Word & World Volume XIX, Number 1 Winter 1999 Texts in Context Refiner’s Fire and Laundry Soap: Images of God in Malachi 3:1-4 FREDERICK J. GAISER Luther Seminary St. Paul, Minnesota I. TEXTS IN CONTEXT REVISITED OW DOES ONE HEAR TEXTS ANEW? MY FIRST NEW TESTAMENT TEACHER, TED Liefeld at the Lutheran seminary in Columbus, frequently wished aloud that he could teach the New Testament to people who had never read it or heard of it—people not contaminated by “knowing” in advance what it says. He longed to help readers find surprise in the text, to make them hear something that evoked a “Wow.” Not always easy with ancient texts, sacred texts, long-interpreted texts. Many Christians, when they hear “For he is like a refiner’s fire,” know not only the words but the tune. The melody to Handel’s bass aria comes to them un- bidden. Such a combination is so deeply rooted in our minds and souls and tradi- tion that it becomes almost impossible to loose ourselves from the meanings it conveys—even for a moment, even just as an exegetical exercise—and to hear something new. The danger comes not because the tradition is wrong, but because, as Gerhard von Rad so profoundly said, “A ‘sermon’ that simply repeats the tradi- tion is not yet a true sermon.”1 How does one preach this text when preacher and audience know it so well and in such particular interpretation? There is no magic, of course, no refined exegetical method (or eschewing thereof) that will invariably produce a perfect (or even adequate) sermon as a white 1Gerhard von Rad, “Sermon on Isaiah 40:1-8 (15 December 1963),” Predigten (Munich: Christian Kaiser, 1972) 129 (my translation). FREDERICK J. GAISER, professor of Old Testament, is editor of Word & World and director of the Luther Seminary in Zimbabwe program. Copyright © 1999 by Word & World, Luther Seminary, St. Paul, MN. All rights reserved. 83 Gaiser precipitate. Still, exegetical study matters—if for no other reason than it slows down our reading. That may be one of the primary values of reading texts in the original languages. For most of us, at least, it takes longer. It requires work. We wrestle with words and syntax and meaning in ways that we are not required to do in our native tongue. Form criticism and the search for chiasms can do the same thing. They help us see something new. And when that happens, even when it is something small, sermons begin to sparkle and people notice. “Develop the urge to communicate,” admonished my freshman comp teacher, at least once each class period. He was absolutely right. Is there anything more deadly than a sermon delivered by someone who really has nothing to say—no urge, no passion, no news, nothing perhaps but freeze-dried tradition (or worse, not even that)? Some, I suppose, at least have the urge to convert, but often that is more about power than communication, more about manipulation than liberation. How wonderful and perhaps how rare genuinely to share a thought, an idea, a word, to touch another with truth (Truth) and be touched in return. What might the Spirit do with such a moment? Another way to hear something new is to hear it in a new context—or to take more seriously an old one. Luther argued that one learned to translate by going to the market rather than to the lexicon.2 What do words actually mean to people in daily use? Good exegesis and good preaching have always thought about this. Fol- lowing Schleiermacher, von Rad once suggested that exegesis allows the text to re- main relatively untouched in its context and comes to it; preaching, on the other hand, allows the hearers to remain in their context and brings the text to them.3 The distinction may be too neat, and, yes, we have all learned the impossibility of a pure objective exegesis. Still, we can do worse than work at understanding the bib- lical context. An incarnating God took it with utmost seriousness! But we can’t stay in the biblical world, because, with rare exceptions, neither we nor our hearers live there any more. So what do words mean now? How do im- ages speak now? Only one who goes with people to the markets and the ball games and the courtrooms and the hospitals can know that. Finally, only pastors called to a place and given to a place can preach well in that place. The call provides the con- text. So, there is nothing new in what Word & World is trying to do in its Texts in Context feature. What we have come to realize, though, is that we cannot do that 2Martin Luther, On Translating: An Open Letter (1530), Luther’s Works, vol. 35, ed. E. Theodore Bachman (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1960) 189: “We do not have to inquire of the literal Latin, how we are to speak Ger- man....Rather we must inquire about this of the mother in the home, the children on the street, the common man in the marketplace. We must be guided by their language, the way they speak, and do our translating accordingly. That way they will understand it and recognize that we are speaking German to them.” 3Gerhard von Rad, “About Exegesis and Preaching,” Biblical Interpretations in Preaching (Nashville: Abing- don, 1977) 14-15; see Friedrich Schleiermacher, “Ueber die verschiedenen Methoden des Uebersezens,” Sämtliche Werke, part 3, vol. 2 (Berlin: G. Reimer, 1838) 218: “Either the translator leaves the author resting peacefully insofar as possible and brings the reader to him; or he leaves the reader resting peacefully insofar as possible and brings the author to him” (translation by John Steely, in von Rad, ibid.) 84 Images of God in Malachi 3:1-4 well while trying to comment briefly on a more-or-less lengthy series of texts. So, we give that task over to the preaching-helps people, who already do it well enough anyway. We will instead work with one text (or maybe two), as a model, a case study, an exercise—a way, we hope, to sharpen our minds, to practice hearing in a new way. We will do that by trying to take seriously both text and context—usually (though not always) a coming pericope text, read in some particular context famil- iar to the writer(s). Such an exercise will not yield a “product” that is universally applicable. Such is the way of homiletical work. But we hope to engage those pre- paring to preach in meaningful conversation. We cannot replace the local preacher, but as preachers ourselves we are always willing to be challenged, encour- aged, and inspired by the reflections and models of others who themselves seek in a variety of ways to be local interpreters of the gospel. Texts in Context will attempt such an exercise. II. THE MESSAGE OF THE MESSENGER The Old Testament reading appointed for the Festival of the Presentation of our Lord (February 2) is Mal 3:1-4: See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple. The messenger of the covenant in whom you delight—indeed, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap; he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the descendants of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, until they present offerings to the LORD in righteousness. Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the LORD as in the days of old and as in former years. February 2 does not fall on a Sunday in 1999, but (unless in a fit of relevance your congregation observes Groundhog Day on the Sunday closest to February 2) the text would be usable on the Sunday before or after, or, indeed, on any Sunday in the Epiphany season. It will fit in Advent also and, in fact, is appointed as the Old Testament reading for Advent 2 (Series C). Handel’s Messiah did not invent the christological reading of this text. As the commentaries point out, the synoptic gospels already identify Malachi’s messenger (whom Malachi himself later identifies as Elijah) with John the Baptist (Matt 11:10, 13; 17:9-13; Mark 1:2; 6:14-15; Luke 1:17, 76; 7:27). And the lectionary, by pairing this Old Testament reading with Heb 2:14-18 and Luke 2:22-40 (for the Presenta- tion), interprets Jesus Christ as Malachi’s faithful priest. To hope to hear the text anew in no way dismisses this traditional christological interpretation. The first time around, that interpretation, no doubt, produced its own rather significant “Wow.” Our hope is not to replace the tradition, but to enliven it. For me—with this text—that happened by coming to Africa (where I write this essay). A radical step, no doubt! Not everyone will be able to duplicate it, but 85 Gaiser our task, as readers of texts for others (and not just for ourselves), is to find some way to step outside of the worlds that we know so well (the one outside our window and the one inside our Bible), and to be surprised. Then, seeing anew, we re-enter conversation with the biblical world and the world in which we live in order that our preaching be faithful.