This is the html version of the file http://www.scotthahn.com/download/attachment/1932
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
Page 1
Liturgy and Empire:Prophetic Historiography and Faith in Exile in 1–2 Chronicles1 Scott W. Hahn 2St. Paul Center for Biblical TheologyReading the books of 1 and 2 Chronicles, we are confronted right away with ques-tions about the meaning and practice of history and prophecy. The Chroniclerobviously understands himself to be writing history in some sense. With his firstword, “Adam,” he signals his ambition to tell the world’s story from the “beginning,”from the creation of the first man to the “end,” his own time in the late sixth orearly fifth century b.c., possibly within a generation of the decree of King Cyrus ofPersia that concludes his work.1But the reader notices that there is more than history at work here. Chroniclesstrains the categories and definitions of traditional historiography, secular or bibli-cal. First, there is the matter of tone. It simply does not read like history. It readsmore like a series of homilies than a historical narrative. Second, there is the ques-tion of why the Chronicler includes so much material omitted from other biblicalsources, while excluding so much material that other biblical writers felt essentialto Israel’s national story.There is much evidence to suggest that the Chronicler was self-consciouslywriting a homiletic and theological commentary on Israel’s history to serve as thesummary entry in the Hebrew canon. And it is important to note that Chronicleswas positioned as the final book in some of the earliest canons.2 Peter Ackroyd is1 The original Hebrew title, dibrē hayyāmīm—“The Book of the Events [literally, “the words”]of the Days,” suggests Chronicles’ provenance as historical writing. So does its fairlystraightforward chronological approach to Israel’s story. The basic outline of Chronicles lookslike this: The Chronicler begins with a long list of the family of nations and ancestors of Israel(1 Chron. 1:1–9), picking up Israel’s story during the last days of its ill-fated first king (1 Chron.10). The narrative pivots on the reigns of the great King David (1 Chron. 11–29), and his son andsuccessor, Solomon (2 Chron. 1–9). The break-up of the monarchy in the years after Solomonand the reigns of the post-Solomonic kings are detailed next (2 Chron. 10–36:16). Finally, theChronicler in short order concludes by depicting the sack of Jerusalem, the destruction of theTemple, the exile of the people and, with King Cyrus of Persia’s decree, the beginnings of theirrestoration to Judah (2 Chron. 36:17–23).2 That was apparently Chronicles’ position in the Bible as Jesus read it. This is suggested fromhis sweeping depiction of the history of martyrdom—“from the foundation of the world …from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah”—that is, from the first martyr in the Bible’sfirst book, Genesis, to the last martyr in the Bible’s last book, Chronicles. See Luke 11:50–51;compare Gen. 4:8–16; 2 Chron. 24:20–21. See Ralph W. Klein, 1 Chronicles: A Commentary,Hermenia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2006), 2, n. 15.Letter & Spirit 5 (2009): 13–50
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
14 Scott W. Hahnsurely correct in describing the Chronicler as “the first theologian of the canon.”3And Martin Selman, who has written one of the best modern commentaries, hasnoted this unique feature of the work: “Chronicles stands apart in its attempt tointerpret the Old Testament from beginning to end.”4If Chronicles demands to be understood in some sense as history, we mustacknowledge that it is history told in a “prophetic” key. There are more than a dozenoriginal prophetic speeches in Chronicles that are found nowhere else in the canon.Prophets, seers, and divine emissaries play a prominent role in his recasting ofIsrael’s history—warning kings, delivering God’s covenant Word, and significantly,“prophesying” in the context of the Temple liturgy.Scholars have shown how the prophetic discourses in Chronicles reflectfundamental theological concerns of the author.5 But to my mind, this dimensionof the work raises a set of further questions: to what extent did the Chroniclerunderstand his own writing of Israel’s history to be a prophetic and even liturgicalact—receiving the Word of God, interpreting and applying it, and delivering it toGod’s people in their concrete historical moment? To what extent is the Chroniclerhimself “prophesying” in the context of the Temple liturgy?In this article I want to take up these broad questions—about the relation-ship between history and prophecy in Chronicles and the relationship between theChroniclers’ historical testimony and the divine Word in which his work, as sacredScripture, participates. My contention is that Chronicles can best be understoodas a work of prophetic historiography characterized by the author’s profound as-similation and interpretation of the covenantal and liturgical worldview of theHebrew Bible.Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the first-century a.d., said thatthe historical records found in the Bible are unique because “only prophets havewritten the original and earliest accounts of things as they learned them from Godhimself by inspiration.”6 Thus, the rabbis described the historical books, such asSamuel and Kings, as “the former prophets.”We detect this prophetic sensibility in the Chronicler, who aims to do farmore than retell Israel’s national story. He is delivering a word of divine assurance.3 Peter R. Ackroyd, The Chronicler in His Age, Journal for the Study of the Old TestamentSupplement Series 101 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1991), 285; compare 280.4 Martin J. Selman, 1 Chronicles: An Introduction and Commentary, 2 vols., Tyndale Old TestamentCommentaries 10a-10b (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1994), 1:42.5 See William M. Schniedewind, “Prophets and Prophecy in Chronicles,” in The Chronicler asHistorian, eds. M. Patrick Graham, Kenneth G. Hoglund, and Steven L. McKenzie, Journalfor the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 238 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997),204–224; Pancratius Beentjes, “Prophets in the Book of Chronicles,” in The Elusive Prophet:The Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character, and Anonymous Artist, ed. Johannes C. deMoor, Oudtestamentische Studiėn 45 (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 45–53.6 Josephus, Against Apion, Bk. 1, 37, in The Works of Josephus, trans. William Whiston(Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 776.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
Liturgy and Empire 15He wants his readers to understand that the history he is retelling is not finished; itis ongoing. God’s divine purposes are still unfolding in the lives of his people—de-spite the catastrophe of the exile and the hesitant and anticlimactic beginnings ofthe people’s return from exile and their restoration to Jerusaelm. The Chronicler’sintent is to recall to the people of Judah God’s original intentions—not only forIsrael, but for creation, and to help align their hearts and lives more faithfully withthat divine plan. A prophetic exhortation attributed to King Jehoshaphat couldserve as a summary of his authorial purposes in this book:Hear me, Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem! Believe in theLord your God, and you will be established; believe in hisprophets and you will succeed. (2 Chron. 20:20)In this article I want to explore more closely this work of prophetic historiography.I will begin by looking at the “worldview” we find in Chronicles—what does theChronicler believe about history, how does he come to those beliefs, and how dohis beliefs guide his selection of materials to include and exclude in his work?Second, I will look at the literary tools and narrative methods he employs forinterpreting his sources and telling his story. The bulk of the article will focus ona close reading of how the Chronicler relates the central moments of his narra-tive—the establishment of the Davidic kingdom. I will concentrate on three pillarsof this establishment—David’s founding of Jerusalem as his religious and politicalcapital; the Davidic covenant; and the origins of the Temple. I will conclude witha consideration of purposes of the Chronicler’s prophetic historiography. Finally, Iwill suggest some of the reasons that I believe Chronicles opens fresh interpretiveperspectives for our understanding of such key New Testament themes as theChurch, the Kingdom, and the liturgy.Although I will not be able to explore this latter final point fully, my conten-tion is that Chronicles’ prophetic historiography offers important perspectives andinsights for the Christian interpretation of the New Testament.7 We see in theChronicler what Jean Daniélou has noticed in the Old Testament prophets—aprofoundly “typological interpretation of history,” in which the basis of presenthope and the vision for the future is based upon a deep reading of God’s patternsof dealing with his covenant people in the past.8 For the Chronicler, the key tohistory is the Kingdom of David established by divine covenant and embodied inthe Temple at Zion and its liturgy. As the rise of this liturgical empire in the pasttriggered blessings for God’s chosen people and for the world, so its future resto-7 Nor will I be able to deal in this article with important critical issues regarding Chronicles.All of these issues I take up in my forthcoming theological commentary on 1 and 2 Chronicles,which will be published in the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible series. The articlehere is a part of this larger work in progress.8 See Jean Daniélou, From Shadows to Reality: Studies in the Biblical Typology of the Fathers(Westminster, MD: Newman, 1960), 157.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
16 Scott W. Hahnration will bring to fulfillment God’s plan for history. This prophetic hope givesChronicles its air of expectation and anticipation, especially in his final portraits ofthe Davidic kings, Jehoshaphat, Josiah, and Hezekiah.The authors of the New Testament in many ways lived under conditionssimilar to those in the Chroniclers’ audience—trying to keep the faith while livingin “exile” as believers in the true God under the domination of a foreign powerand its gods. The Chronicler helps us to grasp the meaning of the new Testament,especially the Apocalypse of John, which shows the Church to herself in her es-sence—as a divine mystery, not just an institution, as a heavenly kingdom andnot only an earthly body. The Chronicler’s liturgical worldview, which builds tothe dedication of the Temple and concludes with a Passover celebration in therenewed Davidic kingdom, also anticipates the New Testament, where the Church,through its participation in the heaven liturgy will be delivered through a succes-sion of earthly empires that persecute her.“A Chronicle of All Divine History”The editors of the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures,grouped Chronicles as the last of the historical writings, following the books ofKings. The Septuagint title, Paraleipomena, indicates the editors’ apparent beliefthat it contained mostly supplemental “things omitted or left behind” in thoseearlier historical accounts.Yet contrary to the implications of its Septuagint title, Chronicles is farfrom a gathering of fragments or things left over. It is a coherent and compellingtheology of history. There is ample evidence that the Chronicler is working with arelatively stable canon of Scriptures. His first words are drawn from the first pagesof the Bible, while his final words are a quotation from the first words of Ezra, awork roughly contemporaneous to his. And he draws extensively from materials inevery major division of the Hebrew Bible—the Pentateuch and the writings of theformer prophets, definitely, but also from the prophets and the psalms.But Chronicles is more than a kind of “rewritten Bible,”9 as some scholarshave surmised, and he is doing more than biblical interpretation. The Chronicler’sprophetic historiography is guided by a prayerful and profound biblical world-view—based on an understanding of what he believes the Scriptures revealabout the ways and means of God and his purposes for Israel and the world. TheChronicler’s narrative is pervaded by a sense of what St. Paul and later Christiantradition would call the oikonomia, the divine economy through which God worksout his saving purposes. For the Chronicler history has a telos—a definite directionand goal toward which it is driving, a goal established before the foundation of theworld through the intention of God. This does not mean that history is reducibleto eschatology in Chronicles. Chronicles is not apocalyptic literature but prophetic9 See Brant Pitre, “Rewritten Bible,” in The Westminster Dictionary of Early Christian Literatureand Rhetoric, ed. David E. Aune (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 413–414.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 5
Liturgy and Empire 17historiography; he looks forward not to the “end” of history, but to the fullness oftime and the fulfillment of what is anticipated in Israel’s liturgy, which is alwaysopen to what God holds in store for the future.This recognition about Chronicles was made early in the Christian inter-pretive tradition. St. Jerome called it “a chronicle of all divine history.”10 For theChronicler, human history is divine history, which is to say that in human eventswe see signs of divine purpose; history is salvation history. History in Chroniclesis a kind of dialogic and filial encounter between the Creator and his creation, andespecially his chosen “firstborn,” the children of Israel.We see this even in the deceptively routine, even seemingly mundane ge-nealogies that introduce the Chronicler’s work. These genealogies, which run fornine full chapters, root the Chronicler’s narrative in the creation of the world andreflect the author’s familial and covenantal metaphysic. Drawing on the “book ofgenerations” and the listing of the “families of the sons of Noah” found in theprimordial history of Genesis 1–11, these opening genealogies connect Israel to theorigins of the human family. As in Genesis, the seventy (or seventy-two) sons ofNoah that the Chronicler lists are meant to symbolize all the nations of the worldand to illustrate their familial relationship to a common father, Adam.11Chronicles is biblical history as family history; it is the story of the family ofhumanity. And at the center of the family of nations is the tribal family of Israel.As Ralph Klein observes:This is a history of all days, a universal history, beginning withAdam and extending to Israel. … [1 Chronicles 1] implies thediversity and the unity of the world and it suggests that Israelunderstood its role within the family of nations and as a witnessto all humanity.12The Chronicler’s prophetic word seeks to remind the people of who they areand where they came from. They are not just another defeated people, movingfrom captivity in Babylon to subjugation in their homeland under Cyrus. They arethe children of God, the people with whom he has made his covenant, his firstbornamong the peoples of the world, a holy and priestly people chosen to bring abouthis divine purposes for creation.1310 St. Jerome, Prologue to The Books of Samuel and Kings, in A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, 2nd. Series, vol. 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996),490; compare Klein, 1 Chronicles, 1.11 Gary N. Knoppers, 1 Chronicles 1–9: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary,Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2004), 273; Marshall D. Johnson, The Purpose of theBiblical Genealogies: With Special Reference to the Setting of the Genealogies of Jesus (Cambridge:Cambridge University, 1969), 232.12 Klein, 1 Chronicles, 81.13 See Exod. 4:22; 19:5–6; Deut. 7:6–7; 10:15; 14:2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 6
18 Scott W. Hahn“One Flesh and One Bone”: Covenant and KinshipThis brings us to a pivotal feature of the Chronicler’s prophetic historiography—his sense of the covenant and the covenantal structure of the divine economy. Ofcrucial significance for interpreting Chronicles is the biblical notion that God’scovenant establishes sacred kinship, setting God, Israel, and humanity in a familialrelationship.14 This relationship is not metaphorical or a sort of legal fiction. Thecovenant points to a sacramental consanguity, a “blood” bond, calling Israel tobe “one flesh and bone” with God—a nuptial-covenantal image we hear in theChronicler.15 At the heart of the covenant is the divine Word, an oath sworn byGod himself. The Chronicler will speak of the covenant as “the Word that hecommanded for a thousand generations,” that is, as a divine oath that can neverbe broken.16 The identity of God himself is defined by his keeping of his covenantoath, as King David sings: “O Lord, God of Israel, there is no God like thee inheaven or on earth, keeping covenant …”17The sequence of biblical covenants is central to the Chronicler’s understand-ing of the divine economy. This can be traced from the early pages of his work.Beginning with Adam and the covenant of creation, his genealogy follows the pathof God’s covenant through Noah, Abraham, Israel, and, finally and cumulatively,to David, with whom God makes a “covenant of salt,” that is, a new and everlastingcovenant.18His work focuses on David and the Kingdom and Temple liturgy estab-lished by the Davidic covenant. The making of this covenant is the climax ofthe Chronicler’s history, with the covenant presented as the fulfillment of God’spurposes for creation. The Davidic covenant is a novum, something unprecedentedand radically new. But in the Chronicler’s presentation there is a profound unity insalvation history reflected in the continuity of God’s covenants. This is another wayof saying that, for the Chronicler, the Davidic covenant advances the fulfillmentof God’s purposes in all the covenants that came before, especially the covenantswith Moses and Israel at Sinai and the foundational covenant, the covenant withAbraham.The Mosaic and Abrahamic covenants illuminate the Chronicler’s under-standing of salvation history. Indeed, as we will see, these covenants provide a kindof typological substructure for the history that unfolds in the Chronicler’s work.14 See generally, Scott W. Hahn, Kinship By Covenant: A Canonical Approach to the Fulfillment ofGod’s Saving Promises, The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library (New Haven: Yale University,2009); Scott Hahn, “Covenant in the Old and New Testaments: Some Current Research (1994–2004),” Currents in Biblical Research 3:2 (2005): 263–292.15 1 Chron. 11:1; see also Exod. 24:6.16 1 Chron. 16:15.17 2 Chron. 6:14.18 2 Chron. 13:5; 21:7.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 7
Liturgy and Empire 19The telos of history for the Chronicler is the fulfillment of God’s three-fold promiseto Abraham—to make Abraham’s descendants a great nation, to give him a greatname, and to make him the source of blessing for all the nations of the world.19And the Chronicler’s ideal of Israel is drawn implicitly from the mandate givento Moses and Israel at Sinai—to be God’s “firstborn son” and “my own treasuredpossession among all the nations … a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”20In Chronicles, David’s kingdom fulfills the “covenant with the people ofIsrael when they came out Egypt.”21 The Law of the Kingdom is the Torah given atMount Sinai, “the book of the covenant,”22 now transformed at Zion into a law forall humanity, as we will see below. Further, as we will see, the Chronicler depictsDavid as a new Moses figure and describes the Kingdom of David and Solomonin terms that make clear the Kingdom’s dependence on the covenant institutionsestablished at Sinai—the “Ark of the Covenant of God,” the central role of theLaw and the Levitical priesthood, and the liturgical assembly, the qāhāl (Greek:ekklēsia).Yet, in contrast to the other historical works in the canon, where the Mosaiccovenant is dominant, the Chronicler seems to insist on the priority of theAbrahamic covenant. This again reflects a sound interpretation of the canonicalrecord, where the Abrahamic covenant is foundational and Israel’s liberation fromEgypt and exodus to Sinai is brought about because “God remembered his cov-enant with Abraham.”23 The Chronicler may also feel that following the ordeal ofthe exile, the people need a return to their roots—to understand that long beforethe Exodus and Sinai there was Moriah, the site of Abraham’s binding of Isaac and,in God’s plan, the site of the Temple at Zion.24The Chronicler wants his readers to see the inner unity of salvation history—running from Adam to Abraham, to the covenant with Abraham’s descendantsat Sinai, and finally to the Kingdom of David at Zion, in which salvation historyreaches its zenith.25 The Kingdom of David is the fulfillment of Israel’s mission tobe a kingdom of priests—but again for the sake of God’s original covenant pur-19 Gen. 12:1–3; 15:7–21; 17:1–8; 22:16–18.20 Exod. 4:22; 19:5–6. On the three-fold nature of the Abrahamic covenant, see Hahn, Kinship ByCovenant, 101–135.21 2 Chron. 5:10; 6:11.22 2 Chron. 34:30.23 Exod. 2:24; 6:5.24 See 2 Chron. 3:1, which I will discuss more below.25 “The real foundation of God’s relationship with his people is rooted … in the Abrahamiccovenant, and this itself in the context of the primeval history. God’s purpose for his peoplebegins in creation, not at the Exodus. … The list of names [in the Chronicler’s genealogies], soeasily read as a mere catalogue, is in fact an assurance of the ultimate origin of the relationship.‘Adam, Seth, Enoch’—that is where Israel, the true Israel begins.” Ackroyd, Chronicler in his Age,265.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 8
20 Scott W. Hahnposes with Abraham—to bring blessings to all the nations of the world throughAbraham’s “seed.”The Chronicler’s God is a God of the covenant, and the economy of salvationis for the sake of this covenant. When David brings the Ark of the Covenant torest finally in Jerusalem, the great historical psalm he composes for the occasionincludes these lines:He is mindful of his covenant forever … the covenant whichhe made with Abraham … an everlasting covenant to Israel. (1Chron. 16:15–17)26The Typological Interpretation of HistoryThe Chronicler’s history, as we have suggested, represents a deep reading of thecanon of Israel’s scriptures. As many scholars have noted, the Hebrew canon isfilled with examples of “inner-biblical” exegesis. Later texts comment upon orinterpret earlier ones; new situations and people are understood and characterizedby analogy to earlier texts. The large measure of what scholars call the Chronicler’sVorlage, or source material, is drawn from the biblical books of Samuel and Kings.But in his rewriting and reinterpreting of his Vorlage, his work is shot through withscriptural references and allusions, in addition to direct quotations and citations.Like any good historian, the Chronicler provides a record of past figures, places,and events; but his accounting is written in such a way that these figures, places,and events often appear as types—signs, patterns, and precursors—intended toshow his readers not only the past but their present reality from God’s perspective.For instance, David is sketched as both a new Adam and a new Moses; the Templeis a new creation and a new Tabernacle and altar.Acknowledging this intensely inner-biblical and typological narrativetechnique is not at all to deny the historical reliability of the Chronicler’s account.Rather, I am suggesting that reporting history simply “as it happened” is not theChronicler’s primary interest. What happened is crucial for the Chronicler. Butonly because in the what of history he sees revealed the patterns of divine intentionand intervention—the why of history. The why of history is the reason for theChronicler’s prophetic historiographical work.The way the Chronicler comes to understand, interpret, and explain the whyof salvation history is through typology. Chronicles is an intensely typological work.Indeed, Chronicles gives us a typological interpretation of history.27 Typology forthe Chronicler is a way to shed light on the unity of God’s plan in history, and toshow the meaning of people, places, and events in light of God’s covenant promisesand redemptive acts.26 Compare Ps. 105:8–10.27 See Scott Hahn, Letter and Spirit: From Written Text to Living Word in the Liturgy (New York:Doubleday, 2005), 19–25.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 9
Liturgy and Empire 21G. W. Trompf has suggested that the typological patterns of “recurrence”found in Chronicles and elsewhere in the Bible, are related to the use of theseScriptures in the rhythms of Israel’s cult and worship.28 Indeed, the Chronicler’sextensive use of typology adds to the homiletical feel of his work. What we find inthe Chronicler fits the definition of what the Jewish scholar, Michael Fishbane, hastermed “aggadic historiography,” a theological and homiletic rereading of Israel’s“received historical traditum [“tradition”],” often utilizing various forms of typology.As Fishbane notes, biblical typology is far more than a literary device.Typological exegesis … celebrates new historical events in so faras they can be correlated with older ones. By this means it alsoreveals unexpected unity in historical experience and providentialcontinuity in its new patterns and shapes. Accordingly, theperception of typologies is not solely an exegetical activity, it is,at the same time, a religious activity of the first magnitude. …Typological exegesis is … a disclosure of the plenitude andmysterious workings of divine activity in history.29For the Chronicler, the typological key to “the plenitude and mysterious workingsof divine activity in history” is the Kingdom of David. Chronicles is the world’sfamily history written in a Davidic key, beginning in the deceptively simple genea-logical lists which are actually careful compositions that progressively narrow theworld’s family tree into a single branch—the line of the family of David.For the remainder of this article we will concentrate on the Chronicler’sdescription of the rise of the Davidic kingdom, in which we see reflected both hiscovenantal worldview and his reliance on typology to illuminate the unity of thedivine plan and the dynamic movements of history toward its fulfillment.Salvation History and David, the New MosesWhat Jon Levenson has observed about the Davidic ode, Psalm 78, is true for theChronicler’s work: “It sees David’s divinely commissioned reign as the consumma-tion of Israel’s Heilsgeschichte [salvation history], the very telos [fulfillment] of theirnational experience.”30 The Kingdom established by David at Zion, “the city ofDavid,” and the Temple built by David’s son, Solomon, are understood to be thepinnacle of God’s plan for creation. For the Chronicler, all human history since28 G. W. Trompf, “Notions of Historical Recurrence in Classical Hebrew Historiography,” inStudies in the Historical Books of the Old Testament, ed. J. A. Emerton, Supplements to VetusTestamentum 30 (Leiden: Brill, 1979), 213–229; also G. E. Wright, “Cult and History: A Studyof a Current Problem in Old Testament Interpretation,” Interpretation 16 (1962): 3–20.29 Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (New York: Oxford University, 1985),352.30 Jon D. Levenson, “The Davidic Covenant and Its Modern Interpreters,” Catholic BiblicalQuarterly 41 (1979): 205–219, at 218.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 10
22 Scott W. HahnAdam has been straining towards its fulfillment in this man of God, David, whowith his son after him, will reign upon “the throne of the Kingdom of the Lordover Israel,”31 which is the Kingdom of God on earth, a liturgical empire throughwhich the blessings of God are to be bestowed upon all the nations of the earth infulfillment of God’s covenant plans since creation.Typology is at work from the moment the Chronicler introduces David in hisnarrative. The covenant meeting of David at Hebron is cast in Mosaic terms. Thepeople refer to an oracle in which God declares to David: “You shall be shepherdof my people Israel, and you shall be prince over my people Israel.” The use of “mypeople” evokes the Exodus and the Sinai covenant.32 The shepherd image, whichthe Chronicler carries over from his sources, looks back to Moses, the archetypalleader of Israel, who was a shepherd in the image of God, who is called “the shep-herd of Israel.”33This shepherd image will recur in the great covenant and dynastic oracledelivered by the prophet Nathan in 1 Chronicles 17, where again David is identi-fied with God in a way that no other biblical figure is related to God. As YoungChae has observed: “[N]o specific king in Israel is described in shepherd imageryas yhwh’s royal representative, with the exception of David before he assumed thethrone. … The Old Testament tends to reserve shepherd imagery for yhwh and,significantly, extends its use only for yhwh’s Davidic appointee.”34The Chronicler’s retention of this image may then be an effort to associateDavid’s kingdom with these prophetic hopes, especially those of Ezekiel, whoforetold the reestablishment of David as king, shepherd, and prince, by an everlastingcovenant of peace and the placement of his dwelling and sanctuary among the peopleforever—all core elements emphasized in the Chronicler’s Davidic portrait.35Throughout, the Chronicler also presents David as a new Moses and theDavidic kingdom as the full realization of the qāhāl, the liturgical assembly ofIsrael as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation in the years after the Exodus. AsDale Allison has noted, while David and Moses are the two dominant figures inthe Hebrew Bible, the typological association of the two is not found elsewhere inScripture and is rare in extrabiblical writings. This suggests that the Chroniclerattaches considerable significance to this typological portrait.3631 1 Chron. 28:5.32 1 Chron. 11:2; compare Exod. 3:7; 6:7.33 For Moses as shepherd: Exod. 3:1; Ps. 77:20; Isa. 63:11. For God as shepherd of Israel: Gen.49:24; Ps. 80:1.34 Young S. Chae, Jesus as the Eschatological Davidic Shepherd: Studies in the Old Testament, SecondTemple Judaism, and in the Gospel of Matthew, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum NeuenTestament. 2. Reihe 216 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006). Compare Ps. 78:71; Mic. 5:2–4.35 Ezek. 34:1–28. See also Jer. 3:15; 23:1–4; Zec. 11:4–17.36 Dale C. Allison, The New Moses: A Matthean Typology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 39.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 11
Liturgy and Empire 23In addition to the Mosaic shepherd imagery, we might note that in generalDavid, like Moses, is presented as a warrior and cult founder, and as a man whospeaks with the words and authority of God. The Chronicler describes both Davidand Moses as “man of God”37 and “servant of God.”38 The Ark of the Covenant, soimportant to Moses, is critical as well to David. As Moses interceded for the sinsof the people, David intercedes to stop the plague caused by his ill-fated census, ina scene that evokes the angel of death from the Passover in Exodus. As sin keptMoses from entering the promised land, sin prevents David from realizing thefulfillment of his dream of building the Temple.39 Finally, as Moses was given apattern (tabnīt) for the Tabernacle, David too is given a tabnīt, not only for theTemple, but for the liturgical order of worship in the Temple.40Some commentators see in all this the Chronicler’s belief that Moses andSinai have been eclipsed and replaced by David and Zion.41 But the evidence doesnot support any such supercessionist conclusions; to the contrary, the Chroniclerportrays a strong continuity between the Mosaic and Davidic covenants. Ziongoes beyond but not against Sinai. For the Chronicler, Sinai leads to Zion by wayof Moriah, a statement that will become more intelligible as we proceed. Davidemerges in the Chronicler’s portrait as the “prophet like me from among … yourbrethren” that Moses had promised.42 As the new Moses, David completes themission of his forerunner. He leads the final conquest of the land, establishingthe capital of his liturgical empire at Jerusalem and laying the foundations for thedwelling of God.Jerusalem, Zion, Qāhāl (Ekklēsia), and KingdomJerusalem is central to the Chronicler’s work. The Jebusites, the inhabitants ofJerusalem (Jebus), are introduced very early in the genealogy,43 and the lines ofboth David and Levi are there rooted in Jerusalem.44 Some scholars see a deliber-ate telescoping in the genealogies to present a mappa mundi, a map of the world thatmakes Israel the center of the nations, and Jerusalem the center of the world.45 As37 1 Chron. 23:14; 2 Chron. 8:14; 30:16.38 1 Chron. 6:49; 17:4, 7; 2 Chron. 24:9.39 Num. 20:1–13, 24; 27:12–14; Deut. 3:23–27; 32:48–52; Ps. 106:32–33; compare 1 Chron. 22:7–10;28:2–3.40 1 Chron. 28:11–19; compare Exod. 29:9, 40.41 Allison, The New Moses, 39.42 See Deut. 18:15–19.43 1 Chron. 1:14; 11:4.44 1 Chron. 3:4; 6:10, 32.45 John W. Wright, “Remapping Yehud: The Borders of Yehud and the Genealogies of Chronicles,”in Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period, eds. Oded Lipschits and Manfred Oeming(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 67–90, at 74.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 12
24 Scott W. Hahnthe genealogy concludes with a listing of the first exiles to return to Jerusalem,46the entire work ends with Cyrus summoning God’s people to come home toJerusalem.47 Indeed, the Chronicler’s “Zion-centrism” has the effect of relativizingthe exile—God’s plans are being advanced, not just in spite of the exile, but in andthrough the exile.Jerusalem, also identified as “the city of David, which is Zion,” is presentedas the true capital of “the Kingdom of the Lord.”48 By some estimates, nearly one-quarter of all the references to Jerusalem in the entire Hebrew Bible occur in theChronicler. Isacc Kalimi has noted: “Jerusalem is depicted by the Chronicler … asan absolutely theocratic city, ‘the city of God/the Lord’ in the full sense of the word,more than in any other biblical work.”49The Chronicler understands Jerusalem in terms of God’s promise toMoses—that upon entering the Promised Land he would establish a centralsanctuary as a place where his holy name would dwell with his chosen people.For the Chronicler, Jerusalem and the Temple built there fulfill this command,found in Deuteronomy 12. Echoes, allusions, and quotions of this promise areheard throughout Chronicles—the cutting off of enemies and the establishmentof peace,50 burnt offerings in the house where the Lord’s name dwells,51 eatingbefore the Lord.52 Thus God will tell Solomon, “I have chosen Jerusalem that myname may be there and I have chosen David.”53In the Mosaic literature, God’s dwelling among his people is integrally relatedto the Ark of the Covenant.54 Thus, after the conquest of Jerusalem, David movesmethodically to restore the Ark to the people. David’s deep concern for the Ark,documented by earlier biblical historians, is greatly amplified by the Chronicler,who refers to the Ark by names not found elsewhere in the tradition, such as “foot-stool of our God” and “the holy Ark.”55 In evoking the Ark, the Chronicler again46 See 2 Chron. 5:2; 1 Chron. 9:3, 34, 38.47 2 Chron. 36:28.48 1 Chron. 28:5.49 Isaac Kalimi, “Jerusalem—The Divine City: The Representation of Jerusalem in ChroniclesCompared with Earlier and Later Jewish Compositions,” in The Chronicler as Theologian:Essays in Honor of Ralph W. Klein, eds. M. Patrick Graham, Steven L. McKenzie and Gary N.Knoppers, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 371 (New York: T &T Clark, 2003), 189–205, at 191.50 Deut. 12:29; 1 Chron. 17:8.51 Deut. 12: 5, 11; 2 Chron. 2:4; 6:10.52 Deut. 12:7, 18; 1 Chron. 29:22.53 2 Chron. 6:6.54 See Exod. 25:10–22; Num. 10:33; Josh. 3:3, 6; 6:6–16; 10:35–36; Deut. 10:1–5, 8; 31:9, 24–26;compare Ps. 132:8.55 1 Chron. 28:2; 2 Chron. 35:3.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 13
Liturgy and Empire 25summons the historical memory of the Exodus and the people’s entry into the land.The Ark becomes the gathering point of God’s holy people.It is striking that, beginning with David’s convocation of Israel to embarkon the mission of returning the Ark,56 the Chronicler repeatedly refers to theliturgical assembly of all Israel as the qāhāl. Like the Ark and Jerusalem, theqāhāl designates something essential for the Chronicler. Indeed, while the termis found forty-eight times in the Pentateuch, it is used thirty-seven times by theChronicler.57 And again, in its use we see a deep inner-biblical relation with Mosesand the Exodus and Sinai tradition. This term (almost always translated ekklēsiain the Septuagint) first arises canonically in the accounts of the Exodus. The firstappearance of qāhāl in the canon, in fact, is found on the night of the Exodus, inthe divine instructions for how the “whole assembly” (kōl qāhāl) is to prepare forthe journey.58The Chronicler will use that same expression, kōl qāhāl, at pivotal momentsin the history of David,59 and in general qāhāl designates the ideal “form” of Israelfor the Chronicler. Israel is fundamentally a qāhāl, a kingdom of priests, a liturgicalempire. Israel is not primarily a national entity organized for military, political, oreconomic purposes; all those ordinary rationales for governments are to be orderedin Israel to the singular overriding reason of giving worship to God. This is whatIsrael exists for—to be the qāhāl; and as the qāhāl, Israel fulfills its mission asGod’s first-born among the nations. As qāhāl, Israel is a people gathered in thepresence of God before the Ark, which, at a climactic moment in the Chronicler’snarrative, will be installed by Solomon in the Temple.60 The qāhāl is a people ofsacrifice and praise.The Royal High Priests: Melchizedek and DavidThis fundamentally liturgical understanding of Israel is anticipated in theChronicler’s depiction of the joyous procession that marks the return of the Ark.61David is portrayed as both Israel’s king and its chief priest. He is clad as the Levitesare in a fine linen robe and an ephod, garb elsewhere in the Scriptures associatedwith the vestments of Aaron the High Priest and the Levitical priests.62 In anotherpriestly move, David officiates in the sacrificial offering of seven bulls and sevenrams. David’s portrayal as priest-king is unmistakable. He does things here and56 1 Chron. 13:2, 4.57 See William Johnston, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 2 vols., Journal for the Study of the Old TestamentSupplement Series 253 (New York: T & T Clark, 1997), 1:168.58 Exod. 12:6.59 See 1 Chron. 13:4; 29:10, 20; 2 Chron. 23:3; 30:4, 23.60 2 Chron. 5.61 1 Chron. 15:25–16:36.62 See Exod. 28:4, 31, 34.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 14
26 Scott W. Hahnelsewhere in Chronicles that only priests are found doing in other books of theBible, such as making burnt offerings and peace offerings63 and imparting God’sblessing upon the people.64Certainly the Chronicler is here continuing the “new Moses” theme. Moses,too, gathered (qhl) the qāhāl, pitched the tent for the Ark, officiated over thesacrifices, and blessed the children of Israel.65 And the installation of the Ark atZion, the place chosen by God for his name to dwell, marks the summation of theprocess begun with Moses’ completion of the Tabernacle at Sinai. David’s blessingof the people echoes Moses’ earlier blessing at the close of Exodus because hisestablishment of the Ark in Jerusalem marks the completion of the conquest ofthe land promised to Abraham. David’s extraordinary ritual feeding of “all Israel,both women and men,”66 also associates him with the ritual feasts of Moses andthe manna in the wilderness, but also with the promise of Deuteronomy 12—thatthe people would one day eat in the presence of God in the place where God willchoose to dwell.67There also may be a “new Melchizedek” typology at work here, another con-nection with the Abrahamic covenant. In fact, I believe David’s choice of Jerusalemas his capital and his priestly-cultic understanding of his kingship are rooted in themysterious figure of this King of Salem and priest of God Most High, who broughtout bread and wine and blessed Abraham in the name of the maker of heaven andearth.68 The identification of Melchizedek’s Salem and David’s Jerusalem is madein the psalms, and some scholars believe the account of Melchizedek’s blessing ofAbraham played a central role in the traditions of Jerusalem, helping to establishthe continuity of the Kingdom of Israel with the covenant promises made to thepatriarch.69 Prior to David’s procession with the Ark there is only one biblicalprecedent for a king performing priestly functions—Melchizedek, who is alsothe first person to be designated as a “priest” in the canon and, according to laterJewish interpreters such as Philo and Josephus, represents the divine ideal for thepriesthood.7063 See Num. 3:6–8, 14–38; 4:47; 6:16–17; 8:14–26.64 See Num. 6:22–27; Deut. 10:8; 21:5.65 Num. 20:10; Exod. 33:7; Exod. 24:7–8; Exod. 39:42–3; Deut. 33:1; see Johnston, 1 and 2 Chronicles,1:190.66 1 Chron. 16:3.67 See Deut. 12:7, 18.68 Gen. 14:18–20. On David as a “new Melchizedek,” see Hahn, Kinship By Covenant, 192–194.69 See Pss. 76:2; 110:4. Bruce Vawter, Genesis: A New Reading (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1977),198.70 See Philo, Allegorical Interpretation, 3:79, in The Works of Philo: New Updated Edition, tran. C.D. Yonge, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993), 59; Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, Bk. 6, Chap.10, 438, in Works of Josephus, 750.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 15
Liturgy and Empire 27The Chronicler is certainly in contact with these traditions and, more sig-nificantly, with the uniquely important tradition in Psalm 110:4 that associatesMelchizedek with the divine sonship and perpetual priesthood conferred by divineoath upon the Davidic kings: “The Lord has sworn … You are a priest forever afterthe order of Melchizedek.”71 There is considerable scholarly consensus that thispsalm, attributed to David, was written before Israel’s exile and it is likely oneof the oldest in the Psalter. It may have originated in the liturgical context of anenthronement ceremony for a new Davidic king, possibly even the coronation ofSolomon.72 For our purposes, we notice important points of contact between thethemes and language of the psalm and the Chronicler’s work. For instance, thepsalm refers to the universal reign of Zion’s king over the nations, the divine deliv-erance of the king from his enemies, and the apparent filial relation of the Davidicking to God. We notice, too, that the psalm speaks of a “footstool” (hadom) forGod—a rare word in the Bible used uniquely in Chronicles and the Psalter todescribe the Ark.73Reading canonically, I suggest that the Chronicler is evoking these ancientAbrahamic and Davidic traditions. With the Ark established at Zion, the GodMost High (’el ‘elyon), the maker of heaven and earth,74 sits enthroned above thenations,75 ruling through his “first-born, the highest of the kings of the earth,”76who is priest and king. In addition, the Chronicler appears to be evoking prophetichopes for a Davidic deliverer and ruler. The ideal priest-king of the past foreshad-ows the one who is to come. Judaism, perhaps even in the time of the Chronicler,read Psalm 110 in messianic terms, and already in the exilic prophecy of Ezekiel, wesense a similar mood. Ezekiel envisioned the restoration of the exiles, the reunifica-tion of the divided Kingdom, and the reestablishment of the Temple under God’s“servant David.”77 As Jon Levenson has noted, the Davidic figure in Ezekiel is apriest-king and the restored Israel a kingdom of priests.Ezekiel hoped … for a community so fundamentally liturgicaland sacral in nature that the Davidide … could only be a liturgi-cal figurehead like the High Priest. … Ezekiel 40–48 hopes notfor a restoration of the monarchy, but for a restoration of themonarch, who is now redefined according to his deepest and71 Ps. 110:472 On the textual issues regarding Ps. 110, see Carroll Stuhlmueller, Psalms 2 (Psalms 73–150)(Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1983), 130–131.73 1 Chron. 28:2; compare Ps. 110:2; see also Pss. 99:5; 132:7; Lam. 2:1; Isa. 66:1.74 Gen. 14:18–22.75 1 Chron. 13:6.76 Ps. 89:26–27.77 Ezek. 37:20–29.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 16
28 Scott W. Hahntruest function as the servant of God, or devoted to the divineservice, to liturgy.78Prayer and Prophecy in the Davidic CovenantAs we have said, the centerpiece of Chronicles is the covenant that God makes withDavid in 1 Chronicles 17. In the context of his narrative, the Davidic covenant is acovenant of grant that rewards David’s single-minded dedication to restoring Israelas a priestly kingdom and desiring to build a house for the Ark.79 And again, wesee that the Chronicler’s account, divided into two sections—the prophetic oracleof David80 and David’s prayer of response81—is redolent with biblical allusionand typology. The term “house” (bayit), referring both to the royal dynasty andthe Temple, occurs fourteen times, while the term “servant” (‘ebed) appears twelvetimes. The use of bayit, while a common term, in this context evokes the covenantdrama of the house of Israel leading up to their flight from the “house of bondage”in Egypt.David’s prayer in response to Nathan’s oracle, with its rhythmic repetitionsof the word “servant” also evokes the Exodus. The early chapters of Exodus involvean ironic play on the notion of “service” and “servitude.” The cruel bondage of theIsraelites under Pharaoh is described with the same root word as the religiousworship and ritual service that God desires of them.82 We have a clash of “ser-vices”—slavery to worldly empire versus the liturgical service of the living God.The climactic declaration of Israel’s divine primogeniture among the nations ismade in terms of the “service” that God desires:And you shall say to Pharaoh, “Thus says the Lord, ‘Israel is myfirstborn son, and I say to you, Let my son go that he may serveme.’” (Exod. 4:22)8378 Jon D. Levenson, Theology of the Program of Restoration of Ezekiel 40–48, Harvard SemiticMonograph 10 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), 143; compare Hahn, Kinship By Covenant,164–166.79 1 Chron. 17:1–2; see Moshe Weinfeld, “The Covenant of Grant in the Old Testament and in theAncient Near East,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 90 (1970): 184–204, at 185.80 1 Chron. 17:3–15.81 1 Chron. 17:16–27.82 Compare Exod. 1:13-14; 5:18; 14:5, 12 (servitude to the Pharaoh) and Exod. 3:12; 4:22; 7:16; 9:1, 13;10:3, 24–26. Note also the use of ‘ebed to describe the priestly liturgical service in the Tabernacle(Num. 3:7–8; 4:23; 7:5; 16:9).83 See Scott W. Hahn, “Worship in the Word: Toward a Liturgical Hermeneutic,” Letter & Spirit1 (2005): 101–136, at 110–113.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 17
Liturgy and Empire 29That the Exodus might not be too far from David’s mind is clear from his tworeferences to Israel’s “redemption from Egypt” in his response to Nathan’s oracle.84Indeed, there is a sense of covenant renewal to David’s prayer. He prays whileseated “before the Lord” (lipnź yhwh), an expression that frequently describesritual and liturgical prayer, often in the presence of the Ark.85 With its liturgi-cal rhythms and repetitions, the prayer suggests that David is not only acceptingGod’s covenant for himself, but also that he is renewing on behalf of all Israel thecovenant made at Sinai.What other nation on earth is like thy people Israel … whomthou didst redeem from Egypt? And thou didst make thy peopleIsrael to be thy people forever; and thou, O Lord, didst becometheir God. And now, O Lord … do as thou hast spoken, andthy name will be established and magnified forever, saying, “TheLord of hosts, the God of Israel, is Israel’s God,” and the houseof thy servant David will be established before thee. (1 Chron.17:21–24)The echoes of earlier biblical covenantal language here are unmistakable, as theyare in Nathan’s oracle. Speaking through Nathan, God employs the vocabulary ofthe Sinaitic covenant, identifying David as his “servant” and a “shepherd,” makingrepeated references to “my people Israel,” and calling Israel’s king his “son.” Thecovenant with David, the new Moses, is clearly a kind of renewal of the Sinaicovenant, an affirmation of God’s election of Israel to be his people and to be theirGod.86 Israel’s election is affirmed as “for ever” (‘ad ‘ōlām), an expression used seventimes in the covenant account, as the son of David becomes the recipient of God’spaternal love for Israel.87 It is significant, too, that David begins his responso-rial prayer with what appears to be a deliberate echo of Moses’ response to God’scalling at Horeb. As Moses wondered: “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh?”David in amazement asks: “Who am I … that thou hast brought me this far?”88Again however, we are invited here to also consider the importance of theAbrahamic covenant for the Chronicler’s understanding of salvation history. Infact, we can note close similarities between the dynastic promises to David andthe covenant oaths sworn to Abraham. David, too, is promised a great name,8984 1 Chron. 17:21.85 See the section on “before Yahweh” in Ian Wilson, Out of the Midst of the Fire: Divine Presencein Deuteronomy, Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 151 (Atlanta: Scholars, 1995),131–197.86 See Exod. 6:7; Lev. 26:12; Hos. 1:8–9; Jer. 31:33.87 Exod. 4:22.88 Compare Exod. 3:11; 1 Chron. 17:16; 29:14.89 1 Chron. 17:8.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 18
30 Scott W. Hahnand a place, a land in which his people will be “planted.”90 The “house” that Godpromises to build for David is a family, a line of descendants who would reignforever (‘ad ‘ōlām) over Israel.91At the heart of the covenant with David, as there was at the heart of thecovenant with Abraham, is the promise of “offspring” (zera‘, literally “seed”).When your days are fulfilled to go to be with your fathers, I willraise up your offspring after you, one of your own sons, and Iwill establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for me, andI will establish his throne forever. I will be his father, and heshall be my son; I will not take my steadfast love from him as Itook it from him who was before you, but I will confirm him inmy house and in my Kingdom forever and his throne shall beestablished forever. (1 Chron. 17: 11–14)92In David’s prayer celebrating the return of the Ark, he had addressed the peopleas “offspring [zera‘] of Abraham.”93 In Nathan’s dynastic oracle, God’s promiseto Abraham’s seed is fastened forever to this promise to David’s seed. Thus, theDavidic covenant—the final covenant of the Hebrew Bible—and the Kingdom itestablishes, is deeply rooted in the fundamental biblical covenant with Abraham.94The Temple and the Testing of God’s SonFor the Chronicler, the Davidic covenant is ordered to the establishment of theTemple and the liturgy. In the narrative, Nathan’s oracle and David’s response arefollowed immediately by David’s preparations for the building of the Temple andSolomon’s accession to the throne. The warfare in 1 Chronicles 18–20 is depicted asDavid’s bringing about the “rest” promised by God as a precondition for buildingGod’s house; again, the promises of Deuteronomy 12 seem central to his under-standing of these wars. Even the spoils of war are dedicated to the Temple.95But, at a moment in his narrative when the world could be said to be almost ina state of “sabbath” rest, the Chronicler disrupts his readers’ expectations—depict-ing a catastrophic pestilence in Israel brought on because of an ill-advised military90 1 Chron. 17:9; 28:9.91 1 Chron. 17:11–12; 28:4.92 Gen. 12:7; 15:5, 18; 17:7–10; 22:17–18.93 1 Chron. 16:13.94 “Through his anointed king, Yahweh exercised his dominion over the nations of the earth,communicating his blessing to them through his people of Israel. … What Yahweh had firstpromised to Abraham, and reaffirmed to succeeding patriarchs, had been brought to marvelousfruition with the emergence of the Israelite state under David.” R. E. Clements, Abraham andDavid: Genesis XV and Its Meaning for Israelite Tradition (Naperville, IL: A. R. Allenson, 1967),59.95 See 1 Chron. 18:8, 10–11.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 19
Liturgy and Empire 31census ordered by David in 1 Chronicles 21. We see in this another example ofthe Chronicler’s typological interpretation of history. His canonical source in 2Samuel also records David’s illicit census, but without any of the cosmic dramafound in the Chronicler, who introduces a supernatural “Satan” and an avengingangel of the Lord as key figures in the narrative. In fact, in 2 Samuel, the story isinserted with little comment as an addendum following David’s final speeches tothe people and prior to the long account of his final days.96The Chronicler, by contrast, positions the census and plague at a pivotalmoment in David’s reign and casts it as a turning point in salvation history. Theentire episode in 1 Chronicles 21 is a unique literary construct of the Chronicler,and is layered with allusions to earlier Old Testament history. It is one of the mostintensely dramatic episodes in all the canon. The Chronicler depicts the censusevent as a covenant “testing,” similar to the testings of Abraham and the childrenof Israel in the wilderness. That David viewed this as a supreme test is indicatedby his great final prayer in Chronicles, where he seems to refer to this episode: “Iknow, my God, that thou tries (bḥn) the heart.” The word that David uses here, bḥn,is related semantically and conceptually to nasah, the biblical term used elsewhereto describe God’s testing of his covenant family.97 God “tested” (nasah) Abrahamin asking for the sacrifice of his only son, and again sought to “prove” (nasah) hisfirstborn Israel in the wilderness.98The Chronicler is describing just such a test, although he does not use theword. Our clues to his intent are not only the inner-biblical allusions in the textbut also the appearance of the figure of Satan. Satan is not mentioned in theChronicler’s source and this is one of only three places in the Hebrew canon wherethe proper name “Satan” is used; the Chronicler is obviously drawing from theseother rare portraits in composing his drama. In Job and Zechariah, Śāṭān is asupernatural figure, under the control of God, but granted a quasi-legal authorityto “accuse” or to test the bonds of the covenant and the faithfulness of the believ-er.99 The Targum, the Aramaic paraphrase of the Scriptures, gives us an accurate96 See 2 Sam. 24:1–25; see H. G. M. Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, The New Century BibleCommentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 142.97 Birger Gerhardsson has noted that nsh is “normally used within the covenant relationship—interpreted in the widest sense to cover all covenants between God and his worshippers whetherthe latter are a nation, tribe, family, or … individual (patriarch or king). In these contexts theword seems to imply primarily a testing of the partner in the covenant to see whether he iskeeping his side of the agreement.” The Testing of God’s Son (Matt. 4: 1–11 & par.): An Analysis ofan Early Christian Midrash, Coniectanea Biblica New Testament Series 2 (Lund: Gleerup, 1966),26–27.98 Gillis Gerleman, “nsh, to test,” in Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, 3 vols., eds. ErnstJenni and Claus Westermann (Peabody, MA: Henrickson, 1997): 2:741–742. For nasah, see Gen.22:1; Exod. 16:4; 20:20; Deut. 8:2, 16. For bḥn, see Pss. 26:2; 17:3; 66:10; 81:7; Job 23:10; 34:36; Jer.12:3; 20:12; Ezek. 21:13; Zech. 13:9; bḥn and nasah are used as parallels in Pss. 26:2; 95:9.99 Zech. 3:1. See generally, Peggy L. Day, An Adversary in Heaven: Śāṭān in the Hebrew Bible,Harvard Semitic Monographs 43 (Atlanta: Scholars, 1988).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 20
32 Scott W. Hahninterpretation of what the Chronicler intends, envisioning a scene similar to thatin Job—with God permitting Israel’s temptation as he permitted Job’s: “The Lordraised up Satan against Israel, and he incited David to number Israel.”100There is nothing intrinsically wrong with taking a military census, which iswhat David calls for, a numbering of “men who drew the sword.”101 There are othercensuses taken in Chronicles,102 and the Mosaic Law sets out the requirements forthe kind of census that David is apparently taking here—although the Law doeswarn of a deadly penalty if the proper procedures are not followed.103 An allusionto the Law may be intended here, as the penalty prescribed by Moses, a “plague”(negep) is similar to the “pestilence” (maggēpā) visited upon the people for David’scensus.104However, God’s displeasure would seem to stem less from David’s failureto pay the half-shekel tax required by the Law than from a deeper violation ofthe spirit of the covenant. We hear this in the warning of Joab, David’s militarychief—“May the Lord add to his people a hundred times as many as they are.”105This is an obvious reference to God’s covenant promise to multiply Abraham’sdescendants so greatly that they could not be numbered. This reading is confirmedby a later reference to David’s census, in which it is said that “wrath came uponIsrael” because “the Lord had promised to make Israel as many as the stars ofheaven.”106 The point is that even though the Lord had given him victory overIsrael’s enemies,107 David still does not trust totally in God’s covenant promises;the failure of his census test proves that—he still wants to “know the number” ofbattle-ready men available to him.108As in the cases of Abraham and Israel under Moses, God permits a testing ofDavid and his fledgling kingdom. But why? The answer is related to the deep bibli-cal theme of primogeniture. The covenant, as we have noted, establishes a father-son kinship between God and Israel.109 The Davidic covenant for the first timeestablishes a direct filial tie between God and his chosen ruler for Israel. Indeed,the Davidic covenant marks the first time in the Hebrew canon that an individual100 Targum Chronicles 21:1. Text in The Targums of Ruth and Chronicles, trans. with introd. andnotes by J. Stanley McIvor, The Aramaic Bible, vol. 19 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1994);see also Job 2:3, where God is “incited” by Satan.101 1 Chron. 21:5.102 See 1 Chron. 11:1; 23:3; 2 Chron. 2:17; 17:13–19; 25:5; 26:11–13.103 Exod. 30:11–16.104 Compare Exod. 30:12; 1 Chron. 21: 17, 22.105 1 Chron. 21:3.106 1 Chron. 27:23–24; compare Gen. 15:5; 22:17; see also Gen. 13:16.107 1 Chron. 18:6, 13.108 1 Chron. 21:2.109 See generally, F. Charles Fensham, “Father and Son as Terminology for Treaty and Covenant,”in Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright, ed. Hans Goedicke (Baltimore:Johns Hopkins, 1971), 121–135, at 128–133.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 21
Liturgy and Empire 33is identified as the son of God. This suggests a previously unimaginable intimacybetween God and his chosen king, who can call God ’ābī, “my Father.”110 The king,then, must truly be a man after the heart of God. And for that he requires a divinepedagogy that includes testing the strength of his faith. As Birger Gerhardssonnotes:The covenant relationship was seen in terms of the father-sonrelationship, and so it became natural to regard temptation asthe paternal act of discipline and a part of the son’s upbringing.The development in this direction began early. … The verb nshis sometimes placed in parallelism with bḥn “to test by trial,” orṣrp, “to test by fire,” “purge,” and found with verbs like ysr, ḥwkyḥ,and ‘nh, “to mortify,” “to discipline,” “to bring up.” … Since thecovenant relationship is defined in family terms these aspectsare naturally taken up into the picture. In the Book of Proverbsthere are many sayings from the ancient patriarchal pedagogicabout the hard discipline which a man has to impose on hisson.111Through the temptation of the census, the son of God, Israel, and Israel’s kingare being trained and disciplined in God’s fatherly ways. Moses had describedIsrael’s testing in the wilderness in such terms: “Know then in your heart that, asa man disciplines (ysr) his son, the Lord your God disciplines (ysr) you.”112 Inhis typological writing of his account, the Chronicler clearly has the wildernessyears in view, in addition to the testing of Abraham. David’s sin, like Israel’s in thewilderness, threatens God’s firstborn with extinction. God sends “the angel of theLord destroying”113— the same expression used to describe the angel of death sentto destroy the Egyptians’ firstborn in Exodus;114 the inescapable and deadly ironyis that the angel who once destroyed Israel’s enemy is now being sent to destroyIsrael.The Chronicler draws his dramatic picture with allusions to two episodesfrom the late wilderness era. The first allusion is to the blessing of Israel by Balaam,who had been hired by the Moabite king to curse Israel. In Numbers 22, Godplaces an angel as an “adversary” (śṭn) to stand up against (‘md) Balaam and blockhis way, just as he sends Śāṭān against (‘md) David and Israel.115 Balaam’s eyes are110 Ps. 89:27.111 Gerhardsson, Testing of God’s Son, 32; see also James A. Sanders, Suffering as Divine Discipline inthe Old Testament and Post-Biblical Judaism (Rochester, NY: Colgate Rochester, 1955).112 Deut. 8:5.113 1 Chron. 21:12.114 See Exod. 12:13, 23.115 Compare Num. 22:22, 31; 1 Chron. 21:1, 15, 16;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 22
34 Scott W. Hahnopened to see an angel with a drawn sword in his hand, as David’s eyes are openedto see the destroying angel, also with a drawn sword in his hand.116 Balaam fallson his face at the sight, as David and the elders do.117And as Balaam confesses, “Ihave sinned,” David also uses these exact words.118 The Chronicler also draws froman episode in Joshua.119 Joshua, like David, lifts up his eyes to see a man standingagainst (‘md) him with a drawn sword in his hand.120 Joshua too falls on his facewhen the “man” identifies himself as the commander of the Lord’s army and tellshim that he is standing on holy ground.More than literary artistry is at work in the Chronicler’s use of these allusions.The episodes in both Joshua and Numbers take place when Israel is encampedacross the Jordan from Jericho—that is, on the threshold of the Promised Land.121As the fragmentary story in Joshua ends with him recognizing that he is in a holy“place” (māqōm), Balaam’s encounter with the angel in Numbers 22 leads to hiserecting altars and offering sacrifices in Numbers 23. And in addition to prophesy-ing a king for Israel, Balaam refers to the very covenant promise that David is guiltyof forgetting in 1 Chronicles 21—“Who can count the dust of Jacob, or number thefourth part of Israel?”122 Here in Chronicles, what these earlier stories anticipatedis being fulfilled. Joshua’s conquest of the land has been completed by David, andDavid’s encounter with the sword-bearing angel will now lead to the revealing ofthe definitive holy place (māqōm) and altar.123Sacrifice at the Threshing Floor of MoriahThe meaning of this place, this altar, and the sacrifices that David will offer de-pends on still another inner-biblical typology that is played out on the threshingfloor of a certain Ornan, a Jebusite, or resident of Jerusalem. The Chronicler placesJerusalem, and this mysterious threshing floor, a cultic site, at the center of thecosmos—at the intersection of heaven and earth. The angel who is to destroyJerusalem is depicted as standing by the threshing floor and standing betweenearth and heaven.124 At this crossroads the fate of the covenant people is to bedecided, not to mention the future of the nations. As the Chronicler describesthe threat to Israel with images from the killing of the firstborn in Exodus, he116 Compare Num. 22:23, 29, 31; 1 Chron. 21:16.117 Compare Num. 22:31; 1 Chron. 21:16.118 Compare Num. 22:34; 1 Chron. 21:7, 17.119 Josh. 5:13–15.120 Compare Josh. 5:13; 1 Chron. 21:16, 20.121 Compare Num. 22:1; Josh. 5:13.122 Num. 23:10.123 1 Chron. 21:22, 25.124 1 Chron. 21:15–16.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 23
Liturgy and Empire 35describes their deliverance from the destroying angel by analogy to Abraham’soffering of his firstborn in the aqedah in Genesis 22.The scenes have marked similarities. Both David and Abraham are said to“lift up their eyes to see” visions of divine import. In Chronicles, the angel standsbetween heaven and earth, his sword unsheathed and raised above Jerusalem, asAbraham put forth his hand and raised his knife above Isaac. By divine command,the hands of both the killer angel and Abraham are stayed. In place of both thefirstborn people of Israel and the beloved firstborn Isaac burnt offerings are madeinstead. Both stories end with an apparent allusion to the Temple: David recog-nizes that this threshing floor is to be the site of the house of God and Israel’saltar of burnt offering; Abraham names the site “the Lord will see” because, ashe had hoped, God had seen to it to provide the lamb for the sacrifice instead ofIsaac. Thus the account in Genesis concludes with an apparent anticipation of theTemple: “Thus it is said to this day, ‘On the Mount of the Lord he shall be seen.’”125The Chronicler sees the establishment of the Temple as the fulfillment of theAbraham story. The Mount of the Lord is now identified with Zion, Jerusalem.126The Chronicler’s typological understanding is explained more fully later, when hereports that Solomon began to build the Temple “on Mount Moriah where theLord had appeared to David his father, at the place that David had appointed, onthe threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.”127 Moriah, which according to popularetymology means “the vision of the Lord” (mōriyyā) is only mentioned in oneother place in Scripture—as the site of the binding of Isaac. And nowhere else inScripture is it recorded that the Temple was built on the place where Abrahamoffered Isaac in Genesis 22.128David’s cry of recognition, “Here shall be the house of the Lord!”129 is thesummation of a careful literary effort by the Chronicler. With an intricate seriesof allusions to every stage of Israel’s history of worship—from the patriarchsAbraham and Isaac at Moriah, to the Tabernacle of Moses in the wilderness, toJoshua’s conquest of the land and the period of the Judges—the Chronicler il-lustrates the continuity of the Temple with God’s purposes and suggests that hissaving plan has reached its pinnacle. We find this interpretation in the Targum.Moriah is there described as the site where “all the generations worship before the125 Gen. 22:14.126 Compare Pss. 24:3; 48:1; 99:9; Isa. 2:3; 13:4; 18:7; 30:29; see also Exod. 4:27; Num. 10:33.127 2 Chron. 3:1.128 Compare Gen. 22:1; 2 Chron. 3:1. As Levenson points out, in both Genesis 22 and 1 Chronicles 21“there is a play on [the word] Moriah and the verb rā’ā, ‘to see,’ and its derivative nouns mar’ā andmare’ź, meaning ‘sight, spectacle, vision.’ The visionary experiences of Abraham and of Davidhere serve as authorization for the inauguration of the Temple on Mount Zion/Moriah. Thetheophany authenticates the sanctuary.” Jon Levenson, Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the JewishBible (San Francisco: HarperSan Francisco, 1985), 94–95.129 1 Chron. 22:1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 24
36 Scott W. HahnLord”—not only Abraham, Isaac, and David, but also Jacob, whose vision of theheavenly temple is said to have occurred there as well.130The Chronicler wants his readers to see the Temple in profound continuitywith this foundational moment in salvation history—when God swore an oath toAbraham to bless all the nations through his seed. In Chronicles, the holy place(māqōm) where God provided the sacrifice that spared Abraham’s firstborn andtriggered the swearing of his oath of blessing, has now become the holy groundwhere sacrifice will be offered to spare the lives of the children of Abraham. AsGod accepted the burnt offerings of Abraham in this place, on this same site, Goddwelling in his Temple will accept the praise and offerings of his people and grantthem his mercy.In recasting the census episode as a covenant test, the Chronicler revealsIsrael’s God to be a God of surprises, able to bring about his purposes even in themidst of apparent disaster—even in spite of the weaknesses and failures of hisappointed covenant mediators. The covenant test leads to repentance and in thatrepentance we see the origins of the Temple liturgy. The liturgy of the Temple willbe a liturgy of reconciliation and atonement, of making a substitutionary offer-ing for sin. But it will also be a liturgy of joyous thanksgiving, for Israel realizesthat it is saved by the faithfulness of God to his covenant oath to Abraham. Thedivine oath, sworn in recognition of Abraham’s fidelity in his covenant test, is whatspared Israel in this moment of David’s infidelity. We find this interpretation inthe Targum of 1 Chronicles 21:When he [God] was destroying it [Jerusalem], he observed theashes of the binding of Isaac which were at the base of the altar,and he remembered his covenant with Abraham which he hadset up with him on the mountain of worship; [he observed]the sanctuary-house which was above, where the souls of therighteous are, and the image of Jacob which was engraved on thethrone of glory, and he repented in himself of the evil which hehad planned.131We notice too that David is portrayed in this episode as both a repentant sinnerseeking forgiveness and as a royal High Priest interceding on behalf of his peoplewith petitionary prayer, burnt offerings, and peace offerings. The intersection ofthese two portraits is highly significant for the Chronicler’s theology of liturgy andhis understanding of kingship. Through this incident, God teaches his covenantson, the king, an essential lesson about what it means to be the shepherd of God’speople. A true shepherd, David comes to learn, must intercede for and even be130 See Targum 2 Chron. 3:1; compare Gen. 28:16–17.131 Targum 1 Chron. 21:15.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 25
Liturgy and Empire 37willing to lay down his life for his flock. Text criticism has helped us to reconstructthe crucial text in David’s conversion:It is I, the shepherd, who did wrong. But these sheep, whathave they done? Let thy hand, I pray thee, O Lord my God, beagainst me and against my father’s house; but let not the plaguebe upon thy people. (1 Chron. 21:17)132The shepherd offers his own life for his sheep, recognizing that the people arenot his own but God’s. This is a dramatic turning point in Chronicles. The kingperforms public penance so that all can see the subordination of the earthly hu-man realm to the heavenly divine realm, the kingship to the priesthood, the leaderof armies to the Lord of hosts. His public repentance, accompanied by sacrifice,triggers the mercy of God, who commands the angel to sheath his sword. We havehere in 1 Chronicles 21 a choice specimen of right political theology. David becomesa kind of paradigm for the postexilic people, who must reclaim their vocation asa kingdom of priests and a light to the nations. For this covenant people, Davidbecomes a model for their private prayer and the moral standards to which theymust hold themselves and their leaders. As Gary Knoppers has observed:The image of David as the model of a repentant sinner is aconstituent element in the Chronicler’s depiction of David.The David of the census story is a person of confession andsupplication par excellence, a human sinner who repents, seeksforgiveness, intercedes on behalf of his people, and ultimatelysecures the site of the future Temple. Precisely because Davidis a pivotal figure in the Chronicler’s history of Israel, David’srepentance and intercession are paradigmatic. The Chronicler’sconviction that errant Israelites have both the opportunity toreform and the potential to make new contributions to theirnation is evident in the reigns of Rehoboam (2 Chron. 12:5–12),Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. 19:1–11), Amaziah (2 Chron. 25:5–13), andeven Manasseh (2 Chron. 13:10–17). But this principle is forma-tively and preeminently at work in the career of David. In thecontext of a national disaster of his own making, David is able toturn that catastrophe into the occasion for a permanent divineblessing upon Israel.133132 The Revised Standard Version and most English translations render the first sentence: “It is Iwho have sinned and done very wickedly.” But based on the manuscript evidence, “It is I, theshepherd, who did wrong,” is preferred. See the discussions in Sara Japhet, I & II Chronicles:A Commentary, Old Testament Library (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1993), 384;Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 147–148; Selman, 1 Chronicles, 208.133 Gary N. Knoppers, “Images of David in Early Judaism: David as Repentant Sinner in
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 26
38 Scott W. HahnThe Chronicler’s account of the founding of the Temple site ends with a finalallusion to the Sinai tradition. David’s confession leads to the command that hebuild an altar. In a scene deliberately crafted to evoke the first sacrifices in theTabernacle in the wilderness, David the king is again shown in the image of apriest. He calls upon the Lord and offers burnt offerings and peace offerings, thesame offerings made by Moses and Aaron in the Tabernacle. And as fire descendedfrom heaven and consumed the offerings on the altar of the Tabernacle, so tooDavid’s offering is accepted by “fire from heaven.”134 As this divine fire looks backto the Tabernacle in the wilderness, it looks ahead to the dedication of the Temple,in which King Solomon’s priestly offerings will also be consumed by fire fromheaven.135The Kingdom of God as Liturgical EmpireIn David’s covenant testing at Moriah we see the full development of theChronicler’s covenantal and liturgical worldview and his typological interpretationof history. History for the Chronicler is moving inexorably toward the Kingdomof God expressed in the Davidic covenant and the Temple, the dwelling of God onearth. At Moriah, God reveals the meaning of history—the blessing of the familyof nations through the liturgy of his firstborn, the royal and priestly people whomhe has made a light to the world.David’s last public act in Chronicles is to lead the entire assembly (kolqāhāl)136 in an extravagant liturgy of sacrifice, offering a thousand bulls, athousand rams, and a thousand lambs, along with accompanying drink offerings.Dramatically, “the kol qāhāl blessed the Lord, the God of their fathers, and bowedand prostrated themselves to the Lord and to the king.”137 This is an extraordinaryand unprecedented identification of the king with God.This is the heart of the Chronicler’s theocratic vision—that the Kingdom ofIsrael under David and Solomon is the Kingdom of God on earth, a kingdom thatis fundamentally a qāhāl, a liturgical assembly. Chronicles, in fact, is the only placein the Hebrew canon where the expression “Kingdom of God” (Melek Yhwh)appears:Ought you not to know that the Lord God of Israel gave thekingship over Israel forever to David and his sons by a covenantof salt? … And now think you to withstand the Kingdom ofChronicles,” Biblica 76 (1995): 449–470, at 469.134 1 Chron. 21:26; compare Lev. 9:22–24.135 2 Chron. 7:1.136 1 Chron. 29:1, 10, 20.137 1 Chron. 29:20. Emphasis added.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 27
Liturgy and Empire 39the Lord [Melek Yhwh] in the hand of the sons of David? (2Chron. 13:5, 8).God’s kingdom is “in the hands of” David’s sons, a grant that is forever (‘ad ‘ōlām)by means of a “covenant of salt” (bĕrīt melaḥ).138 This latter image has sacrificialand offertory overtones. Salt was added to sacrifices as a sign of permanence andappears to have been an important element in ritual meals celebrated to seal cov-enants.139 To say the Kingdom given to David was given by a bĕrīt melaḥ is to saythat the Kingdom is to last forever, guaranteed by the oath of God.140With the exception of Chronicles, the Book of Daniel, and select psalms,the notion of the Kingdom of God is rare in the canon. While God is sometimesdescribed explicitly as king, his kingdom or rule is assumed but rarely referredto.141 By contrast, in Chronicles, there are a remarkable sixteen references to God’skingdom or his reign—all in relation to the Davidic kingdom.142 Martin Selmansuggests that the idea of the Kingdom is rooted in the Passover and the Sinaicovenant, where the word “kingdom” first appears in the canon.143 This furtheremphasizes the intimate connection between the Davidic kingdom and Israel’svocation as a “kingdom of priests.” As Selman observes:It is likely that the later associations of the Kingdom of Yahwehwith Zion, the Davidic line, and the son of man, are part of themeans by which this ideal [Israel as a kingdom of priests] wasbeing restored, or rather, properly instituted. Indeed, one of themajor reasons why the Kingdom of God was spoken of so cau-tiously in much of the Old Testament may be precisely becauseof Israel’s failure to measure up to its ideals.The Davidic kingdom for the Chronicler is the ideal kingdom of priests; it issacramental, making manifest the Kingdom of God. For David, the dynasticpromise means that God “has chosen Solomon, my son, to sit upon the throne of138 2 Chron. 13:5, 8.139 Lev. 2:13; Num. 18:19; Ezek. 6:9; 7:22; 43:24.140 Compare 1 Chron. 17:12, 14.141 God as king: Exod. 15:18; Isa. 6:5; Pss. 47:3; 99:2. God’s kingdom or rule: Pss. 22:28; 45:6; 103:19;145:11–13; Dan. 2:44; 4:3, 31; 6:26; 7:14, 18, 27.142 Selman points out that the Chronicler deploys this concept always in relation to the Davidickingdom and almost always at critical junctures in his narrative. See Martin J. Selman, “TheKingdom of God in the Old Testament,” Tyndale Bulletin 40:2 (1989): 161–183, at 167. God“turned the Kingdom over to David” in deposing Saul (1 Chron. 10:14). David’s celebration of theArk’s return includes the prayerful exclamation, “The Lord reigns” (1 Chron. 16:31). The promiseof the Kingdom is central to the covenant with David (1 Chron. 17:11, 14) and the Temple (2Chron. 7:18). The Kingdom is the reason for the promise to David and his descendants (2 Chron.9:8; 13:5, 8).143 Selman, “Kingdom of God,” 181–182.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 28
40 Scott W. Hahnthe Kingdom of the Lord over Israel.”144 In David’s hymn-like prayer at Solomon’scoronation, he associates the Kingdom with God’s purposes in the creation of theworld:Blessed art thou, O Lord, the God of Israel our father, for everand ever.Thine, O Lord, is the greatness and the power, and the glory,and the victory, and the majesty;For all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine isthe Kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted above all.(1 Chron. 29:10–11)The Chronicler roots his theocratic vision of the divine economy in creation.The God of Israel is the God of creation and the Lord of history. That explainsperhaps a curious feature of David’s response to Nathan’s covenant oracle. In hisprayer, David employs a very rare form of divine address—“O Lord God” (yhwh’elōhīm).145 The Chronicler’s source in 2 Samuel, by contrast, uses ’adōnāy yhwh(“O Lord God”).146 The divine title, yhwh ’elōhīm, originates, canonically speak-ing, in the creation narrative, where it is used about twenty times.147 The only otheruse of the title in the Pentateuch comes in the confrontation between Moses andPharaoh.148 And the title, yhwh ’elōhīm, is only found in six other places—fiveof them in Chronicles, and all of them related to the Davidic covenant or theTemple.149 This is intriguing if not altogether explicable.The title is used twice in the Chronicler’s source for David’s prayer.150 Butthe Chronicler does not use the title in the places that his source does. Instead heuses yhwh ’elōhīm to form a kind of inclusio in the introduction of David’s prayer:144 1 Chron. 28:5; compare 1 Chron. 29:23; 2 Chron. 9:8.145 1 Chron. 17:16–17.146 As Japhet has noted, the Chronicler often makes calculated substitutions and changes in theforms of address for God that he finds in his source material. See the discussion in Sara Japhet,The Ideology of the Book of Chronicles and Its Place in Biblical Thought, 2nd rev. ed., Beiträge zurErforschung des Alten Testaments und des Antiken Judentums 9 (New York: Peter Lang, 1997),20–23; Japhet, I & II Chronicles, 337–338.147 Yhwh ’elōhīm is “exceedingly rare in the rest of the Bible,” according to Nahum Sarna, whoadds: “Admittedly … the remarkable concentration of the combination of these divine namesin this narrative [Gen. 2:4–3:24] and their virtual absence hereafter have not been satisfactorilyexplained.” Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translationand Commentary (New York: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 17.148 Exod. 9:30; elsewhere Yhwh ’elōhīm appears only infrequently as part of longer titles, such as“the Lord God of Israel.” See Josh. 7:13, 19, 20; 10:40, 42; 13:14, 33; 1 Sam. 14:41; 1 Kings 8:23, 25;16:13; Neh. 1:5; Ps. 59:5.149 1 Chron. 22:1, 19; 26:18; 29:1; 2 Chron. 1:9; 6:41, 42; 32:16.150 2 Sam. 7:22, 25.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 29
Liturgy and Empire 41Who am I, yhwh ’elōhīm …you are showing me a law for the uplifting of humankind,yhwh ’elōhīm(1 Chron. 17:16, 17)I suggest that the Chronicler, perhaps inspired by his source, sees yhwh ’elōhīmas a way of expressing the special connection between God’s purposes in theDavidic covenant and the divine purposes in creation. This may also help explainthe meaning of the mysterious passage that I translated above as “you are showingme a law for the uplifting of humankind” (ūrĕ’ītanī kĕtōr hā’ādām hammă‘lă). TheHebrew is obscure both in Chronicles and in his source.151 In light of the creationallusion in the title yhwh ’elōhīm, and the Exodus imagery elsewhere in David’sprayer, I think the exegete and interpreter must try to “hear” the likely allusionsto creation and the Exodus in the references in this obscure phrase to the Law(kĕtōr, literally, “a law”) and to humanity (hā’ādām, “the man”); a more literal read-ing also serves better to capture the overall sense of wonder felt in David’s prayer.Whatever murkiness there may be in the text, it is clear that David is marveling atthis covenant and its implications for the human race. The sense of the text is wellexplained by Willis Beecher:What is this “torah of mankind?” … The most natural under-standing is that David recognizes in the promise just made tohim a renewal of the ancient promise of blessing for mankind …151 Compare 2 Sam. 7:19. Various translations have been proposed based on various proposedemendations of the text. Among the proposals:“You regard me as man of distinction.” (Jewish Publication Society Tanakh);“Thou … hast shown me future generations, O Lord God!” (Revised Standard Version);“You have looked on me as henceforth the most notable of men, O Lord God.” (NewAmerican Bible);“Thou … hast regarded me according to the estate of a man of high degree, O Lord God.”(King James Version);“You have let me look upon the generation of humankind to come.” (Klein, 1 Chronicles,371, 383).“And you have caused me, someone of human stature, to see into the future.” (Gary N.Knoppers, 1 Chronicles 10–29: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary,Anchor Bible [New York: Doubleday, 2004], 678.);“And thou are regarding me according to the upbringing [or uplifting] tōrah of mankind,O Lord God.” (Walter C. Kaiser, “The Blessing of David: The Charter for Humanity,” inThe Law and the Prophets: Old Testament Studies Prepared in Honor of Oswald ThompsonAllis, ed. John H. Skilton [Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1974]: 298–318, at315).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 30
42 Scott W. Hahna renewal of the promise made of old that all the nations shouldbe blessed in Abraham and his seed.152“Let Them Say among the Nations, ‘The Lord Reigns!’”The Chronicler indeed presents us with a theocratic and utopian vision, as some ofthe most provocative of recent scholarship has suggested.153 It is not an ideal politi-cal economy or military superpower, but a liturgical empire, a worldwide kingdomordered to a cosmic liturgy, to offering sacrifice and praise to the living God. Theliturgy of the Temple is the means by which the children of Abraham are to bestowGod’s blessings upon the families of the world.Chronicles is a fiercely Judeo-centric document. But we cannot forget that itis also a work that reflects a broadly internationalist, even cosmic outlook. Fromthe initial genealogies Israel’s gaze is being directed outward, ad gente, to the na-tions. Israel is asked to understand itself in light of the world’s beginnings and inlight of is prophetic mission to be “a light to the nations.”154 In his later depictionof Solomon’s Temple, built on the site of Moriah, the Chronicler stresses the“universalism” inherent in the Abrahamic and creation covenants. The Temple forthe Chronicler is indeed what the prophets said it would be—“a house of prayerfor all peoples.”155The Chronicler also seems to share with the prophets a belief in the liturgicalconsummation of history, an eschatological vision of the nations streaming to Zionto worship Israel’s God. I cannot pursue these points of universalism here, exceptto note that this liturgical consummation is anticipated in the long priestly psalmof remembrance, thanksgiving, and praise, composed by the priest-king David tocelebrate the restoration of the Ark.This priestly song of redemption combines passages from three psalms156 andis a profound work of biblical theology in its own right. David interprets Israel’shistory as an economy of salvation flowing from the covenant with Abraham tothe moment when all the nations and peoples of the world—and indeed all thecosmos, the heavens and the earth—worship Israel’s God: “Let them say amongthe nations, ‘The Lord reigns!’”157152 Beecher, The Prophets and the Promise (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1975 [1905]), 238.153 See for instance, Steven Schweitzer, Reading Utopia in Chronicles (New York: T &T Clark,2007); Jonathan E. Dyck, The Theolocratic Ideology of the Chronicler (Leiden: Brill, 1988).154 See Isa. 42:6; 49:6.155 Compare Isa. 56:7; 2 Chron. 5:32–33.156 1 Chron. 16:8–22 = Ps. 105:1–15; 1 Chron. 16:23–33 = Ps. 96:1–13; and 1 Chron. 16:34 = Ps. 106:1; 1Chron. 16:35–36 = Ps. 106:47–48.157 1 Chron. 16:23–33.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 31
Liturgy and Empire 43A Theo-Political Perspective Embedded in the LiturgyIn this article, we have explored the key dimensions of the Chronicler’s prophetichistoriography. We have identified a distinct biblical worldview and seen how theChronicler understands history as the unfolding of the divine economy, a planof salvation that is covenantal and liturgical. And we have seen that his primaryframework both for interpreting that history of salvation and for narrating it forhis readers is typological. And, through a close reading of the text, we have seenhow the Chronicler’s covenantal and liturgical worldview, and his typologicalinterpretation of history shapes his narrative of the rise of the Davidic kingdom,which for him is the mountain peak of the salvation history told in the HebrewBible.The questions that remain involve the Chronicler’s intentions and purposes—to what “ends” did he write his prophetic historiography? The consensus, evenamong the most sensitive scholarly readers, seems to be that the Chronicler didnot hold out much hope for the Messiah expected by the prophets and later writersin the period after the exile and the building of the Second Temple.In moving reasonably among the scholarly extremes, Hugh Williamson hasconcluded with admirable caution: “Although the term ‘messianic’ is perhaps toostrong, it must be concluded that the Chronicler still cherished the hope that oneday the Davidic dynasty would be reestablished over Israel.”158 Selman concludes:The Chronicler’s overall aim was to offer an interpretation of theBible as he knew it. More precisely, his guiding principle was todemonstrate that God’s promises revealed in the Davidic cov-enant were as trustworthy and effective as when they were firstgiven, even though the first readers lived centuries after almostall the events he recorded.159However, Selman, like Williamson, sees “no evidence in Chronicles of a strongmessianic hope.” Rather than trying to “awaken any explicit hope for the future,”he sees the Chronicler stressing “the continuity between the distant past and thepresent or recent past … that God is still building his house and that he invites hispeople to go on participating in the task.”160To my mind, much of the debate over the Chronicler’s meaning has need-lessly bogged down in overly narrow semantic and reductionist arguments aboutwhether the Chronicler expected a Messiah or not. What is often overlooked is thatthe Messiah is only one star in the constellation of Israel’s ancient hope. This largerconstellation, as the Chronicler’s work reflects, includes Zion, Jerusalem, David,158 Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 134.159 Selman, 1 Chronicles, 26.160 Selman, 1 Chronicles, 64–65.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 32
44 Scott W. Hahnthe Temple, the Kingdom, and the covenant. The notion of the Messiah, whilecertainly not insignificant, must be subordinated to this larger Davidic covenantframework. I would argue that the Chronicler’s trust in God’s promises to Davidis, by its very nature, a species of eschatological hope—hope for a Messiah whowould bring about the fulfillment of those promises. But the Chronicler’s hope ismessianic only to the extent that it is Davidic.To be sure there is no trace of secular political messianism in the work. Nor dowe have any overt theology of violent political resistance as we find in 1 Maccabeesand some of the extrabiblical apocalypses of the Second Temple period. But it isa mistake to suggest, as many scholars do, that the Chronicler is not interested inthe political conditions of the people after the exile or that he has no firm hopesfor the future. It is important to remember that Chronicles is not merely a workof nostalgia, a retrospective reading of Israel’s history with the vaguely hortatorypurpose of inspiring the postexilic community to rebuild the Temple and restoretheir religious devotions. The Chronicler believes in the God whose story he nar-rates in his text, a God who is the Lord of history.What some commentators mistake as political quietism is actually a reflec-tion of the Chronicler’s deep faith in God’s covenant plan, primarily advanced byliturgical worship. This lends a certain serenity to his account, for sure. He doesnot preoccupy himself with the wickedness of the Assyrians or the Babylonians;nor does he despair over the divided Kingdom in his account of the monarchyafter Solomon. He begins and ends his work with a matter-of-fact diagnosis—theexile was an inevitable result of Israel’s “unfaithfulness” (mā‘al) to the covenant,and their refusal to heed the prophets that “the Lord, the God of their fathers,sent persistently to them.”161We are back to the question we began this article with: In a work in whichprophets and prophesy plays such an important role, to what extent does theChronicler understand himself to be a messenger sent by God to prophesy to thepeople of his day? As I read it, the many prophetic speeches in Chronicles, in effect,blend together with the narrative to form a single authoritative “Word” spoken tothe Chronicler’s audience. This has been well explained by Fishbane:The Chronicler does not merely use his narrative voice—theauthoritative voice of impersonal history—but employs theconfrontative, exhortative, and instructive voice of propheticpersonae as well. In the course of the historical exposition,moreover, both voices—refracted through the stylistic formsof reported speech and reported events—reinforce each other.The prophetic oratories serve to set the course of the narrativereports and to exemplify them, while the narrative reports recip-161 1 Chron. 9:1; 2 Chron. 36:15–16.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 33
Liturgy and Empire 45rocally comment upon these speeches and teach through them.… The continuous oscillation is, in its effect, part of the exposi-tory power of the Chronicler. Added to it is his aggadic abilityto teach through the traditions. … This content confronted [theChronicler’s readers] as a traditum, as the authoritative versionof the ancient traditio made present as witness and as challenge.No less than his prophetic personae, then, the Chronicler’snarrative addressed his generation, in the twilight of classicalprophecy, with a “prophetic” voice.162Chronicles is aggadic, that is, homiletic. But more than a long series of historicalsermons to the post-exilic community, in Chronicles historical remembrance istransformed into prophetic Word. As prophetic historiography, Chronicles is anact of what the Hebrews called zakhor, a remembrance that is covenantal, liturgical,and indeed, sacramental—bringing one into vital contact with the events recalled.Again we can ask whether perhaps the Chronicler saw his work—which may haveoriginated as a series of homilies delivered in the context of the liturgy—as an ex-ample of the cultic prophecy established by David as a part of the Temple liturgy.163Whatever its precise origins, Israel’s history in Chronicles is being appropriatedand transformed into Scripture, a pattern found elsewhere in the Bible. As StefanRief has said:It was not all facts that were to be remembered, but those thatspecifically documented God’s intervention and man’s response,since in this way human history could be interpreted as therevelation of God’s will. Memory was a central element in ritualand recital, and the festivals manifestly had historical as wellas religious and agricultural dimensions. The biblical narrativerevolves around the reality of everyday life rather than havingits focus on the exclusively spiritual. … Thus, Israel’s historywas incorporated—even transformed—into its Scripture. The162 Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 392.163 1 Chron. 25:1. Rex Mason has suggested that many of the speeches recorded in Chronicles reflect“the method of preaching and teaching among the Temple community.” See Rex Mason, “SomeEchoes of the Preaching in the Second Temple Period? Traditional Elements in Zechariah1–8,” Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 96:2 (1984), 221–235, at 233; Schniedewind,“Prophets and Prophecy,” 212. Rodney Duke concludes that the Chronicler shares a “commonhermeneutic” with the authors of the Targum. In both, “Scripture was actualized. The messageof the text was contemporary; it spoke to the present; ‘revelation’ was continuous. … [T]heChronicler interpreted his tradition both in light of contemporary cultic praxis and accordingto the need of the present situation.” Rodney K. Duke, The Persuasive Appeal of the Chronicler: ARhetorical Analysis, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 88 (Sheffield:Almond, 1990), 115.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 34
46 Scott W. Hahnwhole process was maintained and nurtured by transmission,recitation, and education.164The Chronicler is doing a kind of reconstructive historical apologetics. In recreat-ing the era of David and the rise of the Kingdom he is not only describing thegolden age, the summit of salvation history; he is laying the moral and spiritualgroundwork for the restoration of the Kingdom of God, the rebuilding of theTemple, and the return of the son of David. Donna Runnalls has rightly observed:“The interest of the Chronicler in the eternal Davidic kingship at a time when itno longer existed makes emphatic the idea that the promise awaits fulfillment.”165Again, it is the Davidic covenant promises that give rise to the Chronicler’s theo-political perspective, which is prophetic and eschatological and is embedded in theliturgy and not in imperial conquests.The Priestly Kingdom Before the Exile (2 Chronicles)In this essay, I have focused on the Chronicler’s portrait of the establishment of theKingdom. But the patterns I have identified continue and emerge even more clearlyin 2 Chronicles, which concentrates on the Davidic royal line in the years after thegolden age of David and Solomon, after the Kingdom has been divided. The idealof the Kingdom continues to be presented in royal and priestly terms—as a liturgi-cal ekklēsia.166 In 2 Chronicles, we see that the power of the Kingdom is the powerof God. But it is not expressed in a militaristic program or a political agenda. TheKingdom expresses itself more truly just as it releases the divine power that definesit—in and through worship. For instance, the kings Asa and Jehoshaphat achieveabsolutely unexpected victories over their enemies through liturgical prayer andsacrifice.167 Facing an Ethiopian army a million men strong, King Asa goes to thefront lines, armed not with weapons but with a prayer: “Help us, O Lord our God,for we rely on thee!” In the same way, Jehoshaphat responds to an invasion from164 Stefan C. Reif, “The Function of History in Early Rabbinic Liturgy,” in Deuterocanonical andCognate Literature Yearbook 2006: History and Identity: How Israel’s Later Authors Viewed ItsEarlier History, eds. Nśria Calduch-Benages and Jan Liesen (New York: Walter de Gruyter,2006), 321–333, at 322.165 Donna R. Runnalls, “The King as Temple Builder: A Messianic Typology,” in Spirit WithinStructure, Essays in Honor of George Johnston on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, ed. E.J. Furcha (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick), 15–37, at 24–25. See too, William F. Stinespring,“Eschatology in Chronicles,” Journal of Biblical Literature 80 (1961): 209–219, at 211: the Chronicler“was surely thinking eschatologically of the new David and the new Kingdom that would shortlyor eventually arise in God’s good time.”166 For the liturgical assembly of the Kingdom as qāhāl/ekklēsia, see 2 Chron. 20:5, 14; 23:3; 28:14;29:23, 28, 31, 32; 30:22, 4, 13, 17, 23, 24, 25.167 2 Chron. 14:11–12; 20:1–30.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 35
Liturgy and Empire 47Edom with a long prayer “in the assembly [qāhāl] of Judah and Jerusalem, in thehouse of the Lord.” The Chronicler’s point is that when the Kingdom looks smallin the eyes of God’s people because they face the military might and oppositionfrom superior powers, it is then that the true nature of the Kingdom is manifestedand its power unleashed—in and through their covenant worship in the divineliturgy.The climax of the Chronicler’s narrative of the Kingdom is reached duringthe reigns of Hezekiah and Josiah, in their respective celebrations of the Passoverof all Israel.168 In these dramatic Passover scenes, we see the Davidic king wieldingdivine power precisely in and through the paschal liturgy in the Jerusalem Temple.We see revealed the deepest meaning of the Kingdom, as the king harnesses allthe wealth and political authority at his disposal, subordinating everything tothe summoning of the people and the preparations for the feast. The Chroniclerwrites of Josiah’s Passover as if it were the culmination of Israel’s history and thefulfillment of its destiny: “No Passover like it had been kept in Israel since the daysof Samuel the prophet; none of the kings of Israel had kept such a Passover as waskept by Josiah, and the priests and the Levites, and all Judah and Israel who werepresent, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.”169The prophetic “word” to the Chronicler’s audience is two-fold: First, theKingdom is not primarily human, but divine; it is not political, but priestly andliturgical. The second and related point is this: the Kingdom is one and theKingdom is God’s, no matter what earthly appearances might indicate to the con-trary. It is important to remember that the Chronicler never really acknowledgesthe political reality of the divided Kingdom. The historical moment of the split isaccounted for,170 but the remainder of 2 Chronicles focuses on the continuationof the Davidic line reigning in the southern kingdom of Judah. This is the trueIsrael, as the Davidic king Abijah reminds King Jeroboam, leader of the separatistkingdom in the North: “Hear me, O Jeroboam and all Israel! Ought you not toknow that the Lord God of Israel gave the kingship over Israel for ever to Davidand his sons by a covenant of salt?”171An Alternative Biblical Theology of EmpireThe Chronicler advances a kingdom ecclesiology in which the Kingdom on earthis a sacrament of the Kingdom of God. And this message is intended to speak tohis audience in the years after the exile. Although there is no Davidic king seated168 2 Chron. 30:1–27; 35:1–19.169 2 Chron. 35:18.170 2 Chron. 10:16–17.171 2 Chron. 13:5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 36
48 Scott W. Hahnon an earthly throne, the Kingdom is nonetheless real. In the restored liturgy ofthe Temple, the people have the divine Kingdom made manifest on earth in itssacramental and liturgical expression. Whether there is an earthly ruler who isJewish and Davidic, or whether the world is governed by a Gentile, such as thePersian King Cyrus, in the rebuilt and rededicated Jerusalem Temple, Israel willglimpse on earth of their true king who reigns in heaven. Living in a land occupiedby an external foe, the task is to trust in the promises of God to David and toattend themselves to right worship, to giving glory to the God of Israel, in the newhouse they are to build in Jerusalem.172In all of this, I suggest, we have the seeds of an alternative biblical theologyof empire, one that intends to instruct Israel on how to live in the new post-exilicenvironment, how to worship the true God while still living under the dominationof a foreign power. As William Schniedewind has noted, the prophetic speechesin Chronicles, while ostensibly speaking to the historical events being recounted,are also addressed homiletically to the Chronicler’s audience.173 Thus, the prophetShemaiah explains why God permitted Israel’s subjugation to Egypt under KingRehoboam in terms that could apply to the entire exilic generation—“so that theymay know the difference between serving me and serving the kingdoms of theworld.”174The Chronicler’s prophetic historiography teaches a morality of exile andreflects what E. P. Sanders has called “restoration eschatology.”175 The Chronicler’saudience is, in a very real sense, still in exile, even though the people have beenfreed from Babylon and returned to the land. They have to learn how to keep faithin exile, how to serve God while still in captivity to the kingdoms of the world,awaiting the restoration of the Kingdom of David and the Temple.New Testament TrajectoriesChronicles thus points to its own future fulfillment; the story that the Chroniclertells is not yet complete. This sense of a history awaiting its own fulfillment iswhat makes Chronicles such fertile ground for New Testament studies. To date,the work has not received the kind of attention from New Testament scholarsthat it deserves. But I do not think it only coincidence that the Christian canonbegins with the genealogy of Matthew, just as the last book of the Hebrewcanon, Chronicles, began with a genealogy; what better way for the first editors172 Compare 2 Chron. 36:28.173 Shniedewind, “Prophets and Prophecy,” 222–223.174 2 Chron. 12:7–8; the translation is Shniedewind’s; “Prophets and Prophecy,” 222.175 E. P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism (Phildaelphia: Fortress, 1985), 77; see also, N. T. Wright, TheNew Testament and the People of God (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1992), 269–272.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 37
Liturgy and Empire 49of the Christian canon to emphasize the continuity between the Old and NewTestaments and the unity of the economy of salvation from Adam to Jesus. TheChronicler would also seem to be the source for Luke’s tracing of Christ’s humanlineage back to Adam, “the son of God.”176 And it is significant that the renewalof the Davidic kingdom in Chronicles is symbolized by the reconstitution of theqāhāl under Kings Hezekiah and Josiah and their celebration of the Passover,177 asthe climax of the new covenant is the institution of the new Passover, the Eucharist.I am convinced that careful study of the aspects of Chronicles that we havelooked at here—the Chronicler’s vision of salvation history rooted in creation; hiscovenantal typology; his treatment of the Kingdom of God as a qāhāl/ekklēsia and aliturgical empire—can shed great light on Jesus’ own teaching about the Kingdom,the Church, and the Eucharist. To suggest just one implication of reading theNew Testament in light of Chronicles, I believe that the Chronicler’s vision of theKingdom as qāhāl/ekklēsia is behind Jesus’ identification of the Church (ekklēsia)with the Temple and the Kingdom in the Gospel of Matthew. While it is beyondmy purposes here to demonstrate this, reading Matthew 16:16–20 in light of theChronicler’s vision, causes us to notice a series of terms and concepts that are theunique focus of the Chronicler—Kingdom and Church, divine fatherhood andsonship, Temple and foundation stone.We can also trace the influence of the Chronicler’s kingdom ecclesiologyin Luke, especially in the meal scenes and in the establishment of the Eucharist,where Christ, presented in Davidic terms, promises to his Twelve, gathered as areconstituted Israel: “I covenant to you a Kingdom, as my Father covenanted oneto me.”178 Whereas Matthew and Luke use Kingdom vocabulary, John and Paulspeak of the Church in terms of the Temple—and again, one can identify how bothhave tapped into the Davidic traditions that we have explored in the Chronicler.179Finally, we see the strands of this tradition braided together in the Apocalypse:Jerusalem, the Kingdom, the Temple, the Church, and the Son of David.180176 Luke 3:38. Matt. 1:1–27; Luke 3:23–28. Compare W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison Jr, The Gospelaccording to St. Matthew: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark,1988), 1:167–188; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke I-IX, The Anchor Bible 28(New York: Doubleday, 1979), 499–504.177 See 2 Chron. 30, 35.178 Luke 22:29; for this translation and its implications, see Scott W. Hahn, “Christ, Kingdom, andCreation: Davidic Christology and Ecclesiology in Luke-Acts,” Letter & Spirit 3 (2007): 113–138,at 131–133.179 See 1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; John 2:13–16; 14:1–3. For this tradition in John, see Scott W. Hahn,“Temple, Sign, and Sacrament: Towards a New Perspective on the Gospel of John,” Letter &Spirit 4 (2008): 107–143. For Paul, see Raymond Corriveau, “Temple, Holiness, and the Liturgyof Life in Corinthians,” Letter & Spirit 4 (2008): 145–166.180 See Yves M.-J. Cardinal Congar, “Church, Kingdom, and the Eschatological Temple,” Letter &
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 38
50 Scott W. HahnIndeed, I would suggest that in these and other areas the Chronicler offersus a kind of royal-priestly prototype of the New Testament Church. With hisliturgical and sacramental appropriation of history, the Chronicler wants to leadhis audience to see the “signs of the times,” the divine purposes being unfolded ineveryday reality. He is preparing his readers, those who have returned to Jerusalemand those still in the Diaspora, to recognize these “signs” and to prepare theirhearts to live as a royal and priestly people, the agents through whom God willbless all the nations.Spirit 4 (2008): 289–317. See generally, Scott Hahn, The Lamb’s Supper: The Mass as Heaven onEarth (New York: Doubleday, 1999).
