Mizpah

When I was in college some friends and I tagged the end of each missive to our paramour with ‘Mizpah” (Genesis 31:48): yes, we wrote actual letters back then: put stamps on them, and walked them to the campus post office. Mailed them!! To my friends and me, Mizpah not only sounded sweet, but also was a subtle gesture of infatuation.

I now fantasize how some love-sick college student must have found the verse in a Bible reading and thought, “How creative and sweet! I’ll add that to my next letter to my sweetheart!” Obviously a lot of us thought that as well. We took the word Mizpah at face value: we thought it meant “God will watch over and keep us till we can happily embrace again! Till then, both of us will be under God’s loving and watchful care.” 

My! were we wrong! Mizpah, if anything, is contrary to a romantic sentiment. Such a presumption portents language danger: using a pithy, cute term, or aphorism when not knowing its precise meaning. This often happens when Scripture quotations are used to emphasize or elevate meaning in an event. A wedding ceremony is a good illustration; “whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God.”

But I digress. It is fairly easy to get into semantic trouble, not knowing the context and meaning of symbols or phrases: especially when using one in the presence of someone who actually knows the meaning and context. Intent and context are essential in understanding what is actually being said: misused. not so much.

Let’s peruse the Scripture quote above; nowadays couples often write their own wedding vows: eclectic symbolism and accouterments are sometimes brought into the church and ceremony. The quote is Naomi to Ruth, and sometimes read from the Bible, or sung as special music in wedding ceremonies. The words,” whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge” (King James Version)  are from one woman to another woman. In context it is deep loyalty of one widow to another, her mother-in-law. It is sweet. It is noble. It is comforting. It is not anywhere close to a romantic gesture. My humor makes me visualize this gesture as two guys would, going on a camping trip. One says to the other, “Let’s keep together, and setting up camp will be a snap with both of us working together. But you’d better do your part! I’m watching you!” 

 As for understanding Mizpah, read the entire chapter 31 of Genesis. There, one discovers Laban, his son-in-law, and daughters wallowing in a rats’ nest of cheating, swindling, and deceit. Finally, just shy of coming to violence, they settle things. And, not all that fairly. But settled it is. An uneasy peace.  Jacob and his crew set up a pile of stones, a symbol often seen in the Old Testament: . Jacob announces that these stones will always be a reminder of our conciliatory agreement.

Then Laban names the place Miapah ,saying: “May the Lord watch between you and me when we are absent one from another.” Laban follows that statement emphasizing that not only is God watching you, but I too, will keep my eyes on you and your scoundrel ways. “So. Watch it, Buddy!!!” This licks all the red off your candy, if you thought Mizpah is a sweet word that enfolds the hearts of two sweethearts until they are together again. 

Here’s a wild example of how something taken out of context and intent can do damage; Two teenage girls at a swimming party. One of the girls, wearing her fashionable new swimsuit, sits accidentally on a recently painted bench . Her mother gave it to her as a birthday present. She stands up and screams, “My mother is going to kill me for this!!” Taken out of context and ignoring her intent, a passerby might wrongly assume child abuse is in the works. Silly? Maybe. But in today’s culture, such a statement could open up a pandora’s box troubles.

Such mishaps in communication happen too easily: An idea launches a drive; the drive becomes a movement. Such mishap occurs if the idea is nefariously hijacked. Or, just as ignoble, is given an opposite or subversive meaning. I am not decrying the decay of the King’s English: that task is left for more scholarly folk. The English language is an ever flowing stream. Therefore when spoken with clarity of communication it demands our knowing the meaning of words and terms we use.

Maybe I should use Mizpah here; should you or I need to be strictly guarded in our use of “The King’s English!”