Women’s Lib Comes to a Village in Samaria

A big shout out to lectionary “Year A” in the three-year cycle which gave us just yesterday the intrepid and resilient (though sadly nameless) “woman at the well” in John’s account of the Gospel (4:5-42). She herself was a fount of living water as we gathered for worship in this Lenten season, in these days when white patriarchy is running amok across the globe and an oily rain is falling on the people of Tehran—an unprecedented environmental catastrophe.

“Woman at the Well,” Hyatt Moore

Rather than oil in the streets, and as if like Moses, we struck the rock in the wilderness in worship and out from ancient biblical texts streamed the kind of clear watery refreshment we hardly knew we needed so terribly much. How fortuitous and perhaps even divinely inspired that the lectionary landed on these biblical texts in Women’s History Month—a month that really should feature actual women (with names, damnit!) and not merely stereotypes.

It’s dismayingly difficult to keep women real given the long, the achingly long literary, religious, and political history of turning the stories of women into archetypes, symbols, and violent cliches. As we now know in some fresh and horrifying ways from Jeffrey Epstein’s island of misfit billionaires, women (and girls) are not merely tropes but objects to be traded, trafficked, bartered, enslaved, raped, tortured, and killed.

A Sunday lectionary hardly seems up to the task of unraveling and dismantling such an infernal misogyny, unless we pay attention, and unless we take ancient stories as contemporary beacons, and unless we insist that Scripture really can inspire and equip us—with the Holy Spirit’s charisms—to live as revolutionaries, just like Jesus.

So let’s be sure to notice when reading the story about that fierce woman at the well—and then notice again, and then still once more (because deeply ingrained patriarchal habits are insidiously hard to break)—that there’s absolutely nothing in this story about repentance and forgiveness; but there’s quite a lot in this Johannine story about cycles of patriarchal domination.

Let’s take a step back from that observation (which sounds like heresy in my Evangelically-shaped ears) and consider carefully the calcified cliches behind which women so often disappear. Just a couple of weeks ago, for example, on the first Sunday in Lent, the lectionary assigned the classic story from Genesis about the temptation of Adam and Eve by the serpent.

Ah! But that’s not how most of us remember that story. Most of us have heard it referred to as the “temptation of Eve,” who then seduces Adam to make the same mistake she did.

That difference makes a significant difference: imagining only Eve present for the serpent’s temptation makes Eve a symbol of the original seductress who leads to the fall of man (both in the generic and particular sense)—and who does so again and again, from generation to generation, wearyingly repeated as stale caricature on a manly stage.

John’s story at a well in the desert has often been read in much the same way as that iconic story from Genesis.  In fact, the literary figure of “Woman as Wicked Seductress” is so common—infusing the air we breathe and the water we drink—most of us don’t even have to know about it to read John’s story with that motif as our interpretive lens.

I grew up hearing this story as an encounter between Jesus and a sexually promiscuous woman—a woman who had led astray no fewer than six men—and how wonderful it is that God’s forgiveness can extend even to someone like her; but none of that is even hinted at in John’s telling.

The first-century context of the story offers alternative ways of reading that are much more plausible. Given the ancient mortality rate, this woman could have been widowed multiple times; cultural customs would have forced her to marry the brothers of her deceased husbands, one after another.

It’s even more likely that she was struggling because of religious marriage regulations in which only men could initiate divorce, and for any reason at all; the social and economic vulnerability of unmarried women might have forced this woman to remarry after multiple divorces just to survive—and perhaps that’s why she resorted to living with a man who was not her husband, a way just to put food on the table.

To repeat once more: Jesus says nothing at all to this woman about forgiveness, not even repentance; what startles and astonishes this woman is that Jesus apparently knew—he knew and he named—what she had been enduring and living through.

Reading this story apart from the usual patriarchal assumptions about sexual morality can itself be quite liberating, and a way to notice a remarkable first-century embrace of a woman as student and disciple, as compelling witness and evangelist, and some would say one of the earliest apostles! A whole village follows Jesus because of her ministry!

But there’s more: John goes still further in his portrayal of Jesus as a divine social revolutionary with a story that isn’t about just any (anonymous) woman; this woman is from a village in Samaria, a region denigrated and despised by the religious elite in Judea. (It takes hardly any imagination at all to bring to mind today’s “Judeans” and “Samaritans”.)

Recall the biblical story (1 Kings 16—2 Kings 9) about Ahab, a corrupt ruler of the northern Kingdom of Israel, who made a political alliance by marrying a Phoenician woman by the name of Jezebel. Together, they set up their own capital city away from Jerusalem and in Samaria, where they established a temple for idolatrous worship.

Even when those details from the biblical story are unfamiliar, very few would fail to recognize the name “Jezebel”—yet another emblematic figure of the dangerous seductions of women in the affairs of men.

John the Evangelist may have been enamored with a misty-eyed neo-platonic mysticism (and I confess to finding wonderful insights when I read him that way), but right now, today, it matters even more to see in this one Johannine woman the embodiment of both the vexations of gender and the hostile rivalries of ethnicity.

I mean, what if John is writing this story not as a way to illustrate God’s gracious forgiveness of a “sexual sinner” (dare I repeat this? that is not in the story at all). What if he is instead writing a story of God’s own determination to liberate women from their patriarchal classifications, and to heal the wounds of ethnic rivalry and hatred? Sure, preach forgiveness, but not with this story; this one is about freedom.

Oh, how much richer this story becomes when it’s not merely and crudely about how many sexual partners a first-century woman may have had (honestly, who cares?) but rather how often women become trapped in cycles of male domination and control, illustrated by this one woman—an illustration embodied by a woman of undesirable ethnic heritage.

“Woman at the Well,” Chris Cook

John may be rooted in thick and even convoluted theological speculation, but he is also (I am convinced) committed to taking otherwise simple and ordinary encounters and rendering them with a brilliant divine presence and transformative insight.

Consider the lectionary’s rich texts last week, for the first Sunday in Lent: not only the story of Adam and Eve’s temptation but also John’s story about Nicodemus, a member of the judicial counsel of the Judeans, coming to visit Jesus at night. The symbol of darkness can remind us of seeds planted in the soil of Earth, just as the body of Jesus himself is eventually planted in a dark tomb, from which will sprout an Easter life. 

Yesterday, by contrast, John’s Jesus encounters the Samaritan woman drawing water at high noon, in broad daylight. Something important is being brought into view, being revealed and illuminated for us to see.

As I read this familiar story once again this year, I kept returning to the frame John seems keen to create for it: authentic worship. If “proper worship” divided Judeans and Samaritans, then John insists in the bright light of day to show us living water flowing like a crystal stream of healing between the Judean Jesus and the Samaritan woman—water that not only restores life to a parched land but also provides a balm for the ethnic violence that has scarred the land.

That violence is rooted in the ethnic and patriarchal hostilities that have marred human history for millennia. True and life-giving worship, in other words, will always lead us into relationships of healing and reconciliation for the sake of Beloved Community.

The day is coming, Jesus says, when the true worshippers of God are not tied to any one location or belong to only one chosen race or exhibit a favored gender but shall instead all worship together in spirit and in truth—both outwardly in our bodies and inwardly in our souls, as the lectionary collect for the day declared.

As these lectionary texts lead toward the Eucharistic Table, it’s worth remembering that John is the only Gospel writer to include a rather grisly detail in the story of the crucifixion: both water and blood flowed from the pierced side of the crucified Jesus (19:34).

Now, it is certainly possible to read that moment as a forensic examiner: the Roman centurion’s spear likely pierced through the pericardial membrane around the heart of Jesus, releasing its watery fluid along with the blood.

Sure, but I don’t think John cares one little bit about that. I think John cares that human beings are physically born from their mothers in a mix of both blood and water, and here it flows from the Jesus who invites us all to be “born again.” The fourteenth-century mystic Julian of Norwich imagined exactly this: the wound in the side of Jesus as the womb from which we are reborn into New Life—Jesus, she said, is our blessed mother.

Even if John only gestured toward the socially transformative power of authentic worship, it’s high time we take that conviction with us to the Eucharist Table. There we remember the death of Jesus and proclaim the hope of Easter—the intertwining of memory and hope creates true and genuine community, as Josiah Royce once noted, and leads to the formation of Beloved Community, as Martin Luther King, Jr., later preached, and which John the evangelist insists leads to rebirth.

“Desert Water Bearer,” Annie Horkan

Rebirth as mere “blank slate”? No, but being born again into a world where the life of a woman at a well in the wilderness can reassure us that God’s living water shall not fail to heal us and free us from the racially gendered systems of domination that wound us all.

Called to Life, Tempted by Shame

Mythologies often tell the truth better than facts—at least about the stuff that matters most: who we are, how to live and love, why we exist.

The Bible is brimming with truer-than-fact stories, and many of us heard a classic one from the first book of the Bible yesterday, on the first Sunday in Lent, and it even featured the fabled forbidden fruit.

As I pondered why it should matter to tell stories like these when the world swirls with chaos and pain, I stumbled upon a wonderful retrospective essay on Toni Morrison and her socially transformative work—perfect for Black History Month!

Most people probably don’t think of Morrison as a Black activist; she was a novelist. What does storytelling have to do with changing the world?

Ah! That’s exactly the connection to notice: the best stories are always world-changing, even if the “world” is one’s own interior landscape.

The essayist noted, for example, that Morrison’s novel Beloved is deliberately “fragmented,” and that she invented a kind of narrative language to evoke the unspeakable horrors of slavery and its brutalities, but also the resilience, the courage, the beauty of those who had been enslaved. For Morrison, stories matter because, at least in part, they can contain what our minds cannot confront.

Stories, fables, and mythologies often tell the truest things about us, even when we don’t want to know them. We tell stories to navigate the world, to pass along vital information, and to create places of meaning and purpose for ourselves in the unfolding evolution of the Universe. We also tell stories when we just can’t bear reality any other way.

Among the most important (and nearly entirely caricatured) sets of such mission-critical stories sits nestled in the first three chapters of Genesis, brilliantly stitched together from a variety of ancient mythologies by an ancient storyteller who is wrestling with what it means to be human. As we heard in church yesterday (if we could manage not to hear what isn’t in that story and turn down the volume on all the messages most of us heard from childhood and 1970s television ), this biblical storyteller struggles with the human condition because of a key conviction: we are not yet embracing the kind of life for which God made us (Genesis 2:15-17; 3:1-7).

In the same way that Toni Morrison understood the power of stories to contain what our minds cannot confront, this biblical storyteller can help us face the agonizing aspects of human life and also the staggering beauty of living as a creature of the living God. The struggle and the beauty; the agony and the glory—not only stories, but visual art carries into those spaces where are linear modes of cognitive sorting fear to tread, as artist Edwin Lester reminds me so vividly.

“The Beginning,” Edwin Lester

That’s what makes these first three chapters of the Bible so foundational: not as a pseudo-scientific account of human origins (Darwin is not an enemy of faith!), but rather as a story about the human condition that can help us travel along the good road toward flourishing.

We might also note that churches committed to the three-year lectionary cycle are currently living in Year A, which just happens to be the foundational year for the sake of Christian formation, and we certainly had plenty of material to sort through yesterday for the beginning of Lent! The story from Genesis, and also St. Paul’s interpretation of that story in his letter to the Romans (5:12-19), and still more: Matthew’s version of the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness (4:1-11).

Each of these texts separately and especially taken together reflect the ongoing and often deeply vexing struggle with it means to be human: in relation to each other, with the wider world of God’s creation, and in God. This struggle maps the entire Lenten journey—toward the Cross and into the Empty Tomb—and for many of us they are vexing texts, irritating, familiar enough to breed contempt, and almost always weaponized (as often happens with the best stories).

All of that vexation was certainly true for me, for many years, and then, as if flooded by divine illumination—probably because of a providential confluence of arguing with Christian fundamentalists about marriage equality and seeing a gay Jewish therapist about my own internalized homophobia—I suddenly read the Bible through an entirely different and luminous lens.

The following is the fresh path I’m still traveling through these texts, briefly charted (and if you want to read more about this, it’s at the heart of my book on thinking theological about sexual intimacy):

The first (and I would say most important and vital) thing to notice comes from the temptation in that ancient and iconic garden in Genesis. Quite honestly, my entire professional life, as well as my personal life, changed dramatically when I saw clearly what resided at the root of that temptation: shame.

Yes, it is also true that this story is about disobedience and guilt and the need for forgiveness; but those aspects are secondary, because they emerge first and foremost from the deadly dynamics of bodily shame—and they are indeed devilishly deadly. (I cannot recommend highly enough the work of Brene Brown on this; among here many videos and publications, you can start with this TED Talk on shame.)

“Adam and Eve,” Omenihu Amachi

I am thoroughly convinced that the vast preponderance of the world’s distress is rooted in unacknowledged and unaddressed shame. Notice carefully the character of the temptation itself. The wise serpent says to the first humans: “if you eat this fruit, you will be like God.”

Here’s the essence of that crafty invitation: to suppose that the way God made us isn’t good enough; being merely human is not enough—we have to be like gods.

That’s shame talking, not guilt, and the difference matters: Guilt attaches to something I’ve done; shame attaches to my sense of self. This ancient storyteller then shows us the deadly effects of shame: it separates us from each other, it separates us from the wider world of God’s creation, and it urges us to turn away from God.

Not just coincidentally, what follows immediately after this moment in the next chapter of Genesis is the story of fratricide, when Cain kills his brother Abel; shame often gets projected outward into violence—it’s in the daily news every single day.

The second thing to notice is how Matthew’s Jesus resists the deadly solutions to the problem of shame—even though they are very tempting.

Every year on the first Sunday in Lent, most Christians hear the story about Jesus being tempted in the wilderness. This year, I read that story as for the first time. Thanks to the lectionary pairings (like fine wines with a delicious meal of Mediterranean food?), it suddenly occurred to me that each of the temptations Jesus faced is just another version of what the serpent offered Adam and Eve in the garden: a way to reject human nature.

“Temptation of Christ,” Chris Cook

Oh, the trickster serpent says to Jesus, you’re hungry? A mere human couldn’t solve that problem; but if you really are the Son of God, why don’t you turn these stones into bread?

Oh, you’re afraid of heights? Mere humans usually are. But if you really are God’s chosen, jump off this high tower; God will surely save you.

Oh, you’re a bit short of money? That’s a classic source of human anxiety, poor thing. So just worship me, and I’ll give you all the riches of the world.

Jesus says No to each of these ways of rejecting his God-given humanity—he may be hungry, afraid, and poor, but his humanity is intact for the good road toward divine flourishing, toward the very purpose God intends, which is nothing less than abundant life, for all.

The story from Genesis presents that abundance, I would say, as a life made for communion—for deep intimacy with each other, an interlaced community with the wider world of God’s creation, and union with God.

Shame inevitably corrodes that purpose from the inside out, erupting into hateful speech, fragmenting families and communities, and maintaining deadly divisions among us with violence.

Among the many reasons Christian communities keep the Eucharist as the heart of their life of common prayer, surely this must be paramount: It is the Table of Communion: a visible and tangible reminder of the kind of life for which God makes us and toward which God wants to lead us.

Yes, gathered at that Table offers the vital assurance that we are forgiven; and perhaps today what we need even more urgently is that Table’s balm of love to heal our shame.

“Adam and Eve,” Louis Joseph

Standing at the Crossroads of Healing

Today, Ash Wednesday, Christians begin the annual Lenten journey toward the Cross. While always important to note, this year it seems especially vital and indispensable to say as clearly as possible that this journey does not glorify pain and suffering, nor does it imagine violence as saving.

“Blessing the Dust,” Jan Richardson

To say the same thing but differently: crucifixion was a first-century tool of state-sponsored terror—it is quintessentially that from which we must be saved. The image of Jesus on that cross is the image of God in solidarity with us, all of us, on a path toward new life.

I stumbled upon yet one more way to say the same thing in a compelling blog post by Jon Paul Sydnor: crucifixion was a crime, and we must stop seeing this act of performative cruelty as salvific. For Sydnor, “The crucifixion is the wound; the resurrection is the balm.”

Those insights have a long way still to go before they sink fully into my bones and muscles. I grew up in an Evangelical Christian tradition that told me (in both overt and subtle ways) that I’m tainted, depraved, and mostly if not wholly bad—being a burgeoning gay boy didn’t help. The cross of Christ was our only hope at appeasing the wrath of the God who made us. (Don’t try to make sense of that sentence; it doesn’t make any sense at all.)

The struggle to embrace the “way of the cross” as none other than the “way of life and peace” (as the Book of Common Prayer would have us do in the Collect for Monday in Holy Week) is not particularly helped by the Sunday lectionary, which will give us a set of texts this week that can feel like a relapse into a religious addiction: the putative “fall” of Adam and Eve in Eden (Genesis 3:1-7) and St. Paul’s apparent framing of that story as the origins of “original sin” (Romans 5:12-19).

For these reasons and more, I’m so grateful for the “Crossroads of Healing” initiative here at All Saints’ Parish in Saugatuck, our shared effort to host gatherings and events at the intersection of the arts and spirituality. This initiative emerged from our commitment to name and address the wounds of race, gender, class, and sexuality in an ecological frame, and especially for the sake of healing toward thriving.

I’m particularly grateful for this initiative as we begin Lent and reflect on the multi-layered imagery of the Cross. Or, as we might note, Christian communities have especially appreciated the image of a cross at intersectional moments. Rather than just one meaning, the cross of Christ carries many modes of interpretation, including the reassuring hope of divine healing for the wounds of separation, isolation, and the violence of oppression.

This initiative has heightened my own awareness of how Christian faith and culture create various intersections as race and gender (especially in this patriarchal society of white supremacy, which describes the United States from its very founding) intertwine with the Cross, and all for the sake of interlaced liturgical rites and spiritual practices.

But really, what does all of that mean for the first Sunday in Lent and those trigger texts from the lectionary?

We spend nearly as much time on visual art in my parish as we do with Scripture and the Prayer Book. All three have been woven together in ways that prove remarkably insightful and life-giving. Preparing for this year’s Lenten journey, for example, I spent some time with the work of Nigerian artist Olamilekan Abatan; his mixed media piece “Adam and Eve” will certainly accompany me this year on the forty-day journey through Lent.

“Adam and Eve,” Olamilekan Abatan

The complexity of Abatan’s painting echoes and magnifies the complexity of the story itself—for some, this painting could introduce complexity into a biblical story that is usually treated in rather simple (and therefore misleading) ways. The first and most obvious thing to notice, and in rather stark contrast to many visual depictions of Adam and Eve in Western art, these figures are Black, and clothed in ways that might suggest they are African. This makes contextual sense given that Abatan is himself Nigerian, but it also makes scientific sense given that our human species originated on the continent of Africa.

There are other layers to notice here. Adam and Eve are poised on the brink of eating the forbidden fruit. Look closely and you will see something unusual in Eve’s lap—a laptop computer made by Apple. It’s a wonderful double entendre evoking the longstanding cultural assumption that the “forbidden fruit” was an apple even though the kind of fruit is not mentioned in the biblical story.

Still more: might Abatan be inviting us to wonder whether modern technology is a kind of “forbidden fruit”? The biblical storyteller refers to that fruit as coming from the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil”; in that sense, do today’s technology devices give us too much access to knowledge? Or perhaps deceitful knowledge is the problem. Or maybe the technology itself—just like the fruit in the original story—is the problem because it creates a distraction from relationship as it pulls apart the intimate couple in this story. This echoes an important way to frame that third chapter in Genesis—as a rupture in intimacy, the breaking of relationship, and the dissolving of trust.

More than only these insights into that ancient story, the artist himself and his approach to the work provide intersectional touchstones—crossroads of healing, as it were—for just such a time as this. Abatan was born in Lagos, Nigeria, in 1997 and has emerged as a leading figure in what some have called the “hyperrealist” scene in contemporary African art; he blends Western sensibilities with elements of African visual culture, and he also mixes media (wax fabrics, charcoal and pencil, and acrylic paints, for example).

“Black Lives Matter,” Olamilekan Abatan

In addition, Abatan frequently places African figures in classical European poses, using the painting techniques of historical masters like Caravaggio, which tend to evoke Western art but with the “African human” moved to the center of the frame rather than the margins or unseen entirely. He sometimes replicates the style of a religious icon, as in the piece he calls “Black Lives Matter.” The pose, the gesture, and the clothes, not to mention the halo, all suggest an icon of Christ; the use of an African figure as well as the title of the piece can make that assessment a bit disorienting, but the Latin words on the open book held by this African man would seem to confirm the guess: “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” One’s own cultural context and history make all the difference in how one reads this image—and what it evokes. Is a Black/African Jesus, for example, the “way to life” in a society trapped in the dynamics of white Christian nationalism?

Even this brief synopsis of Abatan’s life and work makes me wonder about my own reading of history, and the kind of engagement with Scripture I tend to favor, and the way I retrieve theological traditions for pastoral and priestly work: what have I consigned to the margins that might rightly belong at the center? Whom have I overlooked entirely in the texts or visual images of my theological education? More pointedly, how much of my Christian faith relies on having omitted key figures or moments or places (whether intentionally or accidentally)?

Questions like these are not about finding fault or assigning blame for anything; to the contrary, they seem more like assembling the pieces of a treasure map—what kind of riches have we never known in our own traditions because of the restricted views we have lived with for so long?

“The Beauty of the Cross,” Daniel Bonnell

That question alone always makes me glad to observe Black History Month (and all the entanglements and intersectional complexities that go with it); every year I learn something new to intertwine with my own perspectives, not only about Black history but also about my own story; and I appreciate something in fresh ways not only about other traditions, but also how communities of faith can interlace these multiple traditions for a truly rich and “mixed media” witness to a better world—surely these are the “crossroads of healing” toward which we might actually be glad to journey in this Lenten season.