Monday, July 13, 2009

July 19: the Ark of the Covenant

The Hebrew scripture lectionary reading from this week focuses on a figure who has recently been cited in media ranging from the New York Times to the Daily Show: King David. When explaining his decision not to resign from office after visiting his mistress in Argentina, Mark Sanford wrote that, like David, he “fell mightily, he fell in very significant ways, but was able to pick up the pieces.” In a clip called “Mark Sanford Consults the Old Testament,” Jon Stewart protested, “You’re a conservative Christian, and you’re dipping into my book?”

The passage for this week centers around an object of ancient Israelite religious practice called the Ark of the Covenant. Readers who grew up during the 80s probably have a mental image of the Ark as the object that Indiana Jones was trying to rescue in Raiders of the Lost Ark, which, in the movie’s climax, unleashed primeval chaos upon the Nazis who sought to control its power. 2 Samuel 7:1-14a describes the prophet Nathan conveying to David’s Yahweh’s desire that the Ark be housed, not in a portable tent as it was during pre-monarchic times, but in a Temple in Jerusalem:

After the king was settled in his palace and the LORD had given him rest from all his enemies around him, 2 he said to Nathan the prophet, "Here I am, living in a palace of cedar, while the ark of God remains in a tent."
3 Nathan replied to the king, "Whatever you have in mind, go ahead and do it, for the LORD is with you."
4 That night the word of the LORD came to Nathan, saying:
5 "Go and tell my servant David, 'This is what the LORD says: Are you the one to build me a house to dwell in? 6 I have not dwelt in a house from the day I brought the Israelites up out of Egypt to this day. I have been moving from place to place with a tent as my dwelling. 7 Wherever I have moved with all the Israelites, did I ever say to any of their rulers whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, "Why have you not built me a house of cedar?"’


What exactly was the Ark of the Covenant? What were its uses, and how was it perceived? Michael Coogan describes it as having multiple functions: it was a sort of safety-deposit box in which the tablets of the covenant were held; it was viewed as the footstool of Yahweh’s throne; and in battle, it served as a war emblem (Coogan, 116, 126). Exodus 25 is written as a transcription of Yahweh’s instructions to Moses as to how and of what materials the Ark should be built. Yahweh commands that an offering be taken up from the people of “gold, silver, and bronze, blue, purple, and crimson yarns and fine linen . . . spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones and gems . . .” (25:3-7). Yahweh commands an Ark made of acacia wood which Coogan notes was considered resistant to insects. He also suggests that the descriptions of the Ark’s material would have been unlikely to be available to a group of runaway slaves in the wilderness. Yahweh is quotes as saying to Moses, “And have them make me a sanctuary, so that I may dwell among them” (25:8).

One aspect of this passage that may sound strange to readers who perceive God as omnipresent is the depiction of the Ark as the physical location of Yahweh’s being. The line, “I have been moving from place to place with a tent as my dwelling”, conveys an image of God as an ambulatory nomad accompanying the Israelites. Coogan explains how the Ark would have functioned as a physical indicator of Yahweh’s presence, without violating the prohibition against physical images of “anything that is in heaven above” (Exodus 20: 4; Coogan, 116). While Yahweh might have been invisible, Yahweh’s footstool was viewed as a focal point of religious ritual.

Finally, there was also the perception that the Ark, brought out to the field of battle, would represent divine sanctification. Coogan writes,

“As the visible sign of the invisible divine presence, the ark also served as what is called a palladium, a war emblem. When the Ark participated in war, the divine presence was through to be there (see 1 Samuel 4:6-7), and so the war became a kind of ‘holy war’ . . . An ancient battle cry associated with the ark is preserved in Numbers:

Arise, O LORD, let your enemies be scattered, and your foes flee before you (Num 10.35; compare Ps 68.1)” (Coogan, 125).

1 Samuel 4-6 contains an extended narrative describing a battle scene against the Philistines in which the Ark was brought to the field. Thirty thousand Israelite soldiers die, and the Philistines capture the Ark. In a storyline that may have served as inspiration for the ending of Raiders, the “hand of the LORD” strikes, causing panic and death among the Philistines who eventually return the Ark.

8 "Now then, tell my servant David, 'This is what the LORD Almighty says: I took you from the pasture and from following the flock to be ruler over my people Israel. 9 I have been with you wherever you have gone, and I have cut off all your enemies from before you. Now I will make your name great, like the names of the greatest men of the earth. 10 And I will provide a place for my people Israel and will plant them so that they can have a home of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked people will not oppress them anymore, as they did at the beginning 11 and have done ever since the time I appointed leaders [a] over my people Israel. I will also give you rest from all your enemies.
" 'The LORD declares to you that the LORD himself will establish a house for you: 12 When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his father, and he will be my son.


For pastors and readers interested in reading more about connections between monarchic ideology and the Ark of the Covenant, The Oxford History of the Biblical World is a useful resource. In particular, in the section “Sacral-Royal Ideologies of the Monarchic State” in the essay Kings and Kingship, Carol Meyers examines techniques available to political rulers in the Ancient Near East to consolidate power through positing intimacy between ruler and deity.

Referencing two lectionary readings from this week—Psalm 89 and 2 Samuel 7:14—Meyers draws attention to the “adoption formula”, language in which the deity refers to the ruler as a “son.” 7:14, in which David’s “offspring” who built the “house for my Name” is cited, can be considered a reference to Solomon, under whose rule the Temple in Jerusalem was built. In Psalm 89, the Israelite king described as God’s firstborn son is David (Meyers, 197-198). Psalm 89:27 reads, “I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.”

I submit that the rhetorical gestures described in these ancient texts, in which political rulers claim divine sponsorship, are extremely relevant to understanding similar gestures used today. I will close with a quote from Meyers on the topic of kingship ideology:

“The ability of a national ruler to exercise power over a large group of people—over kinship groups with which he has little or no connection—was facilitated by military successes, by favorable redistribution policies (2 Sam. 6.18-19), and by securing loyal subjects and staff through both those means. All these processes are related to or contingent upon an ideological component of royal rule. A king’s power ultimately rested on and was legitimized by a series of symbolic acts, attitudes, icons, and structures connecting the king with the deity and human kingship with divine rule (Meyers, 197).

Other lectionary readings for this week include Psalm 89:20-37; Ephesians 2:11-22; and Mark 6:30-34, 53-56.

Sources:

Coogan, Michael D. The Old Testament: a Historical and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2006.


Meyers, Carol. “Kinship and Kingship: the Early Monarchy,” in Coogan, Michael D. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

No comments: