|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Advent: Male-centric?
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
This article mentions that the lectionary readings for Advent tends to skew towards male characters:
http://www.anglicanjournal.com/articles/do-we-ignore-the-women-at-the-centre-of-advent
We get two Sundays on John the Baptist and this year, being year A, we don't really get Mary on the Fourth Sunday, we get the focus on Joseph in the Matthean infancy narrative.
The article also notes that the liturgy rarely ever mentions the foremothers of our faith, Sarah, Hannah, Elizabeth or Anna.
What about one suggestion is to dump John the Baptist on the Third Sunday of Advent, and instead, insert the Annunciation on the Third, and the Visitation on the Fourth?
[ 02. December 2016, 03:19: Message edited by: Anglican_Brat ]
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Are you following a lectionary which does Matthew this year? We are, thus the supposed male skewing. Try Series C (Luke) for the female skewing.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
And to add insult to injury, the Advent season ends with the birth of a male child! Perhaps someone wanted something to write about, so many dollars per word style.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Galilit
Shipmate
# 16470
|
Posted
Well, in 1964 or 65 I asked my first Spiritual Director (a.k.a. "Mum") why the Baby Jesus was not a little girl.
She replied, "I don't think they'd have listened to a lady in those days"
Haven't heard a better answer in the intervening 50+ years even with all my really intelligent university-educated discussions and readings
--------------------
She who does Her Son's will in all things can rely on me to do Hers.
Posts: 624 | From: a Galilee far, far away | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
What about one suggestion is to dump John the Baptist on the Third Sunday of Advent, and instead, insert the Annunciation on the Third, and the Visitation on the Fourth?
We have a church feast that celebrates the Annunciation. It's called Annunciation and takes place on March 25.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teekeey Misha
Shipmate
# 18604
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
We have a church feast that celebrates the Annunciation. It's called Annunciation and takes place on March 25.
We have a church feast that celebrates John the Baptist. It's called the Nativity of John Baptist and takes place on 24 June.
And the First and Second Findings of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 24 June.
And the Third Finding of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 25 May.
And the Beheading of John Baptist takes place on 29 August.
And the Conception of John Baptist takes place on 23 September.
And isn't there also a Synaxis of John Baptist after the Baptism of Christ?
Two Sundays in Advent as well? Talk about building your part! ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
Misha
Don't assume I don't care; sometimes I just can't be bothered to put you right.
Posts: 296 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Galilit:
Well, in 1964 or 65 I asked my first Spiritual Director (a.k.a. "Mum") why the Baby Jesus was not a little girl.
She replied, "I don't think they'd have listened to a lady in those days"
Haven't heard a better answer in the intervening 50+ years even with all my really intelligent university-educated discussions and readings
IMHO there is another one which your mother would almost certainly not have known in 1964-5 unless she was working at the forefront of biological research. It is my understanding that we now know that if it were possible to clone a child of Mary, either ex utero or by some sort of spontaneous parthenogenesis, the child could only have been born female. A mother can only bear a male child by either the normal method of impregnation or miraculously.
Going back to the argument about why there are two Sundays about John there Baptist in Advent, only the second of the two is actually about him. The first one is supposed to be about the prophets. The gospel features John the Baptist because the others are all in the OT. So he is the only one active in the gospels.
[ 02. December 2016, 14:26: Message edited by: Enoch ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Teekeey Misha:
.....
And the First and Second Findings of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 24 June.
And the Third Finding of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 25 May.....
It was found three times? That might explain why although I have seen the head of John the Baptist in Amiens Cathedral, it is also in a church in Rome and in another in Damascus ... ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.
Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Metapelagius:
quote:
Originally posted by Teekeey Misha:
.....
And the First and Second Findings of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 24 June.
And the Third Finding of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 25 May.....
It was found three times? That might explain why although I have seen the head of John the Baptist in Amiens Cathedral, it is also in a church in Rome and in another in Damascus ...
I think there's one in Aleppo, as well. (No, don't ask me what Aleppo is!)
I've sometimes wondered if JtB was like one of those creatures who keeps regrowing a new head when one is chopped off. That would have shown Herodias!
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Metapelagius:
quote:
Originally posted by Teekeey Misha:
.....
And the First and Second Findings of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 24 June.
And the Third Finding of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 25 May.....
It was found three times? That might explain why although I have seen the head of John the Baptist in Amiens Cathedral, it is also in a church in Rome and in another in Damascus ...
I think there's one in Aleppo, as well. (No, don't ask me what Aleppo is!)
I've sometimes wondered if JtB was like one of those creatures who keeps regrowing a new head when one is chopped off. That would have shown Herodias!
You've just outed yourself, Gary Johnson. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Goode
Shipmate
# 9224
|
Posted
Self-regenerating body parts? Who needs stem cells, when you can do it with a diet of locusts and honey.
Posts: 654 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
IMHO there is another one which your mother would almost certainly not have known in 1964-5 unless she was working at the forefront of biological research. It is my understanding that we now know that if it were possible to clone a child of Mary, either ex utero or by some sort of spontaneous parthenogenesis, the child could only have been born female.
Chromosomes were described in the 20s and parthenogenesis in the 30s.
But even then it isn't possible to clone a child of Mary so I don't really follow the reasoning.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
It's really not on for God to have borne a male son. You'd think She could have arranged it differently if She'd wanted, but there yer go...
Personally, I have no problem with the Prophets, and John the Baptist, being blokes. Our Lady makes up for it with her pivotal role in the story of our redemption.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Metapelagius:
quote:
Originally posted by Teekeey Misha:
.....
And the First and Second Findings of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 24 June.
And the Third Finding of the Head of John Baptist takes place on 25 May.....
It was found three times? That might explain why although I have seen the head of John the Baptist in Amiens Cathedral, it is also in a church in Rome and in another in Damascus ...
You may remember the conversation in Umberto Eco's "The Name of the Rose" between the monk William of Baskerville and the novice Adso. After describing several alleged "relics", William said: "In the cathedral at Cologne, I saw the skull of John the Baptist at the age of twelve".
"Really?' Adso exclaimed, amazed. Then, seized by doubt, he added, "But the Baptist was executed at a more advanced age!".
"The other skull must be in another treasury," William said, with a grave face.
(I think that's just about short enough to be OK for copyright ...).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teekeey Misha
Shipmate
# 18604
|
Posted
quote:
Priginally posted by The Rev. Nancy Knowles, of Thamesview United Church in Fullarton, Ont. in the article
...there would be no birth of John the Baptist, birth of Jesus, or even the harried innkeeper, without female characters present...
Has the United Church re-written the Gospels to include the inn-keeper from nursery Nativity Plays? If not, I'm damned if I can find a "harried innkeeper" in any lectionary readings for Advent and Christmas!
I confess I don't like the two-John-Sundays version of the lectionary, not because I think it's a misogynist exclusion of women (I don't - it isn't) but because I just don't like JB much. I'd much rather hear about Elizabeth and Mary, not because I think including their stories is about acknowledging and empowering wimmin in the Gospel (I don't - it isn't) but because they're just such good stories. The Visitation says FAR more to me about our faith than JB strutting round shouting and generally being "antisocial for Jesus".*
*ETA: Above opinions are, I'm quite happy to accept, based not on any profound theology, but solely on my own feelings as a fallen and shallow human being. ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
[ 04. December 2016, 18:21: Message edited by: Teekeey Misha ]
--------------------
Misha
Don't assume I don't care; sometimes I just can't be bothered to put you right.
Posts: 296 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tobias
Shipmate
# 18613
|
Posted
Among other oddities in the article is the fact that, in discussing the lectionary provisions, it treats the psalms as readings. And so, on the occasion when the Magnificat is suggested as an alternative to the psalm, the author treats it as a reading too - and discovers a mare's nest of misogyny:
quote:
One alternative reading is suggested—the Magnificat, Mary’s Song (Luke 1:46–55), but this optional reading omits the first three words of the passage. Those words are, simply, “And Mary said.” The song is there—the female author is omitted.
Perhaps we have erred for centuries in even speaking of the Magnificat: it ought to begin with "And Mary said", and correspondingly be called the Et dixit Maria!
As to people being neglected, why do we hear about Elizabeth and not hear about Zacharias?
--------------------
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
Posts: 269 | From: Terra Australis Incognita | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
BabyWombat
Shipmate
# 18552
|
Posted
Yes, for those using the Revised Common Lectionary we are in Year A, which focuses on the gospel of Matthew. Luke’s gospel was primary last year in Year C, and that is when we had less focus on the male characters in the nativity narrative. It all evens out over the three year cycle, but can be frustrating at times.
In terms of remembering our mothers in the faith, TEC’s Eucharistic Prayer C contains the line:
Lord God of our Fathers: God of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob; God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…
In my region of the US the first portion is normally informally adapted, by bishops and priests alike, to read:
Lord God of our Fathers and Mothers: God of Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, and
Jacob, Rachel and Leah….
--------------------
Let us, with a gladsome mind…..
Posts: 102 | From: US | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tobias:
Among other oddities in the article is the fact that, in discussing the lectionary provisions, it treats the psalms as readings. And so, on the occasion when the Magnificat is suggested as an alternative to the psalm, the author treats it as a reading too - and discovers a mare's nest of misogyny:
quote:
One alternative reading is suggested—the Magnificat, Mary’s Song (Luke 1:46–55), but this optional reading omits the first three words of the passage. Those words are, simply, “And Mary said.” The song is there—the female author is omitted.
Perhaps we have erred for centuries in even speaking of the Magnificat: it ought to begin with "And Mary said", and correspondingly be called the Et dixit Maria!
As to people being neglected, why do we hear about Elizabeth and not hear about Zacharias?
If you don't mind my saying, and I appreciate my reasoning might sound a bit pedantic, but that really is a bit odd.
When we sing the Magnificat, we are singing Mary's words, joining our voices to hers and making them our words too. We are not singing 'about Mary'. We are singing 'with' her. Adding in 'And Mary said' would shift the whole flavour of the canticle to narrative, 'about' rather than 'with'.
Besides, don't most people know that this is Mary's song, without having to have it spelt out to them each time they sing it? Wouldn't that irritate the same people as grumble when the person leading the service says things like 'and now at the top of page 24, we say together ... '?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tobias
Shipmate
# 18613
|
Posted
Enoch, I hope you don't think I was making that suggestion seriously! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
Posts: 269 | From: Terra Australis Incognita | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Graven Image
Shipmate
# 8755
|
Posted
I have no problem with the nephew of the Virgin Mary being mentioned in Advent or her Son at Christmas. Clearly it is all about her. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Posts: 2641 | From: Third planet from the sun. USA | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Graven Image:
I have no problem with the nephew of the Virgin Mary being mentioned in Advent or her Son at Christmas. Clearly it is all about her.
Second cousin actually.
And, no, it's not all about her - she's involved to a remarkable degree but it's all about the one who comes.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teekeey Misha
Shipmate
# 18604
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Second cousin actually.
First cousins once removed actually.
[That's based on the assumption that Mary and Elizabeth are actually first cousins, and the Gospel is too vague to be certain of that.]
I suspect GI was speaking tongue in cheek (or tongue poking out as the smiley indicates!). Of course it's all about the one who comes, but how He came to come (and all those involved in the story) is part of the charm, the excitement, the joy, the wonder, the profundity of His coming. God did not just dump Messiah in the world and shout "TADA!" The impact on all involved, even before He came, is an important statement about who He is.
--------------------
Misha
Don't assume I don't care; sometimes I just can't be bothered to put you right.
Posts: 296 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tobias:
Enoch, I hope you don't think I was making that suggestion seriously!
No, I didn't think that, but I did want to say why I disagreed with the argument you were referring to, and why.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Graven Image
Shipmate
# 8755
|
Posted
quote:
I suspect GI was speaking tongue in cheek
Of course I was. My point being we all know that the truth of Advent is all about our Savior come to be with us, and that He will return again. All others male and female alike are part of God's story and a reminder that we also are part of this story and that is the Good News. .
Posts: 2641 | From: Third planet from the sun. USA | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
I haven't read the original article, but it seems to be thinking that Advent is a commemoration of a series of historic events.
It isn't. The historic events (and in Advent one woman, ie Mary, is going to be more prominent in them than any male) only illustrate and embody the theological message.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
What about one suggestion is to dump John the Baptist on the Third Sunday of Advent, and instead, insert the Annunciation on the Third, and the Visitation on the Fourth?
We have a church feast that celebrates the Annunciation. It's called Annunciation and takes place on March 25.
There is an ancient western custom of celebrating the Annunciation during Advent, either as the main feast or as a secondary celebration in addition to the March date. The exact time for this varies from one rite to the next but the existence of the March feast in no way does away with the Advent celebration, any more than the various Byzantine celebrations of "The Synaxis of..." are negated by the major feast of whichever saint is being honoured.
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Although the Annunciation clearly "should" be in March, most people think of it as part of the Christmas story.
So I'm happy to include in Advent. (In any case, in March it interferes with Lent).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
I haven't read the original article, but it seems to be thinking that Advent is a commemoration of a series of historic events.
It isn't. The historic events (and in Advent one woman, ie Mary, is going to be more prominent in them than any male) only illustrate and embody the theological message.
Right. And of course, Advent also points to future events.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
