Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Jesus as mother prayers
Instead, we were like young children among you.
Just as a nursing mother cares for her children
– Paul in 1 Thessalonians 2:7
Truly Lord, you are a mother
for both they who are in labour
and they who are brought forth
are accepted by you.
– Anselm of Canterbury
Suck not so much the wounds as the breasts of the Crucified.
He will be your mother and you will be his son.
– Bernard of Clairvaux
But our true Mother Jesus, he alone bears us for joy and for endless life,
blessed may he be. So he carries us within him in love and travail
– Julian of Norwich
From Giving Birth: Reclaiming Biblical Metaphor for Pastoral Practice
)
Why is there a need to portray Jesus as a mother. It was this liberal thinking that stopped me coming to Espresso. I was sick of arguing with people who wanted to push the envelope in these areas. Why can we not just accept Jesus as who he was rather than what we want him to be. All of those quotes are from men not from God’s word except for the one from Thessalonians which is completely different. I just feel if I was in your class hearing that shared in Auckland that I would be very disappointed to come to a lecture/talk and have that said….
Comment by Karen — August 20, 2009 @ 2:00 pm
thanks Karen. firstly, this is my blog, as it says on the top “steve taylor seeking a sustain-if-able spirituality with God/self/people/place/culture” – so this has got nothing to do with espresso, unless you are wanting to name me as the “liberal” at espresso!
2nd, the 3 quotes are from a book written by a woman. i wonder why she things they are important.
3rd, the first quote is the bible, and i take the bible pretty seriously.
4th, none of these quotes will be in my session today. my blog is a place for me to process stuff, so i placed them there. what i will talk about is discipleship as being born again, and what that image – of born again – might mean. since new birth is an activity of God, then the character of God shares unique expression with the experience of some woman. it might make you feel better to consider what you don’t agree with as being liberal, but I want to suggest that being born again is more Biblical than liberal.
5th, orthodox Christianity is quite clear that all our human language about God is limited and that God is beyond our gender constructions. to claim God is female is heresy. so is the claim that God is male. however english only provides gender specific pronouns and so Jesus as a mother is a way of simply reminding us of the limitations of english language.
steve
Comment by steve — August 21, 2009 @ 9:46 am
oh, forgot to point out that the final quote, from Julian of Norwich is a woman!
steve
Comment by steve — August 21, 2009 @ 9:48 am
The claim, that God is male is heresy? That would make Jesus a heretic. He called Him “Abba”, Father. (Mark 14:36)
Comment by Ingrid — August 21, 2009 @ 12:46 pm
And even if “Abba” should be rendered ‘parent’ instead of ‘father’, Jesus is male and since He is God, one third of God would be male and two thirds neutral, because we know, that He will return with the same body as He left. Or do you think I’m wrong?
Comment by Ingrid — August 21, 2009 @ 2:36 pm
Furthermore, I used to think, that spirit beings i. e. angels were neutral. In Job 1:6 ‘Sons of God’ ( which are generally considered to be angels) present themselves. The same Hebrew words ‘Sons of God’ are used in Genesis 6:2. This would indicate that angels, though spirit, are male.
Comment by Ingrid — August 21, 2009 @ 5:59 pm
Ingrid, as i said, “all our human language about God is limited and that God is beyond our gender constructions.”
so you point out Jesus calls God father. For me that is a description of a relationship that is father-like. If you take it literally – that God is a father, has male sexual organs then are you saying that God had a sexual relationship with someone to produce Jesus?
(this incidentelly is why the apostles creed calls jesus begotten on made.)
i much prefer to not take father language literally, but like mother language, find it helpful way to describe the many facets of a relationship with God.
steve
Comment by steve — August 22, 2009 @ 10:40 am
thanks steve for these mother images. They are useful to me as i am wondering about midwiving another life that God may be birthing in Brooklands. The image has also helped me express my grief at being part of new life that God seems to be bringing about but is either still born or has a very short life.
Comment by Jo Wall — August 24, 2009 @ 12:15 pm
thanks Jo. I’ve got Sinead O’Connors’ This is to mother you running through my head as I type. fantastic song,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQjiLSxMZIU
steve
Comment by steve — August 26, 2009 @ 6:04 pm
Just to clarify when I said those quotes are from man I did mean ‘mankind – humans’ as opposed to God inspired scripture. If Jesus or God are to be seen as female then I am sure the bible would allude to that but it doesn’t.
I have no issues with the term born again or what that means and do not consider this liberal. What is liberal (for want of a better word) is the mind set that we need to bring the sovereignty of God down to these mortal levels
Comment by Karen — August 26, 2009 @ 8:15 pm
appreciate the clarification Karen.
In terms of the Bible, check out Israel as God’s weaned child in Psalm 131:1, 2; God giving birth in Ps 90:2; God in childbirth in Isaiah 42:14 and 66:9; God breastfeeding in Isa 49:15; God as a comforting mother in Isa 66:12-13.
In the New Testament, in Acts 2:24, the Greek word for God’s resurrection is odinas, the word used for female contractions and Jesus is like a mother, along with the verse I quoted initially, Paul’s ministry as being like a nursing mother.
So that’s the Bible. It uses female images to describe God. .. which I now place alongside your initial comment …. “Why is there a need to portray Jesus as a mother. It was this liberal thinking that stopped me coming to Espresso?”
Answer. Cos it’s in the Bible. And I wonder why you then call it “liberal”. Is it a tactic you use to dismiss ideas and people you find challenging?
steve taylor
Comment by steve — August 26, 2009 @ 11:01 pm
If I’m doing something LIKE a mother, that does not make me a mother (or woman). If I’m doing something LIKE a father, that does not make me a father (or a man)
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 11:44 am
For me, the mindset that is wrong, is to think, that we know better than Jesus Himself. And He clearly said: Abba, Daddy. He did not call God Mum.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 11:49 am
We are meant to dismiss ideas that are wrong.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 11:54 am
Welcome back Ingrid.
Yes, Jesus did call God ‘father.’ But doesn’t that verse have to be laid alongside the rest of the Bible – including the verses I have listed in which God is described using “mother” type imagery? When I do that, I conclude, as I wrote initially “all our human language about God is limited and that God is beyond our gender constructions. to claim God is female is heresy. so is the claim that God is male. however english only provides gender specific pronouns”
Feel free to dismiss me as wrong. But all scripture is inspired isn’t? How can you dismiss me and provide a way of understanding the Bible verses I posted above?
steve
Comment by steve — August 27, 2009 @ 12:12 pm
Karen, can I clarify how you are using the word “liberal”?
I might be misreading how liberal is being used, and if so I apologise. But when I hear it, I hear it used to describe people who don’t take the Bible seriously, when for me, my understanding was shaped by reading those Bible verses I’ve listed above and wanting to take all Scripture as inspired and authoritative.
steve
Comment by steve — August 27, 2009 @ 12:14 pm
“Abba” is not a pronoun.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 12:47 pm
When I said: “We are meant to dismiss ideas that are wrong” I was not dismissing you as wrong, but that was my answer to your statement to Karen:”Is it a tactic you use to dismiss ideas you find challenging?”
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 12:54 pm
RE Isaiah 66:9 for example: “Shall I bring to the birth and not to cause to bring forth” yes, but He is bringing something to the birth via Zion (66:8). He is not the mother Himself, Zion is.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 1:05 pm
Psalm 131 is talking about David, not God. ….By the way, I do prefer KJV.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 1:11 pm
Re KJV – that’s fine, as long as you use it aware that the KJV is based not a Greek translation but a Latin trans of the Greek (sort of like 3rd hand) and that since the KJV publication, many more NT manuscripts have been found that dated much closer to the time of Jesus,
steve
Comment by steve — August 27, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
Psalm 90:2…This word ‘yalad’ can have father imagery, mother imagery, midwive imagery, but can also just mean ‘bring into existence’. When I think of creation, I just think of Genesis 1:2+3 etc. God creating by the Spirit through the Word…..Frankly, the human birth process seems to me a pretty messy affair, I don’t enjoy dwelling on.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 1:42 pm
Isaiah 42:14……In order to groan, pant and gasp you don’t need to be a woman….I would say, the bible does not “portray” God as a mother, but in a few instances uses birthing similes.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 1:58 pm
Which version do you consider to be the best then?
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 2:02 pm
re version – depends on the purpose. i found it helpful to think of a continuum. at one end is “literal”; at the other is “communicative.” “literal” eg NRSV or NIV tries to stick as close as possible to original and i use those for my sermon prep. “communicative” eg Message or Good News or CEV will focus more on contemporary idiom, and i use those in the communicating process, as long as I consider them still authentic.
so my desk when i’m prepping has about 3 bibles and 5 commentaries open, piled up, as i work away. it’s a mess
steve
Comment by steve — August 27, 2009 @ 6:59 pm
so if you say that the bible uses birthing similes, (i agree with you) then does not that also apply to “Abba” – a simile? which was my original comment – “orthodox Christianity is quite clear that all our human language about God is limited and that God is beyond our gender constructions. to claim God is female is heresy. so is the claim that God is male. however english only provides gender specific pronouns”
steve
Comment by steve — August 27, 2009 @ 7:01 pm
Your name is ‘Steve'(crown). Is that a simile? You are Steve. You are not like a Steve…… Isaiah 9:6 …”His name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor The mighty God THE EVERLASTING FATHER THE PRINCE OF PEACE……..As you say “our human language about God is limited”. That is true. However Jesus came to reveal the Father to us. He said I and the Father are one. He who has seen Me has seen the Father. He could have said: “He who has seen Me has seen God”. Instead He said: “has seen the Father”……Jesus is male….God is spirit. Yes, but why can’t spirit be masculine, if angels are spirit and masculine, like I mentioned further up?…..God has a voice that has been heard by some. What kind of voice do you imagine it to be? Certainly not a feminine one.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 8:24 pm
PS.: Bernard of Clairvaux: “No one can enter into heaven unless by Mary”….I wonder what version *he* read.
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 9:07 pm
You say “English only provides gender specific pronouns”. What about ‘it’? Is that considered gender specific?
Comment by Ingrid — August 27, 2009 @ 10:22 pm
I have all those verses you mentioned earlier Steve on a bookmark I got at Expresso and just found them when I was going through something the other day. I cringed then like I did when I first got them. They are verses that liken how God feels about his chosen people/nation. He cares for them – he has birthed them by creating them and weeps and pains over them like a mother does in childbirth but saying something is like something is is not saying they are one and the same. As for God as a breastfeeding mother I am sorry to offend but that is not what the verse says and I do not believe what it is implying.
I believe it degrades the power of God to bring him down to a wet nurse type description.
Comment by Karen — August 27, 2009 @ 11:46 pm
i’m not offended by the bible at all karen. if the bible says it, i’m very happy to adjust my theology 🙂 can’t call me liberal though now can ya!
i personally think there’s enormous beauty and power in breastfeeding – the tenderness, the sense of communion – that’s an image of God i find enormously comforting.
i’m very happy, as i’ve said all through this thread to accept female language in Scripture as “like”; which surely means we accept the male language as “like” and it returns to my initial comment – all our human language about God is limited and that God is beyond our gender constructions.
i’m happy to wind this up and move on.
steve
Comment by steve — August 27, 2009 @ 11:54 pm