Living Theology inthe Metropolitan Chicago Synod
Volume 8, Number 3
Fall 2003
Reclaiming Lament
How to Argue with God: An Example Based on the Law-Court Pattern ofPrayer
Walter L. Michel
Thetheme of this article is “The Law-Court Pattern of Prayer.” This pattern isused by the poets in accounts about Abraham, Moses, and Elijah, and is presentin about fifty Psalms, in Jeremiah and in Job. In all of these texts the poetswrestle with the experience of innocent suffering. We will look at despair inPsalm 88, which is a lament of the individual – a bitter outcry against God outof the depths of obscene agony.
TheLaw-Court Pattern of Prayer, including the concept of innocent suffering, is atheme in the Tanakh which is not usually accessible to Christians. [“Tanakh” isan acronym for the Hebrew Scriptures, T(orah, “Teaching”), N(ebi’im = Prophets)and K(etubim = Writings).]
Amongthe reasons for this phenomenon are the following:
2.That the Torah no longer means “teaching, guidance, revelation,” as for Jews,but “law,” in a negative and legalistic sense, among Christians. Jews use Torahas a life-giving source of wisdom and joy from God.
3.That according to the Tanakh, Genesis 3 is a myth about disobedience and theloss of immortality and not a myth of “the Fall” as among Christians.
4. That the Christian doctrine of original sin,which took on its basic form only in the fifth century of the Common Era,claims that all humans, beginning with conception, are sinful and unclean andcannot be innocent, and therefore any kind of innocent suffering is notpossible.
There are many other reasons that the concept of innocentsuffering is not accessible to many Christians – among them the fact that eveneducated Christians do not know Hebrew and therefore have little or no empathyfor the Hebraic spirit of the Tanakh.
Rememberhow Abraham argued with God about the destruction of Sodom when he said, “Farbe it from You to do such a thing, to bring death upon the innocent as well asthe guilty, so that innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it from You! Shallnot the Judge of all the earth deal justly? (Genesis 18:25).
Asreported in the Tanakh, the deity in this literature offered a berith, i.e.,something like a covenant, treaty, promise, to a medley of people and run-awayslaves from Egypt, and formed them into his people. At something like acovenant signing ceremony at Mt. Sinai, the deity and the peoples committedthemselves to each other. The deity promised protection and the people promisedworship, i.e., to live according to the vision which God has (imago dei) forhis people. The berith was not offeredto all humans, but God’s vision for all humans is clearly expressed in theTanakh. In Genesis 1 God is portrayed as an emperor and all humans as vassals.The royal task of humans is expressed in five verbs in Genesis 1:28. Allexpress the image, the vision, which God has concerning the responsibilityhumans have as royalty, as vassals in their relationship to God.
1.prh, “be fruitful, bear fruit,” i.e., have children and educate the nextgeneration so they too may live according to the vision which God has forhumans. Not to do so is a crime, a sin.
2.rbh, “multiply, be many,” i.e., have enough children for the human task ofresponsible management of the earth. Not to do so is a crime, a sin.
3.ml, “fill,” i.e., be present on the earth everywhere (cf. the disobedience inGen 11) as God’s royal representatives and cultivators. Of course, this is nota commandment for overpopulation or for having children who are not loved andeducated properly. To conceive children without love and responsibility is acrime, a sin.
4.kbs, “control, discipline, subdue,” i.e., like a good regent, queen, king, orgovernment, humans are to defeat anything hostile and destructive to the wellbeing of animals and of the earth. What a task! Of course, humans are alwaysresponsible to God. Not to control or eliminate hostile forces is a crime, asin. Note that control over humans is not included here.
5.rdh, “govern, manage, drive, lead, direct, guide, have dominion, “ i.e., like agood regent, queen, king, parent, or government, humans are to exerciseresponsible leadership, of course, always in God’s stead, for God’s purposesand not for human ambition and objectives! Not to lead responsibly is a sin, acrime against God.
Thisthen is the image, the vision, which God has of humans and their task (male andfemale, in equal partnership), according to Genesis 1, namely, to behave likegood royalty, vice-regents, agents, ambassadors of God (cf. e.g., Ps 72:12-14)and not like bad, vicious, authoritarian, tyrannical royalty, vice-regents,governments (cf. e.g. Ezekiel 34:2-4).
Thepeople, covenanted at Mt Sinai, came to be known as the Hebrews and, later, asthe Jews. The name of the deity is known as YaHWeH (‘eL), which can mean “(‘el)is Present” (Qal), or “(‘el) Causes to Be” (Hiph’il). The deity has also manyother names. I will refer to this deity simply as “God,” as distinct from themany other gods.
Theidea of the covenant made the Law-Court Pattern of Prayer possible. When acovenanted individual or a group of the people or all of the people of Godexperienced innocent suffering they could address God and demand justice. Theycould accuse God of breaking the covenant, file a complaint, a lawsuit, andpetition God to change his mind or to repent.
Somepeople in the Tanakh express the deep shock that God at times contemplates andis actually engaged in breaking the covenant. The covenanted people feel thatit is their duty to call God back to remember the covenant – to change hismind, repent, and to pay restitution. As an introduction to the theme I recommend a thorough reading and studyof Anson Laytner, Arguing with God: A Jewish Tradition (Northvale, NewJersey and London: Jason Aronson, 1990). Some Christians, especially educatedChristians, may have an initial aversion or even hostility to the content ofthis book, but the facts discussed in it are irrefutable.
Onpage xviii Laytner presents the basic components or the structure of theLaw-Court Pattern of Prayer:
•
•
•
•
Abraham,Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, many Psalmists, and the authors of Lamentations and ofJob, challenge God and rail against an unjust and even abusive covenanted God.For God to behave like an abusive father is untenable and totally indefensible.
Thebest, and probably the most disturbing book for Christians, which deals withthe experience of the deity as an abusive parent, is the following: David R.Blumenthal, Facing the Abusing God: A Theology of Protest. (Louisville,Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993). This book deserves concentrated,deep and long study, especially by Christians who are not used to thespirituality of the Tanakh and the spirituality of the Jew, Jesus of Nazareth.
Noother deity, among the thousands of gods, offered a covenant to a select groupof people whose task it was and is to invite the rest of the human community toworship this God. No other deity can be served a lawsuit, neither the god ofthe Christians, the Trinity, nor the god of Islam, Allah (which means “TheGod”). Neither Christianity nor Islam can deal with the experience of innocentsuffering by billions of people.
Insix passages Jeremiah screams at God (See Laytner, p. l8f).
InJeremiah 20:7ab we read:
(Wemust appreciate the fact that in Hebrew only a few consonants are needed toexpress complicated thoughts.)
Justimagine! You have given in to your seducer and then you begin even to willinglyparticipate in the seduction and the joy of erotic play, and then the seducerrapes you. What? Why? For a few more details on this verse, see Abraham J.
Today,whether we are religious or not, we do not have to turn to Jeremiah to expressour anger and fury with the chaos of our lives. Too many of us experienceintolerable, innocent suffering in our relationships with strangers and evenwith those we love intensely. How does one deal with blatant injustice, lies,humiliation, rejection, abandonment? For many Christians there is no problembecause all of this is due to original sin and the lack of faith in Christ.According to the doctrine of original sin, the most horrendous suffering issimply deserved – none is innocent; all have been guilty since conception.
Arecent, sensitive and studious book addresses the possibility of reclaiming thelament form in Christian prayer and worship: Kathleen D. Billman and Daniel L.Migliore, Rachel’s Cry: The Prayerof Lament and Rebirth of Hope (Cleveland, Ohio: United Church Press, 1999). From a Hebrew perspective, the reclaiming of lament for deservedsuffering is possible, but the Law-Court Pattern of Prayer (a lawsuit againstGod for undeserved, innocent suffering) is impossible for Christians as long asthe claim of the doctrine of original sin is not abrogated. For an unpublishedreview of the book you may turn to my web site, www.michelwl.net.
Animpressive and very convenient introduction to the Psalms, which I have usedregularly since its publication, provides an excellent study of the variousforms and types of the Psalms: Sabourin, Leopold, S.J., The Psalms: Their Origin and Meaning.New, Enlarged, Updated Edition. New York: Alba House, 1974 (Society of St.Paul, 2187 Victory Blvd., Staten Island, New York 10314. The book is out ofprint but may be available in libraries or on the Internet.)
Ofcourse, not all scholars agree on which psalms belong to which category, but aserious misjudgment leads to a hopeless misunderstanding of the psalm. Sabourinprovides a very useful list and a basic discussion of the laments.
BecauseChristian scholars are unable to admit the possibility of innocent suffering itis often difficult to recognize the distinction between complaints aboutso-called deserved punishment and inappropriate, abusive behavior from God inChristian treatments of the Psalms.
Hereis Sabourin’s list:
LAMENTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL: Psalm 5, 6, 7,13, 17, 22, 25, 26, 28, 31, 35, 36, 38, 39, 42, 43, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 61,63, 64, 69, 70, 71, 86, 88, 102, 109, 120, 130, 140, 141, 142, 143.
LAMENTSOF THE NATION / COMMUNITY: Psalm 12, 44, 58, 60, 70, 77, 79, 80, 82,83, 85, 90, 94, 106, 108, 123, 126, 137.
Ialso recommend the section on “Psalms of Petition and the Book of Lamentations”in Laytner, Arguing with God, pp. 22-32.
Psalm 88
Wewill now consider despair in Psalm 88, which is a lament of the individual.This Psalm is one of the best examples of a bitter outcry against God out ofthe depths of obscene agony.
Thetranslation is my own and it follows closely the one given by Mitchell Dahoodin Psalms II: 51-100 (AnchorBible Series Vol. 17. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1968. Please refer toDahood for the philological notes.) Mytranslation also tries to indicate the structure of the Law-Court Pattern ofPrayer.
Afteryou have studied the psalm, and read my translation carefully, you may thenproceed to “translate” my translation into beautiful English poetry withoutlosing the Hebraic spirit. Of course, there is no such thing as a perfecttranslation. I do not trust any translation, not even my own.
Psalm 88:1-19 (18)
1 SUPERSCRIPTION
Asong
2-3
2 Oh YHWH/LORD - my ELOHIM - my LIBERATOR
3 may it come - before YOUR FACE / PRESENCE -
4-10 TROUBLES ANDCOMPLAINTS
4 (3) Because- saturated - with evils / troubles - is -
my wholebeing
and -my life - to SHEOL - has reached down /
5 (4) I amreckoned - among those who have gone down
- tothe PIT
6 (5)
7 (6) YOUhave plunged me - into the PIT - the LOWEST
8 (7) against me - weighs heavily - YOUR RAGE
9 (8) YOUhave estranged - those who know me - from me
10 (9) my eyes - grow dim / hurt - because of - myaffliction
Icried out to YOU - Oh YHWH - at all times
11-13 QUESTIONS ADDRESSED TO GOD
11 (10) DoYOU - for the dead - make / work - marvels
12 (11) IsYOUR CHESED - recounted - in the GRAVE
(note:chasdekha II emunatkha. chsd II ‘mnh
<‘amen)
13 (12) AreYOUR MARVELS - made known -
inthe DARKNESS
YOURRIGHTEOUSNESS - in the LAND
ofFORGETFULNESS.
14-19 ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE ABUSIVE GOD
14 (13) But I - to YOU - Oh YHWH / LORD -
I amcrying for help
andin the morning - my prayer -
letit come before YOU.
15 (14) Why- Oh YHWH / LORD - do you
rebuff- my whole being
why- do YOU turn YOUR FACE - from me.
16 (15) Afflicted - I am - and expiring - and groaning - I croak
17 (16) over me - have swept - YOUR FURIES
18 (17) They have surrounded me - like WATER / FLOOD
19 (18) YOUhave removed far - from me
Divine Response
Thedivine response is missing. Why? Why is the divine response missing? What ahorrendous insult to the devastated person who trusted God and turneddesperately to the covenanted God for acquittal and for God to act as LIBERATOR(cf. v. 2). God is adding insult to injury by His silence. What does a drowningperson (see. v. 18) expect? Why do people (and even God) who could help walkaway from a drowning person?
Note the first word of the psalm. It is YHWH /LORD. The expectation is (according to Hebrew Poetry) that the psalm wouldclose with a response from God. But what is the last word of the psalm? It ismachshakh, which is another form of choshekh, “Darkness,” an epithet of theland of the dead, the underworld, Sheol.
Thisis a poetic device and is called an envelope structure. There are dozens ofpoetic devices which are used in more than one third of the Tanakh. Thesedevices must be known and recognized in order to begin to appreciate what thepoet wanted to say. All translations are inadequate and feel like kissing yourbride through the veil.
Thepoet could not have been more obvious. He wants us as readers to respect theagony and misery of the innocent sufferer. The psalmist expected protection,healing, acquittal and justice from the covenanted God ... but there is onlyabandonment and death. Machshakh = choshekh is, therefore, a very appropriateway to close a lawsuit against God who adds insult to injury and does notrespond with the deserved acquittal and liberation.
As anintroduction to Biblical Hebrew poetry and to a lifetime of surprising insightswhich are not available in any other way, I recommend the study of W. G. E.Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to its Techniques. (Sheffield:JSOT, 1984), and the work of M. Dahood on the Psalms (The Anchor Bible,Vols. 16,17, 17a. Doubleday, 1966, 1968 and 1970), which includes the highlyuseful section “The Grammar of the Psalter.”
Nowturn to “Beth’s Psalm” in Blumenthal, pp. 227-232 (see below). When I used this reading several times in mycourses, there was not a dry eye in the room. Do yourself a great favor and getBlumenthal’s Facing the Abusing God and study the book very carefully.
Howwill you and I respond to Jeremiah, to the author of Ps. 88 and to Beth? Willit be in a manner which is offensive to them and which makes their sufferingeven worse?
Foran outline of my presentation on the Law-Court Pattern of Prayer at theMetropolitan Chicago Synod 2001 Professional Leaders’ Conference, you may turnto my web site, www.michelwl.net.