• 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

10 responses to “Liturgical Notes – as given to the servers this morning”

  1. Moyra Avatar
    Moyra

    So what really happened?
    you can’t leave me in suspense like that…. Did any of it go according to plan?

  2.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    What really happened

    Well, Fr Bishop did not really turn up with enough time to spare to be accorded the offer to celebrate. He did make it into the pulpit in time for the sermon. Just.

    So, we had a Presiding Minister and Sub-deacon. Not quite a High Mass, more Gas Mark 5.

    Excellent control of the thurible.

    No amount of bowing to the offertory procession or censing them would make them go away. Perhaps someone was supposed to do something else to them, but I sure don’t know what they were waiting for. Perhaps someone will tell me in the week.

    Offertory elements arrived nearer verse 4 of the hymn than verse 1.

    Presiding Muggins ended up flitting out with the vessels to St Anne’s chapel.

    And a good time was had by all. 

     

     

  3. Pamela Avatar
    Pamela

    I wish I’d been able to get out my bed in time for yesterdays service – I love it when the incense is used.

  4. Vicky Avatar
    Vicky

    chaos what chaos?
    apart from the late Bish and the sneaky switching on of his mike, I was blissfully unaware of the chaos at the altar……isn’t it always like that?  Just think yourselves lucky you don’t have to accurately time the ringing of bells and the ‘donging’ of dongs which, if inappropriately done, can throw transubstantiation into reversal…..

  5. Brannon Hancock Avatar
    Brannon Hancock

    didn’t notice
    I didn’t notice a thing. (Well, except the tardy homilist.) ‘course, sitting out w/ the congregation, my eye misses a lot of that I’d probably notice were I with the choir in our normal place. For instance, with the Bishop at the “big pulpit,” I couldn’t see him at all from where I was sitting. In fact, it took me about 25 seconds to figure out where the strange disembodied voice was coming from…

  6.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    Servers and Sight Lines

    Oh, there was no chaos at the altar – the servers served impeccably. It is the mark of good serving that no-one should know that things were not quite going to plan.

    As for seeing the Bishop – one of the things I’ve been giving a lot of thought to is the sightlines in the Cathedral which are pretty terrible. There is no perfect place to preach from or to celebrate at which will enable everyone in the pews to see. At one time in the life of the church people were charged pew rents – higher rent for seats you could see from.

  7. Elizabeth Anderson Avatar
    Elizabeth Anderson

    sight lines
    True enough re sightlines. As someone who regularly sits in south side pews – I’ve figured out exactly where to sit in the pew so that the offending pillar is between altar and eagle – so I could see preacher and celebrant. Which is extremely selfish becuase it means whoever else is in the pew (usually James) can’t see.

    I thought the preaching from the centre, in front of the altar – most visible – and not so far away from congregation as ‘voice from the sky’pulpit – is best option so far.

    As for incense – not a wiff reached said south aisle. But I suppose for it to permeate to back of church would involve overwhelming those front and centre.

  8.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    Sight Lines from the North Aisle
    As a someone who regularly sits in the North Aisle, I can see most of what goes on except when the pulpit is being used. On those occaisions, moving tot he other end of the pew gives me a view of the pulpit around the north side of the organ console.

  9. Elizabeth Anderson Avatar
    Elizabeth Anderson

    Hmmmm
    I feel like great amusement could be had by all with coloured yarn connecting various bits of the Cathedral. Green for the pulpit, red for the altar, blue for the lectern – stretching around the pillars, organ console . . .

  10. Mysterious stranger Avatar
    Mysterious stranger

    Mystery to me
    As someone who has just about mastered morning prayers the above just remains a complete mystery to me.I like the idea of the yarn though.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • What the Scottish Episcopal Church is Voting On

    As I write this, it is just over 24 hours until a debate and a vote in the Scottish Episcopal Church’s General Synod that lots of people are going to be more interested in than most other General Synod happenings. It is the debate and the motions relating to a change to the Canons (ie…

  • The Tim Farron Question and the Archbishop of Canterbury

    Let us return once again to the Tim Farron Question. Oh, I know, I really do know that you’d much prefer it if we could just move on. However, the Tim Farron Question is actually rather important. And trust me anyway, this isn’t [mostly] a post about Tim Farron, who might be expected to have…

  • 10 Thoughts on the Blessing of Asparagus

    It seems that Worcester Cathedral recently had a service for the blessing of asparagus. As this is a matter that might be seen to have consequences for the wider Anglican Communion, I thought I’d offer a few thoughts. There can be no justification for blessing asparagus as asparagus is never mentioned positively in the bible.…

  • What institutional homophobia looks like

    Here’s a quick example to illustrate what institutional homophobia looks like. Yesterday the report of the Theological Forum of the Church of Scotland to the General Assembly was published and it deals with a number of issues of interest to LGBT people. (It is well worth a read). Amongst the “deliverances” ie proposals to go…