“God’s care for the underdog”
By Rev. Michael Stonhouse
Meditation – Sunday, June 25, 2023
Genesis 21:8-21 (Forward, p. 58) CEV p. 19
Certain people, Christians included, may sometimes quail at the idea of having a God-given responsibility to care for the poor and dispossessed among us, but it is a well-established principle in the Scriptures. Certainly, in the psalms rulers are enjoined to care for the poor, the widowed, the orphans and the stranger in their midst, and the prophets say the same. Here, in today’s passage we see God Himself exemplifying this principle in His own actions.
Hagar, through no fault of her own, has become a pawn between Sarah and Abraham, and a ‘thorn in the flesh’, an irritant, to Sarah. Sarah does not like the prospect of her son, Isaac, playing with, and presumably, growing up with Hagar’s son, Ishmael, as equals. And, probably more to the point, she disliked the idea that Isaac would not get the full inheritance but would have to share some of it with Ishmael. And so, she demands that Abraham get rid of the two of them—set them free, in other words--thereby eliminating any rights that Ishmael would have had earlier to the family fortune upon Abraham’s death.
Now, Hagar, at least not directly, bore no responsibility for this turn of events. Now, when I say ‘not directly’, I am not saying that Hagar was altogether faultless in the matter. Earlier on, when Hagar conceived and Sarah still had not, Hagar become haughty and proud and flaunted her ‘success’, her pregnancy, in Sarah’s eyes, and looked down upon her mistress, and treated her with contempt (see Genesis 16:4).
Now, that is most interesting: in spite of her ‘fault’ in the matter—and Sarah and Abraham’s obvious lack of faith in God in this, in having Hagar serve as a second wife and surrogate mother in Sarah’s staid—God still intervenes on behave of Hagar and Ismael and cares for them.
So, this says to me that, seeing as we are to imitate our Heavenly Father, we should do likewise. We should care for the poor and needy in our midst, even when they bear some fault or responsibility in the matter. And yes, as with Abraham and Sarah, sometimes we have contributed to the situation in the first place. And so, the care of the needy among us is not an optional extra, something to do when and if it suits us. Amen.
Forward notes: “Do not be afraid; for God has heard the voice of the boy where he is” (verse 17b).
“What should we make of the story of Hagar? Abraham and Sarah, largely revered in our tradition, act out some of the most heinous sins of slavery. They force Hagar to have sex, to become pregnant, and to bear a child for them. When she justifiably responds with anger, they mistreat her to the point where she is willing to risk the wilderness.
“God then sends Hagar back to the house of slavery, but like an antebellum mistress looking at the mixed-race children sired by her unfaithful husband, Sarah cannot bear the mere sight of Ishmael, so she tells Abraham to send him and his mother away.
“Yet God saves Ishmael and gives him a future as a free man. The first departure is a desperate escape, yet the second is an emancipation (albeit begrudging and cruel).
“There are thorns and roses in this and many other stories in scripture. It is our job to take both into full account and to listen to what the Spirit is saying through each.”
MOVING FORWARD: “What are some other stories in scripture that have both thorns and roses? How do you respond to these conflicting narratives?”
Some concluding notes: I’m afraid that today’s author has errored on a couple of counts. Firstly, he has misread the account: Abraham is not an unfaithful husband. He has taken Hagar as a secondary wife at the instigation of Sarah, and with her full approval. After all, this was a customary practice in those days. Secondly, there is no indication that Hagar reacted with anger, with contempt, yes, with a sense of superiority, yes, but not anger. And why not? Because, by the customs of the times, Abraham’s adoption of her son meant that he was now an heir, or rather, co-heir, able to inherit some of Abraham’s wealth upon his death. Thus, surely was nothing to be angry or upset about. Indeed, it would have fueled her gloating and her distain at the still barren Sarah and would have greatly grieved and upset that latter woman.