Issuu

CHRONICLES OF

History and

worship Orthodox Christian Reflections on

the Books of Chronicles by Patrick Henry Reardon

Ancient Faith Chesterton, Indiana

Ancient Faith Publishing A division of Ancient Faith Ministries P.O. Box 748 Chesterton, IN 46304

Printed in the United States of America

ISBN: 978-1-888212-83-9

memoriae parentum

Sample pages only. Purchase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

Contents Introduction ................................................................................................ 7 The Mind of the Chronicler b 9 The True Significance of Davidâ€™s House b 12 Remembering David b 13 Levi and Judah b 15 Chronicles and Christology b 18 A Christian Reading of Chronicles b 21 Another Christian Approach b 22 History and Biblical Understanding b 24 History and Worship b 27 chapter-by-chapter commentary 1 Chronicles 1 b 31 1 Chronicles 2 b 35 1 Chronicles 3 b 37 1 Chronicles 4 b 39 1 Chronicles 5 b 41 1 Chronicles 6 b 43 1 Chronicles 7 b 45 1 Chronicles 8 b 49 1 Chronicles 9 b 51 1 Chronicles 10 b 53 1 Chronicles 11 b 55 1 Chronicles 12 b 57 1 Chronicles 13 b 59 1 Chronicles 14 b 61 1 Chronicles 15 b 63 1 Chronicles 16 b 65 1 Chronicles 17 b 67 1 Chronicles 18 b 69 1 Chronicles 19 b 71 1 Chronicles 20 b 73 1 Chronicles 21 b 75 1 Chronicles 22 b 77 1 Chronicles 23 b 79 1 Chronicles 24 b 81 1 Chronicles 25 b 83 1 Chronicles 26 b 85 1 Chronicles 27 b 87 1 Chronicles 28 b 89 Sample pages only. Purchase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

1 Chronicles 29 2 Chronicles 1 2 Chronicles 2 2 Chronicles 3 2 Chronicles 4 2 Chronicles 5 2 Chronicles 6 2 Chronicles 7 2 Chronicles 8 2 Chronicles 9 2 Chronicles 10 2 Chronicles 11 2 Chronicles 12 2 Chronicles 13 2 Chronicles 14 2 Chronicles 15 2 Chronicles 16 2 Chronicles 17 2 Chronicles 18 2 Chronicles 19 2 Chronicles 20 2 Chronicles 21 2 Chronicles 22 2 Chronicles 23 2 Chronicles 24 2 Chronicles 25 2 Chronicles 26 2 Chronicles 27 2 Chronicles 28 2 Chronicles 29 2 Chronicles 30 2 Chronicles 31 2 Chronicles 32 2 Chronicles 33 2 Chronicles 34 2 Chronicles 35 2 Chronicles 36

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b

CHRONICLES

91 93 95 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 111 113 115 117 119 121 123 125 127 129 131 133 135 137 139 141 145 147 149 153 157 161 165 171 175 179 183

About the Author ................................................................................ 187 Also by Patrick Henry Reardon ................................................ 187

Introduction

b IF IT IS THE CASE—AND LIKELY IT IS—that the Books of Chronicles are among the most neglected parts of the Bible, the loss is surely to those who do the neglecting. Indeed, I confess to having suffered that loss for many years. I had read Chronicles regularly, of course, as a simple matter of duty, but with scant understanding of what I read. I had no adequate guide to introduce and direct my study of this important biblical theologian. Only in old age have I come to grasp and appreciate the quiet, contemplative perception of biblical history found in Chronicles, which I now regard as among the most theologically mature books of the Hebrew Bible. My own relative neglect for many years, however, prompts a sense of compassion for those other readers who find the Books of Chronicles rough going. It is a fact that the work of the Chronicler is not easy for beginners, for whom the present commentary is intended as a modest introduction and guide. I so hope my effort will meet this need, because the informed reader will find in Chronicles a robust diet for the spirit. With respect to these books, however, the number of readers that can be called “beginners” may be rather large. Indeed, many brave souls, summoning their inner resources and mounting an effort to the task, have found even the opening chapter daunting. For one thing, nothing much seems to be happening. In the Hebrew and Greek texts, in fact, the Chronicler does not get around to his first verb (“begot,” naturally) until verse 10. Before that mildly exciting moment, the first page of Chronicles is a bare list of names. The beginning reader, looking for a plot in the story, is disconcerted. Aware that the page in front of him is the Word of God, he is understandably hesitant to call it boring. Nonetheless, what is he to make of all these interminable names with no discernible narrative? He finds himself plodding through a primitive phone book, as it were, published long before the telephone was invented. This view would at least explain why the numbers are missing. Sample pages only. Purchase the full book at 7 http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

Most readers, after all, are prone to associate good storytelling with at least an occasional recourse to verbs. Verbs make things happen, and if nothing happens, there isn’t much of a story. This, I suppose, is an assumption we picked up early. For example, among our very first literary adventures there was “See Spot run,” a sound, robust imperative with a hearty ratio of two verbs to one noun. This is lean, muscular literature that seldom gets livelier. Perhaps our expectations of literary excitement were unduly raised by that enduring vision of Spot on the run. By any standard, nonetheless, the first chapter of the Chronicler is extraordinarily short on verbs. “Begot” appears six times, and “reigned” twice or so. That just about does it. Well, the verb “died” does come seven times toward the end of the chapter, but by then the reader may feel like doing the same. Moreover, the problem is not confined to the first chapter. If the reader gets this far, he must still trek through another eight chapters before he arrives, as though with a trumpet fanfare, at that glorious oasis opening on chapter 10: “Now the Philistines fought against Israel; and the men of Israel fled from before the Philistines, and fell slain on Mount Gilboa.” Aha, he says to himself, some real action at last. Spot is finally on the run. He quickly discovers, nonetheless, that chapter 10 has only fourteen verses, and most of the next two chapters go right back to more lists of names. Perhaps by the time he reaches chapter 21 the reader is completely in sympathy with the Lord’s punishment of David for taking a census! To gain some perspective on this dilemma, I think it useful to recall the Greek name for the Books of Chronicles, Paralipomena, which means “stuff left out.” Although this name does not do justice to the Chronicler’s intention, it does indicate what he did not intend to do. He did not intend to give us the whole story. Consequently, the Chronicler omitted a great deal. Indeed, at many points (all of chapter 1, for instance) he manifestly presumed his readers already knew the story. The Chronicler’s intention was, rather, to tell the story from a perspective different from those of the other biblical historians. Like the authors of Genesis, Samuel, and Kings, the Chronicler had in mind to grasp the meaning of Israel’s history, not simply to relate the facts, and Copyright © 2006 by8Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION readers owe him the responding effort to discern what he thought that historical meaning to be. Because of the difficulties already noted, this effort may have to be considerable, and it is true that relatively few Christian readers have bothered with it. In fact, many readers of Chronicles, perhaps overly impressed by the Greek title in use among Christians until fairly recent times, have treated these books as merely paralipomena, just “stuff left out” of the racier, more exciting, See-Spot-run pages of Samuel and Kings. The work of the Chronicler is often pursued as though it offered only a dull supplement to these other books. In the standard Hebrew text, indeed, this impression is strengthened by the Chronicler’s place at the very end of the Bible, where the final editors of the Masoretic text inappropriately set it. The Greek Bible, in contrast, at least has the merit of putting the Books of Chronicles in front of Ezra and Nehemiah, which are the proper continuation of the Chronicler’s narrative. Unless the reader grasps the Chronicler’s historical perspective and literary intention, these books will continue to be obscure. It was to address that need that the present commentary was written. Let the reader of the present work be resolved, then, to read it as an aid to the study of the Books of Chronicles, not as a substitute for that study. It is the present author’s intention to help the reading of the Bible, not to distract from it or replace it. (I can hardly describe my horror when some folks mentioned reading Christ in the Psalms in place of the Book of Psalms!) The Mind of the Chronicler Who, then, was the Chronicler, and what did he have in mind to say? It is not possible to identify the Chronicler with assurance, nor to pin down with certainty the date of his work. Some historians, taking their cue from the Talmud (Baba Bathra 15a), identify him as the great Ezra, but these same scholars also disagree—by as much as sixty years—about the date of Ezra’s mission. However, I do not think the reasons for identifying the Chronicler as Ezra himself, or even as the author of Ezra-Nehemiah, are convincing, nor do they explain why some of the dominant theological and liturgical themes in the Books of Chronicles are largely absent in the pages of Ezra-Nehemiah. I am disposed to say that there appears to be 9 Sample pages only. Purchase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

some sort of literary relationship between Ezra-Nehemiah and the Books of Chronicles, and leave it at that. So when did the Chronicler write? If it is implausible—and a consensus says it is—to place him earlier than the mid-fifth century, when Nehemiah arrived in Jerusalem, the earliest possible time of composition would be the late fifth or early fourth century. What, then, is the latest possible time of the Chronicler’s work? Inasmuch as the priestly genealogy in 1␣ Chronicles 3:19–24 seems to extend to six generations after Zerubbabel in the late sixth century, we will not be much off if we suggest some date close to 400 BC. Thus, it is reasonable to think that the Chronicler wrote during the second half of the Persian period, before the rise of Alexander and its ensuing trauma. This loose dating is sufficient to help the reader understand what the Chronicler had in mind to say. After the edict of Cyrus in 538, the exiles returning from Babylon carried many questions in their minds. One of these questions had to do with the covenant promises made to the house of David. The Davidic monarchy had been abolished, and although some still hoped for its eventual restoration, that restoration did not seem likely—certainly not while the Persians held sway. The Persian Empire, the new power in the Fertile Crescent, did not intend to encourage underling kings, an institution tolerated by the Assyrians and Babylonians who preceded them. Persian rule would be structured on geographical districts known as satrapies, with all satraps and other officials appointed by the emperor. Thus, when Cyrus assigned Zerubbabel to oversee the return of the Jewish exiles in 538, this royal descendant of David did not come to Jerusalem as a king but only as an appointed governor. Moreover, the Persians had no intention to leave Zerubbabel in Judah very long after the initial settling of the returning exiles. Indeed, given the messianic aspirations to be found among some of these latter (cf. Hag. 2:21–22; Zech. 4:6–7), it would be too risky for the Persians to leave a son of David in charge at Jerusalem. It is not clear when Zerubbabel returned to Babylon, but we observe that his name is not found among those present at the new temple’s completion in 515 (Ezra 6:14), nor is there any record of another governor from the Davidic family appointed to Jerusalem. As time went on, then, and the citizens of Judah became ever more Copyright © 2006 by10Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION accustomed to living under Persian rule and without a Davidic king, those given to reflection on their history were obliged to think anew on the meaning of the house of David. In view of the obvious fact that the covenanted monarchy at Jerusalem was now gone, what was to be made of the divine promise that David’s throne would last forever? In the light of all the recent events, what was to be said about the monarchical house of the son of Jesse? What was the true historical significance of that institution? These questions were pondered deeply by thoughtful minds, both during the Babylonian Exile (cf. Ezek. 34:23–24; 37:24–25) and during the ensuing years (cf. the late-sixth-century editor of Is. 55:3–5 and the still later hand in Zech. 12:8–10). Also numbered among those who pondered these questions in depth was the Chronicler. In respect to David’s royal house, any Bible-reader can see how profoundly the Chronicler’s perspective differed from the historical interest in Samuel–Kings, a narrative finished much earlier, probably during the Babylonian Captivity. Although the author of Samuel–Kings had a great deal to say of the house of David, it is clear his historical interest was much broader. He does not appear to be arguing some thesis dominated by the Davidic monarchy. An examination of the work makes this clear. Recording the two centuries during which the kingdoms of Israel and Judah co-existed (922–722), the Books of Kings (or “Kingdoms,” as they are known in the Septuagint) devoted more space to the schismatic Kingdom of Israel than to the covenanted monarchy of Judah. In Kings we learn more about Jeroboam than about Rehoboam, far more about Ahab than about Jehoshaphat. It is obvious, then, that the complex of Samuel–Kings is not built around the Davidic covenant and throne as a thematic center. When we turn to the Books of Chronicles, on the other hand, the significance of the Davidic throne is impossible to exaggerate. For all practical purposes, the Northern Kingdom does not even exist! This author mentions that schismatic nation only when he absolutely must. In Chronicles the very name “Samaria” is found only eight times, and always in connection with wars against Judah. Clearly the author would rather not mention the Northern Kingdom at all. His interest has entirely to do, rather, with Judah and Jerusalem, and his mind is engrossed with one question: “What was the real and lasting significance of David and his house?” Sample pages only. Purchase 11 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

The True Significance of David’s House Of the 65 chapters contained in the Books of Chronicles, 19 are devoted to the reign of King David (1␣ Chr. 11—29). This bare fact sufficiently indicates the importance of David in the mind of the Chronicler. But even more significant, I believe, are the concerns the Chronicler decided to treat within these 19 chapters and the way he proportioned those concerns in the narrative. Of these 19 chapters devoted to David, the Chronicler allotted no fewer than 11—over half—to describe that king’s solicitude for Israel’s proper worship (1 Chr. 13; 15— 16 and 22—29). This material includes the transfer of the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem, the organization of the priestly and Levitical ministries, preparations for the sacred music, and David’s lengthy instructions to Solomon with respect to the temple. According to the Chronicler, David not only made all the arrangements for the construction of the temple and the organization of the worship (1␣ Chr. 28:19), he did so by the Lord’s own command (2␣ Chr. 29:25). Even the musical instruments used in the worship are credited to David (2␣ Chr. 29:27; cf. Neh. 12:36). To grasp the significance of this liturgical emphasis of the Chronicler, it is useful to compare his account of David’s reign to that in the Books of Samuel. In Samuel there are 77 verses devoted to David’s liturgical interests, whereas in the Chronicles there are 323. According to the Chronicler, that is to say, David’s major importance as an historical figure had to do with his efforts with respect to the divine worship. It was precisely David’s work for the temple and its liturgy that rendered him most significant in the history of the people of God. As the Chronicler could plainly see from looking around him, surveying the circumstances of his own life and times, David’s one enduring accomplishment was his singular, unparalleled contribution to Israel’s worship. Everything else about David had disappeared from the earth. His battles and conquests were only faint memories. Other details of David’s life (his adultery and murder, certainly) were best forgotten. His hereditary throne had disappeared, like all the other thrones of history. For this reason also, the Chronicler omits all discussion of David’s life prior to his becoming king. This otherwise interesting material was simply not pertinent to his theme. By the Chronicler’s time, the only thing left that made David a Copyright © 2006 by12Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION truly important historical figure was the body of his achievements on behalf of Israel’s authentic and proper worship of God. David’s liturgical accomplishments alone had survived the ravages of history, but for the author of Chronicles these achievements were quite enough, and his long historical reflection was based on them. Following this conviction about David’s true place in history, the Chronicler went on to regard the rest of Judah’s kings through that same lens. Of the nine chapters he devoted to the reign of Solomon, the Chronicler used six to tell of the building, appointing, and dedicating of the temple. After all, none of Solomon’s other accomplishments had endured. Only his provision for Israel’s worship made him a figure of historical consequence. This theme of the royal patronage of Israel’s worship continues through the remainder of the Chronicler’s narrative. He alone tells us of the northern Levites who fled to Jerusalem to serve in the temple during the reign of Rehoboam (2␣ Chr. 11:13–17). Solely from the Chronicler do we learn of Asa’s liturgical reforms (15:8–15), Jehoshaphat’s sponsorship of the teaching Levites (17:7–9), and his prayer in the temple (20:5–12). Only the Chronicler condemns King Uzziah’s interference with the priestly ministry of the temple (26:16–23). He alone describes in detail certain liturgical reforms of Hezekiah (29:12—31:21), Manasseh (33:15–17), and Josiah (35:2–18). When the Chronicler speaks, then, of “the mercies of David” (hasde Dawid—6:42; cf. Ps. 89[88]:2, 3, 50; Is. 55:3), this expression has specific reference to Israel’s worship, especially the liturgy in the temple. Although David’s royal house had not been restored to the throne, the Lord’s own house, the temple, had been rebuilt since the return from exile, and even now it served as the place of His authentic and orthodox worship. In the Chronicler’s time, the final fortunes of the Davidic royal family were still unknown, but this author was yet able to point to its one undeniable historical achievement. David’s line had fashioned and equipped Israel’s true worship. That was their contribution to sacred history. Remembering David The historical perspective of the Chronicler was perhaps most poetically expressed in one of the final “Psalms of Ascent,” those hymns Sample pages only. Purchase 13 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

chanted by the pilgrims to Jerusalem as they climbed the hill on their way to the temple. This psalm, Psalm 132 (Greek and Latin 131), prays the Lord to “remember David / And all his afflictions,” those things he suffered to establish the service of the temple. It goes on to associate closely the fortunes of the Davidic house with the blessings of the house of the Lord. The psalmist believes that if the Lord really remembers David, He will clothe Zion’s priests with salvation and cause her saints to sing for joy. All these things are done in remembrance of David. In this entire psalm there is not one word of anything else David accomplished except his provision for the temple’s worship. If it is thus that Israel prays the Lord to remember David, it is because this is how the Lord’s people themselves should remember David, especially as they tread those final uphill steps to enter the Lord’s courts with praise and thanksgiving. David was the founder of it all. Because of God’s promise to David, a special protection attended His temple and the worship that took place in that temple. This psalm guaranteed that Israel would not enter the house of the Lord without thinking on the king who saw to its construction and provision. This is exactly how the Chronicler too remembered David—as the true builder of Solomon’s temple, the spiritual leader who arranged its priestly and Levitical ministries, the master liturgist who composed its music and provided the singers and instruments to give it voice. Compared with these accomplishments, little else about David was worth remembering. Moreover, and more importantly, the Chronicler’s view of David is inseparable from his view of Israel.␣ For the Chronicler, what made David different from all other kings of the earth is exactly what made Israel different from all other nations of the earth—the knowledge and correct worship of the one true God. David did not inaugurate Israel’s worship, of course. That task was given to Moses and his brother Aaron, and if the Chronicler seems to neglect that earlier part of Israel’s liturgical history, it is because he knew that story had already been told and was readily available. In the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, the Chronicler recognized the earlier proper treatment of his own chosen theme, and it was his intention to carry that Mosaic story on to its later stages, especially as embodied in the liturgy of the temple. It is in this theme of orthodox worship that we perceive the hisCopyright © 2006 by14Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION torical perspective of the Chronicler. To his mind, the deepest and most enduring fact of history is the correct, covenanted worship of the true God by His chosen people. Beside this, everything else is relatively insignificant. For him, all other aspects of man’s history are judged in importance by their relationship to this standard, for in the estimation of the Chronicler only the correct worship of the true God gives lasting significance to the deeds of men. This is the guiding principle manifest throughout all the narrative we are considering. At least one other biblical theologian shared the Chronicler’s conviction about the relationship between history and worship, because more than two centuries later we find the same perspective in the Son of Sirach. “Let us now praise famous men,” that wise man solemnly begins, “and our fathers that begot us” (Ecclus. 44:1), and then he goes on to trace the high points of biblical history in the characters of Enoch, Noah, Abraham and the other patriarchs, Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Samuel, David and Solomon, Elijah, Hezekiah, Isaiah, Josiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zerubbabel, and Nehemiah. But what, for Ben Sirach, constituted the crowning and glorious achievement of all this lengthy history? The worship in the temple, which he describes in stirring detail in chapter 50. Here we see him relishing the grandeur and beauty of the temple liturgy, presided over by Simon the high priest, as the sons of Aaron chant the praises of God and all the worshippers prostrate themselves in adoration. Israel’s history finds its culmination, fulfillment, and meaning in its worship. Earlier in the same narrative, moreover, Ben Sirach prepares his readers for that grand scene in the temple by describing David’s provision for this worship in the arrangement of liturgical feasts and seasons, the composition of hymns, and the establishing of choirs to sing them (Ecclus. 47:8–10). Ben Sirach’s view of history and worship, then, seems identical to that of the Chronicler. Levi and Judah In spite of the Chronicler’s dominating interest in David, and notwithstanding the basing of his narrative structure on the sequence of the Davidic kings, the theological perspective in the Books of Chronicles is not that of the royal tribe of Judah. The writer is not simply a traditional apologist of the Davidic throne. To virtually all Bible-readers it is obvious that the Chronicler crafts Sample pages only. Purchase 15 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

his history, rather, from the perspective of a minister of the temple. His viewpoint may be described as more clerical than royal, hierarchical rather than monarchical. Thus, he has vastly more to say about the ministry of the temple than about the other concerns of the king’s palace. In fact, we may describe the Chronicler’s perspective even more precisely. He writes, not simply as a minister of the temple, but specifically as a Levite, this term meaning a male member of the house of Levi who is not a descendant of Aaron. This would explain the Chronicler’s truly singular interest in the Levitical ministries of the temple. A simple word count will demonstrate this interest. The term “Levite,” which is found only five times, and in only one chapter, of the Book of Leviticus, appears in Chronicles ninety-nine times. If we add in the instances of “Levites” in Ezra-Nehemiah, we come to a total of 158 times, more than in all the other books of the Bible combined. Moreover, it is the Chronicler alone who provides such detailed genealogies of the various Levitical families, including the sort of information normally associated with family records. These Levites not only assisted the priests, the sons of Aaron, in the preparation of the sacrifices, they also cared for other aspects of the temple. Some served as doorkeepers, for instance, some as singers and musicians, and, at certain periods of history, some served as teachers of the Law. The Chronicler shows a pointed interest in all these ministries. Can we further narrow the focus of the Chronicler? Perhaps we can. Among the various ministries the Levites performed in the prescribed worship, the Chronicler reveals a particular regard for the liturgical music. This regard is manifest if we simply compare the Chronicler’s stories with those in Kings, where the verb “to sing,” shir, is found only one time (1␣ Kings 10:12). For example, unlike the parallel account in 2␣ Kings 11, the Chronicler tells of the activity of the temple singers and musicians in the deposition of the usurper Athaliah (2␣ Chr. 23:13). Again, the Chronicler alone speaks of the music sung and played during the transference of the ark to the newly constructed temple (2␣ Chr. 5:12– 13). More than one reader, impressed by this evidence, has found it easy to believe that the Chronicler sprang from one of the “singing families” among the Levites, perhaps the house of Asaph, whom David placed over the temple’s musical ministries and whose name appears so frequently in the titles of various psalms. 16Patrick Henry Reardon. Copyright © 2006 by All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION Without pressing the case further, we may at least conclude that the Chronicler represents the perspective of the ministerial tribe of Levi rather than the royal tribe of Judah. Furthermore, as we shall see in the commentary, he directs a great deal of his attention to the relationship between these two tribes. The ministerial tribe of Levi was born of Jacob’s third son, while the tribe of Judah was sired by his fourth. Furthermore, Israel had a hierarchy long before and long after it had a monarchy. Thus, from the very beginning the priesthood of Israel enjoyed an ascendancy of sorts over the royalty. The relationship between these two Israelite tribes invites comparisons with similar examples from the history of religion. One thinks, for instance, of ancient India, where the raja (from the same root as the Latin rex, meaning “king”) belonged to the ruling caste of the Kshatryas, the caste immediately below that of the priests, or Brahmins. Occasional religious frictions between the two groups, in fact, eventually spawned two new religions, when Mahavira and Siddartha Gautama, both of them from the Kshatryas caste, broke with the Brahmins and became the “founders” of Jainism and Buddhism, respectively. It is exceedingly curious that these things happened in the sixth century BC, about the time that Israel lost its monarchy but kept its priesthood. In the Bible there is no socioreligious crisis comparable to that in Hinduism. With very few exceptions, such as Uzziah (2␣ Chr. 26:16– 20), the kings of Judah did not encroach on the prerogatives of the clergy. In those instances where David or Solomon is said to offer sacrifice, it is said in much the same sense as saying that David or Solomon built a bridge or constructed a wall—that is to say, they caused the thing to be done. Nor, on the other hand, did Israel’s priesthood attempt to usurp the duties and privileges of the throne. There is no reason to question the Chronicler’s overall portrait of the two institutions working together in harmony. As we shall see in the commentary, in fact, the temple’s priesthood was effective in saving the Davidic throne in its hour of greatest danger—the six years during which the infidel daughter of Ahab and Jezebel replaced the sons of David. The story of the restoration of young Joash to the Davidic throne by the high priest Jehoiada (2␣ Chr. 23) is among the most memorable narratives in Holy Scripture. Still, the Chronicler’s perspective on these matters was that of the 17 the full book at Sample pages only. Purchase http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

clergy, not the royalty. He evaluates the kings of Judah largely on the basis of their attention to and care for the worship. By that standard, such kings as David, Solomon, Hezekiah, and Josiah received very good marks. Some of the others did not, and perhaps the worst of them all turned out to be Joash, who “did not remember the kindness which Jehoiada his father had done to him, but killed his son” (2␣ Chr. 24:22). Chronicles and Christology Our reflection on this rapport between Israel’s kings and her priests is perhaps the best point at which to consider a proper Christian reading of Chronicles. Christians believe, after all, that the concord and affirmation between hierarchy and monarchy, as affirmed in Chronicles, is rendered perfect in God’s Word incarnate as both priest and king. We confess that in the person of Jesus the Lord, perfect priesthood and complete kingship are forever joined. We should further acknowledge that the unity in Christ of these two institutions serves as the standard and model for interpreting their history as narrated in Chronicles. First, kingship. Jesus is everywhere in the New Testament confessed as Son of David and the proper, eternal heir to his throne. As such, the early Christians believed, Jesus is the fulfillment of the covenant promise made to David that his Son would forever rule over Israel: “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:32–33). This is a standard and ubiquitous understanding throughout the New Testament (e.g., Matt. 1:2–16; 22:42–45; Rom. 1:2–4; 2␣ Tim. 2:8). Second, priesthood. Since there was attached to the priesthood of the Old Testament no explicit covenant entirely equivalent to the kingly covenant made with David, Christians needed a bit more reflection to arrive at an understanding of Jesus as priest. This they were able to do because they believed that on the cross the Savior offered Himself in sacrifice, specifically as a sin offering, the sacrifice of atonement. From the very beginning this fundamental soteriological thesis was transmitted regularly in the words pronounced at the center of Christian worship: “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28). St. Paul used the same liturgical category, the sin offering, with Copyright © 2006 by18Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION respect to the cross when he preached, as a matter of primary importance, that “Christ died for our sins” (1␣ Cor. 15:3). He later returned to this image of the sin offering in Colossians 1:14 and Ephesians 1:7, using in both places the same words, “we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” In Ephesians 5:2 Paul used even more explicit liturgical language to say, “Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.” But if Jesus offered sacrifice, these Christians reflected, then Jesus is a priest. The conclusion was inevitable. Hence, it is not surprising to find two New Testament writers identifying Jesus as a priest. These writers are St. Luke and the anonymous author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. It is further significant to our study of Chronicles that both writers refer to Jesus’ priesthood in the context of His kingship. We may look at these two authors in turn. We may start with Luke, whose identification of Jesus as priest is studiously quiet and understated. First, Luke mentions, as though in passing, that Jesus’ Mother is kin (syggenis—1:36) to a “daughter of Aaron” (1:5), a subtle suggestion, easily unnoticed, of Levitical blood in Jesus Himself. Luke’s delicate hint is apparently compatible with his assertion that Jesus was a descendant of Judah (3:33). Second, St. Ambrose draws attention to a literary inclusio formed by Luke’s two references to the throwing of dice, both in the context of sacrifice. The first instance, which determines Zacharias’s liturgical task of offering incense in the temple (1:9), stands in correspondence to the later throwing of dice at the foot of the cross, the altar where Jesus offers Himself in the supreme sacrifice (23:34). Ambrose comments, “It was read in the dice which priest should enter the temple. . . . What else was signified but that there would come a Priest . . . who would not offer sacrifice for us in the temple made with hands, but would annul [vacuaret] our sins in the temple of His body? Perhaps on this account the soldiers cast dice for the Lord’s garments. As the Lord prepared to offer sacrifice for us in His temple, the shaking of the dice before Him would also fulfill the precept of the Law” (In Lucam 1.23). We likewise observe in Luke’s second instance of dice rolling that Jesus offers His sacrifice under a sign identifying Him as the king (Luke 23:38), thus fulfilling the promise of royalty made at the beginning (1:32–33). That inscription proclaiming His kingship was placed on Sample pages only. Purchase 19 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

the cross by the same soldiers that rolled the dice at the foot of His altar. Luke’s Gospel, then, joins the hierarchy and monarchy of Jesus in the sacrifice of the cross, where He is portrayed as the sacrificing king. We may turn now to the Epistle to the Hebrews, which treats the priesthood and kingship of Jesus very differently from Luke. This author goes to considerable length to insist that our Lord’s priesthood is of a completely different order from that of Aaron. To describe Jesus as both priest and king, he reverts to the Bible’s earliest example of Melchizedek, who served “God Most High” as hierarch and monarch at Jerusalem, centuries before the sons of Judah and Levi took on those responsibilities (Gen. 14:18–20; Heb. 6:20—7:18). The priesthood of Jesus, prophesied in Psalm 109[110]:4, was to be “according to the order of Melchizedek” (Heb. 7:17), “in the likeness of Melchizedek” (7:15). The priesthood of Jesus was not of the Levitical order, in which “every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins” (10:11). On the contrary, “our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood” (7:14). His, then, is a royal priesthood, the priesthood of a king. The author of Hebrews illustrates this union of priesthood and kingship in Jesus in a striking way: the priesthood of Jesus is perfected in His enthronement. The sacrifice offered by Jesus is rendered perfect by His entrance, once and for all, into the Holy Place not made by hands (9:11), in order “to appear in the presence of God for us” (9:24). This entrance into the heavenly sanctuary renders His sacrifice perfect, because “if He were on earth, He would not be a priest” (8:4). But what did Jesus do when He entered the heavenly sanctuary? He did what no priest on earth would ever do in the earthly sanctuary. He sat down. He assumed His throne. It is a mark of priests on earth, says Hebrews, that they stand at the altar (10:11, hesteken). Not this Priest, however. This Priest is the King, who “when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high” (1:3). To Him we proclaim, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever” (1:8; Ps. 44[45]:6). The same psalm that says, “You are a priest forever / According to the order of Melchizedek,” also says, “Sit at My right hand” (Ps. 109[110]:1, 4; Heb. 1:13; 5:6, 7, 15; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2). As the King, likewise, this Priest wears a crown (Heb. 2:7, 9). His is Copyright © 2006 by20Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION the royal priesthood, thus perfecting the concurrence of monarchy and hierarchy adumbrated in the Books of Chronicles. A Christian Reading of Chronicles I want to extend our consideration of a Christian study of the Chronicler by suggesting that there is more than one legitimate approach to the sacred text. Christian history itself testifies to this exegetical variety, in which the rich meaning of Holy Scripture is never reducible to just one framework nor to a single formula. The Church has always insisted that the Bible is open to more than one approach, as long as each interpreter stays within, and takes his guidance from, the Rule of Faith (as explained, for example, by St. Augustine of Hippo, The City of God 15.26). We can start, for example, by mentioning the standard fourfold outline formulated by St. John Cassian in the early fifth century (Conferences 14.8). This traditional outline speaks first of the literal or historical sense of the text, the meaning originally intended by the biblical writer himself. As applied to a Christian reading of Chronicles, the pursuit of this sense will endeavor to read the sacred text through the author’s manifest theological and historical concerns and within the boundaries of the work’s historical context. A great deal of the present commentary is devoted to this pursuit. According to Cassian’s outline, however, this literal sense of the Bible is transformed by its doctrinal significance discerned in the light of Christ. This is the deeper meaning of Holy Scripture indicated by the risen Lord, who “beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself ” (Luke 24:27). Following the lead of St. Paul, sacred tradition calls this meaning the Bible’s allegorical sense (allegoroumena—Gal. 4:24), the newer, more complete significance, the sensus plenior evoked from the sacred page through its fulfillment in the Mystery of Christ. Reading Chronicles according to this sense, the figure of David, for example, is perceived to be a type of Christ, who fulfills in a special, definitive way what that Old Testament prophet and king accomplished by way of allegory. Namely, Christ provides for God’s people the true worship, the true priesthood, the true temple—all the things that David, through shadows and figures, provided in his own time. Sample pages only. Purchase 21 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

The third sense in Cassian’s traditional outline is the Bible’s tropological or moral sense, its existential, practical, and concrete application to the life of the believing reader. We perceive this sense of the Old Testament in St. Paul’s applications of the sacred text to the Christian’s moral life, as when he wrote of the ancient Israelites in the desert, “all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come” (1␣ Cor. 10:11). In addition to negative examples, such as the one cited by Paul, the New Testament offers many positive Old Testament models, such as Elijah (Jas. 5:17) and Rahab (Heb. 11:31). The work of the Chronicler, approached in this tropological sense, is full of myriad moral examples, both positive and negative, applicable to the life of the Gospel. Thus, the Christian reader is inspired to emulate such models as the foresight of David, the integrity of Jotham, the loyalty of Jehoiada, the courage of Micaiah, and so on, while cautiously eschewing the folly of Rehoboam, the infidelity of Jehoram, the cruelty of Athaliah, the ingratitude of Joash, and so forth. The Christian reader, in his assessment of these moral examples, will be careful to interpret the text, not only according to the ethical standards of the Old Testament, but also in the full light of the Gospel. That is to say, the Christian moral life is always life under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, not according to the bondage of the Law. Still following Cassian’s interpretive outline, the fourth level of significance in Holy Scripture—its anagogical or eschatological sense—is the meaning that it has with respect to the last things, the definitive fulfillment of all history. Interpreted in this sense, the Books of Chronicles present us with a prophetic adumbration of man’s eternal destiny, his worship before the Throne of God in glory. Everything the Chronicler has to say with respect to priesthood, sacrifice, hymnography, and prayer is a preparation for the everlasting worship described in, say, the Epistle to the Hebrews (e.g., 12:18–24) and the Book of Revelation (e.g., 5:8–14). Another Christian Approach In addition to the fourfold exegetical pattern outlined by St. John Cassian, let me suggest another Christian avenue to the Old Testament, one with a particular application to the Books of Chronicles. This second approach differs from Cassian’s in the following way. Cassian’s doctrinal outline is constructed on the actual process of the Copyright © 2006 by 22Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION history of salvation. It begins with the history of the Old Testament in proper sequence, an understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures on their own terms, so to speak, their own meaning in their own settings, and then goes on to examine the Old Testament through the perspective of the New, the lens of Christ. This exegetical process is the movement from letter to spirit, in which the meaning of the New enhances the meaning of the Old Testament. Next, there is the understanding of sacred Scriptures as they are read and applied in the concrete lives of Christians. Finally, there is the ultimate fulfillment of God’s Word when all signs and images have been absorbed into the light of eternal beatitude. This progressive understanding of the Bible in four steps has a discerned chronology. The approach I am suggesting does not proceed along that chronological path. It begins, not with the history of the Bible, but with the personal history of the Gentile (like myself ) who comes to Christ, not through the inherited history of the Old Testament, but through the original, straightforward proclamation of the Gospel. I ask myself, why should I be interested in those ancient Hebrew writings in the first place? What connection do they have with me? And I answer, those ancient books have no special connection with me except on account of Christ. Christ alone is my link to those writings. That is to say, I don’t begin with the Old Testament. I begin with Christ. I commence with the Center. Christ is not only the Mediator between God and man; He is also the Mediator between the Old Testament and the Church. Except for Christ, why should the Church be theologically interested in the Old Testament? In this way we Christians actually begin to grasp the Old Testament according to its spiritual meaning, its allegorical sense, its Christological significance. As Christians we only go to the Old Testament because it pertains to Jesus. Otherwise the Old Testament is, for us non-Jews, just another ancient book. We accept it as our Bible only because it is Jesus’ Bible. In truth and strictly speaking, after all, it is only Christ that makes the Old Testament theologically pertinent to us. Without Christ, the Old Testament is not really our history. We have no continuity with it—it is not part of our memory—except through Christ. The Christ that is proclaimed brings the Old Testament with Him in the proclamation. Indeed, the barest preaching of the Gospel includes the Old Testament, in the sense that what Jesus accomplished for Sample pages only. Purchase 23 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

our redemption was “according to the Scriptures” (1␣ Cor. 15:1–4). The Christ we proclaim is proclaimed as the fulfillment of the Scriptures. It is in these swaddling clothes that the Messiah is adorned. Our Spirit-prompted acceptance of the Gospel, then, the saving gift of our faith by which we are joined to Christ, also joins us, through Christ, to the ancient faith of the Hebrews who awaited His coming. Through Christ, their history becomes our history; we are engrafted into the Bible’s ongoing chronology. The Hebrew Scriptures become our own family album. The history of the Bible and the history of the Church form a single narrative, of which our lives are an integral part. Let us apply this truth to the Books of Chronicles. I would like to do this by a series of affirmations. First, that apparently uninteresting, taxing list of names with which the Chronicler begins has in Christ become our own family tree. Because of Christ, we are part of a single story. An earlier part of our story is narrated in the Books of Chronicles. Second, like any family history, the story in Chronicles is selective and told with a distinct purpose. As we have already reflected, that purpose has to do with the understanding that worship is what finally gives meaning to history. Third, this thesis from Chronicles is true of our own history. The chief task of the Church, on earth as it is in heaven, is the glorification of God according to the prescribed orthodox worship. This is a major lesson the Church is to learn from the Chronicler. Applied more particularly to our personal lives, Chronicles would have us affirm that the life pleasing to God is the life centered on the orthodox worship God has revealed to the world in the family history of His people. Everything else in history will disappear. All that remains will be the entirely correct and everlasting worship of God. Fourth, Israel’s ancient temptation to forget this truth is what chiefly brought about the series of disasters narrated in Chronicles. That story, too, is told for our learning, to preserve us from the same lack of discernment, lest we lose our way and become likewise reprobate. History and Biblical Understanding Inasmuch as the Books of Chronicles appear in the Bible as “historical books,” it will be instructive, I believe, to say something about the relationship between history and Holy Scripture. Copyright © 2006 by24Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION First, the Bible not only records history; it also creates history. By this I mean that the Bible, as written down, read, and proclaimed in the ongoing community of faith (the Church of both Testaments), influences and directs the course of history. We ourselves are part of the history created by Holy Scripture. We are the qahal, the ecclesia, the gathering of those who in the Holy Spirit are assembled to attend to God’s Word. In the history it records, the Bible itself prolongs that history in those who receive it in faith. Second, this unified history, comprised of what the Bible records and what the Bible creates, is a single, living, ongoing reality, in which there is a continuity between the words of Holy Scripture and the Church’s understanding of those words. If there were to be a break between the Bible and its interpretation, that continuity would be lost. There would be a disruption in salvation history. This is the tragedy known as “heresy.” Third, this continuity is called Holy Tradition, which embraces, as a single reality, the history narrated in the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Scriptures themselves, and the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church that reads these Scriptures in her worship, understands them in her teaching, and proclaims them in her ministry to the world. The biblical history narrated in the Church by the reading and proclamation of the Scriptures is the early part of the Church’s own history. It is our history, and we in the Church understand it as our history. Fourth, the correct understanding of Holy Scripture includes what some of the Church Fathers (for instance, Didymus the Blind, Job 9.13; Isidore of Pelusium, Letters 4.203) called theoria, meaning the spiritual discernment of the inner meaning of the Bible through the lens of Christ. This inner sense of Scripture is not abstract; it pertains to one’s personal life in Christ as a living member of the Church. That is to say, true theoria involves understanding the Bible in such a way as to cast light on the actual living of the Christian life in the Church. The Bible becomes the mirror in which we see our true faces (Jas. 1:23). Theoria is not only an understanding of the Bible, but also an understanding of ourselves in relation to God. It entails the reading of the Bible as a path of self-knowledge and growth in the Holy Spirit. Theoria includes the perception of historical analogies between our own lives and the history recorded in God’s Word. What in the Bible is called theoria is in our souls called the image of God. Through Sample pages only. Purchase 25 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

the contemplation of these analogies, we understand our own life and grasp both what God is doing in those lives and also what we ourselves are supposed to do. This is a Spirit-given insight into the Word of God, permitting that Word to take the measure of our own existence. Within the Rule of Faith handed down in the Holy Tradition of the Church, these spiritual insights into Holy Scripture are potentially infinite—sed theoriae quasi infinitae, as St. Bonaventure expressed it (In Hexaemeron 15.10). In these perceptions the past of the Bible is rendered effective in the life of the Christian, because both are parts of a single history. Through these theoriai the Holy Scriptures provide the pattern for understanding all of history. There can be no “theology of history” except through the full, experienced understanding of the Bible. This spiritual exegesis of the sacred Scriptures, however, always takes place in history and pertains to the movement of history. The Bible is not a reservoir of truths that can be removed from an historical shape. Understanding of the Bible must not become something abstracted from the historical movement of the Bible itself. Its continuous line, which records history, is recorded within history and gives form and shape to future history. What, then, should be said about dogmatic pronouncements by which the Church seems to “fix” doctrine, to remove biblical teaching from its historical context? The correct answer to this question, I believe, must involve two considerations. First, such dogmatic pronouncements, far from being an abstraction from history, also take place within history. To solidify a doctrine into a dogma does not sunder the doctrine from history. History is not to be described solely as fluid. It is obvious that a great deal of history— the past!—is absolutely settled and fixed. There is no history without continuity, and dogma is the guarantor of continuity. In this sense, dogma is essential to history. Dogmas are not timeless, but they are fixed and unchanging. Theology grows, but dogma does not develop. It is fixed, absolute, and dependable, giving guidance to subsequent history. I presume to cite, on this point, one of the most learned theologians of recent years: “Dogma is by no means a new Revelation. Dogma is only a witness. The whole meaning of dogmatic definition consists of testifying to unchanging truth, truth which was revealed and has been preserved from the beginning” (Georges Florovsky, Collected Works, Vol. 3, p. 30). 26Patrick Henry Reardon. Copyright © 2006 by All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION Second, such dogmatic pronouncements, even when they are formulated in a positive way (such as the homoousios of Nicaea), tend essentially to serve a negative purpose. To the extent that the fullness of revelation has already taken place in God’s incarnate Word, there can be no new dogmas, only new heresies. Consequently, the dogmatic formulations of the Church are radically apophatic. They are “definitions” in the sense of setting limits (fines), lines to exclude heresy. They do not “clarify” divine revelation by adding light, as it were, to what is already the fullness of light. Finally, there can be no real understanding of the Bible in the present without an understanding of the Bible in the past, both the past as recorded in the Bible itself and the past in the sense of the Church’s historical understanding of the sacred text. The attempt to come to Holy Scripture outside of that long historical context is not only presumptuous; it also separates the reader from the Bible’s own history. Again in the words of St. Bonaventure, “the knowledge of future things depends on the knowledge of past things” (In Hexaemeron 2.17). This can be hard work, but in the study of the Bible there is no substitute for the knowledge of history. Accordingly, in the present commentary on the Books of Chronicles, this interpreter’s first and dominating intention will be to place the sacred text in its historical setting, pointing out from time to time, as opportunity allows, how the Church has understood the message of these books. But this is not only history, because the Chronicler was not only an historian but also a theologian of history. For this reason the present commentary is also an exercise in the history of theology. On the other hand it also presumes, rashly no doubt, to be part of the ongoing and larger theological enterprise of Holy Church in our own times. For this reason I am daunted by the challenge published by Father M.-D. Chenu about a half-century ago: “In a way, the history of theology falls within theology itself. A perfect history of theology, if one existed, would yield a theology of history” (from the Introduction to his La théologie au douzième siècle). History and Worship We reflected earlier on Ben Sirach’s list of “famous men,” which forms a continuous narrative by a series of very short biographies. Similar to 27 the full book at Sample pages only. Purchase http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

that list is the roll call of the heroes of faith in Hebrews 11. Like the list in Ben Sirach, this one too includes Enoch, Noah, and Abraham near the beginning. More pertinent to our reflections here, however, is the place where the narrative ends—in a scene of liturgical worship. The author ends his narrative by referring to this “so great a cloud of witnesses” (12:1), who appear shortly afterwards in his description of orthodox Christian worship: But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel (Heb. 12:22–24). In this memorable text, the history of the chosen people comes to its fulfillment when in one assembly is gathered together the entire “cloud of witnesses,” those “spirits of just men made perfect,” along with Christians themselves, these later pilgrims who have “come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God.” Once again, biblical history arrives at its culmination in God’s people assembled to worship Him. In our worship we are surrounded by, and enter into communion with, the great cloud of the biblical witnesses, those “spirits of just men made perfect.” In our worship, biblical history is now. It has never stopped, and our own lives are part of it. When the saints on earth worship the Lord, that is to say, this worship joins them to the worship in heaven. The prayers offered by the Church on earth are mingled with the worship in heaven: “Then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, ascended before God from the angel’s hand” (Rev. 8:3–4). But what happens then on the earth? These prayers jointly offered by the saints in heaven and on earth affect the course of history. Things happen in history: “Then the angel took the censer, filled it with fire from the altar, and threw it to the earth. And there were noises, Copyright © 2006 by28Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

INTRODUCTION thunderings, lightnings, and an earthquake” (8:5), and the following chapters of Revelation go on to describe the historical results of this prayer. The Church’s worship, then, is at the center of the Church’s place in history. It is through her orthodox glorification of the biblical God, the Father of her Lord Jesus Christ, that the Church chiefly fulfills the historical role to which that God has summoned her. Finally, it is in this worship of the Church that Holy Scripture itself finds its complete and proper context. It is chiefly through its proclamation in the worship of the Church, centered on the sacraments of the Church and most especially the eucharistic liturgy, that the Bible gives shape, substance, meaning, and hope to man’s history.

29 the full book at Sample pages only. Purchase http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

1 Chronicles 1

b IN FIRST CHRONICLES THE PREMONARCHICAL PART of human history (that is, the long period from the beginning of the world to the reign of David, which latter began about 1000 BC) is reduced to hardly more than an outline, in some places simply a list of names (chapters 1–9). There will be many such lists throughout Chronicles. By leaving out the details of human history prior to David’s monarchy, the Chronicler conveys the impression that everything that happened prior to David was a preparation for the covenant God made with Israel’s first true king. Indeed, for the Chronicler the real covenant of the Lord is that which He made with David. All the earlier covenants (with Noah, with Abraham, and even with Moses) appear diminished by comparison. This is a perspective unique to the Chronicler. David is his interpretive lens. This explains the Chronicler’s lack of interest in the kingdom of Israel, that northern entity established by Jeroboam I at the death of Solomon in 922. Indeed, if the Chronicler does not regard the founding of the short-lived Northern Kingdom, the schismatic kingdom of Israel (922–722), with so much as an explicit mention, it is precisely because that kingdom was founded in opposition to the Davidic covenant. As we shall see when we come to that period, the Chronicler’s theological preoccupations render his stories very different from those in the Books of Kings, where some of the more memorable stories are, in fact, about the monarchs and prophets of the north. The genealogies of this first chapter are concentrated on the descendants of Abraham, who dominate the Arabian Peninsula and the western part of the Fertile Crescent (vv. 27–54). We detect that the author is narrowing his focus, concentrating his energies toward the goal of the narrative, which is David. For all that concentration, nonetheless, the Chronicler does place the history of Israel within more ample human history. Thus, he commences with Adam, the single father of the human race, and his Sample pages only. Purchase 31 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

extensive genealogies of early man give what one historian calls “evidence of an ecumenical concern.” Israel’s history is regarded as the high point of human history. Later on, the New Testament will, in a similar way, extend this perspective by tracing the genealogy of Jesus all the way back to Adam (Luke 3:23–38). Somewhat in contrast to this “ecumenical interest,” however, the genealogical lists in this first chapter also reflect the Chronicler’s concern for the purity of Israel’s own bloodline. Religious leaders in postexilic Judaism (that is, after 539 BC)—and no one more than Ezra himself— were very much preoccupied with this bloodline purity, out of a need to maintain the nation’s ethnic and religious integrity. This is why we find in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, works following the theological traits of Chronicles, a solidly negative attitude toward the Samaritans or any marriage with non-Israelites. The lists here in chapter 1, then, serving the theological interests of the Chronicler, were not intended to be complete, and we should avoid attempts to reconcile these lists with other genealogical material, as though their incompleteness were somehow an historical defect. As St. Augustine noted repeatedly in The City of God, none of the genealogies in the Bible was meant to be exhaustive. Each biblical genealogy, Augustine saw, served a specific literary, historical, and theological purpose. A good reading of the Holy Scriptures should concentrate on discovering those purposes. In the present narrative, for example, Cain and all his descendants are omitted. Why? In fact, the Chronicler refuses even to mention the existence of Cain’s posterity for the same reason that he will later ignore the schismatic kings of the North—namely, why should he bother to recall what the Lord has chosen to forget? Hence, the Chronicler writes here only of those ancients who were important to the ancestry and family history of the chosen people. This interest determines his choice of material. Respecting the present list we observe that, of the three sons of Noah, there are fourteen names associated with Japheth (vv. 5–7), thirty with Ham (vv. 8–16), and twenty-six with Shem (vv. 17–24). Thus, the list consists of seventy peoples or nations. The Bible is fond of selections of seventy (Num. 11:16; Luke 10:1), which is the sum reached by the multiplication of the digital ten by the perfect number, seven (which is “perfect” because it comes from the union of the divine three with the Copyright © 2006 by 32Patrick Henry Reardon. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing.

1 CHRONICLES,

CHAPTER

human four—man himself having four sides and thus dividing the world into four directions). How should the Christian read this list of names? First, he should see them as pertaining to his own family history. Second, he should regard them as the names in that “great cloud of witnesses.” If they tend to become blurry, he does well to remember that a certain blurriness is characteristic of clouds. The reader should not think of this as a problem. Third, let the Christian reader devoutly pray that his own name will be added to this ancient list. If he bears these considerations in mind, it is unlikely that the task of reading these countless names will ever become boring.

Sample pages only. Purchase 33 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

1 Chronicles 2

b NOW WE BEGIN THE GENEALOGIES of the “Israelites.” Indeed, we here observe, for the first time, that Chronicles habitually refers to Jacob by the name “Israel,” the name he received after his famous wrestling match at Peniel (v. 1). Whereas the name Jacob denotes that intriguing historical character to whom so many interesting things happened, the name Israel denotes more particularly the patriarch of the twelve tribes, the man who gave them his name. The Chronicler omits all the fascinating stories about “Jacob,” but he is extremely interested in this same character under the name “Israel.” In the genealogies of Chronicles, beginning with this chapter, we also observe that great prominence and elaboration are accorded the tribes of Judah and Levi, the kingly and priestly households. Taking the genealogies of Chronicles as a whole, Judah will get 102 verses and Levi 81 verses of attention, whereas all the other tribes taken together will receive only 126 verses. In this respect these genealogies contribute to a more general theme in the Books of Chronicles. For the Chronicler, writing long after the destruction of the Northern Kingdom by the Assyrians in 722 BC, only the tribes of Judah and Levi were of immediate moment, and he was eager to demonstrate the mutual support of the priestly family and the covenanted royal house of David. Hence, this dominance of Levi and Judah in his genealogies. The present chapter also provides the Bible’s only list of the Jerahmeelites (vv. 25–41), David’s “country cousins” mentioned in 1␣ Samuel 27:10; 30:29. As usual, the Chronicler is interested in this family solely because of its relationship to David. This pronounced accent on the genealogy of Judah will be of even more significance to the Christian, of course, because this is the genealogy of the Incarnation itself: “For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah” (Heb. 7:14). Within the genealogy of Judah, special prominence is given to the ancestors of David’s father Jesse (vv. 10–12), for obvious reasons, and Sample pages only. Purchase 35 the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/chronicles_of_history_and_worship/

HISTORY

AND

WORSHIP: THE BOOKS

CHRONICLES

then to his descendants (vv. 13–15). Here we learn that Jesse had seven sons, which is a problem if we recall that 1␣ Samuel 16:6–11 mentions eight sons of Jesse. Perhaps the rabbis were correct in their speculation that one of the eight sons, having died childless, is intentionally left out of this genealogy. Because of Caleb’s prominence within the territory of Judah, a great deal of this chapter concerns his family (vv. 18–24, 42–50). There is, however, another reason for this attention given to the family of Caleb. It provides some background for the character of Bezalel mentioned in 2␣ Chronicles 1:5. This Bezalel was of interest to the Chronicler because he was the craftsman credited with the proper embellishment of the tabernacle (Ex. 31:35–38). In this genealogy of Caleb, then, we see another sign of the Chronicler’s concern for all things associated with worship. Since the word kenite means “smith,” we have in verses 50–55 the world’s first genealogy of, well, “the Smith family.” Let the attentive reader, then, see what he can do to “keep up with the Smiths.” They too are in the Book of Life.

Chronicles of History and Worship: Orthodox Christian Reflections on the Books of Chronicles