Sean Major-Campbell | Are we being hypocritical?

QUESTIONS FROM readers of Family and Religion are relevant to my recall of a conversation that I had with a mother at a local conference. A mother stood to share that she accepted her lesbian daughter, but was having difficulty with her daughter’s partner who always presents with a gender non-conforming way of dressing.

She then went on to note how uncomfortable she is when her daughter, who is a university student, comes to the community with her friend. This is right here in Jamaica. This mother who genuinely cares about her daughter then asked me what I thought about her concerns.

I recognised that her concerns were perfectly understandable. That she was concerned about her daughter’s image in a context that has difficulty with same-gender love that is publicly expressed. I also noted that she was concerned about gender non-conforming presentations in a context that also frowns upon this. We also agreed that there is the matter of what people will think and say about her. We further recognised that either of them could be subjected to violence.

As we conversed, the concerned mother made a profound declaration. After realising that her genuine concerns were validated, she recognised that her conflict also had another dimension. She blatantly announced with reference to herself, “But mi is a ipocrit. Mi aksep ar, but mi jus friad a wa piipl a go seh.” (But I am a hypocrite. I accept her, but I am afraid of what people are going to say).

We had a chat on the etymology of the word ‘hypocrite’ and its roots in the mask worn by Greek actors to depict what they wanted the audience to see. She was given a chance to see how hypocrisy is used to serve protection of self.

This mother’s story is the truth of so many in the space of church. Several LGBT+ youths are leaving the church for various reasons. Chief among them is the concern that a loving parent has the stress and burden from the questions at church. Does she have a boyfriend? When is she getting married? So, what is she doing with her life? Why does she dress so masculine? Why does she have tattoos?

Today in a church somewhere near you, there is a prayer meeting in which the prayer warriors are fasting, praying, and “beating the demons out” of a gay son or daughter! But what else can a caring mother do when her misguided church brothers and sisters have for long been a source of community support and spiritual nurture? Poor mother does not even know that one man on the prayer team and her adult son are lovers. But that is another story.

There are Caribbean folk clutching pearls about any reference to such realities in any form of sex education. Completely naïve about the abundance of material on the Internet. Unfortunately, the Internet also comes with other dimensions which might lead to unhelpful presentations and the lack of appropriately presented information.

Fears that a 15-year-old will be contaminated by any sex education that goes beyond abstinence and pregnancy prevail. This helps the adults in their lives to feel as if they are protecting the children.

While same-gender love in the Bible is not necessarily erotic love, it is rather interesting to note Theodore Jennings (2005) who in looking at Ruth and Naomi says, “This story of two women serves to depict what it means to have steadfast love, and what it means to ‘cleave’ to one another.” K. Renato Lings in Holy Censorship or Mistranslation? notes that Ruth and Naomi in social terms were united by their widowhood which placed them like orphans at the bottom of the social pyramid. The writer recognises that Ruth as an immigrant, a Moabite citizen and a widow with no close relatives would have been destitute.

One may see how getting married to wealthy Boaz would have been wise for “insurance” purposes. The story of Ruth, however, centres on her relationship with Naomi. No wonder that Lings sees that in committing herself to another woman, the Hebrew text is emphatic. “The Hebrew text expresses this with the phrase dovqah bah, ‘she clung to her.’” It is enlightening to see the value of engaging the source text of the Hebrew. “The root verb is davaq which means ‘cleave to’ ‘cling to’ or ‘stick to’. There are specific reasons for highlighting davaq. It resonates powerfully with the verse from the creation story in Genesis which explains that a man shall leave his father and mother and ‘cleave’ to his wife (Gen 2:24). In this manner, the narrator utilises the solemn verb davaq to emphasise that Ruth’s decision to cling to Naomi is for life.”

Ruth followed the guidance of Naomi in attempting to secure a relationship with Boaz. She succeeded and they were married. After the birth of a son, Obed (who would become grandfather of King David), it is the women’s relationship that is celebrated. Little wonder then that in Ruth 4:14-15 we see, “The women said to Naomi: “Praise be to the Lord, who this day has not left you without a guardian-redeemer. May he become famous throughout Israel! He will renew your life and sustain you in your old age. For your daughter-in-law, who loves you and who is better to you than seven sons, has given him birth.”

What do you think about K. Renato Lings’ contemporary reflection here? He says of Boaz, “Strictly speaking, and according to the underlying narrative logic, he plays the role of financial patron and sperm donor.” Consider this in the Bible’s account in Ruth 4:17, “The women living there said, ‘Naomi has a son!’ ” (Not Ruth!) And they named him Obed. He was the father of Jesse, the father of David.” Some things to ponder in your next Bible study.

Fr Sean Major-Campbell is an Anglican priest and advocate for human dignity and human rights. seanmajorcampbell@yahoo.com