Over the last three weeks, we have been on a journey through the book of Ruth. We started with Naomi, Ruth’s mother-in-law, fleeing famine in Bethlehem, finding food and wives for her sons in Moab,7, and losing everything when her husbands and sons died. You may or may not remember that I previously said that “the Moabites were indistinct ethnically from the Judians (being descended from Lot), but they had a different cultural identity and a different tribal God.” That’s all true, but it’s only part of the puzzle – which we’ll get to in a minute. First I want to remind you of some wordplay that we find in the text that is really important as we come to the end.
As I said before, “Naomi” means Pleasant. “Elimelech,” her hubby, means God is King, and going to Moab was to turn their back on God. Likewise, their sons were Mahlon and Chilion, meaning Sickness and Spent, and Orpah – the daughter-in-law who returned home – means Back of the Neck. All this would have been clear satire to those who knew (kind of like the way that Cain means possessed and Abel means mist), which is why Naomi laments and changes her name to Mara, meaning Bitterness, and says that she went away full and returned dry and spent. Dry and spent – that’s important for the last chapter. In the midst of all of this is Ruth, which some say is derived from words meaning Friend or Companion; but there is a problem – she is a Moabite.
It’s not just a problem because the Moabites serve another God. That gets dealt with in the first chapter when Ruth says, “Where you go, I will go. Your people will be my people, and your God will be mine, too.” The problem is figuring out when and why this story was written and added to the Hebrew canon of scripture in the first place! I say when and why because scholars don’t actually agree on it.
If the story was written during the Davidic Kingdom, then the point of the story is to establish and affirm the line of David, and perhaps encourage some humility when it comes to the role of foreigners in establishing and expanding their empire. If it was written in the time of exile, then it was to give hope in the promise of the covenant that God made with Abraham. If it was written after the exile, well then it gets really problematic because there was a big push to ethnically cleanse Israel during the Ezra and Nehemia time frame that especially targeted Moabites in Nehemia 13.
Now, why does that matter to us? Some would say that the reason Ruth matters to anyone is because of the theme of loving kindness – chessed in Hebrew – that flows through this text. You may remember that is how we ended chapter 1. In chapter 2, Jackie Cummings brought her mom's wisdom with her – quite literally – to say that if you “do right, right will follow you.” That’s what happened when Ruth made good on her claim and worked the fields and found favor in her deceased husband’s kinsman, Boaz.
Last week, in chapter 3, we talked about the way chessed moves from a personal ethic to laying the groundwork for relationships and intimacy – not just the romantic kind, but the kind that allow us to truly see and hear one another. The kind that allows those with little to give and everything to lose to still have a voice and a choice. The kind that is not limited to Ruth and Boaz on the threshing floor, but also includes the bitter and dried-up Naomi who is coaching Ruth from the sidelines.
That reminds me – there is actually a lot more manipulation and game playing going on in this text than meets the eye. I don’t bring that up to say that this story offers a Biblical witness for effective manipulation. Rather, I bring it up to say that God is at work even in the midst of our dreams and schemes and somewhat faithful pursuits. As we look a little at the more human side of this story, remember that in the end, it is about the abundance of God’s grace.
The first one to make a play is actually Ruth. We do not know her home life or what she’s fleeing, but it can’t be good. She certainly expresses compassion to Naomi, but she is also leveraging the hope of prosperity in Bethlehem and the Jewish custom of levirate marriage. She is not only covenanting to follow Naomi, but she is also demanding that Naomi treat her fairly by not sending her away. Then there is Naomi, who scouts out Boaz and conspires to have Ruth go to him under the cover of night and set up a compromising position. Boaz recognizes all of this, so when he goes to the real next of kin he pretends to be brokering a deal for Naomi’s dead husband’s field.
When Boaz drops the bomb that Ruth comes with the field, his next of kin bows out. Here’s the tricky thing. By the letter of the law, if a next of kin denies the widow her due and refuses to marry her he is the one who is supposed to be pelted with shoes and cut off from his own inheritance. Instead, Boaz finds a loophole and gets others to witness it! He essentially “trades shoes'' with the man to make it all work out in everyone’s favor.
Here’s why all of this matters – no matter if Ruth was written during the time of David or the exile or the return. This story stands to answer the question, “What do you do when the law (Biblical or otherwise) stands in the way of compassion?” This story counters the rigid return to the law without grace and the defensive wall building of Ezra and Nehemiah to say that laws and walls do not build community, compassion does. It does not say that there is no place for the law. It simply illustrates the greater function of grace and mercy and yes, chessed – loving kindness.
With that in mind, it is no surprise that this story is paired with Mary’s song of praise, which reflects Old testament themes from 1 Samuel 2 and throughout the Psalms where God’s strength is praised as the source of salvation for those that suffer. It delights my soul to think of Mary’s joy and Naomi’s joy as the child of promise is handed to each of them.
Of course, that part about a son given to Naomi/Mara, the bitter dry one, to nurse may come across your ears like a needle scratch on a vinyl record – or as some would say, “Wait. What?”
To that, I say that I don’t know a thing about nursing, but I know a story about redemption and hope when I see one. The other thing I’ll say about all of this is that the point here is not that hard work was rewarded, or that guile is fine when the ends justify the means. The point is that God’s grace was active throughout in great abundance, especially when all seemed scarce and finite, and limited.
There are probably a thousand more illustrations and parallels that can be pulled from this story, like the fact that an outsider was the one who made it clear to those on the inside that faith and compassion go hand in hand, but the greater reality of this story points to is the abundance of God’s grace!
Put it on a t-shirt! Make it a theme for a church event! Cross-stitch it on a pillow! None of that matters unless we can find a way to put it into practice in our daily lives. That’s not to say that you don’t. It is to say that until we can find a way to encourage more people to live as though compassion triumphs over legalism and love and mercy always lead to more abundance than fear and judgment, we will remain dry and spent. We will be Mara and not Naomi.
Thanks be to God that there was more to the family back then than Boaz and Ruth, there was also Naomi – who was restored to her community as well. Thanks be to God that their family led to the line of Jesse, the house and family of David, and eventually to Mary and to Jesus. In the lineage of Jesus, we are reminded that the outsider has as much or more to teach about faith as the cradle Presbyterian. In Mary’s song, we are reminded again about God’s priority for those who are oppressed and particularly those experiencing poverty, regardless of whether it is generational or situational.
What, then, do those of us who are on the inside, who have resources, have to do and say in response to this word of abundance that has nothing to do with stuff and everything to do with compassion and kindness? On a personal level, that’s between you and God. On a congregational level, that’s why we roll our sleeves up and participate in ministry together and why we contribute to denominational offerings and regional responses through our Presbytery and Synod.
As we continue to wrestle personally (and as God’s people) with how to respond, it’s a good thing to remember that we are not cut from a cloth that champions the status quo. We are Reformed and Always Reforming. We are people of faith who look to God’s word for direction in hopes that we might be “transformed by the renewing of our minds” as Paul said to the church in Rome (12:2).
Hopefully, we can do just that, because there are those outside the church who may very well be willing to hold us accountable and help us find redemption together – just as Ruth did for Naomi; Boaz for Ruth; and Jesus did as Mary proclaimed he might. So let it be, that we might yet be transformed by the love of God in Christ Jesus to become the compassion that someone needs and somehow find that in doing so we received what we needed, too! And to God be the glory, now and always. Amen!
As I said before, “Naomi” means Pleasant. “Elimelech,” her hubby, means God is King, and going to Moab was to turn their back on God. Likewise, their sons were Mahlon and Chilion, meaning Sickness and Spent, and Orpah – the daughter-in-law who returned home – means Back of the Neck. All this would have been clear satire to those who knew (kind of like the way that Cain means possessed and Abel means mist), which is why Naomi laments and changes her name to Mara, meaning Bitterness, and says that she went away full and returned dry and spent. Dry and spent – that’s important for the last chapter. In the midst of all of this is Ruth, which some say is derived from words meaning Friend or Companion; but there is a problem – she is a Moabite.
It’s not just a problem because the Moabites serve another God. That gets dealt with in the first chapter when Ruth says, “Where you go, I will go. Your people will be my people, and your God will be mine, too.” The problem is figuring out when and why this story was written and added to the Hebrew canon of scripture in the first place! I say when and why because scholars don’t actually agree on it.
If the story was written during the Davidic Kingdom, then the point of the story is to establish and affirm the line of David, and perhaps encourage some humility when it comes to the role of foreigners in establishing and expanding their empire. If it was written in the time of exile, then it was to give hope in the promise of the covenant that God made with Abraham. If it was written after the exile, well then it gets really problematic because there was a big push to ethnically cleanse Israel during the Ezra and Nehemia time frame that especially targeted Moabites in Nehemia 13.
Now, why does that matter to us? Some would say that the reason Ruth matters to anyone is because of the theme of loving kindness – chessed in Hebrew – that flows through this text. You may remember that is how we ended chapter 1. In chapter 2, Jackie Cummings brought her mom's wisdom with her – quite literally – to say that if you “do right, right will follow you.” That’s what happened when Ruth made good on her claim and worked the fields and found favor in her deceased husband’s kinsman, Boaz.
Last week, in chapter 3, we talked about the way chessed moves from a personal ethic to laying the groundwork for relationships and intimacy – not just the romantic kind, but the kind that allow us to truly see and hear one another. The kind that allows those with little to give and everything to lose to still have a voice and a choice. The kind that is not limited to Ruth and Boaz on the threshing floor, but also includes the bitter and dried-up Naomi who is coaching Ruth from the sidelines.
That reminds me – there is actually a lot more manipulation and game playing going on in this text than meets the eye. I don’t bring that up to say that this story offers a Biblical witness for effective manipulation. Rather, I bring it up to say that God is at work even in the midst of our dreams and schemes and somewhat faithful pursuits. As we look a little at the more human side of this story, remember that in the end, it is about the abundance of God’s grace.
The first one to make a play is actually Ruth. We do not know her home life or what she’s fleeing, but it can’t be good. She certainly expresses compassion to Naomi, but she is also leveraging the hope of prosperity in Bethlehem and the Jewish custom of levirate marriage. She is not only covenanting to follow Naomi, but she is also demanding that Naomi treat her fairly by not sending her away. Then there is Naomi, who scouts out Boaz and conspires to have Ruth go to him under the cover of night and set up a compromising position. Boaz recognizes all of this, so when he goes to the real next of kin he pretends to be brokering a deal for Naomi’s dead husband’s field.
When Boaz drops the bomb that Ruth comes with the field, his next of kin bows out. Here’s the tricky thing. By the letter of the law, if a next of kin denies the widow her due and refuses to marry her he is the one who is supposed to be pelted with shoes and cut off from his own inheritance. Instead, Boaz finds a loophole and gets others to witness it! He essentially “trades shoes'' with the man to make it all work out in everyone’s favor.
Here’s why all of this matters – no matter if Ruth was written during the time of David or the exile or the return. This story stands to answer the question, “What do you do when the law (Biblical or otherwise) stands in the way of compassion?” This story counters the rigid return to the law without grace and the defensive wall building of Ezra and Nehemiah to say that laws and walls do not build community, compassion does. It does not say that there is no place for the law. It simply illustrates the greater function of grace and mercy and yes, chessed – loving kindness.
With that in mind, it is no surprise that this story is paired with Mary’s song of praise, which reflects Old testament themes from 1 Samuel 2 and throughout the Psalms where God’s strength is praised as the source of salvation for those that suffer. It delights my soul to think of Mary’s joy and Naomi’s joy as the child of promise is handed to each of them.
Of course, that part about a son given to Naomi/Mara, the bitter dry one, to nurse may come across your ears like a needle scratch on a vinyl record – or as some would say, “Wait. What?”
To that, I say that I don’t know a thing about nursing, but I know a story about redemption and hope when I see one. The other thing I’ll say about all of this is that the point here is not that hard work was rewarded, or that guile is fine when the ends justify the means. The point is that God’s grace was active throughout in great abundance, especially when all seemed scarce and finite, and limited.
There are probably a thousand more illustrations and parallels that can be pulled from this story, like the fact that an outsider was the one who made it clear to those on the inside that faith and compassion go hand in hand, but the greater reality of this story points to is the abundance of God’s grace!
Put it on a t-shirt! Make it a theme for a church event! Cross-stitch it on a pillow! None of that matters unless we can find a way to put it into practice in our daily lives. That’s not to say that you don’t. It is to say that until we can find a way to encourage more people to live as though compassion triumphs over legalism and love and mercy always lead to more abundance than fear and judgment, we will remain dry and spent. We will be Mara and not Naomi.
Thanks be to God that there was more to the family back then than Boaz and Ruth, there was also Naomi – who was restored to her community as well. Thanks be to God that their family led to the line of Jesse, the house and family of David, and eventually to Mary and to Jesus. In the lineage of Jesus, we are reminded that the outsider has as much or more to teach about faith as the cradle Presbyterian. In Mary’s song, we are reminded again about God’s priority for those who are oppressed and particularly those experiencing poverty, regardless of whether it is generational or situational.
What, then, do those of us who are on the inside, who have resources, have to do and say in response to this word of abundance that has nothing to do with stuff and everything to do with compassion and kindness? On a personal level, that’s between you and God. On a congregational level, that’s why we roll our sleeves up and participate in ministry together and why we contribute to denominational offerings and regional responses through our Presbytery and Synod.
As we continue to wrestle personally (and as God’s people) with how to respond, it’s a good thing to remember that we are not cut from a cloth that champions the status quo. We are Reformed and Always Reforming. We are people of faith who look to God’s word for direction in hopes that we might be “transformed by the renewing of our minds” as Paul said to the church in Rome (12:2).
Hopefully, we can do just that, because there are those outside the church who may very well be willing to hold us accountable and help us find redemption together – just as Ruth did for Naomi; Boaz for Ruth; and Jesus did as Mary proclaimed he might. So let it be, that we might yet be transformed by the love of God in Christ Jesus to become the compassion that someone needs and somehow find that in doing so we received what we needed, too! And to God be the glory, now and always. Amen!
Comments