• Leah’s Sad Eyes

    I have a question for those of you who went to Sunday School when you were young.

    What’s the least appropriate thing you remember being taught there?

    As we’ve been going through the stories from Genesis over the last few weeks, I keep thinking to myself – gosh, I remember learning this story in Sunday School.

    I’m not sure that we teach bible stories in Sunday School in quite the same way these days that we used to do. (And that’s not necessarily a bad thing – Sunday Schools of my day were statistically spectacularly bad at retaining people in the faith – I’m the exception, not the rule, so maybe it is worth trying a different tack).

    But here I am again on a Sunday morning reading one of the stories from Genesis and remembering doing the story in Sunday School completely uncritically, as though everything that was going on in it was perfectly normal. As though these were models to live by.

    But as I read these stories 50 years later, I think that might be a bit of a problem.

    The way we read stories matters.

    But we’ll come to that in a bit. For the moment, let’s have another go at trying to read the story of Jacob and Laban and Leah and Rachel and see what we find for ourselves. (Genesis 29:15-28)

    This is one of the most unlikely stories that you could possibly use to teach children anything about religion.

    It isn’t just tricky questions about polygamy that we need to look at though they are interesting.

    This is also a story that makes us think about honesty, decency and about relations between individuals, particularly relationships between men and women.

    When I was involved in the struggle for marriage equality, I kept hearing from those who were opposed to that, pleading for us to remain with what they called Biblical Marriage – by which they meant one man and one woman married to one another exclusively for life and whose children were born exclusively of that union.

    My former colleague Cedric Blakey had a mischievous little question that he used to ask of those putting forward this argument – which was to ask how many people in the bible they could name who fitted that pattern.

    It is a question that bears repeating and thinking about.

    There aren’t many at all.

    (You are welcome to play along and tell me how many you can think of after the service).

    This story is one of those I used to use to try to tease out what people were talking about when they referred to Biblical Marriage.

    This story is a load of trouble.

    It isn’t just that Jacob ends up married to more than one of the women either.

    That’s a problem worth wrestling with but the bigger problem is that this is a story that is about women being traded and passed around by men.

    And the bible is pretty ambivalent about it. Patriarchy is the dominant norm of the society we read about in Genesis. Even more – these stories are the bedrock upon which the patriarchal assumptions of our own societies are based.

    But hear this, and hear it from the pulpit as we read this text today.

    • The domination of women by men is a sin. And that should be remembered when we read the story of Leah, Rachel and Zilpah, the much forgotten maid.
    • Trafficking women is a sin.
    • And the dishonesty of Laban towards Jacob is a sin too.

    There’s something I’ve been wanting to say from the pulpit for a while and this story seems the right context to talk about it.

    Statistically it is the case that in a congregation this size there will be people present who have survived or perhaps still endure domestic violence. Both victims of such violence and those who perpetrate it are present in churches.

    At the last but one Lambeth Conference of bishops of the Anglican Communion there was a session on domestic violence because someone thought it important simply to name an evil. What was less expected was that when the mostly female spouses of the bishops (who were mostly men) started to talk about the topic they started to talk about it from their own experience and started to name and speak about their own experience of being treated badly by their spouses. It is uncomfortable to acknowledge that this is a problem within faith communities. But silence doesn’t make it go away.

    There’s one small detail about this story that always makes me think. It is the line about Leah’s eyes. We are told in the translation we read that Leah’s eyes were lovely.

    I rather like the notion that thousands of years later, someone’s lovely eyes are still being talked about. However, I also know that this is a tricky line of Hebrew to translate. Perhaps the better translation is that Leah had gentle eyes, which has led some to speculate that what was noticeable about Leah, the less graceful and less beautiful of the sisters, is that she was always crying.

    If your eyes are gentle or soft or weary of crying and you are scared of someone you live with then it might help to speak about it. Any of the clergy or the church wardens would be willing to listen and if appropriate to help you to find help – and there are those in this diocese who have worked hard to raise the profile of the problem of domestic violence and who may know how to offer to help.

    Here’s the good news. The bible doesn’t teach me how men and women should relate to one another. It is our God given consciences and holy common sense that have to do that.

    But the bible does teach me that the tears need to be wiped from every eye. Weeping may spend the night, but joy comes in the morning.

    And the bible teaches me that God is on the side of the underdog, the overlooked, the undervalued, the less preferred sister, the cheated son in law, the broken, the weary, the sad, the lonely, the abused, the hungry and the oppressed. And that is good news.

    And God calls us all to wipe the tears and build a world of justice and joy.

    It isn’t entirely clear who the narrator of the story is in Genesis. But someone noticed Leah’s eyes.

    Trust me on this. Someone has noticed you too.

    God looks on you and whether you are beautiful and graceful or whether your eyes are soft with tears, God looks on you and says.

    “You are altogether lovely. And I love you more than anyone you know.”

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

    AMEN

12 responses to “The Scottish Episcopal Church and the biblical case for changing Canon 31”

  1. Julia Avatar
    Julia

    You’ve worked and prayed on this for a long time and come up with the best solution in my opinion. God be with you.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Thanks, but I’m not sure I can claim to have come up with the solution – that claim lies with last year’s synod who did very well at working through all the options available.

  2. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    Do you really find the “Gamaliel argument” convincing? Two thousand years after Our Lord lived on earth, to believe in the possibility of the priestly and episcopal ministry of women still remains a minority position in the Church, as does the belief that homosexual acts should be legal, let alone blessed. Wait for the “Gamaliel effect” and you’ll wait for ever!

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Gamaliel’s wisdom is not about waiting for a majority. It is about letting people be free to testify to what God has done for them and conduct themselves accordingly. If this is not with God, then it will come to naught anyway.

      1. Robin Avatar
        Robin

        Surely that must mean that neither women’s priestly ministry nor homosexual acts are of God, since support for them is still the minority position 2,000 years on?

        (I’m not supporting this interpretation, just stating my long-held belief that the “Gamaliel argument” is feeble and solves nothing.)

        1. Kelvin Avatar

          Neither women’s priestly ministry nor homosexual acts (which acts, by the way?) seem to me to be dying out.

          1. Robin Avatar
            Robin

            After 2,000 years they certainly aren’t generally accepted. I just don’t see the relevance of the “Gamaliel argument”. If you believe in something, argue for it, fight for it, act to bring it about!

  3. Eamonn Avatar

    I don’t want to put words in Kelvin’s mouth (He wouldn’t let me, anyway), but the Gamaliel argument is really a shorthand way of saying that we should look to scripture, not for what Lucy Winkett called ‘clobber texts’, but for the spirit to which scripture testifies, the spirit of unconditional generosity which informs all God’s dealings with humanity: ‘For my thoughts are not your thoughts’.

  4. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    I thoroughly agree with what you say, Eamonn. That is exactly how we should use scripture. Maybe my adverse reaction to Gamaliel is a very personal one. It certainly goes back a long way. My trusty old SCM Torch Commentary on Acts, from my teenage years, damns with faint praise:

    “The main point of Gamaliel’s speech is clear enough. He says, ‘Don’t act in a hurry. Time will prove whether God is behind this or not.’ Not a very courageous line, but one which we are all prone to follow from time to time.”

    There are so many things which it is impossible to believe are of God but which over the centuries have *not* come to naught and show no signs of doing so!

  5. The Rev. Jeff Donnelly Avatar
    The Rev. Jeff Donnelly

    The Gamaliel example reminds me of the fact that one of the results of the early Jewish-Jesus movement was a divergent branch of Judaism which ultimately developed into an entirely separate religion. We may hope for an undivided Church on this issue, but one very real possibility of what God will do is that Christianity will again diverge into different expressions that may or may not remain unified in one institution. Indeed, the Church already exists on many different paths. I wonder whether the goal of keeping the institutional church together will end up being the real question that needs to be answered.

  6. Fr Enoch Opuka Avatar
    Fr Enoch Opuka

    I bet the views of other Anglicans are irrelevant. I have no problem with one being gay. Indeed I have had friends who are gay. But why can’t we leave the issue to individual decision? If the SEC knows that their decision is going to dialienate others why make it. Should churches in Africa advocate polygamy?

  7. Rtgmath Avatar
    Rtgmath

    Perhaps the best argument regarding same-sex marriage is the fact that marriage is and always has been a cultural artifact. Marriage in the Old Testament varied in custom, but was primarily “bride-price” or family contracts. Boaz and Ruth’s marriage differed from Rebekah and Isaac, and again from Hosea and Gomer, and from Joseph and Mary. The Greeks and Romans had different cultures still, and so do we. Polygamy was allowed, with the exception of Church leaders. Not even Jesus disputed polygamy!

    The overriding considerations in Scripture are faithfulness and love. If Faith is to be relevant to all cultures, we must focus on larger issues, not cultural specifics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • The Episcopal Way of Death

    I shall spend a considerable part of my work today thinking about how to help the congregation here to face death. Face their own deaths and face the reality of the deaths of those they have known through the years – the reality of those whom they have loved with a passion and the reality…

  • Love means Love

    Members of the Scottish Episcopal Church voted earlier this year to allow the marriage of same-sex couples to be able to be conducted by those clergy who wish to conduct them. We voted on that after years of discussion. It was passed by the 2/3rds majority in the House of Bishops, the House of Clergy…

  • The Scottish Episcopal Church and the upcoming Primates’ Meeting

    There’s been a little flurry of articles in the press this week about the Scottish Episcopal Church. “SANCTIONS LOOM FOR SCOTTISH EPISCOPAL CHURCH’S PRO-GAY MARRIAGE VOTE” “SCOTS ‘TO FACE CONSEQUENCES’ OVER GAY MARRIAGE” “GLOBAL ANGLICAN CHURCH LEADERS CONDEMN SCOTLAND FOR ALLOWING SAME-SEX WEDDINGS” And so on. The only awkward thing about all these articles is…

  • 75 questions for people who want to help churches to grow

    Helping churches to grow is hard work but there are some things that need to be addressed to help congregations to grow which seem to be fairly consistent across churches which are otherwise very different in style. Some time ago I published two lots of 25 questions for people who want to help churches to…