Saul, the king that

I will not cancel my merciful promises to him, as I cancelled my promise to the king who went before thee.

The Prophecy of Nathan 25 u Sovereignty undisturbed I will give him among this people of mine, for

was banished from my favour. "Through the ages, far as thy thought can reach, dynasty and royalty shall remain for ever unshaken.

The

text itself calls for

ever; his throne, to endless time, secure.

a few remarks.

If the

is

two accounts are read

carefully, quite considerable differences become evident. 2 Kings states that the fact that David himself did not build the temple and

immediately, was due to the wars in which he had found himself involved (v. I). 7 Further 2 Kings 7 envisages (v. 14) punishment meted out to David's line (v. 12), that is, to the Judaean monarchy, if it should do evil, but this punishment will be restricted and on a human scale, that is, it will not destroy the line. God will treat David's descendants as a father treats his children. Everything points to the .fact that this passage was written before the capture of Jerusalem. 8 Paralipomena omits this intimation of punishment to come., This is doubtless because the passage was written after the restoration in the heyday of Judaism 9 (about 300 B.C.). But above and here we find the most remarkable difference between the all two accounts, a difference affecting the meaning itself of the prophecy and which therefore we cannot avoid mentioning it is because Paralipomena applies to Solomon in particular as the builder of the temple, a statement which Kings applies to the whole of David's line, to all his descendants collectively. The only exception to this in Kings is verse 13 which concerns Solomon, As this verse cuts across the general sense of the passage, and verse 14, as we have seen, links up with verse 12 (which deals with David's line) while verse 13 interrupts the sense (since it deals with Solomon alone) we consider

7

Kings 8. 17. The idea occurs in Deuteronomy, cf. Deut. 12. 10. In same way, according to Deut., it was because Israel found rest in Sion that God chose this place to be the dwelling-place of his name; cf. M. Schmidt, p. 94. On the other hand, Paralipomena (1 Prophet u, Tempd ... Paralip. 22, 8; 28. 3) states that the reason was that David had shed too much Cf. 3

the

blood. $ The ancient and primitive character of 2 Kings 7, whatever minor corrections were eventually made in later times, is shown also by the fact that it does not presuppose the division of the tribes nor the exile, and Nathan appears in the chapter in an uncouth manner which would have been modified at a later date. We may also note that Ps. 88(89) and Ps. 131(132) are clearly connected with the version in Kings and not with that in Paralipomena. There is general agreement with the view that, in spite of later modifications, the nucleus of the account in 2 Kings 7 goes back to the time of David: cf. L. Rost, op. ciY., pp. 47 seq,; M. Noth, Histoire derail, French translation, Paris, 1954, pp. 233-4. 8 Judaism here has its original sense of the religion and polity of Israel after the return from Babylon. It was from this time onward that the Israelites became

known

as Jews.

Translator's note.

26 this verse 13, as

gloss in praise of

The Mystery of the Temple

do many commentators Solomon.

since

Wellhausen/ as a

This being the case, it seems to us that the 2 Kings text is the authentic and corresponds more closely with the prophecy as actually made to David by Nathan. In any case, this is the generally accepted view. One Catholic critic has recently attempted to reverse this opinion and to show that Kings is the text that has been added to and embellished whilst Paralipomena, especially in the Greek 2 This author has many version, is more close to the original. observations of considerable interest and value in regard to matters of detail in the two versions. Yet in our opinion they do not go beyond the level of composition and style. In this respect it is certain that the Kings text contains additions which are evidence of later 3 editing and a few traces also of the vocabulary and themes of 4 Deuteronomy, which show that the text was worked over under Ezechias or later. But far deeper than the level of composition, there is the level of

more

thought and its direction and intention. The direction and intention of the prophecy in 2 Kings point to the following idea: "You want to build a house for me, but it is not you who will build me a house, 1 E,g. Budde, Ldlir, Smith, R. Kittel, Nowack, Gressmann; E, Dhorme, Les livres de Samuel (tudes bibliques), Paris, 1910, p. 328; A. Schulz, Die Mucker Samuel (Exeg. Handb. z. A.T., hrsg. v. J. Nikel, VIII), t 2, MUnster, 1920, p. 81; L. Diirr, Ursprung und Ausbau der israelitisch-judtechen ffe Handserwarttwg, Bin Beitrag zur Theol des A.T,, Berlin, 1925, p. 69; W. J. PhythianLondon, 1942, pp. 158 seq. ; R. de Vaux, Adams, The People and the Presence in Bible de Jerusalem, m loc.; M. Simon, "La prophetic de Nathan et le temple," in Rev. d'HisL et Philos. relig,, 32 (1952), pp. 41-8. A. Mtedebielle, in La Saint* Bible (Pirot-Clamer), t. 3, Paris, 1949, p. 492, defends the authenticity of the verse but nevertheless puts it in brackets. Van den Bussche (see next note), p. 34, objects to this critical attitude towards verse 13, 2 H. van den Bussche, "Le texte de la proph6tie de Nathan sur la dynastic davidique," in Eph. Theol Lov. r 24 (1948), pp. 354-94 and in An&L Lovaniensia bibl et orient. , ser, 2, fasc. 7, Louvain, 1948: for a criticism of this view see M. Simon, article quoted in the preceding note. It is to be noted that A. Brunei, "Le Chroniste et ses sources" (Rev. bibl, 60 [1953], pp. 481-508; cf, pp. 504-5) holds a very different view from that of V.d,B. on the relation between 2 Kings and 1 Paralip.; J. L. McKenzie, S.J., "The Dynastic Oracle: II Samuel T\ in Theological Studies, 8 (1947), pp. 187-218, discusses the literary problem of 2 Kings 7* and 1 Paralip. and Ps. 88(89) and gives the fourth century B.C. as the date of their composition. He shows that the three versions have used each in its own way and freely, an original account dating from I>avid*s reign. Ps. 88(89) follows this more faithfully than the other two in the sections it quotes* but omits all reference to the Temple. 8 Van den Bussche finds signs in 2 Kings of a tendency to clarify and explain .

,

,

M

*

as well as to embellish the primitive text.

* Budde and Dhorme note that the manner neighbouring enemies is mentioned is in the 25. 19; Josue 21. 42; 23. 1 (D). In David*s Deuteronomic themes, references to which are

in

which freedom from attack by

Deut Cf. Deut. 12. 10; prayer (7. 23-4), there are also given in the various editions. style of

The Prophecy of Nathan

27

it is I who will build one for you, namely, a line that will never dis5 appear." This was what David understood Nathan to mean (v. 19). The direction and intention in Paralipomena point, on the other hand, to this idea: "You want to build me a house, but it is not you who will build it for me, it is your son (Solomon)." And this is a

completely different story. 2 Kings was certainly written, at least in its essentials, before the exile, since its version of the prophecy is the source of all the subsequent royal Messianism and since too it was revived by prophets and in psalms before or during the exile. 6 Paralipomena, on the other hand, is post-exilic and reflects the theocratic ideology that followed the restoration under the influence of Esdras. The book has a far more ideological "construction" than 2 Kings, it develops the ideal of theocracy of which David was the type. 7 In its view, David made all the preparations for Solomon's temple, he commissioned Solomon to implement his plan and even settled in the minutest detail the whole organization of worship in the building and its staffing from the cantors down to the porters (1 Paralip. 23. 2-26, 28; 28. 1-20), Hence we should follow the text of 2 Kings, in spite of literary editing, as giving the more authentic version of the great prophecy of Nathan. In regard to the words used, we should note that "house" corresponds to the Hebrew bait (Greek; o&coc), which means the house, the fixed abode in which a man lives. Tent corresponds to yeri'ah, rather a rare word in this sense; 8 to dwell corresponds to the verb iashav (see above, p. 8, note 4); residence [Knox translates "for me to dwell in" Translator's note] corresponds to leshivti, an infinitive derived from the same verb iashav, with a first person pronoun used as a suffix. Hence the literal meaning is the for me to dwell in. So all the words are very simple and offer no difficulty. We already know that the tenor of the prophecy of Nathan is as follows "you want to build a house for me, but it is I, Yahweh, who will build one for you." The change-over from the meaning of a :

5 So also Ps. 88(89). 30-3. *Isa, 11. 1 seq.; Jer. 23. 5; 33. 15; Ezech. 34. 23; Ps. 88(89); 131(132), a later work. Cf. 2 Kings 23. 5; 3 Kings 2. 4; 8. 15-26; 11. 38. 7 Cf. A. Noordtski, "Les intentions du Chroniste", in Rev. bibL, 49 (1940),

pp. 161-8. 8 The normal meaning of the word is a tent made of goat's hair, like that used by the Bedouins. "The word yeri'ah for the tabernacle belongs to P: cf. Ex. 26. 1 seq.; 36. 8 seq.; Num. 4. 25", says Dhorme, op. cit. p. 326. But in our texts, the provisional resting-place of the ark when brought back to Jerusalem is in question, not the tent of the exodus. The LXX translation is good: :

9

t%

axrjvfjs, in

M.O.T.

2*

the middle of

[in]

the tent.

The Mystery of the Temple

28

of a house in the sense of lineageas "house" used in the Middle Ages and still is today, was (French "mesnie") for instance, in the term "The House of Austria" is very frequent in

house to

live in to that

the Bible. 9

It is at

the root of Nathan's prophecy.

Not

that the

which God will God. That will 1 come, but not yet. For the moment, God says to David: "It is not you who will provide me with shelter or offer me sumptuous hospitality. I have no need of this and I did not ask Moses or the Judges for a house to dwell in. It is I who will treat you munificently in your descendants and in your (my) people, as I have begun to do in your own case, since I chose you when you were watching over your sheep, and I have made you the head (the shepherd) of my people and have been with you in all your undertakings. This munilatter expressly states that the "house and family" give to David will be the "house and temple" of

show towards you will consist in granting stabiland to your descendants." This is the initial meaning of the prophetic announcement. This was what David understood it to mean before all else, as is shown by his great and exquisitely beautiful prayer of thanksgiving (2 Kings

ficence that I shall

ity (permanence) to the people

But the text implies another purpose and another intention. For when God disposes of the idea that David is to build him a temple, he gives as the reason for what amounts to a refusal the fact that he has never lived in a "house" from the day when he brought the Israelites out of Egypt He was in temporary camps (literally, "he came and went", the reflexive form of the verb halaq, to go) in a tent ('ohel: cf. above, p. 11), under shelter (mishkan 2 cf, p. 12). We have already seen what this means. It mattered little whether God was in this place or that, he wanted to be with his people. This is why he dwelt with them in a tent since they were a wandering 7. 18-29).

:

The following examples are chosen at random: Gen, 7. 1; ExodL L 21 (with the note in the Jerusalem Bible); 19. 3; Num. 18. 1; Judges, in which families are called bait * house; 1 Kings 3. 12-14; 2 Kings 2. 10; 3. 1 and 6; 12, 10 and 11; 3 Kings 2. 24; 11. 28; 12. 19, 20; 14. 10; Jer. 12. 25; Ruth 4. 11 where the meaning changes in the same verse. In non-biblical Hebrew, cf. for instance the Damascus Document, III, 19. Cf, the expression "house of Israel" (Jen, Ezech. and elsewhere) and in the N.T., Matt, 10, 6, 12-13, 25, Israel is the "house 1 * a family to be ruled and managed) of God: Num. 12. 7; Osee 8, 1 ; Jer. ( 12. 7; Heb, 3. 5-6. 1 1 take this to be the meaning of A. Gelin's criticism of the Flchc spirltuelle de rA.C.J,F. No. 18 (1949) in which I had explained Nathan's prophecy by comparing the two senses of the word "house". This comparison is obvious and valid, it is at the basis in fact of the whole prophecy, but it does not directly give the declaration found in John 2. 21, etc, 2 Cf* above, p. 12. Dhorme notes, p, 237, that mishkan is connected with *ohel in Ps. 77(78), 60 (we could add 1 Paralip, 6. 17) and that in Ezech. 25. 4 the word indicates a nomad's tent. 9

The Prophecy of Nathan

nomads. 3

29

We

are not yet told that God is in men, people he wants to be with them. But verse 7 in our text4 is very similar to certain passages in the prophets declaring that there is no true sacrifice other than man himself, e.g. "What, men of Israel, did you like the

spend forty years in the desert, ever for me your burnt-sacrifice, ever me your offerings? ." (Amos 5. 25); "Burnt-sacrifices, offerings, not of these was my theme when I gave commandments to your fathers at the time of their deliverance from Egypt" (Jer. 7. 22). That David had a profound grasp of the fact that beyond the promise of munificent treatment, for which he gave thanks, lay God's desire to be with his people, is suggested we believe by an episode during the time of his flight from Absalom, itself so full of deep religious meaning. When the king was crossing the torrent of Cedron before climbing the Mount of Olives, Sadoc and the Levites were seen carrying the ark of God and ready to accompany David in his flight. But he, as though his faith and love discreetly wished to leave it to God to acknowledge those who were his own, sent the ark back for

.

to Jerusalem. 5

.

We

may gauge the extent of the deepening process at in David's soul as a result of his loyalty, his prayers and his trials, by returning to a scene which took place in his youth, when

work

from Saul, he had the latter at his mercy and yet as the anointed of the Lord and the sign of his will. The religious attitude of the young David fleeing from Saul and David in his old age fleeing from Absalom, is all of one piece. David during his respected

flight

him

had reproached the obsessed and jealous king for the way in which he had forced him into exile: "they had exiled me this day from the Lord's domain, bidden me go and worship alien gods" (1 Kings 26. 19). At that time David apparently shared the common belief which Israel itself was to find so difficult to abandon Israel too will need to go into exile in a foreign land and according to which the Godhead was linked to a specific place. 6 But, as we have already 3

Fr Lagrange puts this well in the passage following that quoted above, p. 18, note 9; "According to Old Testament history, the choice of place is really a secondary matter. God wanted to be with the children of Israel when he became their God on Sinai, and so he made his dwelling with them. As they were nomads, he dwelt in a tent and was not attached to any particular place (Ex. 25. 8). When they eventually settled, God chose a place in which to dwell" (Le judaisme avant Z-C, p. 446). We shall see what reservations have to be made in regard to this last sentence,

"This way and that the whole race of Israel journeyed, and I with them; now now to that, I gave the leadership of the rest, and never did I reproach any of them for not building me a house of cedar." 5 2 Kings 15, 24 seq., which it is essential to read in this connection. 6 Examples of this belief are found in the Bible: cf. David's words in 1 Kings 26. 19; 3 Kings 20. 23 (here it is the Syrians who are speaking); 4 Kings 5. 17 (in the case of Naaman the Syrian); 17. 16 and 29 seq. (where the belief is 4

to this tribe,

The Mystery of the Temple

30

meaning of the tent in the desert and of that induced the LXX to translate the Hebrew of which God presence verb shakan by the Greek KaraaKrjwvv, to live in a tent, "to tabernacle", is that Yahweh is the one sovereign God and so is not linked, like the seen, the innermost

false

gods and the idols, to any particular place.

He is always Yahwch-

who-brought-Israel-out-of-the-land-of-Egypt, the living God who is with his people, provided they are truly his, as their God of strength 7

salvation. He is and will always be he who, on Sinai, the place of decision and of the establishment of Israel as the people of God, revealed himself in the words, "I shall be who shall be," The phrase has the verb in the hiphil mood and so suggests causality, the God who is the cause of being. It is not therefore man's place to build a temple for God. Yahweh himself makes his own temple by dwelling in the midst of his people, and his presence cannot fail to be supremely active. Hence, when Yahweh answers David by saying: "You are not going to build a

and

house for me, it is I who will make one for you/* he is implicitly proclaiming, by designating David's house as the place where above all his sovereign generosity will be at work, that the temple he will erect for himself will be this house of David in which his generosity will manifest itself in all its splendour. The messianic meaning of the text becomes evident once we have explained its most obvious sense. It looks forward to the reign of God himself as it will materialize In Jesus Christ. But this reign of God could not be clearly revealed except as a prophecy, for it only existed at the time in a prophetic manner,

David was a prophet,, Nathan too, whilst Solomon was no more than "a wise man". It has been very rightly observed that his reign was characterized by the absence of prophetic activity. 8 The promise Yahweh had made that he would dwell among the children of Israel, a promise he renewed to Solomon (3 Kings 6. 12-13: verb tfakari), was understood by the latter to have been fulfilled once the temple he undertook to build in about 960 B.C. was actually in being. He thought he had fully achieved what Nathan had foretold to expressed among the Assyrians in the matter of the settlers in Samaria); Ruth 1. 15 to 2. 12; Ezech. 11. 51 (cf. perhaps 33, 24) where we find it among the Jews remaining at Sion after the capture of the city and the deportation of the best elements of its population, Cf. again the terms of the edict of Cyrus as reported in 1 Bsdras 1. 2 (cf. 7. 15). See J. Pedersen, Israel, pp. 632 seq., 650, 7 There is no end to the number of relevant texts. This formula 'deserves a separate study of its own, Cf, below, p. 60, note 9. 8 Cf. H.-M. Feret, **Salomon ou le Messianisme inconscient; La signification messianique de Salomon": cahiers de "Forma Gregts", Feb. and March 1951. Pedersen (Israel, III-IV, p. 127) observes that Solomon, unlike the other kings, had no recognized prophet of his own.

HMV,

The Prophecy of Nathan

31

David. In the description of the dedication of the temple, which in the account given by the book of Kings has many original characteristics and is certainly not without genuine religious splendour,

Solomon

declares

:

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, who has now fulfilled in act the promise he made to my father David. So many years since he had rescued his people from Egypt, and never a city among all the tribes of Israel had he chosen to be the site of his dwelling-place or the shrine of his name; but a man he did choose out, to rule

And when

his people, king David. built a house in honour of the

he, my father, would have Lord God of Israel, the Lord told

him

that he had done well to conceive such a purpose in his heart; But it is not for thee, he said, to build me a house. A house shall be built in my honour, but by thy son, the heir of thy body. That promise of his the Lord has fulfilled: I have come forward in my

upon the throne of Israel, as the Lord promised should; it has been mine to build a house to the honour of the Lord, Israel's God, and to find a home for his ark, witness of the

father's place, to sit I

made with our

fathers when they escaped from Egypt 2 Paralip. 6. 4-11 and, for Solomon's conviction that he was accomplishing the promise made to his father David, 3 Kings 2. 24, 33b).

covenant (3

Kings

8.

15-21;

cf.

The whole of Nathan's prophecy

is

in this beautiful prayer, yet

everything is, so to speak, levelled down and reduced to an historical event whose significance can be gauged by the man involved in it. The same kind of tone is heard later in the statements of political

theology made by a man like Eusebius, theologian, courtier and friend of Constantine. He believed and he proclaimed that the latter 9 had established the kingdom of God. Men are always tempted to confine themselves to what they see and touch, to be satisfied with this and to think that a preliminary achievement fulfils God's promise. For a time Abraham thought that the promise made to him was fulfilled in Ismael (c Gen. 17. 18). Josue gave praise to God and .

rightly

so

. ,

for having accomplished all the promises

made

in

but these promises were capable of more comfulfilment which would only materialize after long periods of plete Israel's favour,

*

For Solomon,

filled in

the

1

cf. Fe"ret, loc. at, ; for Eusebius as seeing the prophecies fulMonotheismus als politisches Empire, cf. E. Peterson,

Roman

"Der

Problem," in Theologische Tmktate, Munich, 1951, pp. 86 seq. x Josue 21. 43-5; 23. 14. This, according to W. Vischer, is the meaning of the book of Josue (Les premiers prophttes, NeucMtel and Paris, 1951, p. 11),

The Mystery of the Temple

32

2 waiting and urgently needed purification. Only the prophets and this is, in fact, their task draw attention to the process of development from seminal promises and to the progress of the latter

towards their accomplishment through successive stages of fulfilment continuously transcending one another.

We have identified two meanings and, as it were, two planes in Nathan's prophecy. In the first place and more obviously it is the promise of a magnificent future for David, with whom God establishes a perpetual covenant. It also includes a reference to the manner in which God will dwell with his people, present as he always as supremely active and as the people's Saviour. We must complete our explanation of the text by rapidly surveying the subsequent: fate of these two themes in Israel's life until the birth of Jesus and even until the founding of the Church. In its first sense, Nathan's prophecy was a promise of help, prosperity and perpetuity. A covenant was concluded between Yahwch and David. 8 For Israel it was an assurance of God's saving intervention in their affairs and of his blessing. It even seems that at first it played a more active role in the minds of the Israelites than is

the covenants made in earlier times with Moses and Abraham. 4 Hence, in the history of Israel and especially in that of Juda, we find

a whole series of references to the promise of Nathan: 2 Kings 23. 5 and Psalm 17(18). 51 (2 Kings 22. 51) which are still part of the story of David then the psalms celebrating in lyrical manner the deeds to which 2 Kings, chapters 6 and 7, bear witness. There is Psalm 131(132), Memento Damme David> which apparently was ;

sung in celebration of the anniversary of the translation of the ark,

and perhaps therefore during the royal feast of Sion of which we 2

shall

Fr dc Vaux well says: "The Pentateuch is not complete in itself* It announces the promise but not its realization since it (the Pentateuch) comes to an end before the entry into the Promised Land. It is no mere accident of literary composition that has deprived it of a conclusion which some look for in the book of Josue; the Pentateuch was to remain incomplete like a hope or a constraining force . ." (Introduction to Genesis in the Jerusalem Bible, p. 23). * Cf, 2 Kings 23. 5; Ps. 17(18)* 51 (2 Kings 22. 51); Ps. 88(89). 4, 29, 35; Jer, 33, 21, 26; Isa. 55. 3 (Acts 13. 34); 2 Paralip, 6* 12 seq.; 13. 5; 21. 7, etc, 4 Some historians of the Israelite people reveal an excessive mistrust of the traditions which report the story of Abraham and the facts of the exodus or of Sinai, and so they consider the covenant made with David through the agency of Nathan as providing the most reliable starting-point, historically spmktng* from which to reconstruct the national and religious history of Israel In this view, the older covenants made with Moses and Abraham owe something to a reconstruction inspired by theology* .

The Prophecy of Nathan say something a

upon Sion

.

.

."

little

Then

33

further on: 5 "The Lord's choice has fallen there is Psalm 88 (89), Misericordias Domini.

seems to have been composed as early as the last years of the Judaean monarchy, the historical part of the psalm at least, 6 to which were added, doubtless after the exile, 7 a kind of introduction in the style of the Sapiential books (Yahweh is seen not so much as a God who is active in history as one who presides over the whole world order) and some somewhat disillusioned reflections in which the psalmist reminds God of the promise formerly made to David. What has become of it now? The only answer is a cry of anguish to Yahweh, a cry that is so lacking in messianic inspiration that it cannot even end by asserting that hope is fully justified (verses 39-52). In the midst of the trials that have come upon Jerusalem, the prophets often recall the promise of help given by God to the Davidic monarchy (Isa. 16. 5; 37. 35); the covenant made through the agency of Nathan even becomes the basis of a renewed form of alliance which will finally lead to the promise of an entirely new one (Isa. 55. 3 with the note in the Jerusalem Bible). The Davidic fact and Nathan's promise are restated from an expressly messianic viewpoint. This Davidic fact is indeed the basis of what is known as royal messianism in which the hope of salvation that inspires the whole history of Israel finds expression in the expectation of a saviour king who will It

come to restore, to bring peace and joy. 8 The king was the supreme "Anointed One",

the mashiah, the Messias. Psalm 2, attributed by the Acts to David, 9 uses the word, 5 Fr J. Cales prefers to connect this psalm with the dedication of the Temple by Solomon, See Le Livre des Psaumes traduit et comment**, Paris, 1936, t. 2, p. 511. Others suggest a more recent date for Ps. 131(132) (e.g. J. Steinmann, Les Psaumes, Paris, 1951, p. 57, note 1). But there is nothing certain about this. It is

wording of v. 12 does imply that, at the time, David's sons were no longer on the throne of their father. 6 Verses 4-5 and 20-38. Cf. above, p. 23, note 6, Fr Cales (t. 1 p. 139) thinks the reference is to the time when Joakim, grandson of Josias, went away as a captive into exile. The monarchy had fallen and Jerusalem was captured and sacked. But see above p. 26, note 2. Cf. O. W. Ahlstrom, Psalm 89. Eine Liturgie aus dem Ritual des leidenden Konigs* Lund, 1959. 1 Cf, Steinmann, op, cft. 9 pp. 54 seq. 8 H.~J. Kraus, Die Konigsherrschaft ... (quoted below), pp. 90 seq.; on Messianism, cf. P. Ceuppens, De prophetiis messiamcis in Antique Testamento, Rome, 1935 (an exegesis and discussion of each passage); M.-J. Lagrange, Le nwssianisme chez les Juifs, Paris, 1909; Le judalsme avant Jesus-Christ, 1931; L. Dennefeld, article "Messianisme", in Diet, de Thtol. cath., t. 10 (1929), col. 1404-1568; L. Dun:, Urspmng und Ausbau des israelitischen-judischen Heils., A. Descamps, J. Giblet, B. erwartung* Berlin, 1925; L. Cerfaux, J, Coppens Rigaux, Uattente du Messie (Rech. bibL), Paris, 1954 (bibliographies); H.-M. Feret, "L'e'conomie providentielle dans la R6v61ation biblique," in Forma gregis, Oct. 1952, Nov. 1952, Dec. 1952-Jan. 1953. * Acts 4. 25, hence the decree of the Biblical Commission, 1 May 1910 (penpossible, however, that the

.

zinger, n. 2133).

.

The Mystery of the Temple

34

time, in the context of a royal messianism and even looks forward to a final, total and universal triumph, In Amos 9, 11-12, the restoration envisaged is perhaps more historical and political than genuinely messianic. 1 It is at the time when the Judaean monarchy is about to disappear that the preexilic prophets, Isaias, Michaeas and Jeremias, introduce the great themes of royal messianism. Precise historical circumstances allow us to date the first great declaration of this belief from the year 735 B.C. The kings of Israel and Damascus intended to destroy the Judaean monarchy of Achaz,

perhaps for the

first

who

refused to share their policies. They advanced to threaten JeruIt was at this point that Isaias went to Achaz with the mission short time after of assuring him that all would be well (Isa, 7, 1-9). salem.

A

he returned to the king and made the famous prophecy of the sign of Emmanuel (7. 10 seq.). Once more the God who had formerly spoken to David through Nathan responded to the attitude of the king with divine generosity. Achaz was a mediocrity, yet David's heir (cf. 4 Kings 16. 3) and the two northern kings were threatening to overthrow the monarchy. Achaz did not wish to ask for a sign but God himself gave this sign: a child would be born of the * 4 young girl" (still a virgin). If the sign was to have any value for Achaz and the people of Sion it would seem that the birth had to take place under their very eyes. Further, Isaias was counteracting Achaz's fear of seeing his line replaced by some Syrian prince (7. 6). Hence ?

would have to indicate that this line would certainly endure since it was also that of David (cf. 38. 5). In a word, it would have to refer there and then to some royal child. It is tempting to think of Ezechias in this connection, He did in fact succeed Achaz and had the spirit of a true son of David (cf. 4 Kings 1 8. 3). But, as St Jerome pointed out long ago, Ezechias was twenty-five when he the sign foretold

became king (4 Kings 18. 2). He was therefore bom eight or nine years before his father Achaz became king, and Achaz reigned for sixteen years. It is, however, obvious that over and above the child announced in the prophecy, whoever he might be, God was concerned with implementing the promise made through the ministry of Nathan and, apart from all the catastrophes Israel might undergo, with giving to David's royal line that ultimate and final seal which the prophet calls "EmmanueP*. It is clear from the very terms of the 1

Fr Ceuppens* op. cit. whilst occasionally quoting this text (p. 424 for instance)* does not examine it in the chapter he devotes to passages with a messianic viewpoint,, although this chapter is very comprehensive indeed. Yet Acts 15. 14-17 with its reference to Amos lends support to the view that the prophet was envisaging the coming of the Messias.

The Prophecy of Nathan prophecy, which suggest a miraculous

35

any Immediate historical fulfilment is out of the question. The later prophecies have the same implication with their evident messianic sense and their link with the Emmanuel prophecy: 9. 5-6 and 11. 1-5. Who the Emmanuel announced by these prophecies was really to be, would 2 only be known at a later date. birth, that

Danger continued to threaten Israel She had been delivered from the hostile activities of the Ephramites by the capture of Samaria, but was now faced with the armies of Assyria. It is at this point that Michaeas prophesied that, after the period of trial, there would be a restoration of all Israel and a shepherd of God's sheep in Sion (Michaeas 4. 7-8). It is from this passage that the angel Gabriel's prophecy to Mary took the words: "He shall reign over the house of Jacob eternally" (Luke 1. 32-3). Michaeas's prophecy is clearly repeated in a passage whose Davidic messianism is outstanda ing and well-known (5. l~4 ): "Bethlehem-Ephrata! Least do they reckon thee among all the clans of Juda? Nay, it is from thee I look to find a prince that shall rule over Israel." This prophecy occurs in the reign of Ezechias, at the time when the king of Juda had been humbled by Sennacherib

we have

as

seen,

It

Is

(4 Kings 18. 14M6), and, in this context that Psalm 131(132) was

written.

Jeremias has many prophecies of a royal Messias In connection with David's house. On the one hand he foretells the destruction of the house of David (21. 11 seq.; 22) whilst, on the other, he also prophesies that God, although he is himself to be Israel's Shepherd (Israel will be a theocracy), will raise up from David's stock an authentic "seed" who will become a perfect shepherd for his people (23. 1-8). The word semah, a seed (or germ), now becomes a technical term for the Messias, the mediator of salvation. 3 See also 17. 25 and 30, and 30. 9, where the outlook is eschatological. The restoration prophesied therefore refers to Nathan's declaration. But, except in one passage (33. 14 seq.) which is not by Jeremias but dates from 2

Cf.

W. Vischer, "La proph6tie d'Emmanuel et la fiSteroyale de Sion", in Studes

tMol et

The author compares

relig., 29 (1954/3), pp. 55-97. 7. 9; 3 Kings, 1. 37; 11. 38;

the expressions used

Ps. 88(89). 21-2, 24 with the actual word to be with). He does likewise with 2 Kings 7. 14 (to be a son) and Emmanuel ( Isa. 9. 5-6 and Ps. 2. 7 (to be begotten). On the Emmanuel prophecy, in addition to Ceuppens, op. cit., see J. Coppens, "La prophe"tie de la *Almah'*, in Eph. TheoL Lovan., 28 (1952), pp. 648-78 and in Vattente du Messie, pp. 39-50 (bibin

2 Kings

liography). 8

"Seed (germ) of David": Jer. 23. 5; 33. 15; Apoc. 5. 5, For "seed" (germ) alone, see Zach. 3. 8; 6. 12. Cf. Isa. 4. 2, where the word is already found, and II. 1 and 10, where it is used together with another expression.

The Mystery of the Temple

36

theme of 2 Kings 7 is separated by Jeremias of 2 from that Kings 6. When the prophet of defeat and destruction recalls the ark and the Presence associated with it, it is to say (13, 15 men will no longer trouble themselves seq.) that at the restoration about the lost ark nor will they ever construct another. Yet "Jerusalem will be called the throne of Yahweh." In our next chapter we shall see to what essentially prophetic conception this statement corafter the exile/ the

responds. Ezechiel speaks in a similar way, although he appears in his fortieth and forty-eighth chapters as the inspirer and even the architect of a cultural restoration centred on the Temple. Like God will himself be Jeremias, he foretells a restoration in which seem that the would It his of 11-31). the (34

people

Shepherd

would henceforth be undertaken by the active, doubt that I, the Lord loving presence of Yahweh ("None shall adds a direct refEzechiel their at their God, am side"); yet erence to the Davidical promise: "They shall have a single shepherd to tend all of them now; who should tend them but my servant David? He shall be their shepherd'' (34, 23; cf. 37. royal functions

24-25).

Thus the theme of a royal messianism remained active even after the destruction of the Davidical monarchy (see also Paralipomena). It was even to receive a concrete exemplification and a kind of historical fulfilment during the post-exilic restoration in the person of Zorobabel, a descendent of David's (Esdras 3, 8) ". but thou, son of Salathiel, says the Lord of hosts, thou Zorobabel, art my servant still; on that day I will take thee to my side, keep thee there, close as a signet-ring; it is a divine choice that has fallen on thee, says the Lord of hosts" (Aggacus ;

.

.

2. 20-3). is repeated more explicitly by his contemsixth chapter, verses 11 to 14, where Zorohis in Zacharias, porary, 5 babel is certainly meant. Some exegetes go as far as to substitute his name for the one which the text confidently quotes: "the high

Aggaeus's prophecy

priest, Josue,

son of Josedec"

(6.

11).

Zacharias had previously

4 The point of view is cultural and pro-levitical, and the royal jjower and the in which Zacharias priesthood are closely associated. This suggests the circle moved. The pro-levitical point of view is post-exilic. Ezechiel certainly does not share it (cf. Ezech. 44. 10-14), whilst the writer of Paralipomena is full of it; cf. G. von Had, Das Geschichtsbild des Ckrontetischen Werkes, Stuttgart, 1930, pp. 81 seq., 88 seq. 6 This is K. Marti's view, Dodekapropheton erktort, 1904, p. 420; L, Dennefeld, art. "Messianisme", Diet de TMoL cath., t. 10 (1929), col, 1486; A. Odin* Bible de Jerusalem,

m

The Prophecy of Nathan mentioned

37

Josue (Jesus): 3. 6-10. 6 Yahweh would place the Temple in his care; it would be his task to watch over its reconstruction. And, just as Samuel had consecrated and "brought forward" David, just as John the Baptist would baptize and "bring forward" Jesus, so Yahweh would bring forward, in the presence of priest and this

people, his servant "Seed" (Gerai). As we have seen, this name was a kind of technical term to indicate the Messias. we find it again in Zach. 6. 12, in a passage which

Now

has a messianic sense and recapitulates the contents of 2 Kings 6 and 7 the temple and David's line. It brings them together expressly. The text as it has come down to us still contains the name of Josue the high priest, but it certainly refers to Zorobabel and even those exegetes who do not accept the change of name agree that it :learly

understood when they correct in

v. 11 the words "on his head" "in his presence" (Josue) 7 [This point is not clear from the KLnox version, where the verse reads ". to crown the high priest, Fosue ." The Douai version however has ". and thou shalt naake crowns, and thou shalt set them on the head of Jesus, the son }f Josedec ." Translator.] The passage continues: is

to

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

This message thou shalt give him from the Lord

12.

.

God

of

one takes his name from the Dayspring (Seed, Germ) ; where his feet have trodden, spring there shall be. [Pere Congar adds a note: "I have not followed the Jerusalem Bible here, which translates the Greek at this point rather than the Hebrew. I have hosts Here :

is

kept more closely to the latter." In fact, it is as well in order to avoid misunderstanding to give an English version of the text P&re Congar provides in the French. This I have done immediately below the Knox version here reproduced. Translator.] 13. He 6 "6. . . the angel of the Lord rose up and gave Josue his commission : 7. My >eckoning follow thou, my commands keep thou, people of mine thou shalt jovern, house of mine shalt have in thy charge, and in their company, that here tand about thee shalt come and go. 8. This for the hearing of the high priest bsue, and others his co-assessors, names of good omen all. 9. Time is I should >ring hither my servant, that is the Dayspring ('Seed' 'Germ'). Stone is here I vill set before yonder Josue; a stone that bears seven eyes, device of my own arving, says the Lord of hosts. All the guilt of this land I will banish in a single a lay." Some exegetes alter the order of the text and put v. 9 before v. 8 and mmediately after v. 7, The promises in v. 7 then refer to the Temple and the stone et before Josue is the Temple. Thus H. Schmidt, "Das vierte Nachtgesicht des ropheten Zacharja," in Zeitsch.f. alttl Wiss., 1936, pp. 48-60; H. Junker, Die ZwolfK/eine Propheten, 2 Halfte, Bonn, 1938, pp. 133-4; so also A. Gelin, in JJ. V. 9, may have given rise to the later Jewish legend according to which in the since it was no longer in the Holy of Holies was >ost-exilic temple, the ark eplaced by a stone on which Yahweh himself had carved his most holy Name. 7 Thus A, Van Hoonacker, Les dome petits propMtes, Paris, 1908, p. 632; L R6gnier, **Le r^alisme dans les symboles des prophetes,** in Rev. BibL, 32 (1923), 402. Both are quoted by Ceuppens, op. ciX,p. 457, who accepts this emendation. .

>.

The Mystery of the Temple

38 it is

shall rebuild the Lord's temple; builder of the Lord's temple, a princely throne he sits, shall he come!

On

what honours

to

throne of a priest beside him, and between these two, what harmony of counsel!

[Now

follows a version of P&re Congar's text:

And you

will

Sabaoth. Here (shall be),

is

speak to him as follows: Thus says Yahwch a man whose name shall be Germ, Where he is

something

will germinate.

He

it

is

who

will rebuild

Yahweh's temple* And he shall be full of glory. He shall sit as a ruler on his throne. And the priest too shall sit upon his and perfect peace shall exist between these two.]

The name Germ is given to Zorobabel because he is a descendant of David, a representative of the lineage ("house") especially chosen by God (Aggaeus 2. 23), and on all these counts, the heir to the promise addressed through Nathan to David, "He it is shall rebuild the Lord's temple" here and now Zorobabel is meant, just as, at the time, it was Solomon who was referred to in the prophecy of Nathan. But the prophecy also foretells the Messias. It is he who will fulfil the prophetic promise whose terms so clearly have in view a future whose date is not yet fixed ("where he is, something will germinate"), it is he who, in the fullness of truth, will build that temple of God which is mysteriously linked with the descendants of David. This passage from Zacharias, the first in the prophetic tradition ;

Nathan to link so expressly the Temple and royal messianism, also the last prophetic announcement of this royal messianism, just as Zorobabel, to whom it was directed, is the last outstanding since

is

descendant of David in the history of Israel. "TheDavidical monarchy ended, but it is exalted at the very moment when the royal race will become part of the people and so be purified among those *anawim* (the 'poor* of the house of Israel) from whom one day Christ will be born." 8 Already another figure of the Messias has come to light in the theme of the Servant of Yahweh (second part of Isaias and perhaps in some of the psalms). A third figure will be suggested in Daniel's son of man (ch, 7). The three images Davidic king, suffering Servant and son of man will be found together in Jesus is

Christ. But in fact, it is far more as the two latter linked together in the mystery of his Pasch, that Jesus will rebuild the messianic temple and fulfil the prophecy made to David through Nathan, as shall see later. When in the Apocalypse, one of the Ancients shows John him who has won the victory, "the Lion that comes from

we

8

A. Gelin, "Introd. & Agg6e, Zacharie, Malachie**,

p.

$ BJ.

The Prophecy of Nathan the tribe of Juda,

from the stock of David", John

39 sees

a Lamb, "a

Lamb

standing upright, yet slain (as I thought) in sacrifice" (5. 5-6). Catholic tradition recognizes the messianic meaning at least of v. 24 in the prophecy of Weeks (Dan. 9. 23-7). 9 We shall not enter here into the discussion or the question of the interpretation of this difficult passage but, as we come to the end of this inquiry on the treatment of Davidic messianism in the prophetic tradition, we shall content ourselves with quoting the message given to Daniel by the angel of the Annunciation: It is ordained that this people of thine, that holy city of thine, should wait seventy weeks before guilt is done away, sin ended, wrong righted; before God's everlasting favour is restored, and the visions and the prophecies come true, and he who is all holiness

receives his anointing. 1

Not

that these final words indicate the person of the Messias (the Christ); in Scripture, they habitually indicate a concrete reality, a thing, not a person. 2 The verse as a whole is concerned with the

work and

and these are crowned and in a way holy of holies, that is, a sanctuary. The declaration is prophetic, precise and yet vague, and linked with other statements which are both extremely precise and at the same time obscure enough to give rise to discussion. However, like other messianic

summed up

order,

in the anointing of a

prophetic statements, its very vagueness, linked as it is with a kind of undefined yet immense widening of the horizons, passes beyond the historical incident immediately envisaged doubtless the purification and dedication of the Temple after the abominations of Antiochus Epiphanius and opens up a strictly messianic prospect which will be expressed with greater precision in other parts of the book (ch. 7). But Daniel nowhere refers to the monarchy or to the promises made to David, although he was devoted to God's house and to Jerusalem. &

Cf. Ceuppens, op.

1

cit.

p. 507.

Pere Congar here uses Crampon's version in which the last phrase reads "pour sceller vision et prophMe et pour oindre le saint des saints," Pere Congar however, changes this and writes not "the holy of holies" but "
The Mystery of the Temple Yet he does bring to God's people a message couched in terms of a makes and unmakes kingdom. On the one hand, God as judge, the kingdoms of the earth. On the other hand, his work of salvation the mysteriis itself a kingdom whose origin is in heaven and which Most the of "saints the High" with ous "Son of man" shares 3 We know how these themes cf. 2. 44 and 8. 24. cf. 7.

40

:

9-27;

were restated by the angel Gabriel in his message to Mary (Luke L Here again there is 32-3) and by Christ and the apostolic Church. of man in Daniel son the to Davidical messianism; no reference comes from on high. Though Christ is the son of David and so does in this way accomplish the promise made to Nathan, it is according to the flesh (Rom. 1.3; Matt 1. 1); yet he is also the Son of God and his true royal power as a power unto salvation comes to him from on high, as does his priesthood which is according to the heavenly order typified by Melchisedech. Though Daniel's messianic message the kingdom in question conies expressed in terms of a kingdom, "saints of the Most High *; the of the it is kingdom high, his Messias is no longer the Davidic king but the transcendent son of man and he too comes from, on high. It is this concept of the Messias together with that of the suffering Servant^ which the will be restated Jesus, who insisted on leaving to one side is

1

from on

by

notion of "son of David" in so far as it was likely to arouse in Jewish 4 minds the hope of a political restoration. Several incidents in the the disGospel (the "messianic secret", cf. Matt. 9. 27-30, etc.; 12, Mark cf. 22. Matt 35-7; 41-6; cussion with the Pharisees: Luke 20. 41-4) are explained by our Lord's concern that this should

not occur.

u

instances of men crying out to Jesus and calling him son of David", the evidence supplied by the rabbis of the second century

The

and which very probably merely repeats a more ancient tradiand finally a famous passage in the Psalms of Solomon bringing 6 us up to about the year 48 B.C., show that the messianic hope In of a royal and Davidic messianism. form the took still times Gospel B.C.

tion,

We

are not therefore surprised that the angel Gabriel in the tidings full of allusions to

he brought to Mary should have used terms Nathan's prophecy; 6

8

For the

"saints

1*

cf. Isa, 4.

2-3.

See A. Descamps, "Le messianisme royal", in L*attente dtt Me$ste> pp. 57-84, 6 Ps. 16(17), 4 and 21-45; cf. M,-J. Lagrange* MemanLwte, pp. 230 seq.; Judatsme avant /.-C, pp. 153 seq. For the rabbinical evidence, cf. Strack-Billcrbeck, 1 1 p. 525; Lagrange, Messtanisme, p. 263, 6 Cf, R Laurentin, Court trait^de thMogie mariak, Paris, 1953, p. 26; Structure 0t ThMogie d$ Luc, /-// Paris, 1957. *

The Prophecy of Nathan 2 Kings 7

Luke

12. ... I will

grant thee for thy successor a son of thy own body, established firmly on his throne. v. 13 I will prolong for ever his royal dynasty; he shall find in me a father, and / in him a son. v. 16 & thy throne shall remain forever unshaken. v. 16 a . Through the ages, far as thy thought can reach, dynasty and royalty both shall endure. v. 13. ... I will prolong for ever his royal dynasty. v.

41

.

He shall

1.

32-3

be great

and men will know him for the Son of the most High: the Lord God will give

him the throne of his father David,

and he

shall reign over the house of eternally, his kingdom shall never have an end.

Jacob

The more one reads the accounts of the Infancy found in St Luke alone the annunciation, the birth of John the Baptist, the canticle of Zachary, the visitation and the canticle of Mary, the presentation in the Temple and the canticle of Simeon the more one is struck by the amazing continuity of these texts with the narratives and themes of the Old Testament. The words of the angel are in line with the concept of royal messianism but with the addition of a theme from Daniel (ch. 7; the son of man). For this concept to become a reality, it has to be crossed with that of the messianism of the suffering Servant. It is not the son of Mary as such nor the son of David who will institute the messianic temple but, as we shall shortly see, the son of man dead and risen, the Servant immolated like the paschal lamb and issuing victorious over death. But before the double theme in 2 Kings 6 and 7 becomes a reality in Christ and the Church, the second meaning of Nathan's pronouncement and, as we have seen, David had an inkling of this had to be unfolded in the history and the soul of Israel. Certainly God had chosen Sion as his dwelling-place and this choice was final. But he wanted to be and he would be where his people were. His Presence was therefore fundamentally identical with the exercise of his royal power by means of which he formed and saved a people who would be his own. So the union of the two themes, Presence of Yahweh and the royal power which from the very beginning had been plainly included in the one but twofold text of 2 Kings chapters 6 and 7 and had appeared again in Psalm 131(132) and in several passages of 7 the prophetic writings, ultimately led to a complete identification of both aspects. In the long run, Go d himself would fulfil the promise made to David by dwelling among and reigning over his people. And this was precisely what came to pass in Jesus Christ by the Incarnation 7

Osee

3. 5; Jer. 30.

9; Ezech. 34. 23-4.

42

The Mystery^of the Temple

of the Son of God. We therefore must now examine the stages of a Revelation whose gradual progress is so well known to us. We have seen how closely God's dwelling among his people and the actual reality of the royal dynasty of David were bound together. They were so united in David's mind. He wanted to make Jerusalem both the place where all the tribes would come to stand before Yahweh and also the city of the king. They were certainly closely associated in the series of facts and in the profound logic which, beginning with the translation of the ark, led to the proposal to build a temple and thence to Nathan's announcement and the promise of an eternal dynasty. They were closely linked in the immediate achievement of Solomon at Jerusalem, i.e.,, a monarchy ruling in splendour over the whole of Israel, and also a magnificent temple. Finally, the bond was probably implied in what was perhaps an annual or in any case an occasional religious celebration in honour of the twofold presence in Sion of Yahweh and the royal dynasty*

The theory of the existence of a royal feast of Sion whose origin is to be found in the two facts recorded by both chapter 6 and chapter 7 of 2 Kings, was put forward by H.-J. Kraus. He advanced a number of converging reasons which make the theory at least credible. 8 Kraus challenges the hypothesis of S. Mowinckel accepted by a certain number of exegetes most of whom are non-Catholics 9 and according to which there already existed in Israel before the exile an annual feast of Yahweh's enthronement, to which the royal psalms (95-7[96~-8]) dating from after the exile refer. The feast, on this view, would have become especially important in the postexilic period. This hypothesis finds no positive support in the Bible apart from certain psalms which hymn the reign of Yahweh; its principal authority is the existence of a New Year's feast of this kind, celebrated in the Babylonian ritual. Kraus on the other hand deduces from certain historical passages (3 Kings 8; 12, 32-3; 4 Kings 23. 1-3) and psalms (131[132]; 77[78]. 65-72; 23[24]. 7-10; 2; 71 [72]; 88[89J) the existence of a feast, celebrated on the first day of the Feast 8 H.-J. Kraus, Die Konigsherrschaft Gottes im A.T Untemtchtmgen z. den Liedern von Jahves Thronbesteigung (Beltr. z. hist. Theol, 13), Tubingen, 1951; Gottesdienst in Israel Zur Geschichte des LaubMnenfestes (Beitr z. evang. : TheoL* 19), Munich, 1954* Vischer is one of those who accept this view (quoted above, p. 35, n. 2.) 8 S. Mowinckel, Das Thronhest&igung JahwSs und der Unprung der Esckato* logie, Christiana, 1922. Cf. H. Schmidt, Die Thronfahrt Jahves am Fest tier Jahreswende im atten Israel> 1927; H, Riesenfeld, transfigure , 1947. For criticisms of this view see ; H, Snaith, The Jewish New Year Festival: Its Origins and Develop* ment, London, 1947; X de Fraine, aspect religteux de la royaitt^ fora^/fre, Rome, 1954; see also Rev. btbL, 1950, p. 298; Nouv. Rev. MoL, 1951, pp. 247

Msm

U

seq., etc.

1

The Prophecy of Nathan

43

of Tabernacles, that is at the beginning of autumn, to commemorate and renew the covenant of Yahweh with David when he chose Sion as his dwelling-place and with this choice permanently linked that of the royal dynasty of David's descendants. It was therefore a genuine royal feast of Sion and of its choice as both the city of the king and the dwelling-place of God. After the exile, David's dynasty no longer existed and there was no reason for a feast of Sion as the king's city. On the other hand, the descendants of the Judaean Mite who had been led away into captivity not so long before, had been delivered by a divine intervention in which the universal character of the sovereign power of Yahweh, the ruler of the whole earth, had been manifested in so striking a way. It was then that, in the spiritual and theological environment reflected in Isaias ch. 40 onward, the psalms that hymn the praises of Yahweh' s universal and transcendent rule were composed and sung (46[47]; 92[93]; 95-8[96-9]). On the strength of passages in Nehemias 8 and in Psalms 49(50), 50(51), 94(95), Kraus is willing to admit that, during the period after the exile, a feast existed in honour no longer of Sion as the royal city, but in honour of Yahweh as the only king in Sion. This feast was celebrated on the first of Tishri, the Jewish New Year's Day. The purport of the feast was always the twofold reality of kingship and God's dwelling in Sion, the object of the covenant entered into with David to which reference was always made (Isa. 55. 3); this was the purport of the mystery of Sion itself. But the kingship was henceforth that of Yahweh, the true saviour of his people. Jerusalem was the "city of the Great

King," and this king was Yahweh, who both lived and reigned in it. In fact several of the psalms devoted to the reign of Yahweh 1

honour

also his dwelling-place in his sanctuary

92(93). 5; 95(96).

6, 9; 98(99). 5.

Kraus's reconstruction is certainly partly conjectural. In particular presupposes a reference to public worship first in the historical accounts of 2 Kings 6 and 7 and 3 Kings 8, and then especially in the psalms devoted to the reign of Yahweh, which can be quite well understood apart from this hypothesis. 2 Yet it must be acknowledged that it does give a reasonable explanation of the texts without doing them any violence or falling into the method of artificial comparisons

it

1

Matt.

5. 35.

Strack-Billerbeck

(1 .

333-4) does not give any Jewish or rabbinical

parallel for this expression, but refers the reader to Ps. 46(47). 3 (LXX); 47(48). 3 (two psalms which Cales, op, cit. 9 t. 1, pp. 485 and 492, assigns to the tune of Sennacherib's defeat); Ps. 94(95). 3 (one of the psalms devoted to the reign of Yahweh and dating from after the exile); Mai. 1. 14. s Cf, A. Feuillet, **Les psaumes eschatologiques du Regne de Yahv6", in Nouv. Rev. tMoL, 73 (1951), pp. 244-60, 352-63. Feuillet discusses this reference to public worship.

The Mystery of the Temple

44

to which Mowinckel resorted. It seems to agree well enough with what the chronological sequence of the texts tells us concerning the subsequent history of the ideas arising from the combination of these two facts the translation of the ark and the prophecy of Nathan. Although royal messianism remained in people's minds until Gospel times, it was largely superseded by the idea of the kingship of God himself. The divine "policy" moves from prophetic announcements and promises to their complete accomplishment, transcending where necessary temporary and unstable implementations. The dual reality of God's Dwelling in Sion and the tutelary kingship had been established in the Temple and the Davidical monarchy and to such a degree that the king, in a sense, sat on the royal throne of Yahweh (cf. 1 Paralip, 28, 5). But both Temple and throne were destroyed in 587 by one and the same catastrophe. As is so often the case in the Bible, this was both a judgment and an act of grace on God's part. It was a punishment for past infidelity and the condition necessary for a higher stage of development. After the exile the Temple would be restored but without the ark above which Yahweh sat. There was to be no restoration of the monarchy. On the other hand, the faith previously centred on the Davidic Messias would be transferred to the kingship of God as Saviour, and to such an extent that the person of the Messias in fact plays only a small part in the post-exilic theme of the kingdom of God and in its 3 eschatological developments, By the same token, the theme of kingship and the theme of God's Dwelling in Sion could coalesce and be-

come

identical especially

when

the idea that

God

is

present in the

place where he reigns became explicit. As we shall see in the next chapter, this is the basis of the prophets' concept of the Presence of God. In keeping with God's master plan, however, there was not only to be a transference and a development of ideas, there was also to be an answer to prayer. The extent to which this was to be explicitly the case is only seen if we go further than the Old Testament and reach the final fulfilment of Nathan's prophecy in Jesus Christ and his body, the Church. Christ is obviously greater than David (cf. Matt. 12. 3-6). Already in the Old Testament a transcendent and heavenly messianism, linked to the mysterious person of the Son of man, was found side by side with Davidic messianism* But, whilst he came from on high, Christ was to be truly the son of David and he would 3

Cf* Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums* Tiibingen, 1926, p. 222; Lagrange, at; for Judaism, cf. J. Bonsirven, art* "Judalsme", in Diet, de la Bible* Suppl, t 4 (1949), col. 1232, 1235, 1244-5, 1248. It goes without saying that the idea of the kingship of Yahweh appears long before the exile and even before the institution of the monarchy; cf, Fewllet, in the article already mentioned, pp. op.

352 seq.

The Prophecy of Nathan fulfil

an astonishingly

in

received.

The

out this

fact.

David

and

Kings 1. Psalm

45

explicit fashion the promise David

had

apostolic catechesis and early apologetics pointed They drew several parallels between Christ and

emphasized

especially

the

incident

related

in

2

to David, said of the royal anointing: "He art my son; I have begotten thee this day." In this connection it has been rightly pointed out that in the ancient East, the king was considered as "son of God" and parallels are 2, attributed

(Yahweh) told me: Thou

easily found. The same or other writers refer to 2 Kings 7. 14 or even to Isaias 9. 5 and 6, 4 not to mention Psalm 88(89). 27. The words "father" and "son" have not the same force in all these

and the sections referring to them in the Epistle to the Hebrews, give them a fullness of meaning clearly unknown in the Old Testament. They do at least justify us in seeing between different passages

7. 14 and the Incarnation of the Son of God a genuine continuity which further revelation alone could reveal to us but which, now that we know the event, we can discover in the first of the prophecies. From prophecy to fulfilment there has not only been a transcendent development, there has also been an answer to prayer. Christ is the true David, he is therefore really David and

2 Kings

St Peter can argue from a psalm attributed to David and show that David was speaking of someone other than himself, the Messias, and was foretelling in a mysterious way the resurrection of Jesus. 5 Peter's point of view is for us a most remarkable one. The body in Christ's Pasch is the body of David and in it the prophecy of Nathan is finally fulfilled. We must remember this when we come to see how Jesus made the mystery of the new and true temple consist precisely in his own body sacrificed and then raised again to heavenly life. In a word, it is in the Incarnation and in the Pasch of the Son of God who is son of man, that the full sense of 2 Kings 7 is translated into fact and goes far beyond the immediate historical scope of the

prophecy. It seems that this is what St Stephen saw and suggested in the admirable speech which led to his condemnation, although he made

We

shall no explicit reference to the prophecy of Nathan as such. therefore leave to one side the chronological order of events and anticipate the study we shall make of the theology of the apostolic Church by examining for a few moments this speech of St

Stephen's. 4

W.

Vischer for instance, article previously mentioned, p. 86. Acts 2. 24-36, which refers to Ps. 15(16). 8-11. Cf. A. Descamps in the work already mentioned, pp. 68 seq. 6

46

The Mystery of the Temple

After some very lively discussion with certain Greek-speaking Jews, Stephen was seized by his enemies and led before the Sanhedrin, "There they put forward false witnesses, who declared, This man is never tired of uttering insults against the holy place, and the law. We have heard him say that the Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place, and will alter the traditions which Moses handed down to us" (Acts 6. 12-14). The accusation brought against Stephen deals precisely with the question of the temple and the Mosaic religious system. It was on similar grounds and as a result of the same kind of evidence that Jesus had been condemned, 6 and it has often been pointed out that the parallelism continues right to the end. Stephen the first martyr is condemned and dies in the same way as his master. 7 And in the great speech he made to the Sanhedrin, Stephen explains very clearly his thoughts on the subject of the temple. The 8 speech should be re-read in Acts 7. 2-S3. Its construction seems odd at a first reading. Stephen spends a fairly long time recounting the history of the magnalla Dei, the wonderful works God has performed on Israel's behalf; the story of

Abraham

(with careful reference to the circumcision), of Joseph, of Moses, against whom he is accused of uttering blasphemies (Acts 6. 11); and, repeating a theme which Scripture frequently substantiates, Stephen shows that the Israelites have not ceased to be full of reservations, obtuseness, infidelity towards Moses and God. The God of whom Stephen speaks is the God-whobrought-Israel-out-of~Egypt When Stephen reaches this point, he gives his opinion on the temple, vv. 44-50, then he suddenly stops

above

all

short and turning directly to his accusers and judges, says to them: u Stiff-necked race, your heart and ears still uncircumcised, you are for ever resisting the Holy Spirit, just as your fathers did, There was not one of the prophets they did not persecute; it was death to foretell the coming of that just man, whom you in these times have *

Matt. 26. 59-61;

7

Compare Acts

Mark

14. 55-9.

56-7 and Matt. 26. 62-6; Mark 14, 60-4; Luke 22. 67-71 or Acts 7. 59-60 and Luke 23. 46 ( Ps. 30[31]. 6); Luke 23. 34. 8 On this speech of St Stephen's see, in addition to the various commentaries on the Acts, F, 3L Foakes-Jackson, "Stephen's Speech in Acts n , in Journal of Biblical Literature, 49 (1930), pp. 283-6; Phythian-Adams, op. c/t, pp. 145-68; M. Simon, **Saint Stephen and the Jerusalem Temple", in Journal of Ecclesiastical History* 2 (1951), pp. 127-42 and article mentioned above, p. 26, n. 1 : C. Charlier, "Le manifeste d'Etienne**, in Bibb et Vie chr$t> No, 3 (Nov. 1953), pp. 83-93. We had already finished writing this book when we became acquainted with M. Menchini's work J7 Discorso di S. Stefano Protomartire mlla Letteratura e 7.

C

Predicazione Crfstiana primitiva* Rome, 1951. St Augustine shows the far-reaching messianic implications of the prophecy of Nathan (De Civ. Drf, XVII. 8: F.L., 41, 540-2) and Ps, 88(89) (ibid., c. 9 to 13, col 542-7), but he does not develop the temple theme.

The Prophecy of Nathan

47

betrayed and murdered you, who received the law dictated by angels, and did not keep it" (7. 51-3). And here he ends. When we read the text today we have the impression that Stephen's speech lacks balance or is even cut short. Not at all; Stephen said what he wanted ;

With perfect clarity and this shows us that this inspired martyr was a real theological genius he dealt with the accusations brought against him and clearly formulated the Christian Church's thought on the temple and the Presence of God. We shall need to quote the passage (vv 44-50) which is concerned with them, if we are to understand him aright.

to say.

44

In the wilderness, our fathers had the tabernacle with them, them of God's covenant; he who spoke to Moses bade him fashion it after the model which had been shewn him. 45 And when God dispossessed the Gentiles, to make room for our fathers' coming, our fathers under Josue brought this tabernacle, as an heir-loom into the land which they conquered. So it was until the time of David. 46 David, who had won favour in God's sight, 47 but in the longed to devise a resting-place for the God of Israel, end it was Solomon that built the house for him. 48 Yet we are not to think that the Most High dwells in temples made by men's to remind

49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is the hands; the prophet says: under What home will you build for me, says the footstool my feet. 50 Was it not my hands Lord, what place can be my resting-place!

that

made

all this? (Isa. 66. 1-2).

Although he does not explicitly mention the prophecy of Nathan, Stephen considers that this episode, characterized by the refusal to surrender to God as the prophets interpreted it, is the decisive moment in the whole history of God's Dwelling with his people or, in other words, of the Temple. Between this refusal as interpreted by the prophets and the facts concerning Jesus Christ as representing the abolition of the old regime and the inauguration of a new one, there is, in Stephen's view, no other decisive stage. Has it not been said that the prophets were the understood this to be so, as

Christians? The latter, in any case, proved by the whole of their argument

first is

with the Jews. Stephen's speech as it has come down to us is not very explicit regarding the new and positive reality of God's Presence in messianic times. It does however put forward one absolutely decisive point: the Most High does not dwell in temples made by men's hands: oij%

the

6 $t/wrog Iv xeipoTtQirjwu; KO.TQIKSL Parallel expressions from in which the descriptive

Old Testament are sometimes quoted,

The Mystery of the Temple

48

word "made by men's hands" is always applied to idols and has therefore a very pejorative sense. 9 But the genuine parallels are those of the New Testament, in particular the one implied in the words accused of using and in consequence of which he, like be condemned "I will destroy this temple that is made by men's hands, and in three days I will build another, with no hand of man to help me" (Mark 14. 58). 1 Between Stephen's use of the exChrist

is

Stephen, will

:

pression "made by men's hands" and that found in the Old Testament there stands the whole history of Christ and the Paschal event.

We

shall consider these at length in their proper place and only then shall we plainly see the whole positive content of Stephen's thought. It

did however seem that it would be interesting to add the witness of the infant Church to the interpretation of Nathan's prophecy, which is thus more clearly seen as representing a decisive stage in the revelation and the bringing into effect (the two are linked together)

of God's

intention to dwell

initial

among men.

Under such conditions we have to ask whether the prophecy of Nathan is equivalent to a repudiation of the Temple, whether it expresses hostility towards the very idea of God's dwelling in a particular spot where men could be virtually certain of meeting

him and

in almost

place* The majority of the exegetes since affirmative. More recently S. Mowinckel

no other

Wellhausen answer in the

and attacked Wellhausen's interpretation as and rationalist dislike of external from a Protestant emanating replied in the negative

As far as we are concerned, we should not care to talk of towards the Temple if what is meant is a completely human psychological and moral tendency, such as the hostility towards democracy which may exist in a democratic country or towards the monarchic system in a monarchist country. In the present case everything is at the level and in the order of prophecy. Through Nathan God said: "I have no wish to have a temple," rather as Mary said to the angel: "I know not man." In the next chapter we shall see what the negative character of the prophecy really is, for at one and the same time, the latter implies an affirmation and in reality repreworship.

2

hostility

s

10.

Thus

H

;

Dom J. Dupont, BJ

16. 12; 19.

1

;

2L

9

in fac,,

with reference to Lev. 26.

9; 30. 7; 46, 6, etc.

We might add

1,

30; Tsa. 2, 13

Tsa. 17. 8.

;

A Pmcherle,

"Stefano e H Tempio *non manufatto' ", in Rtccrche ltelt#io$e> 2 (1926), pp. attemptsn to equate xeiQonoifJTotQ with idols and idols with the words **vain'* **u$eless . The point would then be that there is no substantial difference between the temple of Jerusalem and the temples of the pagans, * Of. also Acts. 17. 24; Heb. 9. II, 24 and below, p, 130. 8 "Natanfoijettelsen, II Sam, kap 7," in Svensk Exegettsk Aarsbok, 12 (1947), pp. 220-9, quoted by M. Simon in the article already mentioned in JKev. Hist. PhiL relig.

32W6,

The Temple of Solomon sents not so

much

49

a refusal as a dialectic of progressive transcen-

dence.

After bringing forward the explanation given by the prophets (down to and including Stephen) of the great announcement made by Nathan we shall be able to see the positive meaning of Solomon's action and why it was blessed by God, the positive meaning too of the Temple Solomon built and of the priestly ideology of Temple and Presence which developed later in Israel. There are three points to be especially borne in mind: 1. the way in which the fact itself of the building of the Temple is presented; 2. the meaning implied in

the building of a material temple; 3. the religion of the Temple and of the Presence of God in Sion which resulted from the realization of Solomon's project. This last point we shall deal with in a short study of the Temple theme in Judaism (ch. v below). At the moment we wish to say something on the first two points.

The way

which the fact itself of the building of the Temple is historians of Israel or exegetes with a leaning towards comparative religion find a similarity between the account of the building of the Temple by Solomon and similar accounts found in various oriental religions. In both cases, so they observe, 3 the same sequence of episodes is found with the object of ensuring that the idea of building a temple receives its consecration from heaven itself and the glory of an origin which is outstandingly miraculous, in the shape of a dream or a vision and the explanation of the dream or vision by some wise or inspired man; sometimes the plan or the model is revealed, detailed instructions are given by the great personage responsible for the initial idea of building the temple, or help is forthcoming from some powerful and eminent man. The parallel is justified in many respects even if it is not very illuminating. All the above elements are found in the biblical accounts of the tabernacle during the exodus and the building of 1.

presented.

in

Many

3 See for instance A. Jeremias, Das Alte Testament im Lichte des Alten Orients, 2nd, edn., Berlin, 1906, p. 53; "Das orientalische Heiligtum'% in ATTEAOZ, 4 (1932), pp. 56-69 (cf. pp. 61 seq.); Lambert, "Les traditions Htt6raires chez les Sume>iens et les Accadiens": Congres francais d'Arch^ologie biblique, April 1954: cf. Rev. de TMoL et de ,Philos. 9 1954, p. 141 (comparison with the story of Gudea building a sanctuary for Lagash). It is possible to hold with Art Sacrg (July-August 1955, pp. 23-4) that there is a valid point in these accounts of the building of temples on instructions received from heaven, namely the idea that every work is inspired and has its origin in the Spirit, especially sacred work. But this is to moralize in the style of Philo.

The Mystery of the Temple

50 4

We

are afraid however that the similarity in may prevent us from recognizing the much more profound and significant difference that must be noted between the case of the Sumerian or Babylonian temples on the one hand, and the temple of Jerusalem on the other. remarkable indeed that the Bible does not assign a It is

Solomon's temple. these cases

very

of legendary type to the temple of Jerusalem, nor to the monarchy with which it is so closely linked in the policy of David and Solomon under the guidance of Providence. There is overtones such nothing here like a religious myth with cosmogonic as are found in the Sumerian or Babylonian religious legends. In this respect, the numerous parallels quoted by A. Jeremias (see above, son J. Jeremias in some half-ap. 49, note 3) and re-quoted by his dozen articles, 5 have for the most part no foundation as far as the Bible is concerned. In any case there are hardly any biblical passages that can be quoted and rabbinical and even Talmudic texts are into service. The founding of the Temple and of the monarchy celestial origin

pressed

both originate in a purely human project. It is David who conceives the idea of building a temple and it is he who chooses its site (cf. 3 Kings 8. 16 which is almost a foretaste of Stephen's speech in Acts 7, 49) and not God through some miraculous sign. It is Solomon draws its plan Yet, at the (or David according to Paralip.) who same time, Yahweh intervenes. Just as he ratified and blessed the institution of the monarchy which he had first refused to do through the ministry of Samuel, so too he consecrates and ratifies the building of the temple although he had in a sense rejected, through the voice of the prophet Nathan, the proposal that he should be provided with one. As on all great solemn occasions, fire conies down from heaven and consumes the sacrifices offered on the occasion of the 6 dedication of Solomon's temple. This is the sign of God's approval. This approval will later be evident also in all the blessings of which in a sense the Temple will be the source and which all the devout .

sons of Israel long to receive.

God

of

established

among

.

.

The Temple is, as it were, the holiness As God's holiness is the

his people.

For the tabernacle during the exodus, cf. above, p. 14, n. 9. For Solomon's cf, 1 Paralip. 28, 11 seq. (the model provided by David); 3 Kings 7. 13 of Hiram, king of Tyre). A. Jeremias, loc. seq, 2 Paralip. 2 seq. (co-operation in Apoc. 21 cit, quotes the dream of Jacob, the temple of Ezechiel and the vision 4

temple,

.

,

6

In particular, "Golgotha", 1926. 2 Paralip. 7. 1, Compare Lev. 9, 24 (cf, 10, 2) for the consecration of Aaron and his sons during the exodus, then the sacrifice of Samson's father (Judg. that of 13. 20), David's sacrifice on Oman's threshing-floor (1 Paralip. 21. 26), Elias on Carmel (3 Kings 18. 38), the renewal of the sacred fire in the temple after its purification by the Machabees (2 Mach. 1. 18-22). Cf. the eschatological

prophecy in

Isa. 4. 5.

The Temple of Solomon

51

ultimate reality behind the whole destiny of the Jewish people, so the Temple will be for them that ultimate reality. It is in relation to the Temple that the whole life of Israel will find its bearings from the

point of view of its relations with God, of its fidelity or infidelity towards him. This fact we shall find at the basis of the preaching of the prophets as far as it deals with the Temple. It is in particular the meaning contained in the great vision which inaugurated the ministry of Isaias (ch. 6) and this vision took place in the Temple. It is from

Temple that Yahweh judges and leads his people 7 just as he had done in the days of Moses from the tent of witness. The Temple takes the place of the tabernacle of the exodus and the writers of the different traditional accounts which form the main thread of the Pentateuch were not wasting time when they read back into the tent of the exodus various facts relating to the Temple of Solomon. The Temple, like the tabernacle of the desert, sheltered the ark which was in a sense the throne of Yahweh and from which he expressed his will Thus David had been able to decide to build the Temple and Solomon had planned it but in reality it was all God's doing. The most decisive action was God's decision to bestow his Presence and this came entirely from him and not from any man. The Temple was a gift of God. 8 Neither David nor Solomon, no priestly rite or prophetic trance had "drawn down" his Presence or brought about his 9 coming. He remained supreme and every communication made by him to his creature was a grace. Thus, in the building of the Temple, two apparently opposite features are found together and they characterize the whole story his

of Israel as sacred history the utter transcendence of God as asserted in a purely human history. Once again, we are far from the cosmogonies and accounts of the "religious" foundations of the Orient outside of the biblical context. These cosmogonies explain the world only by introducing into it the dwelling-place and the life of the gods, they are never more than a chapter of a sacred myth1 ology. The world is not left to exist in its true natural state, nor are the gods really transcendent. They mingle with the elements of this 7

2 Paralip. This point of view is given prominence although with a little too ingenuity and contrivance by M. Schmidt, Prophet und Tempel, ZollikonZurich, 1948. 8 point well brought out by M. Schmidt quoted in the preceding note. Cf. Ad. Schlatter quoted by A. M, Ramsey, The Glory of God, London, 1949, p. 60. 9 The Carmel episode in the Ellas cycle, is of immense significance in this respect, 3 Kings 18. 16 seq. There is the contrast between the useless efforts of the prophets of Baal, their ever-increasing cries and gesticulations, their knives gashing their bodies till they were bathed in blood, and the simple prayer of Elias a few quiet words at the hour when the evening sacrifice was being offered at Jerusalem: "With that, the divine fire fell, consuming the victim . ." 1 This emerges very clearly from A. Jeremias's article quoted above, p. 49, note 3.

much

A

.

M.O.T.

3

52

The Mystery of the Temple

world and are "drawn into" men's lives by means of "religious" rites. But Israel's God is very different, he is Yahweh, the living God. Thus he does not mingle with a world which is in some vague way he has created it by his Word. religious, he utterly transcends it, a natural, non-sacred world. But This world therefore is of itself

and living God intervenes in a sovereign and free in this natural, non-sacred world and in the history, comhe has chosen lives a pletely human as it is, of mankind. The people decisions and act make men which in life fully human historical will. But this world, this people and nature human their to according on the living God and on his free and these men are all the transcendent

manner

dependent

and gracious will. Thus are combined God's utter transcendence and his utter immanence at the heart of a history that is fully human. These two characteristic facts set their stamp on the whole history of Israel and are bound up with the deep realities which make Israel what it is, and they are significantly linked again in the story of the is purely human, not a building of the Temple itself, for this story is a gift from the the time same at the Temple yet religious "myth", transcendent God of Israel and the initiative comes from his gracious will. 2. The meaning implied in the building of a material temple. Clement of Alexandria wrote a page on the subject of Solomon which credits him with an understanding of the mystery of the temple that he may well not have enjoyed. Yet Clement's words, which are actual facts of Solomon's prophetic in style, do throw light on the he built: the of and temple position

According to the book of Kings, Solomon, David's son, understood that the building of the true temple was not only something heavenly and spiritual (rrcm^arm/V), but that it already was related to the fleshly body (adpKa) which David's son and Lord was to make his dwelling (olf
expressly God lives on on the earth (3 Kings 8. 27 = 2 Paralip. 6. 18), his flesh and our in himself clothes he dwelling-place the earth when all is with men when union and harmony are established among

Now

the just, since he uses them to build a holy temple. For the just are of the earth, earthy, when they are still immersed in the terrestrial world and if we compare them to the Lord in his greatness. And blessed Peter himself did not hesitate to say this very

same thing:

The Temple of Solomon

53

"You

too must be built up on him, stones that live and breathe, into a spiritual fabric; you must be a holy priesthood, to offer up that spiritual sacrifice which God accepts through Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 2. 5). And our Lord said of his body which in all its physical dimensions he consecrated unto himself as, in a sense, a place on earth filled with divinity (gvOeov) "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up again. At which the Jews said, This temple took forty-six years to build; wilt thou raise it up in three days? But the temple he was speaking of was his own body" :

(John

2. 19-21).

2

Once more we have moved on

to a prophetic and Christian Yet we have been offered a new and The prophecy made to David, as inter-

interpretation of these events.

somewhat remarkable

idea.

preted by the prophetic tradition, looked entirely to the future, to the future history of the monarchy in Israel and to the messianic time to come. At the heart of the message was the idea, with which we shall

place

soon

become more

familiar in the next chapter, that

God's dwelling-

essentially with his people and in his people, or, as we shall say, in men and in man himself. This is the "golden string" is

that runs through all God's purposes which are summed up in Jesus Christ, the Son of man. can also connect with these purposes Solomon's achievement in building the Temple during the historical

We

period immediately following Nathan's words. And this achievement has its own value. It indicates in fact that God's presence and dwelling within man will not be purely "spiritual"; they will not only use sensible signs, but will literally become incarnate. Just as the prophetic sense of God's dwelling with man looked towards Jesus Christ and his faithful, so the historical fulfilment of the prophecy in Solomon as David's successor and by Solomon as the builder of the Temple, looks towards Jesus Christ and Ms faithful, that is his Church, The Incarnation is the event towards which all points, for in it "the whole plenitude of Deity is embodied, and dwells in him" (CoL 2. 9) and the Church is none other than the Body of Christ (Col. 1. 18; 2. 19; Eph. 1. 23; 4. 12). The economy of the divine 3 Presence on earth will culminate in a bodily presence. The Solomonic references in our prophecy clearly indicate that any purely subjective is excluded. Rather does God's plan lead to their realization in history, in a collectivity, and in institutions.

Presence or Indwelling 2

Fragment from Against the Judaizers, P.O., 9, 768-9; edited by Staehlin in t. 3. pp. 218-19. Translation by Cl. Mond6sert, "A propos du Slgne du temple: Un texte de C16ment d'Alexandrie**, in Rech. Sc. relig., 36 (1949), pp. 580-4: pp. 580-L 8 Cf. Oetinger's saying quoted by M. Schmidt in Prophet und Tempel (p. 167): (7.C.5.,

"Das Ende der Wege Gottes

ist

Leiblichkeit"-~God's

way ends

in Incarnation.

Chapter IV

THE PRESENCE OF GOD ACCORDING TO THE PROPHETS 1

(A) The attitude of the propJicts towards the Temple and

its

worship

authors have certainly made far too much of the theme of an opposition between the priesthood and the prophetic office; they have regularly used it as an interpretative norm. Thus the prophets in this view were enemies of the Temple, the 2 priesthood and public worship. Today there is a movement towards a more exact estimation of the facts of the case. 3 number of studies

PROTESTANT

A

have emphasized the positive and often very explicit relations existing between the prophets and the Temple. Fundamentally speaking, not a single one of them is against the Temple and they all consider both 1 i.e. those prophets who wrote from Amos onward (after 750 B.C.). a A common Protestant prejudice. See, for example, ch. 4 in W. Monod's >u Protestantisme (Paris, 1928, pp. 47 seq.), entitled, **Le 'protestantisme* h
We

The Prophets

55

and Sion as the dwelling-place of God. 4 Some writers go even further, for since S. MowinckeFs studies on the Psalms (1923), it

exegetes hold that the prophets belonged to certain societies associated with public worship and in particular with the worship

many

of the Temple. A new theory or category has thus been evolved, namely that of the prophets closely associated with public worship. In support of the theory parallels from oriental cults are mentioned. Some exegetes would maintain that all the prophets come within 5 this category. This is doubtless an exaggeration and a fashion against whose spell we must be on our guard. 6 Without going so far as to claim that all the prophets were members of societies attached to a place of worship, it would be easy to note in their writings numerous evidences of a positive attitude regarding the Temple as the place in which God was present. For all of them, the Temple or mount Sion is the place in which

Yahweh chose

to dwell (chose to make the dwelling-place of his of his Glory). 7 Although some of the prophets (Amos, Sophonias, Nahum and perhaps Habacuc and Abdias) do not expressly mention the Temple, we have to bear in mind, if we are to judge their silence at its true value, that they wrote very little. Above all we must take into account the specific character of their prophetic experience and mission. Isaias hardly mentions the Temple of Solomon in so many words apart from the account he gives in ch. 6 of his famous vision during which he receives his consecration to the prophetic office. But what deep insight this remarkable passage gives us into Isaias's mystical sense of the Presence of Yahweh in his Temple! Yahweh is seen in it as a king (6. 1 and 5) and clothed

Name and

4 This is the conclusion reached, for instance, by J. Pedersen, Israel* IH-IV, passim, and, to take one example, on p, 559; see also pp. 115-17 (for the question

of

sacrifices).

6 See the documentation in O. Eissfeldt, "The Prophetic Literature", in The Old Testament and Modem Study* A Generation of Discovery and Research, edited by H. H. Rowley, Oxford, 1951, pp. 115-61; cf. pp. 119-26 and

146-7. 6

Eissfeldt, study already quoted, p. 159.

Amos who pronounces judgment on the sanctuaries of Ephraim and Juda, says nothing against the Temple of Jerusalem and he hears Yahweh "speaking . loud as the roaring of lion" from Sion (1. 2). For Osee, the Temple in thunder is the house of God (9. 8); Isaias does not expressly mention Solomon's Temple except in his sixth chapter, but for him God lives in Sion and so much so that he names him "Yahweh-of-hosts-who-dwells-in-Sion"; 8. 18 where this expression is used participially; so too Joel 4. 17; for Michaeas, cf. 3. 11 ; 4. 7; for Jeremias, who came of a priestly family, cf, 8, 19; 14. 19; 17. 12; 31. 6; 12, etc. Cf. Baruch 2. 26 and, of course, the Lamentations. As for Ezechiel (who was a priest), the prophets of the exile (Isa, 64. 10; Dan. 1. 2; 6. 11) and those of the restoration (Aggaeus, Zacharias) there is no need to list references. See also Hab. 1. 20; Abdias 17; Joel 3, 17, 18,21. 7

.

,

The Mystery of the Temple

56

so to speak with a sanctity beyond all understanding. The Seraphim to look on him and they veil their (== the angels of fire) cannot bear faces. The all-holy God requires that his people be holy and Isaias, is that of all Israel, profoundly conscious of his own impurity which taken from the live a coal with was he indeed as needed to be purified,

comes from Yahweh as does judgment, but both the from Temple in which dwells the Glory which nevertheproceed less fills the whole earth. We should note, in passing, this poignant which the prophets say expression of the need for that purification 8 over and over again can only come from God. It is found, linked to the theme of the temple and like it promoted to a higher order, in altar. Sanctity

New

Testament (cf. below, pp. 167 seq., 221). no lack of mention in the prophets of the Temple liturgy 9 and the major religious observances, In Jeremias, who was contemof Josias (Deuteronomy), we find evidence of porary with the reform the beginnings of a priestly ideology of the Temple, the sacrifices and the Sabbath, which was to undergo a phenomenal development 1 after the exile. Jeremias is an outstanding example of devotion to the Temple although both his personal character and his mission are marked by contradictory tendencies which were the cause of intense or Paul suffering. In a sense he is a forerunner of Jesus, Stephen to an end, come to were of forms the Mosaic worship declaring that still remained of it and endeavouring to what for of full respect yet teach in the Temple or the synagogues. The scene of much of Jere2 mias's activity is the Temple or the Temple gate. When he is forbidden to enter, he sends his secretary Baruch with his message in writing (36. 5). Several of the greatest prophets hear the voice of

the

There

is

Yahweh in the Temple

or

coming forth from the Temple:

Amos

1.2;

Isa. 6; 21. 2-5; 66. 6; Ezech. 43. 6., etc Finallyand this is of special importance for the further stages

of

the predictions of the prophets involve for the most part a a future centred on the Temple or at least on Sion, whether they

our inquiry

8

The need of puritythe whole of Ezechiel; Isa. 52. 1 Joel 2. 13. Purification work of Yahweh himself Isa. 1. 25; 4. 4-5; 10. 17; 48, 10; Jer. 6. 27-30; ;

as the

Ezeeh. 36. 25; 37. 23; cf. Mai. 3. 1-4. 4 f 8 The liturgy Offering of first-fruits and the feast of tabernacles Osee 9. 4-5. of thanksgiving in the Temple Jer. 33. 11; fasting and gatherings to implore God's mercy Joel 1. 14; 2. 15 seq.; the SabbathAmos 8. 5; Jer. 17. 19 seq. Ezech, 20. 12; 46. (the authenticity of this passage is doubtful): 1 See, in addition to 17. 19 (previous note), chapters 7 and 11. a Speech at the Temple gate (7. 2); vision of the two baskets opposite Temple the prophet Hananias in the house of Yahweh (24. 1-10); his meeting with the agreement made in the house of Yahweh concerning the liberation of (28);

4. r^eq.J Isa, 2. 2-5; 19. 7; 56. 6-7; 60. 7; 66. IS seq.; Soph. 14-17; 14. 21; Aggaeus 2, 6-9; Joel 3. 17, 21.

ISliich.' 3. 5; Jer. 3.

The Prophets

57

are concerned with the gathering in of the "lost sheep" of the house of Israel, 4 or with a restoration which is often envisaged as messianic,

or finally with a call to all men everywhere to come to the knowledge of and to have communion with the true God. We shall return to this point later when we deal with the prophecy of a restoration of the Presence and of the Temple as a source of blessing and fruitfulness. The attitude of the prophets towards the Temple and its worship is therefore a positive one. Yet it cannot be denied that they showed a certain mistrust in regard to both. 5 They criticized its sacrificial

system and its priests. Not that there is any opposition on their part to the priesthood and to sacrifices as such. True, Amos (7. 10 seq.), Osee (9. 7-8) and Jeremias (20. 1-3; 26; 29. 24 seq.; 36. 5) met with vigorous opposition from the priests. But the prophets criticize the latter because of their infidelity in practice and not their office as such. Their criticism here is of a piece with their attacks on the faithlessness of prophets or so-called prophets. 6 In any case, there is no denying that there is bound to be a difference between

and prophets and even a certain amount of opposition. Prophets are peremptory, they are the men who attack the roots of things. They bring a message which goes counter to the status quo, whilst priests are men who follow a policy of give-and-take, priests

are willing to status quo. 7

compromise and are attached to

tradition

and the

4

Mich. 4. 6-13; Jsa. 27. 13; Ezech. 20. 40. Desnoyers sums up the situation very well in his Histoire du Peuple d'Israel (t. 3, p. 146 n. 1): "We know that the Temple did not occupy, in the religious thought of most of the prophets previous to the exile, the place of honour it held in the minds of the priests at the time of the Jewish restoration. Elias, Eliseus, Amos, Osee do not mention it, Michaeas treats Jerusalem as a 'high place* (1. 5), Jeremias warns men against the 'misleading* confidence of those who cry The Temple of Yahweh! The Temple of Yahweh! The Temple of Yahweh!' as though amendment of life were not a better guarantee of salvation (Jer. 7. 4, 5). He looks forward to a future in which the Hebrews will be converted and will no longer even think of the ark of the covenant of Yahweh which was the raison d^tre of the Temple (ibid., 3. 16). These simple details among many others should be sufficient to show that the passionate religion of the ancient prophets did not lead them towards the Temple with all the enthusiasm some suppose. Their half-heartedness in its regard was unfortunately too often encouraged by the idolatry of which the Temple was sometimes the scene. Cf. 4 Kings 23. 4-12." Cf. A. Lods, Les proph&tes d'Israel et les debuts du Judafsme, Paris, 1935, pp. 5

74-7.

See Jer. 2. 8, 26; 4. 9; 5. 31; 6. 13; 8. 1, 10; 13. 13; 14. 18; 23. 11 and 33 seq.; 26. 7, 8 ; 27. 14 seq. ; 32. 32; cf. Lam. 4. 13 and 16. Cf. for attacks on false prophets, Mich. 2. 6-11; 3. 5-7, 11; Jsa. 9. 14; 28. 7; Soph. 3. 4; Jer. 23. 9-40; Ezech. 13. 1-4; Zach. 13. 2 etc. 7 Cf. Vraie et fausse rlforme dans VEglise, pp. 200 seq. Cf. S. Kierkegaard, The Right to die for the Truth. Examples of this kind of priest are Aaron (Ex. 32. 5 seq.), the Levite who attached himself to Michas (Judg. 17. 7 seq.) and then to the men of Dan (18. 14-20), the priests of the Sadduccean party who accepted the

Roman

occupation.

The Mystery of the Temple

58

The prophets attack the malpractices of a formalist and sham for a true relationworship. They demand worship in which regard

God and

and justice (mishpat &nd$edhdkct) a ritualism used as a facile excuse 8 to justify dishonest conduct. This too is why the prophets feel and show a profound distrust of the false sense of security which may be provided by the pomp of public worship and the formal regularity observance. Juda for instance trusts not only in the of ship with is

not

for uprightness

sacrificed in the interests of

religious

at its disposal but also in the fact that it possesses the covenant (Mich. 2. 6 seq.) s the temple (Mich. 3. 11; Jer. 7. 2 of Juda, in 2 Paralip. 13. 10 seq., seq.; cf. the speech of Abia, king law the (Jer 8, 8) and its descent from Nos templum habemusl*}, Abraham (Ezech. 33. 24). Yet all this is as nothing apart from a per-

human means

sonal conversion (Amos) and the true knowledge of Yahweh (Osee). These first two prophetic writers appeal for reform on the basis of this true interior conversion. It is not a matter of going to some

where worship is offered 1 and to sacrifice there. It is Yahweh men must seek! (Amos 5. 4). And the most radical statement ever made by Amos runs thus: "What, men of Israel, did you spend forty years in the desert, ever for me your burnt43. 23; Jer. 7. sacrifice, ever for me your offerings ?" (5. 25; cf. Isa. a well has Eichrodt As said, prophet is a man 22; Ps. 39[40], 7). in the grip of God as active Reality and conscious of his demands. It is in this context that statements such as the above must be situated, and they are proclaimed in an idiom in which the use of absolute a relative value; they negative expressions has often no more than

particular place

stress a

comparison.

The prophets'

2

criticism of the practice of sacrifice without and for a true relationship with

concern for interior conversion

any

God

continues with begins with Amos (5. 21-7) and Osee (8. 13; 6. 6), Isaias (1. 10 seq.; 2. 9-19; 7. 9; 29. 13, quoted by our Lord in Matt. 15. 7-8; 30. 15; 43. 22 seq.), Michaeas (6. 6-8), Jeremias (4. 20; 7. 21 seq,), and is resumed after the exile (Zach. 7. 5 seq.). It is a

Amos (cf. below); Oscc 4, 4-10; Mich, 3. 1 1-12; below); Jer, 7. 1-15 and 21-8; 31. 29~39; Bar. 2. 26; and a century after the return from exile, Mai L 6 to 2. 9. 9 Cf. Isa. S. 9 seq.; 22. 8b seq. 28. 7*15, etc. 1 Bethel (Amos 3. 14; 4, 4; 5. 5), Galgal (4, 4; 5. 5), Bersabee (5. 5); ci. Osee 4 15 It should be noted that Jerusalem is not mentioned. 8 OB this point, cf. C, 1 Cadoux, "The Use of Hyperbole in Holy Scripture'* in The Expository Times, 52 (1941), pp. 378-81. For an application to pur present problem and to the actual texts we have just quoted, see an article by Fr C* Lattey written independently of Cadoux's; **The Prophets and Sacrifice" (Journal of 8

The

principal references are

Isa. (cf.

;

Theological Studies, 42 (1941), pp. 155-65).

The Prophets

59 3

constant characteristic of the prophetic office. Here again, the 4 prophets are not opposed on principle to sacrifices as such, but the absolute assert of the and true they primacy living personal relationship with the living God, over a wholly exterior relationship which does not impose any obligation to practise righteousness: Amos 5. 24 (mishpat and gedhdfca); Osee 6. 6 (fresed: true love); Micheas 6. 6-8 (hesed again, and "and carry thyself humbly in the presence of thy God"); Ps. 49(50). 19 ("a heart that is humbled and contrite"); Ps. 39(40). 7-11 (obedience to God's law, to his wishes

and his word): cf. 1 Kings 15. 22; Jer. 7. 22, 23). But Israel was to learn from the prophets during the exile that this true interior relation to God demands a change of heart which only God can give by grace, a total renewal which would be, as it were, a new creation: Jer. 24. 7; 31. 31; Ezech. 18. 31; 36. 26; Isa. 51. 7 and cf. Isa. 65. 17; 66. 22. have now reached the heart of the prophets' religion, corresponding as it does to their idea of God. All is contained in the cry

We

of Amos: "Seek Yahweh and you shall live." 5 In actual fact the book of Amos expresses the drama which is played out notinaframework of public worship, even that of the Temple, but in men's hearts. All is determined by a man's fundamental attitude towards God. Whether this attitude is called true justice, righteousness, love and 6 knowledge of Yahweh, as by Amos and Osee, or "faith" as by Isaias,

what is always involved is a fundamental personal attitude towards demands of a living and active God. It is often said that the prophets made possible a movement away from a religion or a form of holiness based on public worship towards a religion or a form of holiness based on morality. But the truth is that the essence of their teaching was that sanctity or religion based on public worship and the Temple was the centre of the latter demanded that there should be a religion and a sanctity based on morality. In a word, over and above the presence of Yahweh in the act of public worship itself, they declared that he must also be

the

present as the sovereign ruler of men's hearts, for

Yahweh

is

a

living God. 3 See as early as the first book of Kings, 1 Kings 15. 22. See also Ps. 39(40). 7 seq.; 49(50). 8-21; 50(51). 18-19. * The passages in which the prophets with the most spiritual outlook assert that there will continue to be sacrifices are Ps. 49(50). 8; 50(51). 20-1 with the note in BJ: Jer. 7. 21 ; 33. 11 Isa. 56. 7; 66. 20 seq.; especially Mai 1. 11. ;

6

Amos

Osee

10. 12; Isa. 55. 6; Ps. 104(105). 4; 1 Paralip. 16. 11 (a passage containing extracts from the Psalms). [Knox, Amos 5. 4, reads "On aid betake you" and v. 6, "On your lives, to the Lord peril of your lives, to betake you**. Douai has "Seek ye me, and you shall live" and "Seek ye the Lord, and live** Translator,] * See 7. 9b; 8. 13-15; 28. 16; 30. 15. 5. 4, 6, 14; cf.

my

M.O.T.

3*

The Mystery of the Temple

60

The God of the prophets is unreservedly and fully the living God, not only, as throughout the Bible, in the sense that he is the very 8 in the very definite opposite of inert and lifeless idols, but also in sense that he intervenes history, acts, commands, "roots up and is truly, 1. Jer. 10). The God of the prophets plants anew" (cf. actually in a wholly special sense Yahweh-who-brought9 IsrM-out-of-Egypt. It is certain that Yahweh is also the God who

fully

and

as we have through David chose Sion for his dwelling-place. This, But the Presence seen, is for the prophets a fact beyond all question. of which the prophets have the most vivid experience and to which in a place they give priority is not the Presence to be worshipped God which will of the Presence by sovereign (Sion), it is the active 1 demands obedience and intervenes in history. Now that we have reached this central idea, which will need to be the place and the part explained, we are in a position to understand

of the prophets in the development of the revelation of the mystery of the Presence, and this evolution is a miracle of continuity and emergence. 7

Jeremias has a special affection for this expression:

4.

2;

5.

2; 10. 1-16;

13 Of! for lifeless 'idols: Hab. 2. 18-19; Jer. 2. 27-8; 10. 3-5; Bar. 6; Ps. 114(115). 4-8' 134(135). 14-18; Isa. 44. 19-20, etc. For Yahweh as the living God see: Exod. 3. 14; Num. 14. 21, 28; Deut 32. 40; Josue 3. 10; Isa. 37. 4, 17; 49. 18; Jer. our preceding note, etc. % 9 Cf. above, p. 30, n. 7. This formula is used as a genuine proper name for the the beginning of the DecGod of Israel. It is the name God gives to himself at 5. 6), on which will be alogue in token of his royal authority (Exod. 20. 2; Deut. based his kiagly activity in times to come (Num. 23. 22-3: Balaam). It is his name as the God who has loved Israel with a unique love (Amos. 3. 1 ; Ezech.

when mention Paralip. 17. 21), the name used for him particularly the punishment Israel has deserved because of her infidelity (Judg. 20. 5 seq.) and 2, 12; 3 Kings 9. 9; 17. 7; Mich. 6. 4; Jer. 2. 6; 34. 13; Ezech. when men are called upon to have faith in the living God who intervenes deto save his people: Osee 12. 10; 13. 4; cisively and with sovereign power in order Jer. 16. 14; 23. 7-8. EzechicPs expression is relevant here also: "And you shall p. 112), and the know that 1 am Yahweh" (cf. Jvt. Schmidt, Prophet undTempel, " phrase so often used, especially by the Isaias of the exile : I am Yahweh and there is no other"; Psalms 104(105); 105(106); 106(107); 113(114); 134(135); 135(136); and finally there are the numerous passages in which the prophets compare the deliverance or the return from exile to a second exodus Isaias, but also Michaeas, 20. 5 seq,;

is

1

made of

;

Baruch and Zacharias. is the point of view adopted by M. Schmidt, Prophet uml Tmipel Problem der Gottesntihe im Ahen Testament, Zollikon-Ziirich, Elm Studw 1948, We share this point of view, but there are moments when Schmidt exploits the influence of an it to excess and places a construction on it which shows existentialist or Barthian religious atmosphere (the same criticism appeared under the signature of Mowinckel in the Internal* Zeit$ch*f* Bibelwiss., 1, 1951-52),

Jeremias 1 This

(e.g. 16. 14),

mm

The Prophets

61

(B) The historical mission and place of the prophets, or the prophetic stage in the revelation of the mystery of the Presence of God

Tradition rightly assigns to David the title of the prophet-king. deserves it and not only for the psalms attributed to him or even because of the typological character of Ms office the Messias will be not only the "son of David", but, like David, a saviour-king he deserves it because the religion of the prophets really began in the religion, in the religious soul, of David. This fact has been noted and

He

thrown into

relief in a remarkable way by J. Pedersen. 2 Without decrying the admirable figure of Samuel, we may say that with David begins the union that will become so characteristic of the prophets, especially Elias, Amos, Osee, Isaias and Jeremias, the union, that is, between the proclamation of religion and a personal experience of God. It is not by mere chance that so many of the superb passages in the Psalter, with their lyricism and their note of personal prayer, have been attributed to David. This personal experience is at one and the same time that of a communion, one could almost say a friendship, with God, and that of an active and sovereign presence intervening to command, to lead, to bring men back from death to life. It is the experience of the "knowledge of God" and of the hesed, that true affection on man's part which reciprocates God's affection for man, so full as it is of grace and lovingkindness. Ultimately this will reach its climax in the Christian ay&m]? It is also the presence, the saving help through which God ceaselessly intervened in David's life, for "he was with David",* and at the same time in the history of Israel, since the latter was enacted in the life of David himself. Thus the idea of God's "royal" presence, a presence of

sovereign active and saving power, gradually became established. This is the idea which is restated by the prophets and they extend it to the history not only of individuals or even of Israel alone, but to the great world of the peoples of the earth. It is true that the fact of the uniqueness and sovereignty of Yahweh had been impressed upon Israel from the beginning of her history. It is seen in the action of Abraham, 5 in the facts of the exodus and of the judgment wrought by God upon Egypt, in the fact too that God had revealed himself and established a covenant with his people on Sinai, outside the a

Israel,

UI-IV, pp. 524

seq.,

654 seq.

8

For passages that treat of the hesed, see Osee4. 2; 6. 6; 10. *Cf. for instance 1 Kings 16;" 2 Kings 5. 22-5; 7. 3 ( =

1

Paralip. 11.9; 12. 18, etc. 6 Either in the fact that God

promises (Gen. (18. 16 seq.).

12.

had

2-3; 15. 5; 17. 4

him out of Ur and Haran, or in the or again in Abraham's plea for Sodom

called seq.),

12; 12. 7; Jer. 2. 2. 1 Paralip. 17. 2);

The Mystery of the Temple

62

boundaries of the Promised Land, and so showed that his plans and his power were not necessarily confined to Palestine (cf. above, there is something p. 14 and note 2). But with the great prophets new, namely the explicit and dazzling revelation of Yahweh's universal sovereignty and kingship, to which all the peoples of the 6 earth are obedient. With B. Duhm, we may note that this revelation is contemporary with the rise and the expansion of the great empires, whose agency Israel itself is brought into what the German

through

historians call the "Weltgeschichte", that

is,

history

on a world-wide

This is not the only occasion on which a supernatural revelation is seen to synchronize with historical circumstances which may the way for the provide it with a kind of framework or even prepare revelation itself. The prophetic view of the phenomena which filled the life of Elias in the second third of the ninth century B.C., is scale.

message of the prophets. For them Yahweh but over all the peoples of the world. His Israel over not only reigns will is carried out in every place and rules the destiny of peoples, 7

characteristic of the

whom

he uses successively as a scourge to administer punishment, 8 or as instruments to bring deliverance. David had not only opened up or enlarged in Israel's religion the vein of personal and living relationship, of a hesed religion, he had also linked the Presence of God with Sion and by placing God's had established dwelling-place side by side with the king's palace, a kind of alliance between the royal house and Yahweh. Kingship and God's Presence were as it were united and the great prophecy of Nathan had, in short, consecrated this union. The prophets, as jwe have pointed out, neither denied nor belittled this choice of Sion on God's part, but, when they faced the situation which had its that there was no origins in David, their task was: (1) to proclaim automatic guarantee that the royal power would continue to be exercised by David's dynasty, or that the Temple would always * Israels Propheten, Tubingen, 1916, pp. 1-3. F. J, A. Hort (The Christian EccksiOy London, 1908, pp. 143 seq.) makes a similar observation in regard to St Paul who, in the Epistles of the Captivity, thought out the mystery of the Church in a world-wide context because he himself, when at Rome, acquired a better understanding of the universal unity of the Empire, 7 his retreat on This is the meaning especially of the mission Elias received the heights of Horeb, when he was bidden to anoint the king of Damascus and the infinite (3 Kings 19, 15). On this world-wide consciousness of Elias in Fr eschatological scope of his mission, see the profoundly moving pages H.-M. Ferefs "L'economie providentielle dans la Tradition bibliquc; De la mort de Salomon & Pexil de Babylone** in Forma gregis, April-May, 1951, pp. 88-100. a few references only as instances of this; Amos 1. 3-2, 16; 9. 7; Isa, 10. 5 seq,; Jer. 1, 10; 18. 1-12; Isa, 48. 14 seq.; Ps. 66(67); 122(123). 3 seq.; 137(138). NeucMtel et Paris, 1945, pp. 108 seq. Cf, S. de Dietrich, e dessein de

m

A

4

Mm.

The Prophets

63

Because of the inveterate faithlessness of Israel, both were to be humiliated and crushed by their enemies; 9 (2) to develop the revelation of the Presence of God, There was indeed a Presence linked to kingship but to the kingship of God. Not that God's kingship excluded a human regency or principality. It is very remarkable and of great importance for ecclesiology that the passages which are exist.

insistent that, from henceforth, God himself would reign in a place for a visible king or prince. 1 The reign of Yahweh find Sion, will exist side by side with leadership exercised by "pastors" after God's own heart, that is of the ideal type represented by David.

most

However,

after its experience of kingship as a

power unto

salvation,

knew

national decay and exile. The course of events helped her to exalt the saving kingship of God above every earthly instituIsrael

at one and the same time of both her temple and her learned she from her prophets (Ezechiel) to understand more king, clearly that Yahweh himself was her true temple (11.16) and her true king (20, 33). The two, united by David on Sion, remained linked, but they appeared now in God who would be both Presence among and King over his people. The Presence would be linked to the Kingship and would be manifested in and through the Kingship. We have only to re-read the large number of passages which foretell that after the period of punishment there will be a restoration, whose sign will be the kingship of God and a new Presence: 2 tion.

Deprived

.

.

.

lame shall yet be a stock to breed from, and wayworn shall grow into a sturdy race; here in Sion they shall dwell, and the Lord be king over them, for ever henceforward (Mich. 4. 7).

14 Wandering hearts, the Lord bids you come back to him, and renew your troth; by ones and twos, from this city or that, from this clan or that, he will claim you for his own and bring you back to Sion; 15 and you shall have shepherds of his own choice to 16 After that, the Lord says, when guide you well and prudently. all is growth and fertility, no longer shall you have the Ark of the 9

For the dynasty,

see

Amos

2. 5;

Osee

1.

4; 7. 7;

8. 10,

15; 13. 10, where

concerned, but Juda too will suffer in its turn, 12. 3. For the Temple, cf. Mich. 3. 12; Jer. 7. 2 seq.; Ezech. (cf. below). 1 Cf. Mich. 2. 12 seq.; 4. 7 and 8; Jer. 3. 14-17; Ezech. 17. 16; 34. 11 seq. and 23 seq. ; 37. 22 and 24 seq. 2 These are the themes of many prophetic texts and sometimes culminate in a messianic outlook: see, for instance, Soph. 3. 15; Ezech. 20. 33 seq.; 37. 22 seq.; Isa. 27. 33-5; there is sometimes an eschatological sense: Zach. 14; Abdias vv. 15-21 (vv. 17 and 21 should be read together). Israel

is

The Mystery of the Temple

64

Lord's Covenant for your railying-cry; from thought and memory the fashionIt will have passed away, nor any care be bestowed on 17 as the Lord's throne of will men is It Jerusalem of it. speak ing .

.

.

(Jer. 3. 14-17).

Jeremias foretells a time when Jerusalem, although finally deto sit, will yet know, prived of the ark above which God was believed because in it of Presence the Yahweh, ever and more than before, God will reign. Isaias announcing in Babylon the good news of the return to Sion, does so in words full of meaning:

Welcome, welcome on the mountain heights the messenger that All is well! Good news brings he, deliverance cries he, telling from the Sion, Thy God has claimed his throne! A shout goes up cries,

all at once, all at once echoing eyes shall witness it, when the Lord brings

watchmen; they are crying out their praise

;

their

Sion deliverance 3

own

(Isa, 52. 7-8).

Thus the sacred Presence which Ezechiel and

also Isaias called

"the Glory of Yahweh" will, as they foretell, return to Sion with the we title of Victorious King and Saviour. But the prophet from whom 4

learn

most in

this

connection

is

the one

we have

just

mentioned

Ezechiel.

and preoccupied this priest was with the Temple he drew, during the Babylonian exile, the plans of the Ideal temple of the future restoration. (Previously he had been the used were very prophet of destruction and exile and the words he fire and lightning ; of a sees his He before theophany eyes remarkable.)

We know how

in

what

detail

proclaiming its presence. But his vision animals grows clearer and takes the form of a chariot yoked to four above or in the midst of which Yahweh seems to be enthroned: Ezech. 1; 3. 12-13; cf. ch. 10. The glory of Yahweh can move from one place to another5 and not only this but also in this first vision it appears to the prophet exiled on the banks of the river Chothe Glory of

Yahweh

is

bar far from Jerusalem, and it comes to him from the north. Thus Yahweh is not confined to the Temple, he may leave it and in fact does so (cf. below); he can accompany or rejoin his people wherever 3

The Knox version has a somewhat

Jerusalem Bible u

in the last phrase,

different sense from that in English runs:

of the text of the

which

For they see Yahweh face to face as he returns to Sion." Translator. Cf. 40. 5 and 52. 12. Isaias, especially in the Greek LXX has a predilection for the word Glory, Doxa, under which he includes all that is contained m^the manifestations (epiphanies) of God and of his saving action: cf. L. H. Brockingin Veins Tferto/n,, ton, "The Greek Translator of Isaiah and his interest in Doxa", 4

1

(1951), pp. 23-32. * Cf. Ezech. 9. 3; 10.

1

seq.; 18. 11,

22 seq.

The Prophets

65

they are, even when they are departed to Babylon. The truth is that God Is In the place where he reigns. That is why, after the restoration, reigning together with a "pastor" after his own heart, "my servant David", over the hearts of those who have been given new life, he says "I ... will set up my sanctuary in their midst for ever they .

.

.

my people and I their God" (37. 26-7). God's dwelling-place is linked to his rule.

This point of view will enable us to understand what we shall call the prophetic dialectic, that is, the simultaneous but not contradictory statement of a positive and a negative truth concerning the same fact; in the present instance, this is the Presence of God, linked as it was to the Temple of Jerusalem when the activities of the prophets

began. We are in fact faced with two series of contradictory statements; the first deals with the precarious position of the Temple and its destruction, the second foretells that after this destruction, God will be once more, always and more than ever among his people.

1. The first statement, which is rooted in the awakened consciousness of Israel before the time of the prophets, is the affirmation of God's transcendence. Yahweh's real dwelling is heaven 6 and it is

from heaven that he shows his power through the lightning and the thunder. "His the arched stairway of heaven", says Amos (9. 6), and Michaeas shows Yahweh coming down from his heavenly palace, from his holy place, to walk upon the tops of the mountains (1. 2 seq.; cf. Isa. 63. 19). And Osee in the same way shows him threatening to withdraw his presence from men and to return to his heavenly dwelling-place (5. 15). Hence the exquisite prayer put by Deuteronomy into the mouth of the faithful Israelite paying his tithe: "Look down, then, from that sanctuary of thine, that dwellingplace high in heaven, and bless thy people Israel . ." (26. 15). Statements of the same kind abound in the prophets both before and during the exile 7 and in the Psalms. 8 When the third book of Kings was being written, a document was inserted, doubtless during the exile, reporting the great prayer of Solomon at the translation of the ark and the dedication of the Temple; the following note was added and it Is obvious that the words had not been used by the king: "Folly it were to think that God has a dwelling-place on earth. If the very heavens, and the heavens that are above the heavens, cannot contain .

6

Cf. above p. 14 and below (on Jewish piety), p. 91. Cf. Isa. 18. 4; 33. 5; Jer. 25. 30; Isa. 40. 22; 55. 8 and 9; 57. 15 (58. 4); 63. 15, 19; 66, 1. 8 Ps. 2. 4; 10(11). 5 and 6; 17(18). 7; 28(29). 9; 32(33). 13; 88(89). 3; 101(102). 20; 103(104). 3 and 13. 7

The Mystery of the Temple

66

what welcome can

it offer thee, this house which I have built ?** not the place to inquire by what theological interpretation this assertion of God's transcendence was reconciled with that of his particular dwelling-place in the temple, for Yahweh, whose throne was in the heavens and whose stepping-stone was the earth 9 also sat between the cherubim of the Holy of Holies and in a sense the ark (the temple, Sion) was his footstool. 1 The prophets go further. In their prophecy of punishments and trials, they proclaim that Yahweh will withdraw his Presence and return to heaven: Osee 5. 15 (cf. Mich. 1.15, together with the notes in the Jerusalem Bible). They foretell the destruction of the Temple and the ruin of Sion ". for such guilt as yours I will turn mount Sion into plough-lands; standing heaps of stones that were once Jerusalem, and brushwood of the high forest growing over the he means to profane his own sancTemple hill" (Mich. 3. 12); ". of that boast which you love so, trembling ever yours, tuary, proud ." (Ezech. 24. 21), Jeremias above all is the prophet for its safety of this tragic prediction and because of it, will be condemned by the priests (chapter 26), as Jesus and Stephen were later to be.

thee, (3

Kings

8, 27).

This

is

:

.

.

.

.

Chapter

7.

x

.

.

A message from the Lord to

2

Jeremias, bidding him there proclaim aloud:

take his stand at the temple gate, and Listen to this word of the Lord, men of Juda, that make your 3 way in through these gates to worship him. Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Amend your lives and your likings, if you would have me dwell here among you. 4 Misleading are those words all about you, The temple of the Lord, here, the 5 Will you but temple of the Lord there, do not trust them.

amend your lives and your likings, giving one man redress against 6 not oppressing the alien, the orphan, the widow, nor another, in these precincts putting innocent men to death, nor courting, to your ruin, the gods of other nations, 7 then indeed I will make my dwelling here among you, in the land which was my gift to 8 your fathers from the beginning to the end of time. You put 9 your trust in flattering hopes, which can nothing avail you; theft, murder, adultery, the false oath, libations to Baal, the 'courting of alien gods that are no gods of yours, nothing comes amiss, 10 if only you can come and stand in my presence, here in this house, the shrine of my name, and tell yourselves you have made amends

for all these your detestable doings! u What, does this house, the shrine of such a name, count for no more than a den of thieves, in fl

*

Isa. 66. 1; Ps. 10(11). 4; cf. Matt 5. 35; 23. 22. Isa. 37. 16; Ps 79(80), 1; cf. Matt 5, 35; 23. 22.

The Prophets

67

yours Think you, the Lord says, that eternal God has no eyes to see it? 12 Go and visit that sanctuary of mine at Silo, where of old my power rested; look well, what havoc I have made of it, to punish the misdeeds of Israel, that were my people too. 13 Because of so much done amiss, the Lord says; because you would not listen when I cried early at your doors, or answer any call of mine u this house, shrine of my name and centre of your hopes, this home I gave to you and to your fathers, shall fare as Silo fared. 15 All those brethren of yours, the whole stock of Ephraim, I banished from my presence, and you shall be banished in your turn. eyes like

?

;

Some fifteen years later (in 592 B.C.), Ezechiel, from whom we have already learned that Yahweh is not tied to the Temple, shows us God as it were in a hurry to leave his sanctuary because of the abominable practices in which the house of Israel had indulged (8. 6); he shows us the Glory of Yahweh (his Presence) rising above the cherubim over which it was enthroned, passing across the threshold of the Temple and leaving it in an easterly direction: 4

And the brightness of the Lord's presence, cherubthroned, rose up above the threshold, till the house was all smoke, and all the precincts filled with the divine radiance ... 18 ... and therewith the bright presence of the Lord left the temple threshold, and stood there, cherub-throned. 19 With my own eyes I saw them, as they spread their wings and rose aloft; saw the wheels follow 22 as they went. And now the cherubim spread Chapter 11. their wings for flight, the wheels beside them, the bright presence of the Lord above them; and that presence, withdrawn from the city's midst, came to rest upon the mountain height eastwards of Chapter

10.

.

.

.

it 2 Ezechiel, like Jeremias, prophesies the profanation of the city and the Temple (24. 21). And in fact Jerusalem was taken, sacked, demolished, the Temple defiled and ruined and the pick of the population, on two occasions, taken away and deported to Babylonia. The exiles' thoughts dwelt earnestly and nostalgically on Jerusalem. Psalm 136(137), Super fiumina Babylonis, preserves for us a poignant echo of their feelings, whilst the Lamentations bring us that of the boundless sorrow of those who had remained behind in Judaea. 2

How inadequate, as far as its prophetic sense is concerned, is all treatment of

passage on "religionsgeschichtlich" lines! e.g. H. G. May, "The Departure of the Glory of Yahweh" (Journ. of Biblical Literature, 56 [1937], pp. 309-21), which connects the episode with a feast in celebration of the summer this great

solstice.

The Mystery of the Temple

68

The third book of Kings, written at that time, introduced into Solomon's prayer at the dedication of the Temple a phrase referring to the custom that then arose among the exiles of praying with their faces towards Jerusalem. 3 An intense work in depth and a process of purification took place in the Israel of the exile and the ideas of the Presence of God and of sacrifice benefited especially thereby. 2.

In fact

it is

at the time

when

this exiled Israel

was without a

Temple, far from Sion which God had chosen for his dwelling-place, that the prophets of the exile said over and over again that God was

and would be more than ever before with his people. God will (once more) be with his people, they proclaim, as they foretell the end of the period of trial and the coming of the restoration sometimes from a purely historical point of view, 4 sometimes from a messianic even eschatological standpoint, with which a universal ist theme is generally linked, 6 Ezechiel, who had seen the sacred Presence leave the Temple in so poignant a fashion, now shows Yahweh returning to Sion: 43. 1 Then he took me to the eastern gate; and all at the sun's rising, the bright presence of the God of from once, Israel made entry there. Like the sound of waters in deep flood his voice was, and the earth was lit up with the splendour all around 4 In it came through the eastern gateway, the splendour of the Lord 5 and with that, a transport seized me, carrying me off himself;

Chapter

.

.

.

into the inner court, where already the brightness of the Lord's filled the temple.

presence 6

it was I heard his voice speaking to me; and the man stood at my side passed on the message, 7 Son of man, he told me, there is my throne; here eternally, in the heart of Israel, is my resting-place (cf. Isa. 52. 7 seq,).

Thence

who

There was therefore to be a restoration of a temple and a Presence similar to those enjoyed prophet Ezechiel received

by Israel before the exile, and the same from God the mission (43. 10) to describe

in detail, even in minute detail, the temple of the revival (ch. 40-8). These chapters in Ezechiel inspired in post-exilic Judaism a kind of * 3 Kings 8. 44 seq. 48; cf, 2 Paralip. 6, 38 and see Dan. 6. 11. The exiles therefore prayed with their faces towards the south-west. Christians, wherever they may be, pray towards the east, for it is from the east that they await the coming, on the day of resurrection, of him who is the light of their souls.

14-17 (cf. above pp. 63, 64); Abdias 17; Ezech, 37. 26-8; Mai 3. 1 seq.; 1-6 ; 52. 7 seq. Then, of course, there are the prophets of the restoration Agg* 2. 3-9; Zach. 1. 16-17; 2. 10-17; 6. 12-13. s Mich. 4. 1-3; Isa. 2. 1-4; 4. 2*6; 18. 7; 25. 6-10; 60. 1 seq. (cf. 13); Zach, * Jer. 3.

cf. Isa. 12,

8.

1-8; Joel 4. I6-21(Vulg.:

:

3.

16-21).

69

The Prophets

bid to outdo all previous forms of liturgical legalism. True, Ezechiel had stressed the separation of the sacred and the profane so as to make certain that the Temple and the altar should be considered as so surpassingly holy. But the Temple whose parts he described minutely was not to be built of stone. Ezechiel was too well aware that God dwells where his people is to lend his support to the idea of a new type of sanctity automatically attached to a place and to things.

The Temple he

describes does indeed outline the characteris-

of a religious reality present on this earth, it translates into visible and corporeal phenomena the spiritual demands of a new presence of Yahweh's Glory. But this new Presence is not to be thought of of moveapart from what the prophet says of this Glory as capable ment from place to place, or apart from the prophecy he makes of the gift of a new heart (18. 31; 36. 26) or apart finally from the decisive and famous passage in which he foretells the reunion and the tics

restoration of a purified Israel and an Israel purified by God in terms which set the prophecy in a clearly messianic con-

himself text:

Chapter

37. 24

them

to tend

They

all,

my

shall

have one king over them, a shepherd

my

servant, David;

my commands remember

and obey

will they shall follow, covenant shall

26 .

.

.

My

be revoked; pledge them prosperity, a covenant that shall never in their set and them sanctuary I will my increase, up give midst for ever, 27 My tabernacle over them; they my people, and 28 I their God; proof to all the world that I, the Lord, have set 6 Israel apart, I that dwell apart in their midst for ever, .

.

.

The Temple whose plan Ezechiel draws

is

not an architectural

has a prophetic meaning. He foretells the messianic establishment of a sphere of purity which will be the place of God's and the Mosaic dwelling and transcend the material existence of Israel institutions. He opens, through the medium of prophecy, a new that will only be chapter in the mystery of the Temple, a chapter the in Apocalypse. completed project,

it

Not only Ezechiel, but also the other prophets whose mission is to foretell the exile or to comfort and enlighten Israel in her time of trial, bring the total reality of the Presence of their God to the of temple knowledge of those who have been deported and deprived is always earth and heaven fills Presence whose Yahweh altar. and and everywhere close to his people. As one of the Psalms of the exile says:

M

Schmidt has written with great insight OB this decisive passage and the 160-7. meaning of the temple in Ezechiel, See his Prophet und Tempel, pp.

The Mystery of the Temple

70

For

us, his worshippers, deliverance is close at hand; in this land of ours, the divine glory is to find a home. (Ps. 84[85]. 10).

Stronghold thou art of the poor, stronghold of the helpless in their

affliction

.

.

.

(Fsa. 25. 4).

God am

I, the Lord says, only when I stand near, and not when I am far away? Where, he would know, will you hide so close

that he

is

not watching you, fills heaven and earth?

he, the Lord, that

word

In a

(Jer. 23. 23-4).

the deported Israelites in Babylonia had the hallowed

religious man undergoes. In dereliction, always near, always with those who fear and love him. God, says the Isaias of the exile, is with contrite and

experience which every

exile, prison,

humble

God

is

hearts. 7

Ultimately, this is his true dwelling-place. Ezechiel for his part has a phrase which is still more daring and, far more than those we have quoted, an anticipation of the final revelation of the New Testament: "Far away I have banished them, says he, widely scattered them; yet, go where they will, a sanctuary in little they shall find in my 8

companionship." Elsewhere Ezechiel prophesied that at the return of Israel Yahweh himself would be king or shepherd and there would be no other 7

He, dwelling in that high and holy place, dwells also among chastened and humbled souls, bidding the humble spirit, the chastened soul,

and live Thus says the Lord, Heaven is my throne,

(Isa. 57, 15),

rise

earth the footstool under my feet. will you build for me, what place can be my resting-place? Nothing you see about you but I fashioned

What home

my hand

gave

From whom, Patient he

One who

it,

the Lord says;

it

being. then, shall

I

accept an offering?

must be and humbled,

stands in dread of

my

warnings

(Isa. 66, 1-2).

Pere Congar, quoting from BJ, has je serai pour eux tin sanctuaire* quelque temps* (i.e. for a while) (italics his), Vulgate, Douai, Knox, Authorised version, all read "a little sanctuary", which on the face of it seems strange as applied to the eternal God. The Catholic Commentary translates "And I have been to them only in a small degree a sanctuary" and explains this puzzling statement by pointing out that "the full observance of Yahweh worship was not possible outside Palestine". The point is of importance for Pere Congar's argument. If the Vulgate reading is taken, there seems little reason for calling Ezechiel's words here "daring** {we formute plus to^/e). -Translator. ft

,

.

.

The Prophets

71

king but he: "I mean to go looking for this flock, search it out for 9 myself" (34. I!). Ultimately, the two themes must be brought together and linked with one another. From the prophetic standpoint, the issue in both cases is the same. Yahweh is with the contrite and humbled heart because he reigns over it. He will himself be his people's temple because he himself will be their king. In the passages we have quoted from Jeremias 7. 3 seq. (above pp. 66, 67), Isaias (p. 70, n. 7) and in those from Isaias 1 and Zacharias 2 that deal with the restoration, Presence and Reign are linked together. Hence there is already an anticipation of the Gospel concept of the place of the Presence and the temple as none other than the people itself when, by its submission to the will of God, it is truly his people. The dialectic we have just analysed is found in the prophets in connection with the closely allied themes of the Sabbath, of sacrifice and even of the law and the covenant. They are the themes which the Epistle to the Hebrews treats as one and shows that they have passed together into a new order when the Mosaic regime which is a regime of servants changes to the regime of sonship whose source is Jesus Christ. The ancient Fathers (the Epistle of Barnabas, Justin, Irenaeus, Origen) liked to return to this very illuminating comparison between the two kinds of temple, sacrifice, priesthood, Sabbath, law and covenant, 3 The prophets' mission was to throw light upon and also to further the realization of God's plan which, by successive stages, was moving towards its final consummation in Jesus Christ. They were to prevent this movement from a fixation at one or other of its stages or in one or other of its characteristics. This was their duty particularly after the building of the Temple by Solomon. Men were not to think, as we have seen that Solomon himself was inclined to do, that God's purpose had been fulfilled, the promise to David accomplished, and 9 Here again there is a marked difference between Vulgate and B J. Pere Congar Void que faurai soin moi-mSme quotes: "I myself will take care of my flock" de mon troupeau. However, later verses in Knox convey the same sense, e.g. v. 14 "Yes, I will lead them out into fair pastures . ." and 15 : "Food and rest . . both these I will give to my flock." Translator. 1 "Welcome, welcome on the mountain heights the messenger that cries, All is well! Good news brings he, deliverance cries he, telling Sion, Thy God has shout goes up from the watchmen ; they are crying out all claimed Ms throne! at once, all at once echoing their praise; their own eyes shall witness it, when the Lord brings Sion deliverance" (Isa. 52. 7-8). 2 Zach. 14. 5 & seq. 8 remind the reader of two passages only. Irenaeus says: "Now that the temple is the heart of man, there is no longer any Sabbath in the sense of rest and leisure that are of obligation" (Demonstrat. 96) ; the great passage from Origen on the death of Moses, In lib. Jesu Nave, horn. 2, n. 1 (P.O., 12, 833-4) or horn. 1, n. 3, edited by Baehrens (G.C.S. Orig., 7, p. 296). .

:

A

We

.

The Mystery of the Temple

72

and worship now represented the Temple a genuine danger and Judaism This was truth of the Presence. very succumbed to it when, after the restoration of Esdras and Zorobabel, the voice of the great prophets was silent. This is why the prophets

that the

with, its priesthood

continued to emphasize the dual nature of the Israelite theology of the Presence, 4 the tension between the assertion of a Presence linked with the holy place and the tabernacle, and the assertion of the existence of a transcendent Yahweh, dwelling in heaven and bringing his action to bear in every place. In the forefront of the prophets' teaching there is always testimony to a tension between Sion and the Temple, the place of God's Presence, and the reality of Yahweh himself, the 5 transcendent, living and active God who alone is genuine Presence,

Above all, this is why the prophets make two opposing assertions concerning the Temple, just as they do in the case of sacrifices, the Sabbath and feasts. In one of the greatest passages in the whole of Christian literature, St Augustine has clearly shown the pattern of this dialectic of sacrifice "Let us see how when God says he wants no sacrifice, he makes it clear that there is one he does want, God does not want the sacrifice of slaughtered beasts, he wants the sacrifice of a broken heart."* The prophets say: "God wants no sacrifices, your ceremonies fill him with loathing!" Yet elsewhere they say that he wants them more than ever! He does and yet does not want them. He wants sacrifices but not of the kind that are offered to him. And the reason for his refusal is to be sought at a far deeper level than the moral obliquities which in fact accompany the Differing of sacrifices. True, the prophets frequently condemn these misdeeds and in terms on which we can never meditate enough, but they are not moral reformers, they are much more than that, just as Jesus, when he drove the buyers and sellers from the Temple, was not merely insisting on the moral conduct required within the sacred place but on something far more important. His gesture was prophetic and, as we shall see, inaugurated a new stage in the accomplishment of the mystery of the Temple. It was the prophets' mission to foretell this stage. This is the point of their dialectic, asserting as it does the two truths there is no Presence (of the kind you know aad are so anxious to preserve); and God will be present more than ever :

:

4

Cf* W. J. Phythian-Adams, Th People and the Presence, ch. 3, pp. 40-58. Cf. above and, for instance, in Tsaias, Sion lifted up as the rallying-point of all the nations (2. 2-5), and Yahweh alone raised up above the earth (2. 11, 17), 9 De civitate Dei* Lib, X, c. 5 (PX., 41, 261); of, the translation of this passage in Appendix B of Fr Bouyer's Mysore pascal (pp. 456 &eq ). On the dialectic of sacrifice in the prophets, cf. O. Hebert, The Throne of David* ch. iv; L. Bouyer, Le Mysore pascal, pp. 273 &eq, ; Y, M.-J. Congar, Vrai et fau$$ rdforme* pp. 136 seq,; Lay People in the Church* pp. 116 seq. and cf, below p. 181, s

t

The Prophets before. 7 There will

be a new Temple and

73

God

will

be for ever with his

people. *

*

*

The new law of the Presence was not to be fully established by the achievements of Zorobabel and by religion after the exile, any

more than Nathan's prophecy could

possibly have been fully accomplished in Solomon. We have already seen that a large number of the prophecies of restoration are messianic and even eschatological. The predictions of the prophets contain certain characteristics which we must rapidly summarize before bringing this chapter to an end L The prophets predict an interior renewal. The Israel of the restoration will be a people of devout and just men, a people obedient to Yahweh, in a word, a people who will practise the religion of the prophets, the religion which consists in the knowledge of God and in the hesed. **See if I do not rescue my people from the east country and the west, bring them back to dwell here, in the midst of Jerusalem ; :

they

my people, and I their

bound" (Zach. vision

is

8.

God,

in truth

7-8). Ezechiel

also the herald of a

new

and loyalty

who saw

heart

and a

either to other

new temple new spirit:

the

in his

24

1 mean to set you free from the power of the you home again from every part of the earth. 25 And then I will pour cleansing streams over you, to purge you from every stain you bear I will give you a new heart and breathe a new spirit into you; 26 1 will take away from your breasts those hearts that are hard as stone, and give you human hearts instead. 27 1 will make my spirit penetrate you, so that you will follow in the path of my law, remember and carry out my decrees. (Cf. 11. 17-20; 18. 31 and Ps. 50(51). 12 seq.)

Chapter 36.

Gentiles, bring

Already before the exile Jeremias had understood that not even a generous effort on man's part, nor even a reform such as that of Josias in which he himself had taken part, could bring Israel that justice of the heart which presupposed an interior transformation and could only be achieved on the basis of a new initiative on God's part and a completely gratuitous remission of Israel's irredeemable debt. Jeremias had spoken, in words that can never be surpassed, of a new covenant. And then Ezechiel in exile, only slightly in advance Cf. Phythian-Adams's chapter on Ezechiel (op. cit.> ch. 5). On the prophetic our Vraie etfausse rfprme t lot. cit, and all chapters 2 and 3 in the first part. It would be easy (and interesting) to show that the dialectic of the 7

dialectic, cf.

prophets was helped by the genius of Hebrew language and thought. 8 **A time is coming, the Lord says, when I mean to ratify a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Juda. It will not be like the covenant which I made with thek fathers, on the day when I took them by the hand, to

74

The Mystery of the Temple

of the author of the second and third parts of Isaias, 9 returned to the theme of the new covenant, which, as he says, will be "eternal", in the dual context of Davidic inessianism and of Yahweh's Dwelling with his people:

Chapter

among

exile

23

1

mean

1

to recall the sons of Israel

the Gentiles, gather

them from every

side

from their and restore

22 And there, in the hill country of Israel, I nation of them, with one king over them all ... will deliver them from the lands that were once the haunts of

them will

21

37.

to their

home.

make one

and make them clean again; they shall be my people, be their God. 24 They shall have one king over them, a 25 ... and ever shepherd to tend them all, my servant David ... 26 my servant David shall be their prince. My covenant shall pledge them prosperity, a covenant that shall never be revoked. I their sinning,

and

I will

them

will (multiply BJ) midst for ever. 27

.

,

.

and

set

up

my

sanctuary in their

My

tabernacle over them; they my people, and 28 I their God; proof to all the world that I, the Lord, have set Israel apart, I that dwell in their midst for ever. 1 2. It is Ezechiel again who, in his description of the ideal temple to come, introduces an idea which has since been adopted in a solemn and ceremonial manner by the New Testament and our paschal liturgy ("Fftfi aqimm ."): "And last, he took me to the door of the temple itself, and shewed me where a stream of water flowed eastwards from beneath the threshold of it. Eastward the temple looked, and eastward these waters flowed, somewhat to the temple's right, so as to pass by the southern side of the altar" (47. 1). This water becomes a great river which purifies the salt waters of the Dead Sea and, on its shores, produces vegetation and crops in abundance (47. 8-12). We think it very likely that Ezechiel took as his startingpoint the actual fact that there was a spring on the south-eastern .

.

rescue them from Egypt . No, this is the covenant I will grant the people of Israel, the Lord says, when that time comes. I will Implant my law in their inner,

.

most thoughts, engrave

it in their hearts; I will be their God, and they shall be be no need for neighbour to teach neighbour, or brother to teach brother, the knowledge of the Lord; all will know me, from the highest to the lowest. I will pardon their wrong-doing; I will not remember their sins

my people.

There

anymore"

(Jer. 31. 31-4).

will

Further passages that mention the devotion of the people after the exile are: Isa. 1. 26; 4. 2-6; 28. 16-17; Soph. 3. 11-13; Jen 7. 3-7; 33. 14-16; Ezech. 20, 38; Isa. 56. 3-8; 65. 8 seq.; Ps, 24(25). 12-13; 35(36). 9-11; 96(97). 10-12; Zach. 5, 3; 8, 7-8. The new Jerusalem will be founded on justice, see Isa. 1. 26; 54. 14; Jer. 33. 15; Baruch 5. 4. * ". . , a fresh covenant awaits you, this time eternal ; gracious promise of mine to David shall be ratified now" (Isa. 55. 3 s ; and cf. 59. 21 ; 61. 8), 1 Cf. Jer. 33, 14-26.

The Prophets

75

quarter of Sion, the spring of Gihon. It was from this spring that Ezechias, during the invasion of Sennacherib, had brought water inside the city as far as the fountain of Siloe; 2 an episode to which the Bible often refers. Isaias found it easy to pass from the fact of this

water which enabled Sion to resist a rigorous siege, to the concept of Yahweh, the only source of Israel's strength. Ezechiel transfers the spring from Sion to the Temple and sees in it a source of fruitfulness for the dispossessed regions of the Holy Land. The theme returns with Zacharias or his continuator, and from the standpoint of a messianic 3 or even an eschatological 4 renewal. It appears again in Joel at about the same time (4. 18 C), and in Psalm 45(46). 5. The prophets always described messianic times as the era of fruitfulness and of the restoration of the conditions of Para5

Here, the new element is the fact that this fruitfulness, linked 6 always is with the living water of a spring comes from the Temple, Jeremias taught that the spring of living water was Yahweh (2. 13); Ezechiel, Zacharias and Joel see it issuing from the altar dise.

as

it

,

and the Temple. Judaism adopted much the same idea in its speculaand the foundation stone of the

tions concerning the rock of Sion

Temple.

7

It is this prophetic idea that our Lord made his own by applying it to himself, according to St John's Gospel. 8 The episode took place 2

The account of this episode is in 4 Kings 20. 20; cf. Isa. 22. 9 and 11 (cf. 7. 1 seq.; 8. 6-8); Ps. 45(46). 5 (where the context is that of Sennacherib's threat); Ecclus. 48. 17. a "When that day comes, clansmen of David and citizens of Jerusalem shall have a fountain flowing openly, of guilt to rid them, and of defilement" (13. 1). 4 "Then a living stream will flow from Jerusalem, half to the eastern, half to the western sea, winter and summer both; and over all the earth the Lord shall be king . (14. 8 and 9). 6 Cf. Amos 9. 13; Isa. 2. 1-3; 11. 1-9; Jer. 31. 12; Joel 3. 18, etc. 6 Isa. 12. 3; 35. 6; 41. 17 seq.; 44. 3; 48. 21; Ps. 35(36). 9; Zach. 12. 10; 13. 1; Joel 2. 28. 7 As regards the rock, the idea was that Sion was the summit of the world, the central point around which the earthly and heavenly world had been created. Thus a relationship was established between the holy place and paradise and it is in this context that the stream of life during the last days was seen to flow out from the Temple; cf. J. Jeremias, "Golgotha und der hi. Pels. Eine Untersuchung z. Symbolsprache des N.T.," in Archiv f. Ntl Zeitgesch. u. Kulturkunde, 2 (1926), pp. 74-128: cf. pp. 92-4. As regards the foundation stone of the foundation stone, Temple, the word thijja in the expression abh&n s e thijja ( in the Hebrew of the Mishna), had two meanings "foundation" (depth) and "to drink". Hence the sacred rock could equally well be called the rock of drinking, and its name was then explained either by claiming that the world had been "founded" with it as its centre, or that the waters that watered or irrigated it came from this rock. On the theme of the water flowing from the Temple in the messianic epoch, as understood by the Jews, cf. J. Bonsirven, Le judafsme pak$~ tinien au temps de Jdw$~Chri$t> Paris, 1935, t. 1, p. 432. 8 See J. Jeremias, Jesus als Wettvottender, Gutersloh, 1930, pp. 44 seq.; H. Riesenfeld, J4$us transfigure, Lund, 1947, pp. 15-28 (Les f&tes d*automne) and .

.

AITEAQE

=

The Mystery of the Temple

76

on the last day of the feast of Tabernacles (7. 37). This day was devoted to prayer for autumn rain. Remembrance was made of the way in which God had given his people the blessing of water, particularly 9 during the exodus (the water that gushed from the rock). There was a procession to the fountain of Siloe, which we believe Ezechiel had in mind when he spoke of the spring flowing from the side of the Temple, and during the procession the words of Isaias were sung: "You shall draw in joy from the fountains of salvation." 1 Water was drawn from the fountain and then poured out as a libation on the altar of sacrifice. It is in this precise context, carefully noted by St John, that Jesus cried out in a loud voice "If any man is thirsty, let him come to me, and drink; yes, if a man believe in me, as the scripture says, Fountains of living water shall flow from his bosom" (7. 38), St John adds: "He was speaking here of the Spirit, which was to be received by those who learned to believe in him.' Thus Jesus claimed to be the true Rock from which the water had gushed in the desert (below, n. 9), but also, though in a more hidden manner, the true temple from which living water would flow, the water that in Scripture is so :

1

constantly an image fo the Spirit (cf. Braun, quoted in n. 8). When the soldier pierced Jesus's side as he lay asleep in death on the cross and blood and water gushed forth, we know that the prophecy of our Lord was fulfilled now that he was "glorified" (John 19, 34), From the side of the body of Jesus, as from the side of the true temple,

flowed the living spring of the sacraments and of the Spirit. It is well known that the theme of the Church born under the symbol of blood and water from the side of Jesus asleep on the cross, as Eve was born from the side of Adam during his sleep, is one of the most constant elements in tradition; 2 it is also, analogously, a biblical datum. All these themes are restated by St John in the Apocalypse when he writes of the heavenly or eschatological Jerusalem: 6 Chapter 21. And he who sat on the throne said, Behold I make 6 I am Alpha, I am Omega, the beginning of all things new, all things and their end; those who are thirsty shall drink it is my free gift.** out of the spring whose water is life. 7 Who wins the victory ? He shall have his share in this I will be his God, and he shall be my son & Chapter 22. * He shewed me, too, a river, .

.

.

.

.

.

;

.

especially F. M. Braun, "L'eau et FEsprit," in Rev. Thomtste, 49 (1949), pp* 5 seq.; A, Lef&vre, *'La blessure du c6t6," in Le Catir (Etudes Carm$litame$ 9 29), Paris, 1950, pp. 109-22. Cf.Exod. 17. 6 ; Num. 20. 2-1 l;Isa. 48. 21; Ps. 76(77). 15-16,20; 104(105). 41. 1 Cf. Strack-Billerbeck, t. 2, pp. 799-809. a For the essential documents see S. Tromp, "Be nativitate Ecclesiac ex Corde Jesu in cruce," in Gregonanum, 13 (1932), pp. 489-527, and the encyclical

Mystici Corporis, 29 June 1943.

The Prophets

77

whose waters give life; it flows, clear as crystal, from the throne of God, from the throne of the Lamb. 2 On either side of the river,

midway along the its fruit

city street,

twelvefold,

one

grows the

yield for each

tree that gives

month.

this tree bring health to all the nations * Cf. Isa. 55. 47. 12 and our 3.

Often,

And

.

* Cf.

2 Kings 7. 14, the prophecy of Nathan. comment on pp. 74 and 75 above. 1.

bearing

life,

the leave