• 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

14 responses to “Breastfeeding in church?”

  1. Eamonn Avatar

    I’m OK with breast-feeding. But is that a tambourine I see in the background?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Oh, she likes her tambourines and guitars does Herself.

      1. PamB Avatar
        PamB

        It’s a lute. Pronounced lyoot by all the best choirs.

        1. Kelvin Avatar

          It is a lutenist angel playing Shine, Jesus Shine.

          1. Bob Chapman Avatar

            That might be the only time “Shine, Jesus Shine” would be appropriate to sing.

  2. Christine McIntosh Avatar

    I fear the tambourine might disturb the feeding child. Trust me. I know about this.

  3. Kennedy Avatar
    Kennedy

    Is the picture of Madonna and Child in the chapel at the Cathedral of the Isles in Millport not showing Mary breastfeeding, not too ostentatiously?

  4. Bob Chapman Avatar

    Enough for Him, whom cherubim, worship night and day,
    Breastful of milk, and a mangerful of hay;
    Enough for Him, whom angels fall before,
    The ox and ass and camel which adore.

    http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/238450

  5. Gay Corran Avatar

    Christine is right: a rattling tambourine would distract a nursing child, particularly one as old as this appears to be! Lute music would be soothing though. Mary’s anatomy is distinctly odd. She seems to have no shoulders, and her breast is in a very peculiar place on her chest. However, we get the point: how could something ordained by God, or “nature” be offensive to anyone? When babies need feeding, they won’t wait; should mothers not go to church or to restaurants for up to two years after a birth? If page 3 type breasts loom from every newsagent’s shelves, what could be so disturbing about breasts being used for their other function?

    1. Christine McIntosh Avatar

      Er … I think you’ll find, Gay, that breastfeeding is the primary function of a woman’s breasts; any other is a creation of male fantasies.

      1. Gay Corran Avatar

        Interesting point, Christine. Although I said “other” not “secondary”. You know that tee shirt for pregnant women that goes “it began with a kiss”? When most of us got pregnant one of the two functions came into it, I’ll bet, male fantasies or otherwise! Breasts have two functions; what is extraordinary is that one is designated as so disgusting that it has to be performed in private, in a corner, or hidden under a napkin – but it’s the wrong one… Bring on the lutes and adoring angels!

  6. Janet Koch Avatar
    Janet Koch

    Hey, Jesus was breast-fed.

  7. Eamonn Avatar

    ‘Is the picture of Madonna and Child in the chapel at the Cathedral of the Isles in Millport not showing Mary breastfeeding?’ Yes, I think it does, Kennedy. It’s also the only Madonna and Child painting I like, as it shows Mary, realistically, as a bedraggled, just-delivered 16-year-old single mother. I wish it were better known.

  8. Jennifer White Avatar
    Jennifer White

    There is nothing better than these comments and this beautiful meme today. 🙂
    -a mom who nursed 2 children for 4 years total

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…