The
Bread of Presence in Times of Crisis
reflections
on Ruth and Naomi
based
on the book of Ruth, chapter 1
by
Troy Cady
For the past two weeks I have
felt like the world has been spinning out of control. For starters, I felt helplessly
indignant as our President refused to cooperate with a Congressional
impeachment inquiry.[1] Meanwhile, I learned that
this fall the Supreme Court will hear a case in which it’s expected they will
rule to expand gun ownership rights,[2] though U.S. citizens
already own 227,000,000 guns (far outstretching any other country in the world).[3] And this is from the same legal system
that goes easy on a white person for killing a black man in his own home but would
throw the book at the perpetrator if those roles had been reversed.[4]
But, wait: there’s more. Just
last week it was reported that in the past year one million people were
apprehended on the southwest border of the United States,[5] clamoring for entrance.[6]
Many of those are children who have been separated from their parents.[7] And, as if that is not
enough, the situation in Syria worsened as Turkey cleared out thousands of vulnerable
people. There were already at least 25.9 million refugees around the world[8] and now there will be even
more.
 |
| Ruth, Naomi and Orpah by Markham Kyra |
In times like these, it is
easy to feel hopeless. It’s as if the whole world is caving in and you’re
trapped, gasping for air, craning to catch even a sliver of light. And that is
the situation thrust upon us in the text from Ruth 1 where, in the opening
lines, we read about a famine and a family with two sons leaving their home to live
in Moab where there is food. By the end of verse 3, the husband and father
dies so, the text says, Naomi is “left with her two sons.”[9]
But all is not lost:
Naomi’s sons get married and this is cause for celebration--but don’t get your
hopes up, yet: her sons also die.
So, Naomi is left without
her husband and two sons in a foreign country. She’s old and can barely take
care of herself, let alone these two women who are not blood relatives. At that point,
there is at least a little hope: she hears that the famine has passed back home,
so she decides to return. Because she couldn’t possibly ask these two women to
leave Moab, she tells them not to worry about her but to return to their own
families who will be able to take care of them better. So, after much weeping,
Orpah returns to her family—but Ruth decides to stick with Naomi. And Ruth’s
words at this point sound like sublime poetry:
“Where you go, I will go;
where you lodge, I will
lodge;
your people shall be my
people,
and your God my God.”
In the midst of
unimaginable suffering, we finally have a sense in this story that something
good is going to happen. To be sure, they have no idea how it’s all going to
turn out, but they do know this: they will have each other and they will have
Naomi’s God.
Speaking of God, the book
of Ruth is striking because God is hardly mentioned and when God is spoken of
by Naomi at the end of chapter 1, it sounds like she’s itching for a fight. In
contrast to Ruth’s uplifting poem, Naomi utters a lament of tired and bitter
resignation, if not protest. When the women of Bethlehem welcome her back, she
replies:
“Call me no longer
‘Sweet’,
call me ‘Bitter’,[10]
for the Almighty has
dealt bitterly with me.
I went away full,
but the Lord brought me
back empty…”
I’ll be honest: reading
that makes me want to say, “Umm, Ruth: you might not want to stand that close
to Naomi right now because I’m afraid lightning’s about to strike.”
Ruth as more than a romance novel
I love the story of Ruth because it’s honest and we
can relate to it. It reflects how we experience life—all of it: the good, the
bad and the ugly all mixed in together. That’s why I think it’s a pity this
story has been treated essentially as a romance novel too often. As I think
back to college, I recall one of my professors who interpreted Ruth this way. In
his lecture, he felt compelled to point out that, as Boaz and Ruth were still
“dating”, Naomi told Ruth to bathe, change her clothes and put on some perfume
so she would smell nice and pretty for Boaz who would surely come to her rescue
if he found her attractive enough.[11]
While it may be true that
Ruth is a love story, when we look at it closely it doesn’t reinforce the
literary trope of most romances where some dude with ripped abs and a chiseled
chin saves a petite damsel in distress. For starters, the story recounts how
God comes to the rescue through the primary agent of Ruth—who is, of course, a
woman who comes to the rescue of another woman.
The title of the book
alone focuses our attention on Ruth’s salvific role, but, in case we
would miss it, the author of Ruth connects her story with the epoch that
precedes it: the book of Judges. In Judges, we hear mostly about a cast of male
leaders but, in every instance, it is only a matter of time before the country loses
its way again. The book of Judges underscores this theme by repeating a certain
phrase throughout: “In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did
what was right in his own eyes.”[12]
It’s against that
backdrop that Ruth is presented, and it’s as if the author wants us to notice three
things. 1) If no Israelite will lead rightly, God will choose someone outside
of Israel to lead. 2) If no man will lead rightly, a woman will
show what’s right. and 3) Ruth leads not by might, like the judges of previous
generations, but by compassionate concern and selfless service. Ruth, thus, brings
to a close the time of the judges and sets up what follows when David will be
king.[13]
Yes, Ruth is so much more than just a romance novel. In fact,
interpreters of Ruth see in it not just a single story but a story of several
stories that occur before and after it.
Ruth and God’s promises to Abraham
First, the story of Ruth is connected with the story of
Abraham. Recall that in Genesis 12 and 15, God promised to Abraham a land, a
people and a blessing.
What’s interesting about
Ruth is that the author presents the gift of the land in light of Israel’s
exile from it and return. Chapter 1 serves as a kind of echo chamber for this
theme of return as that specific word (“return”) appears a total of 12 times in
22 verses.[14]
That’s one “return” for every tribe of Israel. Between Naomi’s family and the
figure of Ruth, we catch a glimpse of what Israel experienced as a nation
overall: the Israelites were exiled and returned to share the land with
foreigners.[15]
In this light, Ruth’s story has some challenging things to say to evangelical
Christians today about the question of Israel sharing the land with others.
In addition to the land,
there are some equally interesting outcomes regarding how God would constitute
the people of Israel. Notice what Ruth says: “Your people will be my people and your God
my God.” The story of Ruth surprises us by telling us that even Israel’s great
king David would be born through a foreign people. Israel was, thus, always to be
understood expansively, as inclusive of non-Israelite people.
And that is how God would
fulfill the promise to Abraham that all nations on earth would be blessed. In
this vein, Ruth 1 includes both blessings and curses, echoing the language of
Genesis 12 that also speaks of both blessings and curses. Observe how this plays out: as Naomi intends to move back home, she blesses the two Moabite
women to return to their own families. But, when Ruth replies, she calls down a
curse on herself should she ever forsake Naomi. It seems that Ruth, more
than Naomi, understands what the truly blessed thing to do is.
Thus, it is through Ruth
that God’s promises to Abraham (concerning 1. the land he would give, 2. the people he
would make, and 3. the blessing they would be) develop in ways we would hardly expect.
Ruth and the story of Job
But the story of Ruth doesn’t stop there. There’s
another story here for us to see as Ruth is also a retelling of the story of
Job with an interesting twist. Recall that the story of Job is about a man who,
early in the narrative, loses everything but his faith in God. Shortly after,
some of Job’s friends show up and they have a dialogue about the meaning of
suffering in which Job’s friends don’t really help Job a whole lot.
In Ruth, Naomi serves as
the Job figure as the writer very quickly relates how Naomi loses everything. Then, the first chapter concludes with her lament, which sounds a lot like
something Job would say: where once life was sweet (that’s what “Naomi” means),
now it is bitter (that’s what “Mara” means); she went away full and came back
empty. Everything has been stripped away.
But, then, here’s the
surprise: in contrast to Job’s companions, Ruth serves as a true companion—for
Ruth does more than accompany Naomi back to Israel, she sides with her in every
respect, up to and including the adoption of Naomi’s God.
a.
compassion and physical need
As we consider how Ruth's story is connected to the story of Job, there are some important
lessons for us to notice regarding how the church can be a healing
presence in a world filled with suffering. The first lesson deals with the
importance of tending to the physical needs of those who are suffering.
Theologian Jürgen Moltmann alludes to this by playing on Friedrich Nietzsche’s
assertion that “God is dead.” Over against that, Moltmann challenges the church
to remember that, to the poor, God is not dead; rather, “God is bread.”[16] The text in Ruth 1
underscores this truth by repeated use of the imagery of bread. As Naomi and
her family leave Israel because of a famine, it is significant that the town
they leave is Bethlehem (or Beit-lechem), literally “the house of
bread.” Then, in verse 6, Naomi is prompted to return when she hears that the
Lord had given them food. The word in Hebrew there is even more specific than
“food,” however. The text literally says the Lord gave them “bread” (lechem).
Thus, in verse 19 Naomi and Ruth return to the “house of bread” (Beit-lechem)
and in verse 22 we learn the barley is ready to be harvested in Beit-lechem.
In the next two chapters, Ruth then works to take care of Naomi who is too old
to work—and God provides beyond their need through the generosity of Boaz.
This is something I love
about the church in which I serve: we understand that one of the best things we
can do to ease suffering is by tending to the physical needs of others. That’s
why I love that our little church runs a food pantry. Through such a ministry
of compassion, we are saying to our neighbors: “God is not dead; God is bread.”
b.
companionship and the essence of the church
Ruth not only tends to
Naomi’s physical needs, she also tends to Naomi’s emotional and spiritual
needs. On this front, it's important for us to notice that Ruth does this simply by being with
Naomi. In 1:16 Ruth expresses it this way: “Where you go, I will go; where you
lodge, I will lodge.”
At the church where I
serve we’ve been exploring what it means to live “missionally” and “incarnationally”,
both personally and collectively. The expression is a fancy way of saying that just as the Father sent the Son to dwell among us so the Triune
God sends us to be fully present to the world. And Ruth exemplifies this
perfectly. Observe this dynamic in her language:
“Where you go, I will
go.”
Ruth is sent.
And “where you lodge, I
will lodge.”
Ruth intends to be fully
present.
The irony is: it is only
in leaving her home that Ruth finds her home.
At any rate, in learning from Ruth's example Christians do well to keep in mind that as we move out of our comfort zone, we will truly be a blessing to all and find
ourselves more at home in the world.
c.
compassion, companionship, and justice
In the middle of all this,
there beats a heart of justice. In chapter 1, Naomi blesses Ruth by saying she hopes
the Lord will “deal kindly” with Ruth as Ruth has dealt kindly with Naomi (since Ruth tended lovingly to Naomi’s husband and sons when they died). The
story goes on to show how Naomi’s blessing comes to fulfillment in Obed’s
birth, the grandfather of King David. But, prior to this, we get a foretaste of
God’s fruitful blessing on Ruth, when she avails herself of a provision in
Jewish law that instructs landowners not to harvest all the way to the edges of
their field but to leave some crops for the poor to glean. Through this
distinctive Hebrew custom, God reminded the people that it is just, right and
good to care for those who are unable to care for themselves.
The word used to describe
this orientation is “hesed.” Like “grace” or “love” it is one of those words
that means so much. It can be translated as lovingkindness or mercy, but it
also connotes faithfulness and goodness. One scholar translates it here in 1:8
as doing or showing “good-faith.”[17] “Doing right by others”
is another way of putting it.
What’s interesting about
the text in Ruth is that usually the term hesed is used to describe how God
treats us but here the term is used to describe what Ruth has done.[18] Ruth did what was right
in God’s eyes, unlike those in the time of the judges when everyone only did
what was right in their own eyes.
The text commends to us some lessons regarding social justice. Too often today working for social
justice equates to thinking the right things or saying the right things
regarding matters of equity. But Ruth shows us that justice goes beyond words;
it is about action. And the action is up-close and personal. Ruth’s brand of
social justice is incarnational. It puts us in contact with people. It’s
so much more than “taking a stand” for something on Facebook.
And the story is even
more fascinating because in the Hebrew Scriptures we would expect Naomi,
the Israelite, to be cast as the one who resembles Israel’s God—yet here it is
the foreigner who mirrors God’s hesed. Centuries later, Jesus
would reflect this theme in a parable about a good Samaritan where Israel’s
finest do NOT do what is right in caring for the beaten man but an outsider
does. Just as Ruth reveals something to Israel about their own God, so the
Samaritan outsider reveals something to the insiders about who will really
inherit eternal life.
I encourage Christians to
let this reversal challenge us afresh today in our own setting. We Christians
often assume that we are the ones who are in and others are out. To break down this divide, we try various ways to help “outsiders”
feel they are welcome with “us.” But the story of Ruth reverses this scenario
and casts the outsider in the “welcoming” role. Notice: it is through Ruth that
Naomi’s faith is restored. So as we think about extending a warm welcome
to outsiders, I encourage us to take a step back and consider how it is that we
can know God better as we are welcomed by “them.” And, of course, what God really
wants is that there will be no more “us” and “them.”
Ruth’s story as a New Creation story
As we live this way, we are essentially cooperating with God in making a New Creation story. Beyond the stories of Abraham and Job, the book of Ruth reaches back into
the creation account itself as Ruth and Naomi find true rest in clinging to one
another and clinging to God. What’s significant about Ruth’s pivotal poem is
that it comes on the heels of Ruth literally clinging to Naomi (in verse
14) after Naomi tells Ruth she wishes her to find “rest”[19] (in verse 9). Those images
of “rest” and “clinging” echo the creation story in Genesis 2 where we read of
God’s rest[20]
and of the first humans clinging to one another.
Here the story of Ruth
shocks us yet again by casting Ruth in the role of the man as we notice that in
Genesis 2 the text says the man will leave his family to cling to his wife,
thus making a new family. Yet, in Ruth 1 it is a woman who leaves her
family to cling to Naomi, another woman—and together they find rest as they
make a radically new family made of both Jews and Gentiles. Galatians 3:28 echoes
this narrative as it says that in Jesus a new family is created where
distinctions between male and female, Jew and Gentile no longer matter. Ruth’s
story gives us a new understanding of family and it is through this new God-creation
that we find true rest.
Conclusion
Thus, the story of Ruth is more than just a
sentimental romance. Ruth can turn us upside-down as we follow her example of
leaving our comfort zone and making a home with others, ministering compassion,
mercy and justice, breaking down dividing lines of in and out, and becoming a new
family by a continual openness to be re-made through the hesed-love of
God. In times of crisis, this is just what the church needs to be: the very
bread of the presence of Christ in the world. Amen.
[1] On
the extent to which this presents a genuine “constitutional crisis” see https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/10/9/20905503/trump-white-house-letter-democrats-impeachment
[3]
See the data set from 2017 at https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/gun-homicides-ownership/table/
[4]
Though Brandt Jean’s offer to forgive Amber Guyger for murdering his brother
Botham is inspiring, many feel justice was not properly served as they grieve the light
sentence she received and observe that punishments for black people are often
harsher than punishments for white people. See the wrap-up of this case at https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/03/us/botham-jean-amber-guyger-trial-wrap/index.html
[5]
According to Mark Morgan, acting commissioner of the United States Customs and
Border Patrol. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/nearly-1-million-migrants-arrested-along-mexico-border-in-fiscal-2019-most-since-2007/2019/10/08/749413e4-e9d4-11e9-9306-47cb0324fd44_story.html
[6]
For annual comparisons and a month-by-month breakdown of apprehensions along
the southwest border see official data published by the United States Custom
and Border Patrol at https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
[7]
About 80,000 children under the age of 18 were unaccompanied by an adult and were
among those apprehended during fiscal year 2019 (which ran from September 1,
2018 to August 31, 2019).
[8]
According to a briefing published by Exodus World Service, accessed 10/17/19.
The briefing notes that over half of the world’s refugees are under the age of
18. See the briefing at https://exodusworldservice.org/why-refugees/
[9]
This essay follows the NRSV translation.
[10]
My translation, see the explanation later in this essay.
[11]
To be sure, the scene described occurs in Ruth 3:3. Still, we tend to read
modern (Western) notions of romance into the story. As I observe later in the
essay, the story of Ruth addresses other interests that would have been more
important to the original audience.
[12]
Most modern translations render “every man did what was right in his own eyes”
in gender-neutral language. For example, NIV renders the text as “everyone did
as they saw fit.” Even the NRSV renders the phrase as “all the people did what
was right in their own eyes.” But the subject in the Hebrew text is “ish”, a
word translated as “man,” literally. Its predicate is: “in his own eyes,” a
third person masculine singular expression. Biblical scholar Stephen E. Fowl
asserts it should be translated as “each man did what was right in his own
eyes.” He explains: “Although the NRSV opts for a gender-neutral translation,
‘all the people did what was right in their own eyes,’ this translation misses
something important about both Judges and Ruth. Judges is full of stories about
men doing what is right in their own eyes in ways that often result in disaster
for women.” See Fowl, “Ruth 1” in Judges and Ruth (Grand Rapids: Brazos
Press, 2018), 217.
[13]
This is to observe simply that Ruth as a text is positioned between Judges and
I Samuel in our canon. Later in the essay, I note why many scholars date the
writing of Ruth to the post-exilic era. Still, thematically, the text of Ruth
takes us from the time of Judges to set up the time of the kings, of whom David
serves as exemplar.
[14]
The Hebrew word is “shub” and it appears in verses 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15
(twice), 16, 21, and 22 (twice).
[15]
This is one reason many scholars date the writing of Ruth to the period after
the exile. Another factor in this determination follows from the supposed
interest of the writer to address the question of inter-marriage between Jews
and Gentiles, which was a distinct concern in the book of Nehemiah that records what happened to the Jewish people after the exile. See Bruce Birch, et. al. “New Life, Renewed Community, New
Crises” in A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament, 2nd
ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005), 452.
[16] “In
a global view, we are all working in a circle which is making the rich nations
ever richer and the poor nations ever poorer. From this circle there is emerging
a world nutritional crisis which will spell starvation for millions. For the
poor and starving in this vicious circle, ‘God is not dead—he is bread.’ If,
with Paul Tillich, we define God as ultimate concern, then for them his
concrete presence takes the form of bread.” See Jürgen Moltmann. “Bringing
Peace to a Divided World” in The Experiment Hope, trans. M. Douglas
Meeks (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 180-181.
[17]
Stephen Fowl. Judges and Ruth (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2018), 220. “Moreover,
although to show hesed clearly requires an inner capacity for mercy and
kindness, hesed is primarily displayed in a pattern of action (hence, ‘do
good-faith’).”
[18] “The
book makes clear that both God and humans can be agents of such love. Naomi asks
that God act in such a fashion toward her daughters-in-law (1:8)…However,
humans can act that way as well, as…Ruth demonstrates in her loyalty to Naomi
(1:16-17).” See Bruce C. Birch, et. al. A Theological Introduction to the
Old Testament, 2nd ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005), 452.
[19]
The Hebrew word is menuhah. NRSV translates it as “security” but it would
be more accurate to translate it here as “rest.”
[20]
Hebrew scholars note that on the seventh day God created rest (menuhah).
No comments:
Post a Comment