You can watch this sermon (and the whole worship service) live at this link!
 |
| [source] There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. This is the testimony given by John when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” He confessed and did not deny it, but confessed, “I am not the Messiah.” And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the prophet?” He answered, “No.” Then they said to him, “Who are you? Let us have an answer for those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” He said, “I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’” as the prophet Isaiah said. |
Now they had been sent from the Pharisees. They asked him, “Why then are you baptizing if you are neither the Messiah, nor Elijah, nor the prophet?” John answered them, “I baptize with water. Among you stands one whom you do not know, the one who is coming after me; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandal.” This took place in Bethany across the Jordan where John was baptizing.
This is the West African ordeal tree, also commonly known as the sassy tree.
Like the bean of the ordeal plant of Nigeria or nuts from the tagena nut tree of Madagascar, it is said that tea made from the bark of the sassy tree was once used when putting people on trial.
Specifically, before freedom of religion had become an (occasionally) common value, and before religious diversity was sometimes and in some places embraced,
the tea from this tree was used by authorities to “determine” whether or not a person was a witch--that is whether or not someone practiced magic
that was un-sanctioned by those who had
power--
something that,
at those times
and in those places,
was a punishable offense.
(As you know, we have our own deep history of such “trials by ordeal” or even “trials by fire” here in the United States).
In this particular instance,
as is often the case, people gathered around, accusations flying.
Inquisitive minds speculating.
Perhaps some folks in the corner placing bets.
And after some time, the accused person, in front of the crowd, would be instructed to take a drink.
If, drinking the tea from the sassywood, the accused person died as a result,
well,
then that person was declared guilty---they (according to their inquisitors) were, indeed, a witch.
If that person did not die, however,
if they swallowed it down or coughed it up
then that person was deemed innocent and
according to legend
free to go,
to walk away,
although it is unclear how many people were ever declared to be innocent in such trials. .
+++
It has been said,
that from the 16th century, onward,
when the term sass was brought to the Americas and the Caribbean by enslaved people,
that the word took on a slightly different meaning
in this very different, very oppressive,
And very painful context.
Here, the word evolved from being the name of a tree and its bark
into an adverb and a verb.
That is:
to act sassy,
to be sassy,
or to “sass back”
emerged in everyday vocabulary.
Later sass would also become a noun.
One could “have” sass or “demonstrate” sass.
And so on.
+++
No longer simply a poisonous bark, used to oppress fringey people,
Sass, on an oppressive continent now came to mean
“giving the master a taste of his own medicine,” or:
“Giving the oppressor a taste of his own poison.”
Practically, in our North American context, this looked like:
Not taking abuse as it was offered by one’s “master.”
Talking back when it was not one’s right or privilege to speak.
Standing up against advances that, though they were ‘legal,’ were certainly not acceptable.
And so on.
Sassing back. Right?
In so doing,
(enslaved people--and especially enslaved women, such as Harriet Jacobs, Mary Prince, Old Elizabeth, Sojourner Truth, and so many others--to whom this term usually applied)...
these women were able to assert their humanity in the midst of a dehumanizing system that would prefer to see them only as chattel (or as property).
That is to sass-back (to resist: even if only for a moment) was humanizing.
It was liberating even in the midst of what (at the time)
seemed to be an impenetrably
dehumanizing
and
unjust
system.
+++
Sass also performed some other important functions.
[These are all documented in M Shawn Copeland’s essay, “Wading Through Many Sorrows”]
Beyond that first and important act of naming and affirming one’s own identity and humanity against one’s aggressor,
sass also offered an interruption to whatever abuse, at the moment, was about to take place.
Whatever aggression or manipulations were being perpetrated, sass offered an interjection. To say “No!”
or anything
(when a slaveholder was used to a YES)
momentary though it was,
disrupted the power dynamic that allowed for and facilitated abuse.
Sass created a pause, an interruption, and an interjection that disrupted the imbalance.
That tipped the scales--raised the valleys and lowered the hills--even if just for a moment.
Also, say scholars, enacting sass, being sassy, sassing back inverted shame.
That is, in being sassed, the shame intended to be placed on the enslaved person was instead turned back onto the perpetrator.
For a moment, before he could start making excuses for himself and justifying his own bad behavior, the oppressor’s face turned red.
It is true, say some authors: In response to feeling such shame, he would likely try to victim-blame or re-shame her, calling her crazy for “acting out” (meaning out of her so-called designated “place” in society).
But
for a moment,
that “place” had shifted.
Lastly, sometimes sass would prevent or at least defer the abuse that the oppressor was intending.
[Again, see Copeland, “Wading Through Many Sorrows.”]
Again, for a moment, something better than usual occurred.
Unjust power was disrupted.
The aggressors were put on the defensive.
For a brief moment, there was a taste of a yet unforeseen emancipation.
And it was good.
+++
As John the Baptist reappears for us in the wilderness today,
locusts and honey, and so on,
It is good for us to remember that he does so in the shadow of the Roman empire.
As he proclaims the nearness of Love,
Herod’s men are already plotting his arrest.
They have taken note, even before Christ’s arrival at the river,
of the power of John’s sassiness.
To the crowds discarded by an emperor who calls himself god,
John’s baptism offers humanity:
you, friends, you, crowds, you, pressed down and pushed out people: (they learn in baptism) you are the children of God. You are God’s beloved. With you God is well pleased.
You discarded, ones--you are salt of the earth.
From among those at the bottom of the barrel, born in stables, no place to lay their heads,
John’s messiah will come, saying:
the lowly shall be lifted
and the last will be first
and even: you, the meek, the long-suffering,
and yet those who will not suffer forever:
you shall inherit the earth.
+++
In the wilderness, outside the walls and the reach of the kingdom’s power,
John and Jesus will proclaim:
the Reign of God’s love (a Reign quite different from this empire and this Caesar) is near.
In fact, (as we talked about last week) when you share your things and turn from the abuses that have so long defined us,
when you love one another and care for the least among us,
when you love in love (and therefore live in God)
indeed, that Reign of Love--if even only for a moment--has already arrived.
It’s here. In spite of everything.
For a moment.
And every such moment becomes a foretaste of what might yet come.
+++
According to scholars who study sass, most autobiographies written by formerly enslaved women in US credit their faith for providing them with the strength and the spark to sass back and to assert their own humanity in the face of a dehumanizing person or dehumanizing system.
According to scriptures, it was faith that allowed John and the crowds in the wilderness to do the same.
It is worth us wondering, I think, then, what kind of a sassy faith we might be
being called into today.
Where are we being called to assert our own humanity when the world may belittle or demonize or dehumanize?
Or:
Where are we being called to affirm an other’s humanity in the face of the same?
Where are we being called to make love the center, to interrupt, to tip the scales, to lower the mountains and to raise the valleys?
How are we being called to prepare the way of Love?
And to prepare the way of the Lord?
Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment