Worship as Interpretation: The Liturgical Reception of Isaiah 6 Sebastian Yosef Selvén Wolfson College, Cambridge June, 2017 This dissertation is submitted to the University of Cambridge for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy ▪ This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. ▪ It is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text ▪ It does not exceed the prescribed word limit for the relevant Degree Committee. 2 This dissertation is an investigation into how the Hebrew Bible is used in (Rabbinic) Jewish and Christian liturgical settings, and how this impacts biblical scholars. I argue against the neglect of liturgy and ritual in reception studies and make the case that liturgy is one of the major influential forms of biblical reception. I do this by taking Isa. 6:3 as my example. My liturgical material is the qedushah liturgies in Ashkenazi Judaism and the Sanctus in three church traditions; (pre-1969) Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism (the Church of England) and Lutheranism (Martin Luther, and the Church of Sweden). As my focus is lived liturgy I investigate not just worship manuals and prayerbooks but also architecture, music and choreography. With an eye to modern-day uses, I trace the historical developments of liturgical traditions. To do this, I have used methodological frameworks from performance and theatre studies, as well as Clifford Geertz’s concept of “thick description”, from the realm of anthropology. I then analyse the impact this can have on biblical researchers, who often come from religious backgrounds. First I raise the issue of the identity of the seraphim in Isaiah 6, and their transformation in both the qedushot and the Sanctus into angels. I show how some of the tendencies in Jewish and Christian liturgy, and Christian iconography, recur in scholarship, for example the association with cherubim. The idea of an ongoing angelic liturgy, stressed especially in Jewish worship, also finds its way into scholarship. A second theme is the presumed liturgical nature of Isa. 6:3 itself. This common idea may, however, owe more to Jewish and Christian liturgical uses of it than to the text itself. In this context I discuss Christian liturgical uses which stress Trinitarian and Christological understandings of the text. I also bring up a nineteenth-century Swedish liturgical use which deviates from the Sanctus tradition. I use this to probe some of the modern ideas of holiness, and how Protestant liturgy has played a part in shaping the sentiments among scholars. Lastly I discuss the theme of Divine presence. Both the qedushot and the Sanctus are concerned with the presence of God. Jewish liturgy has shown a strong tendency to complicate the notion while in Christian liturgy it is instead concretised, either affirmatively or negatively. Some of these issues translate into scholarly debates, where scholarship often bears clear marks of especially Reformed theology. One shared tendency in both Jewish and Christian worship is to “spiritualise” Isaiah 6, and transpose it to a heavenly court. I argue that these ideas still make themselves felt in research on Isaiah 6. 3 Acknowledgements The interdisciplinary reach of this dissertation has meant that for a long time I felt like until I get there I will not know what to use to (study the) worship (of) the Lord. It would have been an impossible endeavour were it not for the many friends and colleagues I have received help from during the course of my writing. Here at Cambridge I would like to single out the help of Bruno Clifton, Christine Corton, Katharine Dell, Theodor Dunkelgrün, Philip Jenson, Sam Kennerley, Reuven Leigh, Victoria Raymer, Stefan Reif, Richard Rex, and the wonderful librarians Meg Westbury at the Lee Library, Wolfson College, and Clemens Gresser, The Divinity Faculty Library. I am grateful to the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible Grad Seminar for comments on this work and others, and especially so to my co-chair, Rosalie Ní Mhaoldomhnaigh. I would also like to thank Judith Newman at the University of Toronto, Eliezer Kaunfer and all the wonderful people at Yeshivat Hadar, New York City, as well as Walter Moberly, Shimon Steinmetz, Martin Berntson, and Maria Liljas. As I at this point have two almae matres, it would not do not to mention Uppsala University and the Old Testament Higher Seminar, from which I have received such generous support. This project would not have been possible without Göran Eidevall and Mikael Larsson there, who have helped me in the course of my writing, as well as enabling my coming to Cambridge to do it. I would also like to especially thank Simon Hedlund for the insightful comments made to an earlier draft of this work. Many have helped this dissertation on the way – Helene Egnell at the Centre for Interreligious Dialogue, Stockholm, Morton Narrowe at the Great Synagogue, Stockholm, Yael Fried, The Jewish Museum, Stockholm, Jonas Tovi and Andreas Ottosson, but none more so than Mikael Mogren, who has been an indispensable support, friend and intellectual sparring partner. Returning to the Great Synagogue, where Maynard Gerber first acted as shadchan between me and the siddur, has been a warm homecoming and I would like to thank everyone for all the hands-on support I have received there. Throughout this work, I have depended on the kindness of strangers, through funding for the project. While various funding bodies have helped me, I would especially like to thank Sixten Gemzéus Stiftelse, as well as The Spalding Trust, the Sir Richard Stapley Trust and Helge Ax:son Johnsons Stiftelse. But there has also been steady friend support, where I would like to especially thank Meghna Nag Chowdhuri, Varun Khanna and Akshyeta Suryanarayan – a true remover of obstacles. 4 Also many thanks for the support and input from the Allstig-Lamos family; Gunilla, Peter, and especially Katarina, a great proofreader and an even greater friend. A crucial colleague has of course been my supervisor, Nathan MacDonald, whose wit as well as wits have helped me through the different stages of writing this dissertation. Without you, it would have been an entirely different text, and certainly not for the better. Your intellectual and stylistic stringency has pushed me further than I would have thought possible three years ago. And going from doctoral parents to actual parents I would like to thank my two wonderful parent sets: Carina Selvén and Björn Rönnerholm, and Pers Göran och Catherine Selvén. these last few years have really shown me what family is capable of, practically and emotionally, and I am so very happy to share my journey through life with you. Thank you also, Kendra, Carl and – in advance – Jenna. Thank you also, Ostwald. Your patience, endurance and humour (and lunch boxes) have been a constant source of support, especially during these final months. for the privilege of having ,המתגאה על חיות הקדש ,Lastly, I give thanks to the Holy Blessed One received both bread and Torah during these last couple of years. 5 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction, Part I. Performance Matters .............................................................................................. 8 Reception studies .............................................................................................................................. 12 Paul Ricoeur and the Mimetic Arc ................................................................................................ 13 Hans-Georg Gadamer and the Fusion of Horizons ....................................................................... 16 Studying Liturgy: Methodological considerations ............................................................................ 21 Jewish and Christian Liturgical Studies ........................................................................................ 21 Other Approaches: Theatre, Performance and Thick Description ................................................ 26 Focus and choice of material ............................................................................................................ 34 Outline of the Study .......................................................................................................................... 36 Introduction, Part II: Liturgical Material – Qedushah and Sanctus ...................................................... 38 Jewish Liturgy ................................................................................................................................... 38 The Qedushah deYotzer ................................................................................................................ 40 The Qedushah deAmidah .............................................................................................................