2 Samuel 6 - 6,7?

[Nance]

These vs refer to the touching of the ark of the covenant. Is there a connection to the tabernacle where our Lord is present today and any person (eucharistic ministers) can go, open and retrieve our Lord which is taking place evreywhere…According to the rubrics that is not suppose to happen, only a priest may.
I guess what Im asking is what does the passage mean when God killed Uz´zah ?
Obviously people aren’t being struck down by God for touching the tabernacle (which is the ark of the covenant) today.
Could you clarify this for me?

 

[Todd_Easton]

Even though his intentions were good, Uzzah was struck dead on two accounts: 1) Uzzah violated the command of Numbers 4:15, 19. 2) Uzzah showed too little confidence in God, who certainly could have stopped the ark from falling if He so desired.

Perhaps the main lesson from the story of Uzzah, like the lesson of those Corinthian Christians who became weak and sick or died after receiving the Eucharist in an unworthy manner (1 Corinthians 11:30), is that we must treat holy things with proper respect.

That God does not always stike folks dead for not showing proper respect for holy things should be attributed go His great mercy.

 

[Nance]

I’m not sure my question has been answered!

The passages in Samuel need to be understood and I would like to know if it has any connection to today in reference to the Blessed Sacrament?
Can you or anyone else attempt to explain?

 

[RyanL]

This is more about Mary’s Perpetual Virginity WRT the Ark of the New Covenant than it is about the tabernacle of the Blessed Sacriment. Just as Uz’zah could not touch the Ark, neither could St. Joseph touch the Ark of the New Covenant. As a pius Jew, Joseph would have known this story.

Further parallels between the Blessed Mother and the Ark:

---

**For instance he shows how in 2nd Samuel 6, there was a journey to the hill country of Judah that the Ark of the Covenant took. Likewise, the same phrase is used to describe Mary’s journey to the hill country. In fact, the same phrase is used. Both David and Mary, “arose and made the journey.” In 2nd Samuel, 6:2 and Luke 1:39. ** ** Laurentin goes on to describe how when the Ark arrived and when Mary arrived, they were both greeted with “shouts of joy.” And the word for shout or the word for Elizabeth’s greeting, anafametzen, is very rare. It’s used only in connection with those Old Testament liturgical ceremonies that were centered around the Ark. It literally means to “cry aloud, to proclaim or to intone.” **

** Elizabeth greets Mary the same way the Ark of the Covenant was greeted. The entrance of the Ark and the entrance of Mary are seen then as blessing an entire household. Like Obededom’s household was blessed, so Elizabeth sees her household as blessed. Laurentin goes on to talk about how David and both Elizabeth react with awe, “How shall the Ark of the Lord come to me?” David says in 2nd Samuel, 6:9. And likewise Elizabeth says, “Why should the Mother of the Lord come to me?” The Ark of the Covenant and the Mother of our Lord are in a sense two ways of looking at the same reality which is becoming clearer and more personal with our Lady. Then finally, the Ark of the Covenant and Mary both remain in the respective houses for three months, 2nd Samuel 6:11 and Luke 1:56.**

---

Any better?

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Nance]

WOW!
That is soooooo cool! Yes it is much clearer and I thank you, my son and I were both wondering, so you not only helped me but him as well.
It does fit, I long learned long ago that passages have a very deep meaning. I would not have rested until this was explained.

 

[RyanL]

If you liked that, you’ll really enjoy this. It’s a lesson by Dr. Scott Hahn on our Blessed Mother (similar stuff, but expanded). If you have never heard of / read Dr. Hahn, I highly recommend his work. Check him out next time you’re in Barnes & Noble!

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Todd_Easton]

Unless there are directives to the contrary that I don’t know about, I do not understand the reason for your question about whether Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist (EMEs) should touch the tabernacle or not. Since EMEs are permitted to touch the Precious Body of our Lord Jesus Christ Itself when giving out Holy Communion, why would they not be permitted to touch the tabernacle where the Precious Body is reserved? Which is holier, the Precious Body (i.e., Jesus Christ Himself) or the man-made tabernacle where the Precious Body is reserved?

 

[TOME]

I think Todd Easton’s original post caught the spirit of the question on 2 Samuel. I say this because of the background in which Paul was writing his letter to the Corinthian does, as I see it compliments 2 Sam. I hope I can explain how I see how these two passages tie into one another.

What caused Paul to write his first letter to the Corinthans, he was writing to a divided community that was going through a real crisis of faith and Paul realized there was a possibility they could end up rejecting the Gospel message Paul presented to them.

Part of the crisis was that a group of the Corinthians (maybe the majority) had accepted a belief that in effect rejected the resurrection of the body. These Corinthians had come to this belief through a misunderstanding that held they would not die but rather would be transformed from there human body (which was subject to the natural corruption that came with death) directly to a body that was like an angel’s. This way Paul spends the time he does re-teaching them about the importance of the Resurrection in their faith.

Along this line and causing the crisis was the fact that there were those of their community who, even though had shared in the charisms of the Holy Spirit ( a sign that the Spirit was active in the Church and a source of division amoung the Corinthians that Paul also had to address) and who had partake of the Eucharist, were dying.

Here we find Paul, first chastizing the Corinthians for not using the graces given them by the Holy Spirit ( which they were taking inordinate pride in) to realize (decern) that if others who had actually seen the Ressurected Lord,were dying, why should they think it wouldn’t happen to them?

And here is how I think it ties into 2 Samuel. At the heart of Paul’s teaching (criticism) was that the Corinthians were believing in themselves and not trusting God. If Jesus died, if witnesses to the Resurrection were dying, why should they. And why, if they believe in the Resurrection, why the problems unless the bottom line was they didn’t trust in the power of God. And this was what had happened to Uzzah. He didn’t trust in the power of God to protect the Ark.

So, for me 2 Samuel 6 and 1 Cor are both lessons on the absolute necessity to have total trust in the power of God. And isn’t having that absolute trust in the power of God also the greatest sign of respect for that which the most sacred?

 

[Nance]

Todd Easton:

Unless there are directives to the contrary that I don’t know about, I do not understand the reason for your question about whether Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist (EMEs) should touch the tabernacle or not. Since EMEs are permitted to touch the Precious Body of our Lord Jesus Christ Itself when giving out Holy Communion, why would they not be permitted to touch the tabernacle where the Precious Body is reserved? Which is holier, the Precious Body (i.e., Jesus Christ Himself) or the man-made tabernacle where the Precious Body is reserved?

Todd, my question had to do with the if there was a connection to today with the tabernacle, I don’t claim to be a biblical scholar and wanted to know what 2 Samuel really meant…as to the EM’s, according to the church they are not permitted to go to the tablernacle :nope: that is strickly the priests duty; and EM are only to be used in very special circumstances not at every Mass where it is leading to many abuses…
In my head I was trying to understand the passage in reference to the tabernacle bc it is the Ark of the Covenant…
Obviously I was no where close to solving the meaning until Ryan came to my rescue.