• Fill the hungry. Lift the lowly. Cast down the mighty. Send the rich away.

    A sermon for the Feast of the Assumption – 2020

    It was one of those things that appeared on the internet and all of a sudden it seemed like everyone I knew was retweeting it and sharing it.

    At first when you looked at it you might have thought it was quite an old image. There’s something about a woodcut that is rather nostalgic. But this was nostalgic and retro in a hipster kind of way and it was a newly created image.

    A familiar figure, but in a stance that I’ve never seen her depicted in before.

    Her head is covered in some kind of head-dress and there seems to be a halo of stars around her head, so there’s no doubt at all who she is. She’s very familiar to us.

    But here she’s standing in an unfamiliar pose.

    I say standing but she’s more active than that. She’s jigging about. Trampling on a snake and a skull. And she’s waving a clenched fist in the air.

    She looks for all the world as though she’s at a Black Lives Matter protest. Or a demo protesting against the government’s hostile environment policy that diminishes the lives of those seeking asylum. Or chanting about Climate Change. Or – well, so many things. So much that’s wrong. So much to put right. She looks like she could bring up a child who knew how to refuse the evil and choose the good.

    And around her in the woodcut there’s words. Her words: “Fill the hungry. Lift the lowly. Cast down the mighty. Send the rich away”.

    And it looks to me as though she’s chanting those slogans and punching her fist in the air in time with the chant.

    Benjamin Wildflower’s woodcut of the Blessed Virgin Mary is at once familiar and unfamiliar. We know instantly that it is her. And we know fine well what kind of values that she stood for. But it is a stance that is startling. Surprising. Slightly unsettling.

    And maybe that’s a better description of her than many – startling, surprising, slightly unsettling.

    It is difficult to think of another woman who has been more depicted than Mary. Yet most artists have played fairly safe. They’ve often produced images of astonishing beauty but often there can seem to be a passivity about the figure whom they depict. As though it was all God’s actions and she was just a recipient.

    Here at St Mary’s cathedral we tend to sit up and take notice when we encounter her in the scriptures. And she’s far from passive. Singing the Magnificat of justice even as she bore the child Jesus in the womb. Egging him on with the scandalous first miracle of turning water into wine. Turning up everywhere – when he was teaching. When he was dying. And being right at the centre of the circle of the disciples when they were set on fire at Pentecost to spread the news that we continue to spread today – that Jesus Christ, her son was raised from the dead. And death is not the end. And though there is much to weep over in this world, sadness is not our ultimate destination.

    The church has had plenty of trouble in passing on this message due to the fake news of a Gentle Jesus who was meek and mild. And it feels as though Mary has been packaged up in the same way as a passive young woman without much of a voice for herself.

    Not the Mary we know at all.

    Some of my favourite images of Mary are the ones that break with that tradition. The woodcut fist shaking Mary is just one of them.

    Elizabeth Frink’s Walking Madonna in the Close at Salisbury is another. A strong women. A woman striding very purposefully. A woman with things to do. And striding out from the church, not into it. She’s a Mary I feel I recognise from what I read in Scripture.

    Or another one that periodically does the rounds on the internet – a medieval manuscript Mary.

    It is from an age where it was very natural to depict the devil as a creature with horns.

    In the image I’m thinking of from 13th century England there’s just such a devil – a bit of a pantomime figure for our cynical modern eyes. And next to him there’s Mary all bedecked in draped clothing as usual. Her body hidden and her face rather beautiful. But this is another Mary’s who is using her fists. Not waving a fist in time to a protest song this time. But something a good deal more aggressive. She seems to be holding the devil with one hand at the back of his neck. With her other hand she’s bashing the devil in the nose with her fist.

    These images of Mary take us both to the scriptural Mary and the theological Mary.

    She’s not just a woman who once sat in a room whilst the Holy Spirit did all the work of the incarnation.

    She’s a collaborator with God’s work in the world. She’s in cahoots with all that is holy and true.

    We get chances in this life to be passive. There are times in our lives when we can choose to do nothing.

    We also get chances to shout out that the Mighty must be brought low. We get chances to stride out in power to do what needs to be done to put the world to rights. And we get chances to recognise the evil from the good and act on that knowledge. Every act a punch in the devil’s nose.

    Mary was one of us.

    She took her chances.

    Let us join her.

    And demand  that God remembers his promise of mercy. That the humble may be lifted up, the proud scattered in their conceit and the hungry filled with good things.

    She’ll be with us all the way.

    Amen

18 responses to “Twenty Years On”

  1. Sarah Avatar
    Sarah

    The time has passed in a blinking of an eye and yet….
    Special time, special place, special people.

  2. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    I met one of my best friends there 37 years ago when we were both bejantines. She happens to be spending this week with me. She is a Rev. Dr these days – I never even made it to the coveted blue scarf. Heigh ho.

    Not one female member of staff in my day at all. They used to say ‘how nice to have the ladies with us’ -some of them – while I ground my teeth.

    I think there is more to it that ‘conservative’ or ‘liberal’ – in that openmindedness is not prescriptive of either. It is the way you think not your conclusions, as a brief study of a certain kind of library shelf will reveal. There, Bauckham is no more welcome than Hampson.

    From my own experiences of students, I would say that (alas) even very conservative Biblical studies still come as an almighty shock to very many.

  3. Steven McQuitty Avatar
    Steven McQuitty

    What about the Church of England colleges, like Ripon, Ridley Hall, Westcott etc…?

    Does anyone have any inside knowledge?

    By the way I have jumped ships and become an Anglican Christian as opposed to a Presbyterian Christian…just started attending my local Church of Ireland parish church, which happens to be Bishop David’s last parish!

  4. MadPriest Avatar

    In England, in order to save money, the dioceses are insisting that ordinands are trained on part-time local courses. This means that they do not have the choice of traditions but have to study under the ethos of the local scheme. Unfortunately, as is the way of things nowadays, these local courses are dominated by Fulcrum type evangelicals.

  5. kelvin Avatar

    Oh, don’t get me started on training ordinands.

    I don’t know anything much about the C of E colleges. I was briefly accepted to study at one of them (known as one of the two bishop factories), when the principal of TISEC decided that she didn’t want to teach me. I visited it once and decided that all the students were frightened of the principal there. I wasn’t convinced that traditional seminary based teaching was any better than the pickled seminary that TISEC had become.

    We always trained together in Scotland, Madpriest. The idea of training based on churchpersonship seems rather odd.

  6. fr dougal Avatar
    fr dougal

    Well, the old Coates Hall was supposed to be a “non-party” theological college, but a friend of mine came to study there as an evangelical ordinand and pointed out that it actually was distinctly Catholic in ethos. It might be more accurate to say that in Scotland the training reflects the ethos of the Province – which means it is catholic in ecclesial outlook rather than evangelical.

  7. David | Dah•veed Avatar
    David | Dah•veed

    I went to graduate seminary in the USA after completing a five year Licenciatura in Human Behavior (psych & soc) in Mexico. The accrediting agency for schools of theology is joint for the US & Canada, so I assume most schools in Canada are very similar to the US.

    I started at Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University in Dallas, TX. I finished at Northwest Theological Union, Seattle, WA. I did one summer stint at Vancouver School of Theology, Vancouver, BC, sitting at the feet of the Rt. Revd. John Shelby Spong. (I drank all of my Kool Aid, thank you very much!)

    In the US & Canada it seems that accredited seminaries fall into two basic categories. The first is a “conservative” seminary with a statement of faith set in stone that a student must subscribe to at some point in order to be allowed to continue their education at that institution. The curriculum then consists of spoon feeding that prescribed belief system into the students so that they might spew it back on exams.

    The second is a “liberal seminary” which has no proscribed beliefs per se and has a curriculum which equips the students to do theology, and leaves what they believe to them to work out. The professors will grade you on your proficiency of using theological methodology and may critique you on how you arrived at your stated conclusions.

    The three seminaries with which I was involved were in the second category. I hear Perkins has a few more evangelically minded professors than when I was there. NTU failed as I and my same year classmates completed our courses and finished our exams. My degree was a four year ThM. We never got our degrees, we cannot get transcripts, but they cashed all of our checks!

    Which has something to do with why I am a psychologist and not a priest.

  8. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    > It was whilst I was there that I joined the Episcopal Church and became an Anglican

    It was excellent that you joined the Episcopal Church, but why on earth did you become an Anglican? I was one for three years, when I lived in Cambridge in the 1970s, but I’m glad to say it did me no permanent damage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Scottish Episcopal Church News for February 2015

    The following news can be reproduced on other websites and in church magazines. Sign up to have news like this delivered each month by email here: http://thurible.net/follow-blog/ Lent Appeals The Scottish Episcopal Church is having a co-ordinated Lent Appeal in each of its dioceses this year in aid of the Scottish Episcopal Institute. The Institute…

  • Charles, King and Martyr

    On this day, the Scottish Episcopal Church remembers Charles I – the king who was beheaded on this day in Whitehall in 1649. There’s always services organised in Scotland to remember Charles. The Scottish Episcopal Church was strongly aligned in the Jacobite cause in times gone by. I tend to remember this day not merely…

  • Sermon on BBC Radio 4

    It was great fun doing the BBC Radio 4 Sunday Worship live from St Mary’s today. There’s always a bit of an adrenalin rush about being involved with the production of 40 minutes of live radio. If you were one of the million or so who tuned in then you’ve already heard this sermon, but…

  • Response from the College of Bishops

    The following is the response from the College of Bishops to the group of more than 50 lay readers and clergy of the church who wrote expressing concern in unusually strong terms to a set of guidelines that the bishops introduced with no consultation last year. This has already been published online elsewhere and so…