Restorationism A Biblical Reflection

Transcription

1 77 Restorationism A Biblical Reflection John Hill CSSR* In a recent issue of The Australasian Catholic Record, my Sydney namesake drew attention to what he called restorationism in the contemporary Catholic Church. 1 By restorationism he means a belief that there is an ideal way of running society and that, if there has been a departure from the ideal, it must be put back at any cost. 2 By way of example he cites some recent Vatican documents on the liturgy, which modify, undo or reverse changes made in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council. For Catholics concerned or disturbed by the state of the church during the turmoil of the post-conciliar era, restorationism may appear very attractive as a sure way of restoring a lost stability. 3 My namesake s essay raises the question of the significance of the past for a society or institution like the church which is undergoing profound change. Catholics resisting change appeal to the past to justify their stance, while the documents of Vatican II itself do likewise to validate some of the many significant changes which the council authorised. 4 His essay prompted me to look at the question of the past in my own field of biblical studies, to see if the biblical tradition might shed any light on the matter. In what follows I will take the book of Ezra as a case study, and examine how it uses the past to support the agenda it advances. * John Hill CSsR TheolM, DTheol teaches Biblical Studies at the Yarra Theological Union, Melbourne College of Divinity. 1. John Hill, Can Restorationism Succeed?, ACR 86 (2009): Hill, Can Restorationism Succeed?, 276. For a more extensive treatment of the idea of restoration, see Joachim Mehlhausen, Restauration, in Theologische Realenzyklopädie 29, ed. Gerhard Müller (Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 1998), Hill, Can Restorationism Succeed?, As my namesake points out, Vatican II saw its work as both aggiornamento (updating) and ressourcement (a return to the roots or sources) Hill, Can Restorationism Succeed?, 261.

2 78 The Australasian Catholic Record My reason for choosing the book of Ezra is that it and the post-vatican II church share two common elements. One is the experience of a major hiatus. The other is an appeal to the past as a means of self-legitimation. The book belongs to a period of the biblical era often called the restoration, or more accurately, the early Persian period. 5 This period followed the convulsive experience of the Babylonian invasions of Judah in the sixth century BCE. The book portrays how one group, in the period of rebuilding that followed the Babylonian disaster, portrayed itself as the true Israel. A key strategy used to advance its claims was an appeal to the past, whereby the rebuilt community is portrayed as having continuity with the Israel of old. A study of the book shows that the past is a construct. Appeals to the past are appeals only to selective elements which advance a particular group s agenda. The book shows that an ideal past can never be recovered. Furthermore it also reveals that in a group which might claim continuity with the past, there can exist covertly a significant element of discontinuity. In the terms of my namesake s essay, the book of Ezra shows that there is more to a restorationist program than an attempt to simply turn back the clock. A restorationist program is part of a larger agenda, involving attempts at self-legitimation and exclusivist claims to authenticity. 1. The Ezra Narrative 6 The book of Ezra is the first of a two-part collection (Ezra Nehemiah) which describes the establishment of a community in Yehud, earlier called Judah, in the Persian period. 7 In this section I will first present a summary of the Ezra 5. It is most frequently used as a counterpart of the term exile. It figures in the titles of the wellknown studies of Ackroyd and Foster, where it refers to the period of the reconstruction of the community in Yehud in the Persian period (Peter R. Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought in the Sixth Century BC [London: SCM, 1968]; R. S. Foster, The Restoration of Israel: The Return from the Exile [London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1970]. The Babylonian invasion of Judah in 587 BCE gave rise to the exile, which lasted until their defeat by the Persians. What followed then was the restoration. As biblical scholarship has increasingly recognised, both exile and restoration are not neutral and objective terms, but rather are constructs which reflect a particular interpretation of Israel s history. See, e.g, the classic study of Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration, For more recent scholarship see James M. Scott, ed., Exile: Old Testament, Jewish and Christian Conceptions, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism, vol. 56 (Leiden/New York/Köln: Brill, 1997); James M. Scott, ed., Restoration: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perspectives, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 72 (Leiden/Boston/Köln: Brill, 2001). 6. While contemporary scholarship is in general agreement that the book of Ezra has more than one author, there is disagreement about the sources of the book and the identity of its redactors. For a summary treatment of these questions, see Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah, OTL (London: SCM, 1989), For a selection of various opinions on these questions, see the collection of essays in Mark J. Boda and Paul L. Redditt, eds., Unity and Disunity in Ezra Nehemiah: Redaction, Rhetoric and Reader, Hebrew Bible Monographs 17 (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2008). 7. For a useful introduction to the book of Ezra, see Ralph W. Klein, The Books of Ezra & Nehemiah: Introduction, Commentary, Reflections, in New Interpreter s Bible (Nashville: Abingdon, 1999), 3:

3 Restorationism A Biblical Reflection 79 narrative. Then I will explore the function of the narrative, and show how it is constructed to validate the exclusive claims of one group to be the true Israel. In particular I will point to its understanding of the past as a means for legitimating the group s claim. The book of Ezra begins by taking up where the Chronicler s history of Israel leaves off. According to 2 Chron 36:17-21 the Babylonian conquest of Judah in 587 BCE and the subsequent deportations of sections of its population left the land empty of inhabitants for a period of seventy years, as predicted by the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 25:11;29:10). 8 The seventy year period comes to an end when the Persian emperor Cyrus appears on the scene and issues a decree allowing the return of people to Jerusalem (2 Chron 36:23). Ezra 1:1 resumes 2 Chron 36:22, and then offers a fuller version of Cyrus decree (Ezra 1:2-4) than that found in 2 Chron 36:23. The decree allows the survivors of the Babylonian exiles to go up to Jerusalem and rebuild its temple (Ezra 1:3-4). As they leave, Cyrus gives them the precious vessels and implements which Nebuchadnezzar had taken from the Jerusalem temple and brought to Babylon (1:7-11). 9 Ezra 2 gives a list of the names of approximately 50,000 people who returned and settled in the towns of Yehud. Various sacred rituals, such as burnt offerings and the celebration of Sukkoth (Tabernacles) were resumed, and the foundation stone for the rebuild temple was laid (Ezra 3). However the rebuilding runs into problems. The returned exiles are approached by a group who are identified as the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin (4:1). They offer their support to help rebuild the temple, but are rebuffed by the exiles. As a result, there is concerted opposition to the rebuilding, and an appeal is made to the Persian king to stop the work. The conflict is resolved when the decree of Cyrus allowing the rebuilding is recovered from the royal archives, and the Persian authorities allow the work to be completed (Ezra 5-6). The dedication of the temple is celebrated with great joy (6:16-18), and is then followed by Passover and the seven days of unleavened bread, also occasions of great happiness (6:19-22). The narrative next turns to the figure of Ezra, and describes his journey from Babylon and arrival in Jerusalem (Ezra 7-8). An official of the Persian administration, but also a descendant of Aaron and a scribe skilled in the law of Moses (7:6), he comes from Babylon accompanied by 5,000 returning exiles (Ezra 8:1-14). Soon after his arrival in Jerusalem he is confronted with the problem of intermarriage men from returned exiles had married women from the neighbouring peoples (9:1-4). Their action is considered as faithlessness (9:4), so 8. 2 Chron 36:21, which contains the prediction of the empty land and the seventy years duration, is constructed not just from Jeremian texts but also from the book of Leviticus. The seventy year period in Jer 25:11 and 29:10 refers to the era of Babylonian domination and the duration of the exiles stay in Babylon. The reference to the land being desolate and making up for its sabbaths is drawn from Lev 26: For further, see Sara Japhet, I & II Chronicles, OTL (Louisville: Westminster/ John Knox, 1993), For references to the plundering of the temple, see 2 Kings 24:13-17; Jer 52:17-23; 2 Chron 36:18-19.

4 80 The Australasian Catholic Record Ezra prays on their behalf, asking YHWH not to punish the people for their sin. After a night of fasting and prayer, Ezra calls an assembly of the people and directs the men to separate themselves from their foreign wives (chap. 10). A list of names of the men guilty of intermarriage is given in chapter ten. The book concludes: All these had married foreign women, and they sent them away with their children (10:44). In this way the integrity of the holy seed (9:2) was preserved. 2. Continuity and the Past in the Book of Ezra The central concern of the book is the question of identity: who in the early Persian period constitutes the true Israel? The book of Ezra advances the claim of one particular group, which eventually comes to dominate. Although the book describes conflicts which occurred in the sixth century BCE soon after the demise of the Babylonians, its real agenda is the situation in Yehud later in the Persian period. 10 The authorship of the book is much debated, but the agenda of its writers is clear. 11 For simplicity s sake, I will refer to them as the Ezra group. In the book they are aligned with the group referred to as the exiles. For the Ezra group, a connection with those exiled to Babylon defines who belongs to the community of Israel The Construct of an Empty Land At its very beginning the book advances the claims of the Ezra group by an appeal to the past. Ezra 1:1 begins with a near verbatim quote from the end of 2 Chronicles, the book which precedes it in the Hebrew bible. 2 Chronicles ends with the description of the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem and the appearance of Cyrus. 2 Chron 36:17-21 portrays the land of Judah as empty of inhabitants after the Babylonian conquest. Ezra 1:1 starts where 2 Chronicles finishes: the land is empty, and ready for occupation. 13 As is clear from both biblical and nonbiblical sources, the idea of an empty land is a theological construct, found not only in Chronicles and Ezra, but also in Lev 18:24-30 and Jeremiah It is used in Ezra 1:1 to validate the Ezra group s claims to possession of the land, a major issue of conflict in the Persian period. Jeremiah 24 reflects the conflict over land and identity in the Persian period. 10. The Ezra account of the temple rebuilding is dated to around the fourth century BCE by Peter R. Bedford, Temple Restoration in Early Achaemenid Judah, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 65 (Leiden/Boston/Köln: Brill, 2000), For a summary of the book s agenda, see e.g., Tamara Cohn Eskenazi, In An Age of Prose: A Literary Approach to Ezra-Nehemiah, SBL Monograph Series 36 (Atlanta: Scholars, 1988), ; Klein, Ezra & Nehemiah, See further, Peter R. Bedford, Diaspora: Homeland Relations in Ezra-Nehemiah, VT 52 (2002): Lester L. Grabbe, Ezra-Nehemiah, Old Testament Readings (London ; New York: Routledge, 1998), See e.g., Hans M. Barstad, The Myth of the Empty Land: A Study in the History and Archaeology of Judah During the Exilic Period, SO 28 (Oslo: Scandanavian University Press, 1996); Robert P. Carroll, The Myth of the Empty Land, Semeia 59 (1992):

5 Restorationism A Biblical Reflection 81 It is a description of a vision, in which the prophet sees two baskets of figs: one of good, edible figs, and the other of rotten, inedible ones. The good figs represent those deported to Babylon in 597 BCE (vv. 4-7), the bad those who remained behind in the land, or who escaped into Egypt (vv. 8-10). YHWH promises that all those who remain in the land will be removed from it and destroyed. The land is thus made empty. The promise to those deported is that they will be brought back to the land, be planted there and built up, and be constituted as YHWH s own people (vv. 6-7). There are two dimensions to the ideological construct in Jeremiah 24. One is the empty land; the other is the favouring of the Babylonian exiles. It is they who constitute the true Israel. Similarly, in Lev 18:24-30 the land promised to Moses by YHWH is said to be empty because it vomited out its inhabitants on account of their wickedness (18:25). This passage can be read at two levels. At one level, it refers to the entry of the people into the land after the death of Moses. However, the book of Joshua makes clear that the land is not empty. It can only be entered and possessed by a divinely guided war of conquest, in which its inhabitants are to be exterminated. At another level Lev 18:24-30 refers to the situation in the Persian period. Although the land suffered destruction during the Babylonian invasions, it was not empty. It supported a functioning community, albeit smaller than that which existed before 587. No matter at which level we read Lev 18:24-30, the portrait of the land as empty is not a historical statement but a theological construct. Evidence that the land was not empty comes from both biblical and nonbiblical sources. The clearest biblical reference is Jeremiah 40-41, which has a different perspective to that in Jeremiah 24. What we have in Jeremiah is a narrative of life in Judah after 587 BCE. It portrays a functioning community, centred in Mizpah and under the leadership of Gedaliah, appointed by the Babylonians in the aftermath of 587. The community has a system of government and some form of worship. According to Jeremiah there was sufficient agricultural activity to support not only people in rural areas but those in towns (40:10-12). Mizpah was a centre to which all the Judeans returned from all the places to which they had been scattered (v. 12). Like the Ezra narrative, these chapters in the book of Jeremiah have their own theological viewpoint, but what they portray corresponds more closely to non-biblical evidence. Until recently the early Persian period was a historical black hole about which we knew next to nothing. However, historical and archaeological research in the last twenty years has shed light on the Judah of the neo-babylonian and early Persian periods. The picture which emerges is not that of an empty land, but one in which, in certain areas such as Benjamin and the northern Judean highlands, communities continued to function without major dislocation. 15 The town of Mizpah grew in size early in the 6th century, 15. For what follows see Oded Lipschits, Demographic Changes in Judah Between the Seventh and the Fifth Centuries B.C.E, in Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period, ed. Oded Lipschits and Joseph Blenkinsopp (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2003),

6 82 The Australasian Catholic Record becoming an administrative centre with large residential buildings and storehouses. 16 Although it had declined in size by the end of the sixth century, it was continuously settled until the middle of the fifth century. 17 At the same time Jerusalem suffered a different fate. It was largely destroyed and depopulated in the aftermath of the Babylonian conquest, possibly to the point where it had no resident population at all. It did not begin to recover until the Persian period. 18 The portrait of an empty land at the beginning of the book of Ezra connects the Ezra group to Israel s ancient past. In this respect the book does not reflect a restorationist understanding of the past as something to be valued in itself. Portraying continuity with the past is one strategy in the larger objective of selflegitimation. The Ezra group is the true Israel. Like Joshua and the people of old, they have been brought out of captivity to possess the land given by YHWH The Exodus Connection Allusions to the Exodus traditions are also found in 1:4 and chap. 2. In 1:4 we read that the returning exiles should receive gold, silver, goods and cattle from their neighbours. Historically, this is rather implausible. What 1:4 alludes to is the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, during which they asked the Egyptians for gold and silver jewelry: And so they plundered the Egyptians (Exod 12:36). 19 Ezra 2 contains a list of the names of all those who returned from exile. It gives a figure of almost 50,000. Together 1:11 and 2:1 give the impression that there was one en masse return, just as once before there was an en masse departure from Egypt. Ezra 2 is also a theological construct, as suggested by the sheer number of returnees, and other signals in the text. 20 According to 2:1, the list consists of the names of exiles who have returned to their own towns. However in 2:2 they are called the men of the people of Israel, while v. 70 refers to them as all Israel. The function of the list in the book is clear: it is the returning exiles who now constitute the new Israel Lipschits, Demographic Changes, Lipschits, Demographic Changes, Lipschits, Demographic Changes, So, Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah, 75-76; Mark A. Throntveit, Ezra-Nehemiah, Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, Ky.: John Knox Press, 1992), 15-18; Melody D. Knowles, Pilgrimage Imagery in the Returns in Ezra, JBL 123 (2004): 57-61; H.G.M. Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah, WBC 16 (Waco, TX.: Word Books, 1985), 16; Knowles, Pilgrimage Imagery in the Returns in Ezra, So, Bob Becking, We All Returned as One : Critical Notes on the Myth of the Mass Return, in Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period, ed. Oded Lipschits and Joseph Blenkinsopp (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 3-18; see also Philip F. Esler, Ezra-Nehemiah as a Narrative of (Re-Invented) Israelite Identity, Bib Int 11 (2003): The origins of the list are not clear. Rather than giving the names of those who returned on one single occasion, it may come from a census of those living in Yehud in the later Persian period. It may also refer to those who returned from Babylon over a period of time which extended well beyond the early Persian period. For further, see Eskenazi, In an Age of Prose, 48; Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah,

7 Restorationism A Biblical Reflection Invoking Deuteronomic Exclusivism The final chapters (chaps. 9-10) deal with the crisis of intermarriage, when the men among the returned exiles marry foreign women. They solve the crisis by sending away the foreign wives and their children. The solution is validated by an appeal to the past. Seeing themselves in continuity with the first generations who entered the land, the leaders of the Ezra group apply the Deuteronomic law on intermarriage to their situation. In Ezra 9-10 the past is used again to validate their exclusive claim to be the true Israel. 22 At the beginning of the book the land is portrayed as empty, but in chaps. 4-6 the picture changes. We find that the land has inhabitants who are variously referred to as the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin (4:1), the people of the land (v. 4), the nations of the land (6:21). They are portrayed as hostile to the Ezra group, and are excluded by the latter from any involvement in the life of the community (4:1-4). The marriage crisis comes about because the people of Israel (9:1) have married women who are variously described as belonging to the peoples of the lands (9:1, 2) and the peoples of the land (10:2). The foreign wives are said to belong to Israel s ancient enemies the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites (9:1). 23 The list is a throwback to Deut 7:1-3, which forbids marriage between Israelites and anyone from a group of seven nations, amongst whom are listed the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites and Jebusites. Prohibitions against Ammonites and Moabites are found in Deut 23:3 (23:4 MT), but there is no such prohibition against Egyptians in that text. Deut 7:1-3 does not mention the Ammonites, the Moabites, or the Egyptians. Although Moabites and Ammonites cannot ever become part of the people of Israel (Deut 23:3), the prohibition does not extend to Egyptians (23:7). Inventive exegesis of the Deuteronomic law in 9:2, reflects Ezra s restoration point of view, where the appeal to and identification with the past is used to validate the claims to authenticity of a particular group who style 22. The literature on Ezra 9-10 is extensive. For further, see e.g., Mary Douglas, Responding to Ezra: The Priests and the Foreign Wives, BibInt 10 (2002): 2-23; David Janzen, Witch-Hunts, Purity and Social Boundaries: The Expulsion of the Foreign Women in Ezra 9-10, JSOTSup 350 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2002); Saul M. Olyan, Purity Ideology in Ezra-Nehemiah as a Tool to Reconstitute the Community, JSJ 35 (2004): 1-16; Daniel L. Smith, The Politics of Ezra: Sociological Indicators of Postexilic Judaean Society, ed. Philip R. Davies, in Second Temple Studies: 1. Persian Period, JSOTSup 117 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1991), 73-97; Harold C. Washington, The Strange Woman of Proverbs 1-9 and Post-Exilic Judaean Society, in Second Temple Studies: 2. Temple in the Persian Period, JSOTSup 175 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1994), ; Harold C. Washington, Israel s Holy Seed and the Foreign Women of Ezra- Nehemiah: A Kristevan Reading, BibInt 11 (2003): Reading Edomites (as does 1 Esdras) for the MT s Amorites. On this see Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah, 174; Sara Japhet, People and Land in the Restoration Period, ed. Georg Strecker, in Das Land Israel in Biblischer Zeit, Göttingen Theologische Arbeiten (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983), 114, 124.

8 84 The Australasian Catholic Record themselves as the holy seed, an obviously exclusivist term whose only occurrence in the OT is here in Ezra 9: The Rebuilt Temple and the Cult The book s account of the rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple forms part of its overall strategy of using the past to validate the Ezra group s theological agenda. In 4:2 they are approached by a group of people, who call themselves fellow-travellers, worshipping the same God as the returned exiles, and offering to help in the work of rebuilding (v. 2). The text however calls them the adversaries of Judah and Jerusalem (4:1). 25 The returned exiles will have nothing to do with their offer, rejecting it by engaging in an inventive exegesis of the decree of Cyrus: We alone will build to the Lord, the God of Israel, as King Cyrus of Persia has commanded us (4:3). A comparison of 4:3 with the text of the decree in 1:2-4 shows two small but significant differences. Firstly, in 1:2-4 there is no reference to a command of Cyrus to rebuild the temple. Rather the decree is by way of a permission or an offer: If any one among you belongs to his people...let him go up (1:3). 26 Secondly, according to 4:3, it is only the exiles who are to do the rebuilding: We alone will build. 27 According to the decree of Cyrus, the offer to rebuild is open to any of those who are of his (the God of Israel) people (1:3). In 4:1-3 the returned exiles interpret the decree to exclude any outsiders from the rebuilding. They alone are Israel, and so the rebuilding is their exclusive prerogative. The Ezra agenda here becomes clearer when we compare this account of the rebuilding with that in the book of Haggai. Like the book of Ezra, Haggai describes the difficulties encountered in the rebuilding, but has a very different explanation for them. According to Haggai the people are living in their comfortable houses, while the temple is still in ruins. As a result of their indifference, they suffer deprivation and drought (1:5-6), a situation which can be redressed by rebuilding the temple. Furthermore, while Haggai refers to the people as a remnant, the words exiles or exile do not appear in the whole book. This is significant because Haggai is generally regarded by scholars as much earlier composition than Ezra. As such it would not be surprising to find in it references to the returned exiles. For Haggai then, the delay in rebuilding does not come from the opposition of some outside group. 28 For Ezra however 24. See further, Douglas, Responding to Ezra, 5-8; Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1991), ; Janzen, Witch-Hunts, Purity and Social Boundaries, The identity of this group is not clear. For a brief discussion of scholarship on this point, see Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah, The translation here is that of Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah, 74. For the relevant grammatical material on this point, see Paul Joüon, Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Subsidia Biblica 14/II (Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1993), I use italics here to reflect the emphasis conveyed by the Hebrew word order. 28. Bedford, Diaspora,

9 Restorationism A Biblical Reflection 85 it is caused by the enemies of the returned exiles, the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin (4:1). Again, it is the Ezra group alone who are the true Israel. The account of the rebuilding of the temple is another strategy used to validate the claims of the Ezra group. The description of the rebuilding in 3:6-9 echoes that of the first temple in 2 Chronicles The continuity between the building of the two temples is also expressed in Ezra 2:10 where the priests and levites act according to the directions of King David of Israel. At its completion, one of the sacrifices offered was a sin offering of twelve male goats, according to the number of the tribes of Israel (6:17). The priests and Levites are then appointed for their tasks according to the prescription in the book of Moses (v. 18). Again, the Ezra group uses the past, identifying itself with the successor of the Israel of earlier eras. In 6:19-22, which narrates the celebration of the Passover, the concept of the true Israel is expanded. The Passover was eaten by the people of Israel who had returned from exile and by those who had joined them and separated themselves from the pollutions of the nations of the land (v. 21). However, as 6:19 indicates, the returned exiles still remain as the core of the true Israel, and separation from the peoples of the land is required by those who join them. The celebration of Passover is another indicator of the book s restoration agenda. By celebrating the great story of the deliverance from Egypt, another point of continuity is established between the Persian period community in Yehud and the pre-587 era. Another important symbol of continuity with the first temple is the return of the temple vessels which Nebuchadnezzar took from Jerusalem. 30 Although texts such as 2 Kings 24:13; 25:13-17 and Jeremiah 52, suggest a total destruction of all the temple furnishings and vessels, we read in Jer 27:21-22 that temple vessels and furnishings which survived the first Bablyonian siege of Jerusalem (597 BCE) will be taken to Babylon, and then subsequently returned at some future time. 31 Ezra 1:7-11 fulfills this promise of their return: Cyrus gives the vessels to the Jerusalem-bound exiles, and in 5:14 he explicitly commands that they be placed in the rebuilt temple. 3. The Book of Ezra: A Selective View of the Past In advancing the exclusive claims of the Ezra group, the book puts forward a selective view of the past. The continuity of the Ezra group with the past is shown through the constructs of the empty land, the entry into the promised land, the celebration of Passover, the Deuteronomic abhorrence of intermarriage, and 29. So, D.J.A. Clines, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther: Based on the Revised Standard Version, NCBC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans ; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1984), ; Klein, Ezra & Nehemiah, 692; Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah, Peter R. Ackroyd, The Temple Vessels: A Continuity Theme, in Studies in the Religious Tradition of the Old Testament (London: SCM, 1987), Ackroyd, Temple Vessels,

10 86 The Australasian Catholic Record the rebuilding of the temple. This emphasis on continuity with the past suggests that there has been a restoration of the people of Israel after the disaster of the Babylonian invasions, deportations and devastation of the land. However the book contains significant elements of discontinuity with the past, and a recognition that an ideal past has not been restored. There are several texts which show this. One is the book s first reference to the figure of Ezra in chap. 7, which describes him as an official of the Persians, a scribe skilled in the law of Moses (7:6) and a descendant of Aaron (v. 5). 32 There are elements of continuity and discontinuity with the past in this portrait. There is the reference to the law of Moses together with the genealogy which is constructed to link him to Aaron the first priest. However more important for the success of the group s exclusive claims is the reference to Ezra as a Persian official. His link with the new overlords of Judah is essential to the realisation of the vision of the book of Ezra. Appeals to the past are one element in the legitimation of the Ezra program, but without the approval of the Persians, there would be no return of people from Babylon and no rebuilding of the temple. 33 Other elements of the ideal past are also missing the free possession of the land and the Davidic dynasty. The fact that Judah is still under the control of a foreign conqueror means that there has been no return to an ideal past characterised by the possession of the land promised to Abraham. Not only is the Yehud of the Persian period a small territory compared to that promised to Abraham in Gen 15:18, it is not the free possession of the new Israel. Furthermore, a restoration of the Davidic monarchy would have been politically impossible, as the Persians would have interpreted it as a threat to their control of Yehud. The appeals to the past by the Ezra group are obviously selective, both in the choice of events and in their interpretation. For example, the construct of an empty land is chosen, rather than the portrayal found in the book of Judges, where Israel co-exists with the neighbouring peoples. The dismissal of the foreign wives and their children is validated by an appeal to Deuteronomic exclusivism and creative exegesis of the Deuteronomic prohibition of intermarriage. It is interesting to note that in the Persian period, there was a view of the past and of Israel s relationship with foreigners that is radically different to that of the Ezra group. In the book of Ruth a Moabite woman is portrayed as a new Leah or Rachel, and as the great grandmother of King David. The appeal to the past by the Ezra group is not only selective, but also ironic. 32. On Ezra as a second Moses, see Lisbeth S. Fried, Who Wrote Ezra Nehemiah and Why Did They?, in Unity and Disunity in Ezra Nehemiah: Redaction, Rhetoric and Reader, ed. Mark J. Boda and Paul L. Redditt, Hebrew Bible Monographs 17 (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2008), As Mehlhausen points out, in order to implement and sustain a restorationist program, its proponents require an existing political and social order to give their program the necessary legal basis (Mehlhausen, Restauration, 87-88). These elements are provided to the Ezra group by the Persian overlords

11 Restorationism A Biblical Reflection 87 The irony is that discontinuity with the past is the necessary condition for a supposed restoration. Persian control of Yehud and Ezra s relationship with the conqueror provides the necessary condition for the group s program of restoration. Furthermore, the appeal to the past is not an end in itself. What the book of Ezra shows is that restorationism, or restoration strategies, do not exist in a vacuum, but form part of a larger agenda. In the case of Ezra it is to validate the exclusive claims of one group to be the true Israel. The book of Ezra also shows that there are casualties in the implementation of a restoration program. The casualties are those who do not belong. The book refers to those who do not belong to the Ezra group as the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin (4:1). The other significant group of outsiders namely the women whom the exiles marry in chap. 9 are portrayed like Israel s ancient enemies. The book concludes with the dismissal of these women and their children. Since they do not belong, the Ezra group is indifferent to their fate. What is important is the purity of the holy seed. Those who do not belong count for nothing. 4. Conclusion In this essay I have used the book of Ezra to reflect on the dynamics of a restoration movement. My reflections on the book of Ezra indicate that an attempt to return to the past will result in the restoration of only selected aspects of it. To return to the past as it was is impossible. Reading the book of Ezra also reveals that there is an element, perhaps covert, of discontinuity in a restorationist program. Any assessment of such a program requires the unmasking and recognition of such an element. Finally, the book of Ezra shows that a restorationist program is not an end in itself, but is part of a strategy of selflegitimation by a group with exclusivist claims to be the true Israel. The book of Ezra is a cautionary tale for today s church. Restorationist movements need critical examination. Their agenda and aims need to be brought out into the open. Any exclusivist claims to orthodoxy need to be challenged. Perhaps most important is a concern for the casualties which can result from restoration movements. As my Sydney namesake noted, the aftermath of Vatican II produced its casualties, and they were often discounted. 34 It would be more than tragic if attempts at the reform of the reform produced a contemporary counterpart of the foreign wives and their children in the book of Ezra Excesses undoubtedly occurred, and neuralgic reactions followed...many were justifiably upset by intolerable liturgical experiments and unfounded reinterpretations of Catholic doctrine (Hill, Can Restorationism Succeed? 269). 35. Used earlier by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Hill, Can Restorationism Succeed? 262), the expression reform of the reform has more recently been attributed to Guido Marini, the present Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations (so, Matthew Gamber, Move For Fresh Liturgical Renewal Gets Papal Support, The Catholic Weekly 65 [17 January 2010]: 7).