I was in conversation with Prof John Curtice about the General Election after the Sung Eucharist this morning.
We touched on what might happen at the election, how a UK government is actually formed, will proportional representation ever happen, will the SNP propose another referendum next year and what it is like being John Curtice in the middle of all this.
The conversation was recorded and is available here:
https://vimeo.com/124745987
How about the wife of Jesus, airbrushed out of the story by later misogynist Christians? See Starbird, M “The Woman with the Alabaster Jar” and other books by her. She is an ex-Catholic who set out to refute the Holy Blood, Holy Grail story and ended by being convinced that Jesus and Mary were a married pair (and an archetype of the male/female balance principle). There’s a wonderful window in Kilmore Church, Mull. Check it out – whoever created it intended it to represent J and M as husband and wife, and M is clearly pregnant. Of course, there is no unchallengeable evidence that Jesus was married, but what I would like to ask the sceptics is why, given that He was the word made flesh and dwelt among us, is it unacceptable for Him to have been a sexual being? Why have later Christians considered sexuality, even in a loving relationship, to be something disgusting? Because they have, we are now stuck with the nasty views of the NotW brigade that sex is either an acceptable leisure activity or something gross. As Margaret Starbird points out, if we restored Mary as Jesus’ beloved consort we would be creating a much more wholesome myth!
It is a little like the arguments that might be made of the relationship between Jesus and the beloved disciple though, isn’t it? All very attractive and neat if you come from a particular point of view but not really backed up with enough evidence apart from modern presumption, presupposition and desire.
I think the arguments on Jesus being married are very far from being liberationary. Rather, they’re the natural end-point of the Evangelical mindset that homophobically (and unbiblically) divides the world into Normal Heterosexual Married types and the demonised Other. “It is better to marry than burn” might have some mysognistic readings conducive to the fundamentalist world-view, but it hardly most naturally supports the idolatarisation of particular heterosexual relationships.
If I had a pound for every time a nominal Sola Scriptura type had told me that St.Paul had to have been married (presumably because Our Lord’s asceticism and disinterest in heterosexual marriage is bad enough) then I would be a very rich man indeed 😉
Interesting post Kelvin! Had no idea that St.Mary M even had red hair Perhaps she could be reclaimed as the Patron Saint of Gingers and Other Persecuted Minorities? 🙂
Oh, her hair was red, Ryan. Flaming Red I believe.
How reginal! 😉
here's what I said this morning.
Went to the theatre the other night, in the cinema. You know, one of these live relays of theatre in a cinema. It was Hamlet from the Royal National Theatre in London being relayed live, I think, to cinemas in 16 countries. The play was excellent. Very good indeed. What interested me though was how…
Forgive me, but I can’t help but be interested in the cross-dressing bearded nun story which was in the Herald today. The short version of the story is that a minister removed a picture of himself dressed as a nun from facebook, where it was his profile pic, following a complaint from someone belonging to…
Can someone tell me the difference between Wikileaks publishing US government cables and the Guardian publishing the same cables. So far as I can see, neither organisation has actually leaked anything, they are both publishing the same material that has been leaked by someone else. I’m struggling a bit to see why the editor of…
Leave a Reply