There
is a wealth of references to women in Scripture. The ones typically cited include Paul’s letter to Corinth
and the pseudo-epigraphical Paul.
These, however, afford an incredibly narrow interpretation of what the
Bible has to say about women. From
the Hebrew Scriptures, we see their insight, as Hagar’s in calling God El-roi; their
intelligence, as Tamar outsmarts Judah; their determination, as Hannah’s prayer and correction of the priest’s
accusation of drunkenness; their bravery, as Deborah’s leadership as a judge of
Israel; this sets the stage for the Greek Bible, in which we see women being
supporters, followers and conversation partners with Jesus and carrying on ministry
with Paul. They are both bearers and
proclaimers of the promise in Luke’s Gospel. My imagination is captivated by all of these, but moreso by
the Syrophonecian woman. Many
women spoke with Jesus, but she had the courage to enter into debate with him:
24From there he set out and went away to the region of
Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there. Yet he
could not escape notice, 25but a woman whose little daughter had an
unclean spirit immediately heard about him, and she came and bowed down at his
feet. 26Now the woman was a Gentile, of Syrophoenician origin. She
begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter. 27He said to her,
“Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children’s food
and throw it to the dogs.” 28But she answered him, “Sir, even the
dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.” 29Then he said to
her, “For saying that, you may go—the demon has left your daughter.” 30So
she went home, found the child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.
Per the etiquette of discourse in Greco-Roman culture, this woman
“won” the debate, gaining neither glory nor honor nor elevated status in
society, but rather healing for her daughter. Mark portrays this woman had the courage to draw God
Incarnate outside of God’s own box.
Rather than accepting the word “dog,” as definitive, she redefined the
terms of the engagement, making the “dog” the recipient of divine favor.
“Dog,”
she replied, “is not my name.”
The
Syrophonecian woman unbinds the Gospel in a way that extends it beyond the
reach of the expected, beyond the reach of what can be anticipated, and
transcends inclusion and exclusion to point toward something greater than
itself. From the margin, as a
woman and a foreigner, she sees the world a little differently, in which a
little girl has value and voice, and the value and voice of her little girl
shapes her own. Voice shaping
voice, we find a theological model for women in ministry. This voice is deeply relational, yet
intelligent; it does not yield to convention nor does it undo convention simply
for the sake of undoing. The
Syrophonecian woman, I think, is herself, fully and unabashedly. “It is not
fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs,” is only the first
word. This word, “dog,” is – at
first glance – accepted. If it is
accepted, then it is certainly redefined.
I
have witnessed women – myself included – hearing the first word offered and
leaving, crestfallen and disappointed to wander the desert of despair. Whether it is an offhand comment
regarding the different emotional makeup of men and women and how it functions
in church, physical appearance, or the power (or lack thereof) one is presumed
to have, the first word is often accepted as the final word. We run from the names we are called and
descriptions offered for so long that we begin to run from our own name. I think what the Gospel does is
redefine the terms of engagement.
It takes the first name offered, perhaps originally as an insult or
fault, and transcends it, defining it as the very place of God’s blessing.
Hagar’s
word came upon having been cast out; Tamar’s word came upon the command for her
to be burned; Hannah’s in the face of infertility; Deborah’s in the face of
war; the list continues. Women are
bearers of the promise and the first preachers of the resurrection. In the case of the Syrophonecian woman,
through a strange twist of terms, a woman called “Dog,” was renamed “Daughter
of God.”
No comments:
Post a Comment