ODES of Solomon 19

[andrewlittle]

For my 1000th post, I wanted to just reiterate something I think is important.

Below is a Morning Chapel sermon I gave while at Cambridge University in late 2003. Discussion in other threads, about gender issues related to God and the use of pronouns, prompted me to revisit this, mostly because this opened up a really vitreolic and, at the same time, heart-warming conversation between me and the British traditionalists with which I was studying and from whom I was learning.

The discussions ranged from the audacity of using non-canonical readings for chapel to the wrong-headedness of perceiving God as anything but male, but ended up after several months opening up lines of communication between us that I will forever remember. The most supportive discussions came from three older male ministers who were spending their sabbaticals at the college. One of them, a life-long bachelor, teared up as he thanked me for what I said.

If this gives something in return to the community that adopted me almost a year ago, I am happy. If not - well, get over it - it's my 1000th post and I'll spend it as I see fit.

Who can imagine God? Who amongst us, or in human history, has been able to claim knowledge adequate enough to fully describe God? Many have attempted to convince the world that they have that kind of intimacy with God, but we believe only one ever has - and Jesus never tried to put the all the wonder of God into human words.

If someone could actually conceive of the image of God, how could that notion possibly be communicated in human language?

Several conversations over the last two weeks steered me to this subject this morning. The main discussions revolved around the overwhelmingly male imagery used for God. The reactions to those chats varied, but many included obvious discomfort with anything but male images. For this reason, I have chosen Ode 19 from the Odes of Solomon as the reflective reading for today.

Reading : The ODE 19:1-5

1 A cup of milk was offered to me: and I drank it in the sweetness of the delight of the Lord.
2 The Son is the cup, and He who was milked is the Father:
3 And the Holy Spirit milked Him: because His breasts were full, and it was necessary for Him that His milk should be sufficiently released;
4 And the Holy Spirit opened His bosom and mingled the milk from the two breasts of the Father; and gave the mixture to the world without their knowing:
5 And they who receive in its fullness are the ones on the right hand.


If we are disturbed by non-male imagery of God, this reading should leave us apoplectic. Was the author totally gender confused? Or was he or she indifferent to the cultural, socially acceptable limitations of gender imposed by his or her society?

The metaphors used in Ode 19 seem to attack the problem of male imagery at a very deep level, creating visual images that can comfort, or haunt, the reader. God, rather than being male or genderless, is depicted as fully both genders. It forces an image of God that is, at first, uncomfortable due to the visual peculiarities we may perceive; in human terms we might consider it freakish. Therein lies a big part of the problem. We tend to want to perceive God as images of ourselves, rather than visa versa.

On that basis, God should look like us, right? God has to be male or female. Tradition says He’s male. Some say She’s female. Aren’t both views simply idolatry?

The visual glimpses painted within this Ode were impossible for me to escape. Once planted they, and any biases I possessed about gender, had to be reconciled. If we truly look at ourselves as images of God, without anyone being capable of achieving the fullness of God, how can we impose a human definition of gender on the Creator? Within this Ode the writer manages to confound our language’s gender limitations, and bring an awareness of God that transcends our human meanings of maternal and paternal. Can’t these images only be understood at the conceptual level? Once conceived in that part of our psyche, language becomes incidental. It becomes apparent that any noun or pronoun, male or female, is woefully inadequate in describing God.

Now I’m not going to present arguments for this view. I am simply going to give some reflections on why I wrestle with “traditional” imagery.

When I returned to Christ’s embrace, I was in sore need of a savior. I was predisposed to picturing God as male, just like me, and in terms of power and authority alone, since that described my role in business. The men of the church welcomed me but, as I later realized, only because of the worldly gifts of administration and fundraising that I possessed. The women’s groups, however, actually prayed me into church before I knew any of them. They then encouraged me into lay ministry and, eventually, into the seminary. When I had no more resources of my own, the women’s bible studies raised funds for my education. Which of these groups more appropriately engendered the spirit of Christ?

On the lowest day of my life, when I faced the question of whether to live or die, Becky B., the music director of my church, spend 12 hours with me - praying and counseling. The minister didn’t have time – he was an author and had a book signing.

On one of a few mission trips to the Tolteca Indians in southern Mexico, our van broke down. All 15 of us were fed while waiting for the repairs. We were joined in the meal by the 3 women who cooked our chicken, tortillas and sauces, but we noticed they were eating beans. As it turns out, they fed us a whole month’s worth of chicken for three families in that one meal.

Scott M., who you heard in the music I played for a prelude, sang with many evangelist campaigns, including Billy Graham. Now, he wrestles his relationship with his father and with God. His father, a prominent lawyer, sexually abused him regularly, as did some of the church elders – ostensibly to drive the “femininity” out of him. Since his religious upbringing has no room for non-father imagery, he has reached the point where he has no place in which to address God.

Ginny T., the conservative daughter of an equally conservative missionary and the wife of a wonderful charismatic lay preacher, perceived she had a call to ministry. Neither her nor her husband had any concept of a female in ministry upon which to answer that call. She and Jim prayed, studied and cried together as she worked out her calling in agony. She now pastors a church in Ohio, and has special ministries for those driven out of church by pastoral abuse. Oh yes, Jim leads the choir and teaches Sunday school.

There’s a litany of other examples, but suffice it to say that I have seen the image of God in the faces and actions of women and men, and in the faces of those who I could not identify as either. I cannot conceive of any imagery of God that excludes any. Each of us has images of God that give us personal comfort and a sense of belonging. This is good. But, especially as ministers, we are called to set aside our own comfort zone and minister in ways that help all people find their own walk with God, through Christ. Much of the time, this is done in the midst of pain, joy, baggage and recovery that doesn’t necessarily line up with our own.

[mjules]

That... that was very touching. Thank you for posting it; it was everything I think believers should be - uplifting, edifying, gently correcting/redirecting/guiding. I might not be so terribly afraid of going back to church if there were more things like this being expressed.

[Vanessa White]

I know that much of the time, I don't pay close attention to how I use gender pronouns when discussing or referring to God, but it has almost always been of the male gender that I "assign" God. Good Catholic upbringing, I assume. Your words help me to see that almost as a type of arrogance, yet a teaching moment for me. To realize that I do not have to have God fit into the image that I want for God, so that I can better visualize that presence in my life.

Just one more step in my growth these days, and I thank you for that.

I am really glad that you are here with us.

[sailaway58]

Damn, you're good. And I mean really good.

[dsdrane]

Please forgive the naivete of a lay person, but I cannot help taking this idea of gender one step further...from the Father to the Son.

Jesus -- the Word made flesh -- was, we know, a Jewish boy. His human-ness was indeed male.

But what of his godliness? Did/does his godliness transcend sex and gender, as well?

For me, I have no problem seeing God as male and female...and something indescribable beyond that perhaps. The "problem" I have is with a "male" Christ.

Anyone?

And thank you, Andy!

And Happy 1,000!

[tdogg]

Thanks for your sermon, it was indeed touching and useful. Very thought provoking as well!

It's a struggle to get past all the aspects we've been taught from way back. Personally, I see God as being all things - male, female, non-gender, all-gender. Can't really imagine it, but if we are all created in God's image, wouldn't that encompass anything and everything we might be (we as a complete historical population from beginning to present and beyond)? Wouldn't that include everything, from humans, to animals to inanimate natural items? When I'm in the mountains, I can see God as being part mountain. When I'm watching the ocean, same there too. God is part wave, crashing up on the cliffs. Part sun, part birds, part salt spray, part me and part you.

Andy, thanks for your awesome 1,000th post. Keep 'em coming! You should definitely be pastoring a congregation somewhere...no thoughts of moving to CA??? I know the MCC here in Sac was searching for a pastor, not sure what the status on that is at this time tho. I don't regularly attend (but I certainly would if you were there!).

[Pablo Rafael]

1000 posts, a milestone indeed.

Yes, we adopted you here on the forums a year ago, Andy.

(Actually I think it was mainly out of pity, but we still did it. )

Awesome post! You are sounding like a Catholic here. (That's a good thing, by the way.) One main difference I see between Catholic and Protestant theology is the Catholic emphasis God working in the world.

We Catholics emphasize that WE are the face of God that people see in the world. When God's love is shown to others, it is shown through us. One of my favorite Catholic hymns is "Voice of Christ" The refrain says, "We the hands, we the eyes, we the voice of Christ. O faithful God, we entrust our treasure to your heart." And when I look at God's work being accomplished in the world I see women working harder at it than men. (So I guess God is female after all!)

And 1000 posts is still too few, keep posting, my friend.

Tu Amigo, Pablo

[iowan woman]

Andy,

Wowza. I really like your sermon.

Good choice for post number 1000.


Thank you for sharing it.