[A sermon delivered to the Oxford Unitarians congregation on Sunday, 2nd of May 2021]
(Readings: Acts 8:26-40 and 1 John 4:7-21)
In our first reading today we encountered a character from the New Testament who, I believe, is sadly too oftern neglected – The Ethiopian Eunuch. Yet there are, of course two Ethiopian Eunuchs in the biblical cannon. And the other is in which book?… no need to all shout at once! Yes the first Ethiopian Eunuch mentioned in the Bible in actually Ebed-Melech in Chapter 38 of the Book of Jeremiah. In that story Ebed-Melech is an official of the King of Judah. Ebed-Melech saves the day in that story by leading a crack team of soldiers to rescue the prophet Jeremiah from a cistern that he has been thrown into (a cistern as in a waterproof well type structure used to collect rainwater – not a flushing toilet cistern).
Anyway, this unnamed Ethiopian Eunuch in the Book of Acts has a few similarities with Ebed-Melech. They were both high ranking advisors of monarchs, and they both would have been subject to roughly the same gender politics of the ancient world.
Eunuchs in terms of the gender hierarchy of the age would have been towards the bottom of the pile. Eunuchs occupied a place below men and women in society and, as a foreign Eunuch our Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts would have been towards the very bottom of the pile. Ethiopia especially was a place that was depicted as both exotic and barbarian by Greco-Roman writers. Countries led by a queen were oftern depicted by these writes as “soft” and their people as unnaturally effeminate.
Our eunuch then, despite having been in a position of great influence and power back in what was then considered Ethiopia – which is likely to have approximated in modern geographic terms to Sudan – would have found himself in a precarious social position while he travelled along the Gaza road. This road, a wilderness road, would have been far from safe for him. His chariot and obvious wealth (scrolls of Isiah were very expensive to commission) that afforded him a protective status in his homeland would only have made him a more obvious target here. Any man wishing to do him ill would have faced little to no punishment for abusing a foreign eunuch.
What would have led him to travel to Jerusalem in the first place? One theory is that our eunuch might have been what was called a “God-fearer”, someone who, despite not being Jewish themselves (and not being able to follow the religious law), had come to believe in the God of the Jews, likely through reading Jewish scriptures and other religious writings. Our eunuch had probably been moved to pray to God at the temple after reading the works of the prophets. Unfortunately, he had, until encountering Philip, probably had somewhat of a wasted journey. Under the laws of Deuteronomy eunuchs were not allowed to be counted among the worshiping community of Israel. It is unlikely that our eunuch’s reception in Jerusalem would have been a warm and friendly one.
What great faith he must have had then, to have continued trying to wrestle with and understand the scriptures of a religion whose structures had no place for him. Indeed, his status as a “God-fearer” if true, would make our eunuch a contender for the first gentile convert to Christianity.
Now, if that is true, this would make for something quite remarkable, that the first gentile convert to this new religion, not even yet recognised as Christianity, was a foreigner who does not even fit into the categories of ‘man’ or ‘woman’ that the first readers of the Book of Acts would have been used to. It is no wonder then that our eunuch, quite rightly in my opinion, has been celebrated by many modern scholars in the field of Queer Theology as an icon for Queer, especially trans, Christians.
Anyone who has found themselves pushed to the outside of society because of their race, nationality, and sexual or gender minority status can see something of themselves in the story of the Ethiopian eunuch.
Philip, in welcoming our eunuch into the church through baptism, becomes a conduit of Divine love. We see him, in the passage of Acts that we heard today, displaying the ethics codified clearly in the First Letter of John that we also heard from today. Little wonder then that gay Roman Catholic Priest and theologian Father John McNeill calls Philip the patron saint of the Queer community because of the affirming welcome he gave to the eunuch. God is not exclusion or hate. God is love, and because of this simple fact, a truly Christian ethic can only be formed with actions that lead to the inclusion and affirmation of those who are oppressed, marginalised and maligned in our society.
This work that Philip and others like him did in centuries gone by we are called to do today and tomorrow. We have to be sure that our message and actions result in all of those trans and non-binary folks feeling love and joy in just the same way as Philip’s encounter with our eunuch left him rejoicing.
All too oftern, people who are excluded in other areas of society are also shut out of the church. Scripture has long been used as an excuse for bigotry and still too many LGBT folk are forced into harmful practices such as conversion “therapy” or are simply made to feel that they have to be quiet about it or made to leave their gender or sexuality at the door of the church in case their very presence might cause offense. Thank God for the Philips of this world who break down these idolatrous walls of bigotry and hate and extend a truly divine and loving welcome to so many of us today.
May we all be like Philip and make the oppressed rejoice in the inclusive and affirming good news.
May we all be like the eunuch and possess a trusting faithfulness so strong that we can find the love of God in the welcome which others give to us.
Amen.
