I get the feeling that this love heart, spotted in a local baker’s window conveys certain truths that it was not intended to convey.
I get the feeling that this love heart, spotted in a local baker’s window conveys certain truths that it was not intended to convey.
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 ๐
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? ๐
Oh, her hair was red, Ryan. Flaming Red I believe.
How reginal! ๐
There is a Big Sing at St Saviour’s tonight at 7.30 pm More details on www.saint-saviour.org Not to be missed.
I was away for part of this week in Perth at the diocesan clergy conference. I?d like to be able to fill the sermon this week with the wisdom that I was able to soak up there. However, things don?t always work out that way. I must be honest ? whatever wisdom was on offer…
Much puzzlement this morning over the wine at the 8 am communion. I knew something was wrong with it the last time I celebrated (on a Wednesday). There was a taste of something familliar, yet I could not quite put my finger on what it was. What it was, was cinnamon. And the wine was…
Somehow the heather managed to avoid being set alight at the diocesan clergy conference this week. No buzz groups. No buzz. Then back last night to the Book Club. This month’s book was The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. This was a good discussion. I’m still mulling over whether the central character…
Leave a Reply