BIBLICAL Horizons, No. 34
February, 1992
Copyright 1992, Biblical Horizons
The first commandment given in the Levitical sacrificial legislation has to do with the animals appropriate to sacrifice: "When any man of you brings an offering to the Lord, you shall bring your offering of cattle (behemah), from the herd or the flock" (Lev. 1:2). Cattle alone were permitted as sacrificial animals, though there were two subdivisions within this general category: cattle of the herd and cattle of the flock. What are cattle? And why did God limit the sacrificial system to cattle?
The word behemah sometimes refers to all land animals (excluding "creeping things," cf. Gen. 6:7; Dt. 14:4) and sometimes specifically to domesticated animals (Ex. 13:12; Lev. 27:28). In Leviticus 1, it evidently has the latter connotation, since it is qualified by the following phrases, "of the herd or of the flock." Leviticus 1:2 therefore required that only domestic animals be offering on the altar of burnt offering.
James B. Jordan points out that the "domestic" animals that were used in the sacrifices were domestic to God, not those necessarily domestic to man. Sheep, goats, and oxen are domesticated by man, and since God takes them into His house, are also domestic to Him. "Domestic birds would be chickens, but it is pigeons and doves that are used in the sacrifices, and they are not domestic. They have to be caught." Jordan continues, "It is God who defines what animals are "domestic" to His altar. Man’s domestic bird may be the chicken, but God’s domestic birds are doves and pigeons" (Jordan, "The Whole Burnt Sacrifice: Its Liturgy and Meaning," Biblical Horizons Occasional Paper No. 11, pp. 1-2).
To understand why only domestic animals were suitable sacrifices, we must examine the meaning of the term for "offering," qorban. Essentially, the word means "something brought near." It is used in the Law to refer to sacrificial animals (Lev. 1:2; 22:18; etc.) and other gifts to the sanctuary (cf. Nu. 7:12-13, 19; etc.). The thing brought near represented the worshiper, who desired to come near himself. Because the worshiper is sinful, however, he can draw near only through a representative offering. The worshiper cannot himself be immolated as a living sacrifice on the altar of burnt offering, but he can ascend the altar through a representative. The worshiper himself cannot become a fixed piece of furniture in the courts of the Lord, but he can offering his qorban of gold and silver. The goal of the qorban was to draw near to God in His house.
The creation account of Genesis 1 gives additional insight into the requirement of Leviticus 1:2. Genesis 1 draws several deliberate parallels between man and the land animals. Both were created on the same day; both were made of earth (1:24; 2:7); both shared the same original habitat. Clearly, analogies between men and animals were built into the creation. This becomes relevant to the sacrificial requirements when we recognize that Genesis 1:24 divides the land animals into three classes: cattle, creeping things, and beasts. These are distinguished by their environment; "beasts" are wild animals, living far from man; "cattle" are domestic animals, which live near to man; "creeping things" cross the boundaries. (See James B. Jordan, "Animals and the Bible," Studies in Food and Faith No. 6). Some land animals, we conclude, are naturally domesticated, naturally nearer to man. Because domestic animals are near to God’s image, they appropriately represent men who wish to draw near to God. Domestic animals are fitting qorban because they naturally qareb ("come near").
There is also a redemptive-historical dimension to the symbolism. Domestic animals not only represent the worshiper’s desires, but also the people that God has specially "domesticated." Israel herself was God’s flock and herd, gathered around His house. A "son of Israel" was appropriately represented by a "son of the herd" (this is the literal translation of Lev. 1:5). An animal, moreover, taken "from the herd" symbolized the Israelite as a member of God’s household. The sacrificial animal represented the Israelite both as near to God and as near to his fellows.
Israel drew near to God to serve Him as priests (Ex. 19:6). I have elsewhere defined the priest as the "household servants of the Great King" (in Biblical Horizons No. 33). The priests are preeminently the "cattle" of God’s household. The priests could enter the sanctuary, just as domestic animals could approach the altar. Domestic animals represent worshiper as priest.
Recognition of the priestly character of the sacrificial animals helps explain why the animal of the burnt offering had to be a male, just as all the priests were male. The burnt offering was the sacrifice of "coming near" par excellence; in that offering alone, the whole animal was ushered into the "Holy of Holies" on top of the altar, and the whole animal entered as a priest into the glory-cloud of the Lord. The parallel between priests and animals is reinforced by the regulations of Leviticus 21-22. Physical defilements disqualified a priest from "offering the bread of his God" (Lev. 21:21), and the same defilements disqualified an animal from becoming bread for God. When an animal was brought to the altar, in short, it came under priestly regulations.
This argument is confirmed by the fact that Noah offered "every clean animal and of every clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar" (Gen. 8:20). Prior to the erection of the tabernacle and the gathering of a priestly people around God’s house, all believing nations were on an equal plane. Thus, Noah could offer any clean animal on the altar; his offering was not restricted to domestic animals, since there was no special domestic people. All believing peoples were priests; therefore, all clean animals were offerable. With the election of Israel as the priestly people, and God’s tabernacling among men, a distinction was made between clean beasts and clean domestic animals.
In the New Covenant, as Peter found, we return in this respect to the Noahic situation (Acts 10-11). There is no longer a distinct priestly nation; all God’s people, whether Jew or Gentile, are priests. Since the wild branches have been grafted in (Rom. 11:17), all clean animals, both domestic and wild, can be offered as food on the altar of God.
The regulations for animal sacrifices point to Jesus Christ. Sacrificial animals had to be domestic, and they had to be taken "from the herd or from the flock." They had to be near to God’s image, and near to their fellows. As the perfect sacrifice, Jesus must fulfill both of these requirements; He must be a domestic "animal," and must be taken from the "flock." Jesus came not to destroy but to fulfill the law and prophets, and in fulfilling this law, Jesus burst the wineskins of the Old Testament requirements. Jesus, the perfect qorban, is not merely symbolically near to God, as the sacrificial animals were. He has been with God from all eternity (Jn. 1:1); He not only dwells in God’s house but is the Son of the house (Heb. 3:6).
But Jesus is not only eternally with God. He has also has drawn near to man. Though domestic to God’s house, He emptied Himself, becoming a Son of the flock. He meets the requirements of the perfect sacrificial victim, since He is not ashamed to call us brothers.
BIBLICAL Horizons, No. 34
February, 1992
Copyright 1992, Biblical Horizons
One of the major themes of the book of Acts is that Christ’s servants follow in His footsteps. For instance, if we compare the lives of Jesus and Paul, we find that each engaged in several years of travelling and preaching. Each set his face toward Jerusalem. In each case the man’s followers knew in advance that he would be arrested and tried to talk him out of it (Mt. 16:21-22; Acts 21:11-12). Each had confrontations in the Temple. Each was tried by three courts: the Jewish Sanhedrin, a Roman Governor, and an Edomite Herod. But, Jesus was silent while Paul proclaimed the gospel. Jesus was convicted while Paul was found innocent. Both the parallels and the contrasts are instructive.
Except for Acts 15:7, Acts 12 records the last incident in the life of Peter. It is interesting to take note of the structure and imagery of this chapter. In verses 1-2 we find that Herod has put James the brother of John to death. Then he arrested Peter (see Luke 22:33), during the days of Unleavened Bread. This was the same time of year Jesus was arrested.
Herod intended to put Peter on trial after Passover. Remember, at Passover one prisoner was released, and Herod did not want it to be Peter (John 18:39; Luke 23:17). Now we have a contrast: Everyone abandoned Jesus, but the Church prayed for Peter continually (Acts 12:5).
An angel came to Peter in prison and told him to get up, get dressed, and follow him. The angel led Peter past the guards and into the city, and then left him. This recapitulates the exoduses in the Bible, particularly Lot’s exodus from Sodom and Israel’s exodus from Egypt (led by the angel of the Lord).
This is analogous to Jesus’ exodus (Luke 9:31; Moses and Elijah spoke with Jesus concerning His "exodus" that He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem). Jesus’ exodus was His resurrection, the ultimate deliverance from the bondage of death. Here in Acts, we have one picture of actual death (James’s) followed by a picture of symbolic death (Peter’s imprisonment). James’s exodus in union with Christ took him to heaven; while Peter’s exodus in union with Christ took him out of prison and back into service.
Just as Joseph’s deliverance from prison and Israel’s exodus from Egypt were foreshadowings of Jesus’ resurrection, so Peter’s deliverance from prison is a retro-reflection of Jesus’ resurrection. The servant follows in the steps of the Master.
Peter realized that God had delivered him from Herod and from the Jews. This positions the Jews as Egyptians, and the Church as true Israel (Acts 12:11).
Now watch how closely the next events recapitulate the resurrection of Jesus. The first persons to encounter Jesus were women, and the first to encounter Peter was Rhoda. As the women ran back to tell the disciples about Jesus’ resurrection, Rhoda ran back to tell the Christians that Peter was at the gate. As the disciples did not believe the testimony of the women, so the Church did not believe Rhoda. Just as the disciples thought Jesus was a ghost until he ate a fish, so the Christians said that Rhoda had seen Peter’s angel (=ghost; Mt. 22:30) (Acts 12:12-16).
Finally they let Peter in, and he told them what had happened. He then said, "Report these things to James and the brethren" (compare Jesus, Mt. 28:10). Then surprisingly "he departed and went to another place" (Acts 12:17). We don’t know where Peter went or why, but his immediate departure reminds us of the post-resurrection appearances and disappearances of Jesus.
A last parallel pointed out in the text is that consternation of the rulers. Both the gospels and Acts 12:18-19 record that the leaders were upset about what happened, and both record what was done to the soldier-guards.
God orchestrates history so that it has meaning. He arranged the events in Acts 12 to communicate to us that He will continue to deliver us from Egypt (prison; death). He caused Luke to record the events in such a way that we see the parallels between Jesus and ourselves. Whether we die like James or are delivered like Peter, we are following in the steps of the Master.
A New Exodus
The exodus from Egypt is woven into the resurrection of Jesus as background to Peter’s deliverance. Both men were arrested at the time of Unleavened Bread, the Passover, which celebrated the exodus from Egypt. It was customary to release one prisoner at this time as a memorial of the release of the Israelites from bondage in Egypt. God released both Jesus and Peter at this time.
But there is another and broader exodus taking place in Acts 12 as well. The story actually begins in Antioch in Acts 11:27, where Agabus prophesies a great famine all over the world. This refers back to the famine of Joseph’s day. Barnabas and Saul go to Jerusalem to take food there. This is equivalent to the descent of the Hebrews into Egypt. While Barnabas and Saul are in Jerusalem-Egypt, the Herod-Pharaoh kills James and imprisons Peter. Peter is miraculously delivered from prison-Egypt. The Jerusalem-Egyptian soldiers are killed, and Herod-Pharaoh is also killed (Acts 12:19-23). Then at the end of the story Barnabas and Saul leave Jerusalem and go back to Antioch.
Thus, the formal structure of this story identifies Jerusalem with Egypt (Rev. 11:8). While a plague of famine came upon Jerusalem, those in the Goshen-Church were protected by the relief brought by Barnabas and Saul (compare the last seven plagues on Egypt; Ex. 8:22). When Herod-Pharaoh tried to destroy the Church, he himself was destroyed. The Church makes an exodus in the person of Saul, who returns to Antioch. Antioch becomes the new capital of the Church, and missionaries are immediately sent out from there (Acts 13:1-3). After the exodus from Jerusalem-Egypt comes the conquest of the world (Canaan).
Jesus’s death and resurrection, and then disappearance (ascension) gave birth to the mission to Jerusalem. After His exodus came the conquest of Jerusalem and Judea. Now parallel to this, Peter’s imprisonment and resurrection, and then disappearance, gives birth to the worldwide mission. Jesus’ exodus put Peter in charge of the conquest of Jerusalem and Judea. Peter’s exodus puts Paul in charge of the world conquest.
The Structure of Acts
Now we are in a position to see more fully the overall structure of Acts. First we have, in Luke’s first volume, the work of Jesus: His preaching, His raising up disciples, His suffering, death, and resurrection. This was the initial microcosm of the gospel. It happened to one Man alone.
The first application of that work was to the Jews ("to the Jew first, then to the Greek"). Peter was put in charge of that work. Acts 2-12 shows Peter recapitulating the work of Jesus. We see Peter preach. We see him raise up disciples (Stephen and Philip) who go out and preach (as Jesus sent His disciples to preach). In Acts 12 we find Peter’s suffering, imprisonment, and resurrection. This was the second microcosm of the gospel. It happened with Jerusalem and Israel as center, according to the pattern of the Old Covenant.
This stage of the gospel established that gentiles were to be included with Jews on the same level. The opponents of the gospel at this stage were the apostate Jews.
Just as the travail of Jesus gave birth to the Jewish Church (and ultimately to the whole Church), so the travail of the Jewish Church gives rise to the world-wide Church. I discussed this at length in Biblical Horizons 27-29, "The Future of Israel Reexamined." I focussed in that essay on the final step in the process of the change from the Old Covenant Jew-Gentile bipolarity to the New Covenant unified Church. Acts shows us an intermediate stages: one centered in Peter and the next in Paul.
The focus of the Jerusalem-Israel Church is Peter, and his imprisonment and resurrection passes the torch to Paul. It is immediately after Acts 12 that Saul becomes Paul, that Antioch becomes the center, and that the world-wide Gentile mission goes into gear. In Acts 12, Peter passes the torch of the Jerusalem church to James, who was an elder not an apostle (Acts 12:17; Acts 15). The torch of the gentile mission is passed to Paul. Peter disappears from view in the same way Jesus did after His ascension.
In this stage Paul is primary and James secondary, since Paul was an apostle and James was not. This stage shows the Church moving out of the womb of Israel and becoming primarily Gentile. The primary enemies during this stage are not apostate Jews but apostate Jewish Christians, the Judaizers. There are two centers of the Church during this stage. Antioch is primary, with Paul as leader, and Jerusalem is secondary, with James as leader. The bipolarity is still being overcome during this stage, and Paul always goes first to the synagogue when he visits a city to preach, but the center of attention has shifted from Jerusalem to the gentile world.
Now Paul recapitulates the work of Jesus. In Acts we see Paul preaching. We see him raise up disciples and send them letters (Timothy & Titus). We find Paul arrested in Jerusalem, tried by the same courts that tried Jesus and Peter, and being delivered.
The joining of Jew and Gentile into one body is still going on and has not yet been completed. But in Acts 28, Paul finally and definitively turns from the Jews. As Peter was the focus of the Jerusalem-Israel Church, so Paul is the focus of the Antioch-centered but Jew-first Church. Peter’s imprisonment and resurrection passed the torch to Paul, and Paul’s imprisonment and resurrection passes the torch out of the New Testament to the ongoing unified Church. The transformation has been completed.
Thus, we have four stages in the coming of the Kingdom. The first stage is in Jesus Christ and His definitive work alone. The second stage is in Peter as head of the Jerusalem-centered Jewish Church that begins to minister to the gentiles. The third stage is in Paul as head of the world-wide Church that is still going to the Jew first and seeking to unite Jew and gentile into one body. The fourth and final stage, after the destruction of Jerusalem and the death of Paul, is the stage when Jew and gentile are completely united into one Church and the bipolarity no longer exists.
I believe that not only does the book of Acts show us how the Church came into being, but it also shows us how the Church will continue to advance. Each time there was a "death & resurrection" experience, the Church emerged stronger, coming out of "Egypt" with spoils. Jesus’ death and resurrection led to the conquest of Jerusalem. Peter’s imprisonment and resurrection led to Paul’s gentile conquests. Paul’s imprisonment and resurrection, connected with the events of A.D. 70, led to the birth of the Church into the world (see Biblical Horizons 27-29). Since that time, whenever the Church has been attacked and put to death, she emerges stronger than before. The blood of the martyrs is always the seed of the Church. The suffering of believers always works to the advancement of the gospel. (For another slant on this theme, see my paper, "The Whole Burnt Offering: Its Liturgy & Meaning," available from Biblical Horizons.)
Biblical Chronology
Vol. 4, No. 2
February, 1992
Copyright © James B. Jordan 1992
by James B. Jordan
(This issue of Biblical Chronology continues a discussion of the Biblical and Assyrian chronologies, begun last month. If you do not have a copy of the January 1992 issue, you can obtain one from the publisher.)
Was Ahab at Qarqar?
Allis writes: "According to his Monolith Inscription, Shalmaneser III, in his sixth year (854 B.C.) made an expedition to the West and at Qarqar defeated Irhuleni of Hamath and a confederacy of 12 kings, called by him `kings of Hatti and the seacoast.’ Qarqar is described as the royal residence of Irhuleni. It was there, not far from Hamath, that the battle took place. Irhuleni was the one most directly concerned. But in describing the allied forces, Shalmaneser lists them in the following order:
He brought along to help him 1,200 chariots, 1,200 cavalrymen, 20,000 foot soldiers of Adad-‘idri of Damascus; 700 chariots, 700 cavalrymen, 10,000 foot soldiers of Irhuleni from Hamath; 2,000 chariots, 10,000 foot soldiers of A-ha-ab-bu Sir-‘i-la-a-a.
These three are probably mentioned first as the most important. It is rather odd that Irhuleni’s troops are mentioned only second in the list, inserted between Adad-‘idri’s and Ahabbu’s. Then follow in order the contingents of Que, Musri, Irqanata, Matinu-ba’lu of Arvad, Usanata, Adunu-ba’lu of Shian, Gindibu’ of Arabia, Ba’sa of Ammon. Most of these countries were clearly in the distant north, Syria and Ammon being the nearest to Israel, and both of them Israel’s bitter enemies. Among the eleven listed (he speaks of twelve kings), only five brought chariots; and most of them brought fewer troops than the first three, though some of the figures cannot be accurately determined, because of the condition of the inscription.
"In view of the make-up of this confederacy of kings, the question naturally arises whether Ahab, who had been recently at war with Ben-haded and was soon to renew hostilities with him, would have joined a coalition of kings of countries, most of which were quite distant, and the nearest of which were bitterly hostile, to go and fight against a king with whom he had never been at war,–an expedition which involved leaving his capital city and taking a considerable army to a distance of some 300 miles and through mountainous country, and, most questionable of all, leaving Damascus, the capital of his recent enemy Ben-hadad in his rear (thus exposing himself to attack), in order to oppose a distant foe whose coming was no immediate threat to his own land or people. Shalmaneser’s father, the terrible Ashurnasirpal, had come as near to Palestine as Shalmaneser then was at Qarqar. But no king of Israel had felt it necessary to oppose his victorious advance to the West. Such an undertaking by Ahab, king of Israel, seems highly improbable to say the least.
"The name Ahab (Ahabbu), while uncommon, is not unique. We meet is as the name of a false prophet, who was put to death by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 29:21). The name appears to mean `father’s brother,’ i.e., `uncle.’ It may possibly be shortened from Ahabbiram (my uncle is exalted) or a similar name. But it is to be noted that the name Ahabbu might be read equally well as Ahappu and be an entirely different name than Ahab, quite probably Hurrian, which would accord well with the make-up of the confederacy.
"The name of Ahabbu’s country is given as Sir’ila-a-a. The reading is somewhat uncertain, since the first character might also be read as shud or shut. Even if sir is correct, the name is a poor spelling of Israel; and it is double questionable because nowhere else on Assyrian tablets is Israel given this name. On the monuments it is called mat Humri, the land of Omri. It is perhaps not without significance that although the battle of Qarqar is mentioned in several of Shalmaneser’s inscriptions, Ahabbu is mentioned on only one of them. The Assyrian kings were great braggarts. Israel was quite remote from Shalmaneser’s sphere of influence. If Ahab of Israel were referred to, we might perhaps expect more than this one slight mention of him.
"Adad-‘idri was apparently Irhuleni’s chief ally, being mentioned first. If this Syrian king was the enemy-friend of Ahab, we might expect him to be called Hadad-ezer, which is the Hebrew equivalent of the name and is given to the king of Zobah of David’s time. The name Adad-‘idri may stand for Bar (Hebrew, Ben)-Adad-‘idri (Heb., ezer), and so be shortened at either end, to Ben-hadad or Hadad-ezer. So it may be, that the Ben-hadad of the Bible and the Adad-‘idri of Shalmaneser’s Annals are the same king."
But not necessarily, says Allis. Assuming that Adad-`idri is the same as Ben-hadad does not tell us which of many Ben-hadads this was. "Ancient rulers often had the same name. We now know of three kings who bore the famous name Hammurabi. There were 5 Shamsi-Adads, 5 Shalmanesers, 5 Ashur-niraris among the Assyrian kings. Egypt has 4 Amenhoteps, 4 Amenemhets, 12 Rameses, 3 Shishaks, and 14 Ptolemies. Syria had apparently both Ben-hadads and Hadad-ezers. Israel had 2 Jeroboams; and both Judah and Israel had a Jehoash, a Jehoram, and an Ahaziah in common. It may be that Ba’sa king of Ammon who fought at Qarqar, had the same name as Baasha king of Israel. Names may be distinctive and definitive; they may also be confusing and misleading.
"There is no mention of the battle of Qarqar in the Bible. It is generally assumed that it was fought several years before Ahab’s death, though Thiele claims that the battle of Ramoth-gilead took place only a few months after Qarqar.
"In the account which Shalmaneser gives of this battle, he claims a glorious victory. On the Monolith Inscription, which gives the fullest account of it, we read: `The plain was too small to let (all) their (text: his) souls descend (into the nether world), the vest field gave out (when it came) to bury them. With their (text: sing.) corpses I spanned the Orontes before there was a bridge. Even during the battle I took from them their chariots, their horses broken to the yoke.’ We are accustomed to such bragging by an Assyrian king and to discount it. But this certainly does not read like a drawn battle or a victory for the allies; and if there is any considerable element of truth in the claim made by Shalmaneser, `even during the battle I took from them their chariots, their horses broken to the yoke,’ this loss would have fallen more heavily on Ahabbu than on any other of the confederates, since Shalmaneser attributes to him 2,000 chariots, as compared with Adad-‘idri’s 1,200 and Irhuleni’s 700. If Ahab had suffered so severely at Qarqar, would he have been likely to pick a quarrel with a recent ally and to do it so soon? The fact that Shalmaneser had to fight against this coalition again in the 10th, 11th, and 14th years of his reign does not prove this glorious victory to have been a real defeat for Shalmaneser. Yet, despite what would appear to have been very serious losses for the coalition (all their chariots and horses), we find according to the construction of the evidence generally accepted today, Ahab in a couple of years or, according to Thiele in the same year, picking a quarrel or renewing an old one with his recent comrade-in-arms, Ben-hadad, and fighting a disastrous battle against him (1 Kings 22); and a few years later we find Ben-hadad again fighting against Israel (2 Kings 6:8-18), and even besieging Samaria (vss. 24ff.). Is this really probable? Clearly Ben-hadad had no love for Israel!
"The biblical historian describes the battle at Ramoth-gilead together with the preparations for it, in considerable detail (1 Kings 22), as he later describes the attack on Dothan (2 Kings 6:8-23) and the siege of Samaria which followed it. Of Qarqar he says not a single word. Why this should be the case if Ahab was actually at Qarqar is by no means clear. It was not because the Hebrew historian did not wish to mention a successful expedition of wicked king Ahab, for he has given a vivid account of Ahab’s great victory of Ben-hadad (1 Kings 20:1-34) which led even to the capture of the king of Syria himself. And, if Qarqar had been a humiliating defeat for Ahab, we might expect that the biblical writer would have recorded it as a divine judgment on the wicked king of Israel, as he does the battle at Ramoth-gilead, in which Ahab perished.
"It is of course true that the record of Ahab’s reign is not complete (1 Kings 23:39). His oppression of Moab is mentioned only indirectly in connection with an event in the reign of Jehoahaz (2 Kings 3:4f.). It is the Mesha inscription which gives us certain details. Yet in view of its importance the omission of any reference to a battle with Shalmaneser in which Ahab took a prominent part would be strange, to say the least." (Allis, pp. 414-417).
In my opinion, Allis’s arguments settle the question. There is no good reason to believe that the Ahabbu or Ahappu of the Shalmaneser Monolith Inscription is the same as the Ahab of the Bible. All evidence is against it. Accordingly, the alleged synchronism between the Assyrian Eponym Canon and the Biblical chronology does not exist, and there is no reason to try and shorten the chronology found in the books of Kings and Chronicles.
We shall devote one more issue of Biblical Horizons to this matter, taking up some of the other alleged synchronisms.
Rite Reasons, Studies in Worship, No. 19
February 1992
Copyright (c) 1992 by Biblical Horizons
I am not infrequently asked for advice on how to implement the kinds of things I’ve discussed in Rite Reasons and in my book The Sociology of the Church. To that end I’m providing in this essay some nuts and bolts that grow out of more than ten years of trying to implement these ideas in a variety of situations and with varying degrees of success.
Psalters for Reading
We’ve got to get the psalms back into the warp and woof of worship and life. But how do we do that, when nothing is readily available, and so many of us have never done it? Let me discuss first of all psalters for responsive reading, and then psalters for singing.
As Rite Reasons 16-18 pointed out, the new Trinity Hymnal, like the old, does not contain a complete psalter for responsive reading. Moreover, both Trinity Hymnals use the curious method of alternating whole verses, paying no attention to the poetic parallelism of the Biblical text. I have discussed this matter at some length in "Church Music in Chaos" (available for $4.00, postpaid), so I won’t say any more about it here. The conclusion, however, is that these hymnals are not useful for a congregation that wants to use all of God’s psalms.
Where do we go, then? The only complete pew psalter I know of is The Psalter: A New Version for Public Worship and Private Devotion, published in 1978 by the Seabury Press. This is an updated version of the Episcopal psalter, and thus much preferable to the very old translation found in the older Book of Common Prayer. It is the translation used in the new Book of Common Prayer. Unfortunately, Seabury Press went out of business several years ago, this book is no longer in print, and to my knowledge no one intends to reprint it. (Can you believe it?) The new Book of Common Prayer, however, is in print, and you can get a copy and make use of the psalter by retyping it.
Thus, there is no pew psalter for responsive readings that I have been able to find. None.
What can you do? Well, you can do what I have done, and that is to type the psalms into your Sunday bulletins week by week. You can use the new Book of Common Prayer as your guide, and go with whatever translation you prefer.
If you want to make use of my own versions, I can supply them. I’ve made up my own translation from English versions, occasionally consulting the Hebrew, so mine are un Copyrighted. I’ve done about a third of the psalms. I can supply these on diskette (large or small size) on Word Perfect 5.1 for IBM-type computers, or I can supply a print out from which you can type your own. The charge for either format is $5.00 or $10.00 for both.
A friend of mine has done up the entire psalter (and other Bible songs) from the New King James Version, and we are seeking to get this into print. For now, however, we cannot make it available.
Psalters for Chanting
The first way to sing the psalms is to chant them straight from the text. There are two common ways to chant. One way is to use Anglican Chants. You can find some Anglican Chant tones in Episcopal hymnals, but I don’t know of any place you can find the psalms set up readily for use with them. (There are lots of 19th century books, such as The Cathedral Psalter, that you can find in used bookstores–if you are prospered in your search; but these use the very old and outdated pre-KJV translation of the old Book of Common Prayer).
The other way to chant the psalms is to use plainsong tones. This is the simplest way and is easy to learn. The new Lutheran Hymnal of the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church has tones for each of the psalms the hymnal includes (which as I recall–I don’t have a copy here–is not all of them). There is a better alternative, however.
I strongly recommend that Church musicians obtain The Psalmnary: Gradual Psalms for Cantor and Congregation, by James E. Barrett. This is not a complete psalter, but does contain the majority of the psalms. This comes in loose pages, and blanket permission is granted for photocopying into Sunday bulletins. The set comes with instructions on how to use these and how to accompany them. Suggested chords are provided. I suggest ignoring the "antiphons," and just singing through the psalms. If you have a pianist or organist who knows much of anything about harmony (not all do), you can readily make use of this material. I’ve never been in a position to do so, but I recommend it highly.
The cost for the looseleaf pages is $21.00. With a nice binder to store them, the price is $24.00. Postage is free on pre-paid orders. Order from The Hymnary Press, S. 1223 Southeast Boulevard, Spokane, WA 99202.
Episcopal and Lutheran church musicians in your area may be able to direct you to other resources, and certainly would be willing to help you train your musician and congregation in how to do these (if they themselves use them, or something like them).
Metrical Psalms
Metrical psalms are inferior to responsive readings because they destroy the structure of the Biblical poetry, and are inferior to chanted psalms because they rephrase the sacred text. You should have it as a rule to read the psalm from the Bible first before singing it in a metrical version. Preferably, read it responsively, unless perhaps it is the call to worship.
The Trinity Hymnal contains some metrical psalms. Many are set to poor tunes, but a good many are usable. There are four complete psalters you can choose from. I have discussed these at more length in "Church Music in Chaos."
The first is The Book of Psalms for Singing, published by The Board of Education and Publication, Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, 7418 Penn Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15208. Almost all of the psalms are set up as 19th-century type hymns, the kind of hymns we are familiar with. Often a given psalm is broken up among several tunes. For the problems of this book, see "Church Music in Chaos."
The second is the Scottish Psalter, published by Oxford University Press. The translations here are old and awkward, though some are good.
The third is the Book of Praise: Anglo-Genevan Psalter, published by the Canadian Reformed Churches and available from Premier Printing, One Beghin Ave., Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R2J 3X5. You need to have a copy of this, for it contains all the Genevan psalms, in good translations. Harmonies, however, are not provided, since in these churches the harmony is provided exclusively by the organ and organists are trained to vary the harmony from stanza to stanza.
Finally, my personal recommendation is the 1987 Psalter Hymnal of the Christian Reformed Church, which can be obtained from CRC Publications, 2850 Kalamazoo SE, Grand Rapids, MI 49560. All 150 psalms are included, some in more than one version. A good number of Genevan psalms are included, in original rhythms, with harmony. The hymn section is also very good. This is the best available pew hymnal/psalter for congregational use at present.
It does have a few problems. Occasionally a hymn has been changed to accommodate sexism, so that we get "Good Christian Friends, Rejoice," instead of "Good Christian Men, Rejoice," but such instances are rare. Also, some of the psalms and Bible songs are versified by men who do not have an ear for English poetry, but you can go through and upgrade these to better English. (For instance, #189, a setting of Psalm 150, calls on us to "Shout His power through outer space." I’ve changed that to "Shout His power through time and space." "Outer space" just does not work; it calls science-fiction to mind, an unwelcome association.)
If you are going to get a new hymnal, the Psalter Hymnal is the one to get. It was published after my essay "Church Music in Chaos," and that is why I did not recommend it there.
As regards hymns, what I wrote in "Church Music in Chaos" still stands. Get the two older Lutheran hymnals and you will find incredible treasures.
Teaching New Psalms/Hymns
To teach new psalms and hymns, you need someone with a strong voice, preferably a man because the male voice is more powerful. (Since this involves teaching/training in the Word, it may be inappropriate for a woman to take this role anyway; but if the ox is in the ditch, so to speak, I don’t think it would be wrong to use a woman here.)
Have the leader sing through the first stanza. Then have him sing each line and the congregation sing it after him. If there are hard lines, do them twice. Then have the congregation sing the whole first stanza, and then go back and do the whole psalm or hymn. Use it again for a couple of weeks, so that the congregation becomes familiar with it.
The choir (if you have one) must practice the new psalm in advance. This is especially helpful if you institute chanting; the choir can give strong leadership to the congregation as they chant.
Order of Worship
I’ve discussed this at length in "Theses on Worship" in previous issues of Rite Reasons. Let me just summarize here. We need to see worship as God’s coming on the Day of the Lord to renew His covenant with us. I don’t think it is difficult to get a congregation to see the truth and value of this. But how do we implement it?
I suggest taking your Sunday bulletin and setting it up in five sections:
God Calls Us
God Cleanses Us
God Instructs Us
God Feeds Us
God Commissions Us
If you are not yet able to have weekly communion, you’ll have to leave off the fourth section except for communion Sundays. I recommend against doing this:
We Gather Together
We Confess Our Sins
We Hear God’s Word
We Eat God’s Food
We Carry Forth God’s Kingdom
Keep the stress on what God does, since He acts first. Leave the primary focus on His action, not on our response.
Now, at the same time, highlight our required responses in your bulletin as well. Here is a very simple covenant-renewal structure that I believe any church can use without difficulty:
God Calls Us
Call to Worship (a psalm)
Response to God’s Call
Psalm of praise (sing the same psalm)
God Cleanses Us
Confession of Sin
Declaration of Forgiveness
Response to God’s Declaration
Doxology
Psalm of the Week
Hymn of Praise (sing the same psalm)
Prayer of Praise
God Instructs Us
Scripture and Sermon
Response to God’s Word
The Creed (Apostles’, Nicene, etc.)
Offering
Pastoral Prayer and Lord’s Prayer
God Feeds Us
Communion Hymn
The Lord’s Supper
Response to God’s Gift
Prayer of Thanksgiving
Closing Hymn
God Commissions Us
Charge (the Great Commission)
Benediction
Response to God’s Charge
Threefold Amen
This is a simple structure that highlights for the congregation what is going on. You can change it, add more psalms and hymns, and vary it from season to season. It can be made more elaborate by adding Old and New Testament Lessons, and making the Creed the response to them, followed by the Sermon with its response as the Offering and Pastoral Prayer. You can add to the songs and prayers around the Communion. Etc. But since most of us work with congregations that are completely unfamiliar with structured worship, this simply structure has it all in seed form.
The psalms can be fitted into each part of the worship service, and I am including a suggested way to do that here.
Psalms for Worship
Arranged for Covenant Renewal
I. CALL TO WORSHIP
20
24
27
29
32
33
34
47
50
62
81
87
91
95
96
97
98
99
100
102
107
111
114
116
117
120
121
122
124
126
127
128
129
133
134
II. EXODUS INTO THE KINGDOM
A. Self-Examination & Confession
6
25
38
51
60
73
80
89
130
139
B. Relief From Distress and the Enemy
3
4
7
10
12
13
17
22
28
31
35
39
41
42
43
44
54
55
56
57
58
59
63
64
69
70
71
74
77
79
83
86
88
90
94
102
109
123
137
140
141
142
143
144
C. Praise to God, Especially for Our Exodus
5
8
9
11
18
21
26
30
40
61
65
66
67
68
75
76
85
92
93
101
104
108
113
115
118
119
132
135
136
138
145
146
147
148
150
III. HEARING THE WORD
1
14
15
19
37
46
49
52
53
78
105
106
112
125
IV. COMMUNION
16
23
36
45
48
84
131
V. MISSION
2
47
72
82
110
149
