Rainbow-colored scarves adorn the sanctuary of Fort Street Presbyterian Church in Detroit, Mich.
DETROIT, Mich. – How many Bible readers knew that Jacob gave Joseph a princess dress, not a coat of many colors? At least that was the interpretation that Annanda Barclay gave in her sermon to those gathered at the More Light Presbyterian’s National Celebration Worship Service.
The worship service was held June 15 at Fort Street Presbyterian Church in Detroit, as part of the many activities surrounding the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s 221st General Assembly.
Barclay’s Scripture readings for her sermon “Cry Out in Love” came from Genesis 45:1-15 and Matthew 15:12-28.
She spoke of compassion, how “we learn compassion because it is a life-long lesson. It breathes outside our decent and orderly frameworks and resides in the messiness of everyday life.”
She continued by asking “How much of God is truly good? How much of Jesus is truly good? How much of the Holy Spirit is truly good, without compassion? What is compassion, if not another embodied form of grace?”
Speaking of the Genesis story, Barclay referred to “our beloved Joseph, who seemed to embody the very essence of compassion …. Throughout the Biblical narrative, compassion seems to be inextricably tied to ‘the other.’”
If anyone knew what it was like to be “other,” it was Joseph, she said.
Annanda Barclay draws attention to her rainbow scarf as she talks about Joseph’s “princess dress.”
Joseph’s father “loved him so much that he made him a gown, which when we read 2 Samuel we learn that the gown is also a princess dress,” she said. “The same garment,” she emphasized as she waved her multicolored, knitted scarf.
The knitted scarves are given by MLP to General Assembly commissioners and observers for them to wear as a sign of their support for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer issues.
“Now could you imagine Joseph in his princess gown, prophesying, dreaming dreams,” said Barclay, “Not only was he loved most by their father, but dreams that one day his entire family will bow to him. … It probably was not easy growing up around Joseph. It helps us to realize their humanity in spite of their acts of hate.”
The story continues that Joseph’s brothers grabbed him one day, threw him into a pit, and then sold him into slavery. They dipped his “gown” into animal’s blood, so they could tell their father Joseph was dead.
But, said Barclay, once the brothers “showed their daddy the symbolic blood on Joseph’s princess gown, the brothers began to realize their indifference to Joseph’s welfare is what truly ‘othered’ them from their father. The text says, the Daddy, Israel, cried out in grief for days because he loved his son.”
She continued, saying that sometimes, “I think we get so caught up in what we think is best, that it isn’t until we witness the pain of those we love, that we begin to question ourselves and our actions. Maybe, maybe, if the brothers had a compassionate heart toward the other, they could begin to see that Joseph could not help that his father loved him so. Joseph had no control. He was not the true source of their pain.”
When reading the text, Barclay said a question kept “popping up” in her mind: “How many times?” Her litany of questions included
- “How many times must we as individual Christians and as members of an institutional body commit acts that deny the humanity of the other, before we become aware of our sin?
- “How many Josephs, how much of creation, has to be placed in a dark, hollow pit, cut off from life-giving compassion and love until we get it?
- “How many times do we act like Joseph’s brother Reuben and disagree to the harm being done to others, but are too scared to speak up and act to stop the oppression and the suffering?
- “How many Josephs have watched us wash our hands like Pontius Pilate so we can sell them off like Joseph’s band of brothers so we don’t have to confront their reality of oppression and marginalization?
- “How many?”
“When we lack compassion for the other, we divorce them from the life-giving love and affirmation of the church and a church family, and we do this for an impressively cheap, easy and hollow gospel that is clothed in the short-lived profit of self-satisfaction and preservation,” she said.
Joseph’s brothers had already “othered” him, she said, making it easier to see Joseph as someone who “needed to be controlled, a person who was easily expendable, a person who when taken out of the picture will enable the family to function in a seemingly healthy and traditional manner … Joseph, the youngest son of Israel, the boy who wore a princess gown and dreamed dreams, was transformed in his brothers point of view from a living breathing human being, to a single problematic issue. LGBTQ people and allies, do you know something about that?” she asked with a grin.
Barclay said that it is never the right answer to look at a demographic of people as a singular issue. “Just like the brothers saw Joseph as a singular problem to be eradicated, so we as the church sometimes get so distracted by what we think is the source of our pain … only to overlook the huge web of oppression and evil that captures us all and keeps us bound,” she said.
Compassion, Barclay said, is not a single issue. “We must remember and hold on to that truth, especially this week at General Assembly because the ‘other’ bears the face of God. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people are not a single issue.”
When this worship service was held at the beginning of the week-long assembly, one of the biggest issues facing it was same-sex marriage. More Light Presbyterians and other pro LGBTQ organizations had worked hard for months to get the issue considered by and then passed by the GA.
Barclay agreed that marriage was important, but, she also spoke of other LGBTQ issues that need to be addressed:
- “Yes, marriage is important, but also is the horrible rate of queer poverty.
- “Yes, marriage is important, but so is healthcare, which especially impacts those who identify as trans- and gender-queer.
- “Yes, marriage is important, but so is racism, which is still ingrained in the LGBTQ movement and the church. Look around you all. Look around,” she said to the mostly white crowd.
- “Yes, marriage is important, but so are the needs of the persons who are differently abled.
- “Yes, marriage is important, but queer youth and adult suicides have not decreased.
- “Yes, marriage is important and it must pass, but ask me how long I could go on with this list of LGBTQ issues?”
“A person or people group are not single issue problems,” she said, “In part, that is why compassion for the other can be so difficult, isn’t it?”
Barclay said that if “we want to participate in mending the church and our world, if we really want to hold fast to this discipleship to who we call Jesus the Christ, we can’t get rid of or be done with a singular issue such as marriage and then expect it all to be well.”
She continued, “Let us learn from Joseph’s band of brothers and expand our understanding of compassion, so that we may indeed represent Christ to one another in our multifaceted identities. So as we move forward working toward marriage equality this week and beyond, may we also advocate for anti-racism. As we have the church recognize our partnerships, may we not settle for the church’s blessing of a partnership that is shackled to poverty. As we bring about the kingdom on earth as it is in heaven, may we not settle for trans-or gender-queer people to struggle because they cannot afford medical care.”
Robin White leads a blessing of the scarves during the More Light Presbyterian worship service at Fort Street Presbyterian Church in Detroit, Mich.
Blessing the scarves
Following the sermon, a “blessing of the scarves” was held. Each person was offered a scarf, if they didn’t already have one as they entered the worship service. During the time of blessing, the Rev. Robin White asked each person to hold or lift up their scarf.
The blessing read in part:
“We bless these scarves, a multi-colored witness, created by people from across the country; young and old, men and women, both rich and poor, with faces reflecting a variety of ethnicities, yet hearts unified into one heart, reflecting God’s love for all God’s children.
“We bless the spirited hands that held the needles, rhythmically in motion, creating these rainbow symbols … rings binding our hearts …
“Finally, we bless all who wear these story-filled scarves. May these colorful mantles encourage loving and respectful conversations.
“May the dialogue foster relationships, refreshing the peace, purity and unity of our church.
“May the rainbows rings draped over our shoulders, be reminders of the yearning for the PCUSA to recognize that love is love and that God already blesses the marriage covenant loving couples make.
“May those of us who wear these wraps as we journey through this week, feel the ever-present love and grace of God wrapped around us. May we, in turn, become a blessing to everyone we encounter along the way.”
11 Comments. Leave new
Very interesting eisegesis!
There is so much wrong thinking, hypocrisy, double speak, arrogance, and self-victimization in this message it is sad and scary. Satan has such a silver tongue!
And Jesus was in reality a closeted bi-sexual who really, really love Mary, had a kid with her, and also really, really loved Thomas, and wished he could have a kid with him as well. And Oh, he supported carbon-credits for green technology and preached the evils of Wal-Mart
Pagan is as pagan does.
You learn something new every day in the PC(USA).
How many times must we endure the apostacy of the PCUSA?
I realize you have inserted your tongue firmly in your cheek— but check out this 1001 Worshiping Community.
http://www.onethousandone.org/Connect/Community-Landing-Layout.aspx?community=526
Too bad Annanda Barclay hasn’t had more effective training. Kethoneth passim, or pac kethoneth, is an ornamental robe that has long sleeves (to the palms) and long length (to the soles of the feet). It would have been made of material that was not single color, perhaps, but no suggestion of rainbow colors can be made. It could have been similar to the toga praetexta worn by young Romans. It was to demonstrate that the wearer was not a worker, but was a ruler. Obviously such a garment would get in the way of real work. It was worn by both genders, as many such long garments were, and still are, worn in that area of the world. The idea that it might have been a “princess” gown is self-serving, short-sighted and is not in any form a critical exigesis of the verse. She sure had to twist things around, and deny all other evidence, in order to serve her agenda. Very sad.
When we lack compassion for the other, we divorce them from the life-giving love and affirmation of the church and a church family, and we do this for an impressively cheap, easy and hollow gospel that is clothed in the short lived profit of self-satisfaction and preservation,” she said.
Excuse me, am I missing something or is she referencing the Bible?
What is with the “blessing of the scarves”? Is she trying to introduce the worship of icons and symbols? If that is the case, can I pull out my Saint Christopher statue from my Catholic days when I go for a drive?
Next: A sermon about how the destruction of Sodom was actually a celestial fireworks show, sent by God to help celebrate that cities wonderful record of diversity….followed by a blessing of hats, scarves, gloves, and socks…
Beth,
The connection between Joseph’s cloak and Tamar’s in 2 Samuel 13 is that they both figured in romantic intrigues of a violent sort. Compare Genesis 39:12: “And she caught him by his garment, saying, Lie with me: and he left his garment in her hand, and fled, and got him out” with 2 Samuel 13:14-18: “Howbeit he would not hearken unto her voice: but, being stronger than she, forced her, and lay with her.” Verse 18 proceeds: “And she had a garment of divers colours upon her: for with such robes were the king’s daughters that were virgins apparelled. “ We assume that Joseph still had his beloved garment – gift of his father – on when he served his service in Potiphar’s house. Annanda’s point is well-taken. Potiphar’s wife was in a pickle. She needed a dress for Pharaoh’s birthday party, so she grabbed the Hebrew princess outfit which her Israeli slave proudly wore. The blood stains added by the brothers only increased the psychedelic effect of the robe.
Tamar’s case is a little different. Amnon wasn’t interested in her garment and didn’t grab it. So how did it get blood-stained? In those days the practice of a deflowered virgin was to bring the stained bed-sheets to her parents as proof of her prior virginity. See Deut. 22:15: “Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate” in the intended goal of forcing the boyfriend to marry her. Tamar’s problem was that she wasn’t a virgin either before or after the encounter with Amnon. We know that from verse 15: “Amnon hated her exceedingly.” He hated her, because she had caused him a lot of unnecessary anxiety. See verse 2: “And Amnon was so vexed, that he fell sick for his sister Tamar; for she was a virgin; and Amnon thought it hard for him to do any thing to her.” The virginity ruse was a trick to attract him, and Amnon responded in spades by playing sick to get her to come and see him (verses 5-6).
In both cases the garment was spattered with blood to hide the truth of the matter. Joseph wasn’t killed by a wild beast, and Tamar wasn’t robbed of her virginity by a rapist. Both Joseph and Amnon were victims of hostile heterosexual environments – Joseph due to his failure to respond to his mistress’s reasonable advances, Amnon, since “he would not hearken unto her voice: but, being stronger than she, forced her, and lay with her” (2 Samuel 13:14). He rejected her sexual advances, and – in the words of 1 Corinthians 7:37 – “(stood) stedfast in his heart, (had) no necessity, but (had) power over his own will, and (had) so decreed in his heart that he (would) keep his virgin.” He resisted to the point of succumbing, when – discovering the absence of her virginity – he turned away from her on the bed and attempted to convince her with words of the futility of a heterosexual relationship.
The Greek word for “of many colors” – poikilos – implies “duplicitous.” Thus we find it in the phrase “divers(e) diseases” (Mat. 4:24, Mark 1:34, Luke 4:40), “divers(e) lusts” (2 Timothy 3:6), “divers(e) lusts and pleasures” (Titus 3:3), “divers(e) and strange doctrines” (Heb. 13:9), “divers(e) temptations” (James 2:2) and “manifold temptations” (1 Peter 1:6). A positive nuance is visible only at Heb. 2:4: “divers(e) miracles” and 1 Peter 4:10: “manifold grace.” As in our day, the palaces of the ruling class were hotbeds of sexual immorality. Compare David’s escapade with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11:4) with the much tamer Clinton – Monica Lewinsky affair and Kennedy’s dalliance with Marilyn Monroe. The kings’ daughters in David’s time sere so used to immoral intercourse that they clothed themselves in blood-stained garments in order to have ready proof for their parents in case they were – like the woman of John 8:4 – “taken in adultery, in the very act.” When Potiphar’s wife lusted after one of these splendid garments, propositioning Joseph to get it was a no-brainer.
Thanks for the tip, Michael!
What prevented Amnon from reacting positively to the promises of orgasm (“celestial fireworks show” as you put it) sent his way by the knockout Tamar was his penchant for sodomy. 2 Samuel 13:1-2: “And it came to pass after this, that Absalom the son of David had a fair sister, whose name was Tamar; and Amnon the son of David loved her. And Amnon was so vexed, that he fell sick for his sister Tamar; for she was a virgin; and Amnon thought it hard for him to do any thing to her.” Amnon “didn’t know what to do with her” (the Hebrew literally), since deflowering a virgin was beyond his sexual competence. But he couldn’t just let the matter glide. To attain his ordination Amnon required two things – 1) a wife in accord with Titus 1:6: “blameless, the husband of one wife; and 2) a homosexual mate in compliance with the Authoritative Interpretation and the amendment to redefine marriage of the 221st General Assembly. The advice he got from his mate, Jonadab (13:3), was: “Play sick, and let her do all the work.” 2 Samuel 13:5: “And Jonadab said unto him, Lay thee down on thy bed, and make thyself sick: and when thy father cometh to see thee, say unto him, I pray thee, let my sister Tamar come, and give me meat, and dress the meat in my sight, that I may see it, and eat it at her hand.” The feast ended when Amnon realized Tamar’s intent to wean him from sodomy by way of violating the seventh commandment: “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14). After Tamar was evicted she ripped up her “coat of many colors” to make herself appear the victim – a clone of Joseph, whose coat was ripped by a lustful paramour (Gen. 38:12). 2 Sam. 13:19: “And Tamar put ashes on her head, and rent her garment of divers colours.”