Reading Genesis Through Tradition – Once Named: What Does God Really Say (WDGRS)?

By Paul Fahey                                                                                        Thursday, February 6

As I was studying the book of Genesis for my course in Salvation History, a nuance that I had not yet heard of concerning the conversation between Eve and the serpent was brought to my attention (Most of the scriptural exegesis in this post is inspired/borrowed from Gray and Cavin’s book “Walking with God”). Here is a break down of that conversation:

What the Serpent said:

Now the snake was the most cunning of all the wild animals that the LORD God had made. He asked the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You shall not eat from any of the trees in the garden’?” (Gen. 3:1 New American Bible, Revised Edition).

What Eve said:

The woman answered the snake: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it, or else you will die’” (Gen. 3:2-3).


What God Really Said™:

The LORD God gave the man this order: You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. From that tree you shall not eat; when you eat from it you shall die (Gen. 2:16-17).

So what’s going here, and why am I pointing this conversation out? Notice two things. First, the serpent intentionally exaggerates God’s command – “Did God really say, ‘You shall not eat from any of the trees in the garden’?” In other words, he makes God’s command appear arbitrary because God could have forbade them from eating from any random tree in the garden, which really means that God is giving Adam this command just for the Hell of it, which really means that God is an omnipotent tyrant.

Second, Eve also exaggerates God’s command – “You shall not eat it or even touch it, or else you will die.” By “buffering” God’s actual command, Eve demonstrates a lack of understanding in what God actually said (and why he said it). Thereby she distorts the significance of God’s actual command. Thereby she makes God’s law appear arbitrary. Thus, while it may not have been intentional, Eve’s exaggeration also undermines God’s law.

I see this same thing playing out in today’s theological and juridical discussions within Catholicism about what the Church really says. Two polarized “movements” with Catholicism, the “progressives” and the “trads,” (that really aren’t that different) are guilty of the same distortion of God’s word that Eve and the serpent are guilty of. For the purposes of polemics, I will use the issue of female ordination to illustrate the point.

The “progressives,” on one hand, intentionally misrepresent and over-exaggerate what the Church actually teaches about female priests. They say things like, “The Church is just a patriarchal organization trying to limit female leadership!” Rather than understanding the reasons behind the Church’s beliefs concerning female priests, this group merely belittles the teaching in the hope of making it appear arbitrary and irrelevant.

On the other hand, the “trads” build man-made fences around the Church’s teaching concerning female ordination. Take, for example, the vehement feelings that this group holds against female altar servers. Their reasoning behind this ban on altar-girls is that serving at the altar is somehow the training ground for the priesthood, and by allowing girls to serve we are giving them false encouragement (or at least a false impression) of the priesthood. However, this “law” is simply an arbitrary fence, and like Eve’s fence around the tree, it distorts the significance of the teaching that it’s trying to protect.

At the end of the day, what’s important is knowing What God Really Said™ and why He said it. The mistake that Eve, the serpent, trads, and progressives make is that they add their own agenda (no matter how well intentioned) to God’s Word rather then remaining docile to it.

Paul Fahey is a husband, father, and catechist. He has a BA in Theology with minors in History, and Catholic Studies and is currently studying at the Augustine Institute for a MA in Theology.


6 thoughts on “Reading Genesis Through Tradition – Once Named: What Does God Really Say (WDGRS)?

  1. I must say that I share your interest in Genesis, especially the passages you cite. Nice interpretation! I would like to point out, however, that in referring to those who support women’s ordination, you make a rather simplistic claim regarding our reasoning. Many, many theologians, female and male, have written much about the topic, even referring directly to Scripture itself. I suggest that you, at the very least, read the work of Fr. Roy Bourgeouis, a Maryknoll priest , excommunicated for his support of the movement. His book, “My Journey from Silence to Solidarity,” is really quite powerful.
    My best to you as you continue pursuing your degree…. and much peace too!

  2. Denise,

    Thank you for your comment. Yes, for the sake of brevity I had to simplify both positions. However, this is a topic that I am not unfamiliar with. And, at the end of the day, docility to Holy Mother Church (whom we believe is infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit) is who I stand with.

  3. I must say the word “docility” rather stuns me. Given our Catholic tradition of social justice work and teaching, we Catholics know how often well-meaning “docile” folk have allowed gross injustice to continue unabated. I understand there are many ways of viewing this particular issue – and even though I am genuinely hurt by the position that women are not capable of embodying the image of Christ – I would hope that, at the very least, all involved Catholics would wrestle and struggle with this actual teaching…. that women’s primary vocations are that of virgin and mother, as stated by Pope John Paul II in his pastoral letter, “On the Dignity & Vocation of Women,” a position with which Pope Francis apparently agrees. Do we really believe that God values women only for their ability to mother? If we read the individual stories of women throughout both scriptures, I’m pretty sure we would discover something different.

    • Docility to the Church should not stun you. As Catholics we believe that the Church speaks the Truth just as infallibly as Jesus spoke the Truth while on earth and how the Word speaks the Truth through Scripture (and to not believe this, quite frankly, is to not be Catholic). To obey and submit to the Church is to obey and submit to Christ. Now, this does not mean that faithful Catholics are never to question or to search for the Truth themselves. Rather, it means that, even though one be questioning, the Catholic is not to subvert or misrepresent the Church’s teachings (which are Christ’s teachings).

      Now to wrestle and struggle with a couple of the things to brought up. I don’t think that women can embody the image of Jesus Christ. Women bear the image of God, just like all human beings. However, while God transcends male and female, Jesus clearly chose to be incarnated as a man. Also, unlike skin color, hair color, height, weight, etc., one’s sex is not merely an accidentally property of one’s nature. Rather, one’s sex is an integral part of one’s nature. Thus women, while bearing the image of God, cannot embody the image of Jesus Christ (who is undoubtably male).

      Also, I think that your comment about the Church teaching that God values women only for their ability to mother is a little disingenuous. Clearly women (think Mother Theresa, St. Joan of Ark, Deborah, Esther, etc.) are valued for more abilities than bearing and raising children.

  4. Paul,
    It seems we’ve hit a point where we will just have to agree to disagree…
    I wish you well,
    and much peace,

  5. Hello ! Good morning ! Thanks a lot for this beautiful picture. I would like to use it for a teaching with pupils. Is it possible ? And which is the author of this beautiful green picture of Eve and the snake ?
    Thanks for your attention and your answer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s