Patriarchy is Starting to Crumble

Happy Easter

I have commented a few times this year that “It doesn’t feel like Easter”. Perhaps, that is because we had no Easter break from school so the weekend is consumed with all the normal end of week/preparing for next week tasks.

Yet, it set me wondering about what is Easter supposed to feel like? Indeed, is it supposed to “feel” like anything at all? We are two thousand years removed from the event but it is a significant part our faith stories. I’m not sure we can even begin to emulate the feelings of those early disciples so at Eastertime we re-capture the significance of the event in a way that is relevant to our personal lives and histories.

Easter has always been a time of new beginnings. Regardless of how the date fell, Easter always felt like the half way point between Christmas and summer. A new season beginning, nature starting to bloom, coming to life reflected everywhere we look. New life is always a joyous occasion, a time for rejoicing and celebration. Easter is depicted with eggs, baby bunnies and spring flowers all signs of new beginnings.

Today’s lectionary reading is John 20:1-18. The passage tells the story of the empty tomb discovered by Mary. Within those eighteen verses a woman who must have experienced a myriad of feelings is portrayed. I can imagine shock and horror, on the discovery of an empty tomb, followed by deep sadness, confusion, unbelief, then as she lingered at the tomb, hope followed by elation, wonder and unbridled joy.

Take a moment to savour Mary’s role. In earlier blogs I have talked about the very important roles given to women in the gospel of John. Mary, his mother, announcing to her son that it was time for the public ministry to begin, the woman wanting healing for her child who revealed to Jesus that the ministry was not only for the Jewish nation but was for all and Mary who anointed Jesus for death. Significant moments.

In this passage a woman is used to reveal another significant event. Mary announces the resurrection. Patriarchy is starting to crumble. One of the most significant seasons in the church’s calendar is announced by a woman. Sadly, patriarchy quickly re-established itself to such an extend that women were largely excluded for the next two thousand years. But this passage does give a glimmer of hope in the words, “Mary announced”. Thankfully, the significance of women’s roles words in the gospels are now often appreciated.

In the text, Mary made two journeys and two announcements. Firstly, she discovered the empty tomb. She ran to find the other disciples. I’m sure this journey would have been full of shock and sadness. She announced to the disciples that the body had gone. They ran to see for themselves, found Mary’s words were true and returned home. Mary lingered at the tomb and grieved. Perhaps there is a lesson in that for when one is facing hardships, not to run away from the grief but to linger a while and see if the situation changes. It did for Mary in an amazing way. She saw a heavenly vision. She spoke to the risen Christ. Her sorrow changed to joy.

She made her second journey. She ran back to the disciples this time with quite a different message. I can imagine the difference in those two journeys. I can imagine the lightness and joy Mary felt as she ran to announce she had seen the Christ. It was a new beginning. New life was shinning through. To announce the change in seasons was a privilege granted to a woman in a time when the testimony of women was not accepted in the courts. In this one woman’s witness patriarchy started to crumble. Good news indeed.

Wasted Women!

Spring seems to have come early to New York state. As I write this in the early morning the sun is already shining through my window although it is still rather chilly. Yesterday we took the pugs for a long walk in the mild weather. Winter has been short this year. The grass is green. Tiny shoots can be seen at ground level . . . the anticipation of what is to come.

Today’s lectionary reading is full of anticipation. Mary anoints Jesus in anticipation of his death. Once again the author of John has portrayed a woman in a strong, prophetic role.

A few weeks ago I wrote about Mary, the mother of Jesus, being used in a prophetic role. In that story, of the wedding in Cana, Mary revealed to Jesus that it was time for the public ministry to begin. It was a significant moment.

Here is another significant moment. Another Mary. This time revealing that the journey to death was starting. It wasn’t portrayed as a rash or careless moment. Jesus recognized that it was a planned moment, it was a prophetic moment: “She bought it so that she may keep it for the day of my burial.” Jesus knew, this was the beginning of the journey to death.

So another women playing a key, prophetic role in the story of Jesus. A women anointed Jesus for his death. A women anointed. Let those words reverberate today . . . a women anointed. This is a key phrase, a key verse, a key happening, a blow to male domination in the patriarchal society of the day.

Yet, if the story is unpacked the significance is even more startling. Not only did Mary anoint but she understood what was about to happen. The disciples who had been Jesus’ companions still did not understand. In the gospel of John this is represented by Judas question, “should the nard not have been sold and given to the poor”. In the gospel of Matthew, Judas is not singled out, the text comments that the disciples were angry and said, “Why this waste?”

It is quite sad, that what should have been an amazing and poignant moment was belittled by the male disciples. I wonder if it would have read differently if it had been John or Peter who had done the anointing. I wonder if a male name would have made the action more acceptable to the disciples.

Read it again, note the male bias in the text, Lazarus’ house, Martha served.

However, I want to focus mainly how making John anoint Jesus changes the story. (Certainly brings it in line with the Old Testament where male prophets anointed kings)

Try reading the story this way . . .

Six days before the Passover Jesus, came to Bethany, the home of Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. There they gave a dinner for him. Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those at table with him. The disciple, John, took a pound of costly perfume made of pure nard, anointed Jesus’ feet and wiped them with his own hair.

So here are some hypothetical questions to ponder.

How does the insertion of John’s name change the story?

Would the other disciples have still cried, “Why this waste?”

Or would they have recognised it for what it was . . . a prophetic anointing signifying the beginning of Jesus’ journey to death.

Maybe the comment “Why this waste” should not be applied to the anointing oil, but applied to the centuries of women who have been ignored and bypassed in their communities of faith.

Footnote:

Nard (or muskroot) is an amber-coloured essential oil which is derived from a plant (pictured above) found in the Himalayas in Nepal, China and India.

A Mothering God

This week I want to highlight one phrase from the gospel text (Luke 13: 31- 35). Those who know me well may already have guessed which phrase it will be.

“I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings.”

I cannot lose the opportunity to re-imagine God. And here we have this lovely, feminine, protective image of God as a mother.

Mothering images have largely been overlooked as patriarchal culture has given us a male god. So it is important that we lift these images from the text. That we savour them. That we allow our mind to be full of them. That we let them permeate us and help us re-imagine a female imagery for God.

Of course, God is God. All language about God is metaphorical. In a sense any images we have of God is only to help us on our spiritual journey. God is not a literal woman, but neither is God a literal man!

Sadly, centuries of seeing women as property, weak, unimportant, insignificant, disposable, to be used by men have led to an unbalanced view of God. This is reflected in Bible interpretations, art works, even in more contemporary movies. The pronoun for God has always been “he”.

It is time to start re-imaging God. At this point I throw out the challenge that I, and others before me, have done. Spend the next three to six months only referring to God as she. It is only when one is as comfortable using “she” for God as using “he” that the female imagery can really start to be appreciated and, more importantly, that the male image is becoming less dominant.

For all of us I think this is a journey. I can only speak for myself, but from early childhood God was always spoken of as male. I grew up with a male God. It is hard to leave behind thoughts and images that have been with us all our lives, images that are part of the predominant culture. It has to be a conscious choice, a determination to leave behind the exclusive, male God.

With that there may be a need to put aside also the traditional male/female roles and see a more rounded, inclusive view of humanity (but that discussion is not for today).

One thing that I have found helpful is to pounce on these female images in the scriptures. To give them special attention. To make sure that we are mindful of the lovely references to God as a mother.

Julian of Norwich (1342-1416) highlighted this need to see the feminine in God. A passage from her writing is included in our Way of Living (pg. 174-5). One of the lines says, “This grace is for all the world because it is our precious mother, Christ.”

I think it is really important that we don’t ignore the references to God as mother. That we find and note the imagery of God as female. There have been many excellent books by feminist theologians on the subject, well worth exploring.

I hope everyone within our community will rise to this challenge. It is a crucial one. It is an important part of who we are as a community.

I will let the final word go to Elizabeth Johnson who speaks to the far-reaching effects of this challenge. “By challenging the bed-rock assumption of this arrangement, naming God in female images promotes change or, in religious terms, conversion of a community's mind and heart to the true equality of women” (2000, Boardman Lecture in Christian Ethics).

(The image depicted is the mosaic in Dominus Flevit, a chapel on the Mount of Olives)

The lost child

It is the third day of Christmas. I hope you are all having a wonderful Christmas season. Today’s lectionary gospel reading is from the book of Luke (2:41-52).

It is the one story, included in the gospel, about Jesus as a child. It is a very strange account. It really doesn’t show Jesus in a good light, especially if we translate it into a contemporary tale.

Imagine this was in the media today . . .

A twelve-year-old boy goes on a trip with his parents. It is a vacation they take every year. Many friends and extended family travel with them. They are going to the capital city to attend a festival in their religious tradition.

After enjoying the festival, it is time to return home. His parents assume he is travelling with other relatives within their large party. When they reached their overnight stop the parents discovered the boy is missing.

At additional expense, and very worried, the parents set off on the long journey back to the city. They search for the boy but are unable to find him for three days. When they eventually do locate him they ask him why he stayed behind and caused them so much anxiety. He gave them an offhand answer indicating they should have known where he would be.

Of course, in contemporary times police and social services would also be involved. If this had appeared in some of the  newspapers I read online I can imagine some of the comments . . .

Parent failure for not checking sooner

Disobedient child

Very naughty child

Cheeky child

Child needs serious consequences

Fancy causing all that worry to his parents

Etc., etc., etc.

So the questions in my mind are

Why is this story included in the gospel?

What purpose does it serve?

What can we learn from it?

As I read it over several times I could only conclude that it was included as part of the gospel to emphasize that the child’s origin was special. The author of the gospel wanted to make a link between the birth stories and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry and chose to do it with a story of the twelve-year-old Jesus.

However, I think the last sentence is the key to the story. Maybe, the detail, the framework is not so significant. The important message is that Jesus “increased in wisdom and in years, and in divine and human favor.” (52)

The first couplet is interesting, “increased in wisdom and in years.” It certainly gives the impression that wisdom grows as one ages. In the gospel text Jesus, as a child, was said to amaze some of the temple teachers with his understanding and answers. The way the story reads indicates that Jesus thought it was time to start taking his place with the teachers. Yet, his mother clearly disagreed. She made him return home with her. She knew he needed time to age and to grow in wisdom. It was more than another dozen years before Mary revealed that it was time for Jesus to start his public ministry.

I think this idea could be of huge importance.  The passage is read on the last Sunday of the old year. It is often a time of reflection on what has been achieved. It is a time when fresh visions and plans for the New Year start to come to mind.

Maybe, this last year nothing has been achieved other than to “increase in wisdom and in years.” Yet, that is a big success. It is preparation time. It is a waiting time but not a wasted time. I think this story shows us the importance of not trying to do things in too much of a hurry. Not to try to do them to soon. Jesus had to wait many years before he was revealed and to start his ministry.

The second couplet can also be relevant today. “To increase in human and divine favor.” I think this speaks to lifestyle while in a waiting period. A aim for a life which finds favor with others. Perhaps expressed best in the words of the lectionary epistle, “clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience . . . forgive each other . . . clothe yourselves with love . . . And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts.

I hope all continue to have a happy and blessed Christmas season.

+Jane

Not Enough to Live On!

Today’s readings are largely about journeys, provisions and widows. The Old Testament reading gave us a choice of two stories. I wish we could have read both as they share the themes of widows, journeys and provisions. 

The first reading is part of the story of Ruth. The background to this story is that Naomi journeyed from Bethlehem to Moab with her husband and two sons. While she was there her sons both married. One of them married Ruth. Sadly, Naomi’s husband and sons all died. Leaving both Naomi and Ruth widows. Naomi had to return to her homeland Ruth chose to stay with her mother-in-law. Together they journey from Moab to Bethlehem.

To keep them from starving Ruth went out into the fields to glean. Boaz, who was their kin, saw Ruth and instructed the harvesters to drop a little more grain than usual to make Ruth’s task a little easier.

However, this wasn’t enough. I think this is a feminist issue. The woman was offered what the men left over!  Perhaps we could say that Boaz was a kindly man, after all he left extra grain for Ruth to glean. But this story is not about whether Boaz was kind or not. It is about women’s rights. And Ruth and Naomi had the right to be cared for by Boaz. It was the law (see for example Deut. 25:5-6,).  Boaz may have been kind to Ruth but he was shirking his duty as a relative.

In the lectionary passage today Naomi finds a way to remind Boaz of his responsibilities to Ruth and herself. This is really important. The women did not calmly accept the little that was offered but demanded their proper place in that society. Happily, Boaz fulfilled his responsibilities and the story ends well.

The second story is very different. In the tale the prophet Elijah is sent by God on a journey to Zarephath. According to the story Elijah will meet a widow who will provide for him. But the widow he meets is at the end of her resources. She has only enough food to prepare one final meal for herself and her son. Then she knows they will die of starvation.  Elijah asks her to prepare bread for him first.  The story tells us that God, through Elijah, has said the “jar of meal” would not be emptied until rain came to allow more crops to flourish. Surely, this is a story of generosity of a woman, sharing even in the face of poverty. Yet, the story does not end there. The widow’s child becomes sick and dies but is miraculously revived by Elijah (or God). Overall it is a story of provision for a woman and her child. In this story the provision is supernatural.

Often in the bible we read of widows and orphans. I think this is a bigger concept than just those who are physically widowed or orphaned. They are used as biblical examples of those who are marginalized, poor, needing care, needing to be seen, etc. The stories around them illustrate this.

The New Testament story also features a journey, a widow and provisions (Mark 12:41-44). In this tale people have journeyed to the temple and are giving money to the treasury. Many give lots of money but the widow puts in only two coins. The story continues with Jesus commenting that she put in all she had to survive with.

This is often called the widow’s mite. It is cited as a good thing, Jesus is said to applaud her generosity. Sadly, this story has also been used to make people feel guilty if they are not giving everything they own to the church.

Today, I want to re-imagine it or re-vision it or re-claim it.

As we read it, remember that the widows and the orphans have often been used to represent those who are needy and poverty stricken.

I want to set the text in context.

Firstly, in the whole scriptures using the examples of the lectionary readings of Ruth and Elijah. In both cases, although in very different ways, a duty of care is illustrated. It is a duty of care that did not let widows starve.

Secondly, I want to set the passage in the context of the verses around it. Immediately before it is love. New commandments are given which talk about loving God and loving neighbour. The text is quite specific, “to love one’s neighbour as oneself—this is much more important than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices” (33)

The people listening were instructed not to be like scribes. “They devour widows’ houses and for the sake of appearances say long prayers” (40).

Then Jesus took the disciples and sat and watched people go to the treasury. The treasury is in the court of women. It consists of thirteen brass receptacles. They were the shape of trumpets. People placed their offerings in them. Nine of them were for money tributes, for example sin offerings. Four were to receive freewill offerings used to buy wood, temple adornments and incense.

They watched the woman come in and put in her two coins. It was all she had.

Was this an example of “devouring widows’ houses”? She was left with nothing to live on.

Does this sound like something Jesus would applaud? Personally, I say a resounding “no”.

As I read the passage it feels like Jesus is showing the disciples the shame of the system. It exposed a religious society that did not care if widows were left to starve.

It exposed a widow harmed by her offering.

Yesterday, we ordained Thomas.

Our conversation was of a new kind of priesthood.

One that serves

One that cares

One where people are more important than temple decorations

One that, metaphorically speaking, doesn’t leave widows and orphans to starve.