Book Review: The Gospel of Mary by Mark M. Mattison

The Gospel of Mary: A Fresh Translation and Holistic Approach
By Mark M. Mattison
Self-published 2013
$5.42 Paperback
$3.99 Kindle

With the discovery of both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library, several early gospels not included in the canon of the New Testament have come to light. In recent years many books have been written on the Gospels of Thomas, Judas, Mary, and Peter with The Gospel of Judas probably being the most well known with all the controversy it caused. Books written on these extra-canonical gospels fall into two camps: scholarly and sensational, which makes it difficult for the normal layperson to find a well researched book that you don’t need a specialized theological vocabulary to understand. That is no longer a problem with The Gospel of Mary: A Fresh Translation and Holistic Approach.

Independent scholar and general editor of the New Testament: Divine Feminine Version, Mark M. Mattison has written a translation and commentary on The Gospel of Mary that is aimed at the typical layperson who is curious to know more about the only gospel that carries a woman’s name. Mattison offers two translations in his book: first a more dynamic equivalent version, then a more literal public domain version. Mattison has also provided a formatted version of each translation which groups the verses into paragraphs along with an unformatted version where each verse is on a separate line as it is in the original Greek and Coptic texts (Coptic is the result of the Egyptian language being written in the Greek alphabet).

Mattison begins by giving us an overview of who Mary Magdalene was as portrayed in both the canonical gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) as well as the gospels that did not make it into the New Testament. After the translation of the The Gospel of Mary, he provides a commentary that explains the theology and spirituality of Mary’s gospel along with its place among the earliest writings of the young Christian movement. Normally the section of the gospel called the Ascent of the Soul is interpreted to mean the various trials and tormentors the soul must get past on its way to heaven after death. At this point most Christians write this gospel off because we believe that Christ is all we need for entrance into heaven. But Mattison offers another way to translate Mary’s teaching on the ascent of the soul:

It’s difficult to read about these seven evil powers and not think about the seven demons which were said to have “gone out” of Mary in Luke 8:2. Just as Mary was released from the grip of the seven demons that terrorized her and kept her bound, so Mary’s vision in 15:1–17:7 describes the soul’s victory over seven oppressive powers whose ravages we’ve all experienced to some degree–powers with names like “darkness,” “ignorance,” “wrath, “and so on. These powers are thus described in terms that invite us to confront our own “personal demons,” so to speak–demons like addiction, anxiety, and anger (p. 43).

Scholar Karen King and Episcopal priest Cynthia Bourgeault have also advocated this way of interpreting the teachings in the Gospel of Mary. This gospel provides instructions on living an authentic spiritual life based on the teachings and life of Jesus. After the resurrection it gave early believers a guideline on dealing with their own demons and living a Christlike life.

Here is where the genius of Mattison’s book really shines: it doesn’t stop with explaining theology. Following Bourgeault’s example from The Meaning of Mary Magdalene, he shows his readers how to live this theology. He offers a chapter on the contemplative practices of lectio divina and contemplative prayer, so his readers can start putting into practice the teachings they learn from The Gospel of Mary. Readers of this book will be equipped to start or deepen their own soul’s ascent to a more self-aware and Christlike life. Mattison also provides resources for those who would like to delve into contemplative spiritual practices. The bibliography provides plenty of resources for those who want to continue their study of Mary’s gospel.

The Gospel of Mary: A Fresh Translation and Holistic Approach will give the reader a sound grasp and understanding to The Gospel of Mary. I recommend it for both personal and group study.

Mark M. Mattison is an independent scholar who was the founder and is still a contributor at The Paul Page, which keeps up with all the scholarship coming out on the Apostle Paul (no small task). Mark is also one of the founding members of The Christian Godde Project and the general editor of the New Testament: Divine Feminine Version.

Disclaimers: I received a copy of this book agreeing to review it, and I saw and gave feedback on early drafts of this book. I also work with Mark on the New Testament: A Divine Feminine Version as an associate editor. In other words, I am a biased reviewer.

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

Proudly Childfree and Not Apologizing For It

A friend on Facebook brought this article to my attention. Ross Douthhat recently wrote for the New York Times that childfree people like me and those who postpone parenthood do so because:

Parenthood is “the last binding obligation in a culture that asks for almost no other permanent commitments at all.” In this sense, it isn’t necessarily that family life has changed that dramatically in the last few generations. Rather, it’s stayed the same in crucial ways — because babies still need what babies need — while outside the domestic sphere there’s been an expansion of opportunities, a proliferation of choices and entertainments and immediately available gratifications, that make child rearing seem much more burdensome by comparison.

This has two consequences for young, reasonably affluent Americans. First, it creates an understandable reluctance to give up the pleasures of extended brunches and long happy hours, late nights and weekend getaways, endless hours playing Grand Theft Auto or binge-watching “New Girl.” Second, it inspires a ferocious shock when a child arrives and that oh-so-modern lifestyle gives way to challenges that seem almost medieval, and duties that seem impossibly absolute. And the longer the arrival is delayed, the greater that shock — because “postponing children,” Senior points out, can make parents “far more aware of the freedoms they’re giving up.”

Once again the complexities of choosing not to have children or postponing children are glossed over. No mention is made of people like me who didn’t marry until I was 36. No mention is made of women like me who have significant health problems that would make pregnancy a living hell of pain. No mention is made of being financially secure enough or grown up enough yourself to start a family (as the daughter of a man who never grew up, I wish more people who wanted to live as perpetual teenagers would NOT have children). No, we’re just selfish people who want to have endless brunches and have marathon viewing sessions of our favorite shows (and no one ever had a child for selfish reasons: “I just want someone to love me”).

I’ve recently written about being childfree at Christian Feminism Today with my post, God Places the Solitary in Families in which I make the point that just because I don’t have children of my own doesn’t mean I’m not a parent:

This year I experienced something I thought I would never experience: empty nest syndrome. I never thought I would feel the emptiness that comes from a child leaving the nest for one simple reason: 10 years ago I decided that I did not want to have children.

What I didn’t know was that a few years later I would fall in love with a young British man who started coming to church when he started college in Chicago. Taylor and I bonded over being writers and our mutual obsession with Dr. Who. For three years we read each other’s writings and talked about everything. Somewhere along the way I realized Taylor was my kid; I had “adopted” him. In June he and his girlfriend moved to Seattle, and I became an empty nester. I can’t believe how much I miss my kid.

I also wrote a post a few years ago on my reluctance to write about my choice not to have children. I admitted I was selfish, but not because I want to spend my free time brunching it up:

I know there are those who will think I am selfish for not having children, and you’re right. I am selfish. I know how much time and energy it takes to raise kids. I know how large of an investment it is, and there is no return policy. I do not want to spend my time and energy raising kids. I want to spend my time and energy writing books. I am going to give birth and create new life: I’m just going to stick to giving birth in a metaphorical and spiritual sense.

(I’m happy to say that an article based on this post will be published in the June issue of Gather Magazine.)

Yes, I’m selfish for not wanting to have children, but not because I want an extra hour to brunch with the girls. I’m not having children because I want to do the same thing Ross Douthat does while his wife spends twice as much time taking care of their children. A Pew Study last year reveals that women spend twice as much time caring for children as men do. As I work at home and my husband works elsewhere, guess what would happen to my writing time if we had children? I’m 43–middle aged, with health problems. There’s no way I would have any energy to write once I finished with childcare. Don’t get me wrong: my husband would help all he could, and he would be an incredible father, but he works 50 hours a week outside of the home. I work at home. Do the math. (I have to admit when I see my husband with our nieces and nephews I feel a little guilty for not having children because he really would’ve been an awesome dad. But I don’t feel guilty enough to undo the tubal ligation, give it a go then be in unbearable pain for the last half of my pregnancy.)

The decision to postpone having children or not to have children at all is so much more complex and complicated than brunch and TV shows. It has to take into consideration the age the couple was when they committed to each other, the health issues of each person, where you are financially, and if you’re cut out to be a parent. Not all of us are. I’m not. I’m the first person to admit, I’d be a horrible mother. I’m glad I know that about myself. The decision not to have children is a complicated one that takes a lot of soul searching and years of discernment to make, and it should not be demeaned by an assumption that I would rather have time for one more mimosa than change a diaper.

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

Why Susan Patton Is Wrong About College Women & Marriage

Susan Patton would be vastly disappointed with me. The mom of two Princeton sons, whose letter to Princeton and now an editorial in the Wall Street Journal telling women in college to marry while there before all of the good fish in the sea are gone, does not want to hear how I didn’t even meet my husband until I was 28, and then I didn’t bother to marry him for another eight years. According to her, I was a very lucky woman who had focused on my career and graduate studies to find a man at all since I didn’t grab one up in college:

Could you marry a man who isn’t your intellectual or professional equal? Sure. But the likelihood is that it will be frustrating to be with someone who just can’t keep up with you or your friends. When the conversation turns to Jean Cocteau or Henrik Ibsen, the Bayeux Tapestry or Noam Chomsky, you won’t find that glazed look that comes over his face at all appealing. And if you start to earn more than he does? Forget about it. Very few men have egos that can endure what they will see as a form of emasculation.

So what’s a smart girl to do? Start looking early and stop wasting time dating men who aren’t good for you: bad boys, crazy guys and married men.

College is the best place to look for your mate. It is an environment teeming with like-minded, age-appropriate single men with whom you already share many things. You will never again have this concentration of exceptional men to choose from.

The biggest problem I have with Patton’s view is her poor opinion of men. She seems to imply that men hit their peak in college then it’s all downhill from there. If I was one of Patton’s sons I’d be pretty depressed about my mother’s view on men. She seems to think that men are these delicate flowers whose egos have to be constantly assuaged, and after college they are just not going to become more intelligent, better people as they continue to grow up. To be honest, I’m pretty insulted on behalf of all the wonderful men in my life who are incredibly intelligent and love strong intelligent women. I have more than one male friend who has no problem with his wife, partner, or significant other making more money than he does. Patton’s view of men and their delicate egos does not line up with the men I know. Neither does her view that as a woman gets older she’ll find fewer and fewer intelligent men available. I have found the exact opposite to be true. And yes there are men who once they hit their 30s only date women in their 20s, but I don’t think it’s as normative as Patton implies. I have plenty of friends in their 30s who have married in the last five years to people the same age as them (or close to).

I’m sure this is exactly what Patton’s Wall Street Journal readers want to read. After all the old white boys club does not want their patriarchy to change. They want women put back in their place, so that men can continue to rule the world without worrying about pesky annoyances like maternity leave, family leave, equal pay, or the fact that birth control is basic healthcare. Patton is doing everything she can to help them out. Thanks Susan. I wonder if her views would be different if she had daughters instead of sons?

There is also one other huge problem with Patton’s article. She’s wrong. Women with college educations are more likely to be married by 40 than woman without college degrees, whether these women married in college or not. In College Women, Don’t Listen to Marriage Concern Trolls Amanda Marcotte cites a study done by Paula England who said: “[Women with college educations] marry later, but they catch up. By age 40, 75 percent of college-educated women are married, compared to 70 percent of those who attend high school or some college and 60 percent of those who did not complete high school.” Older men don’t seem to be turned off by smart women their age if 75% of those women are married by the age of 40. England’s study also found that college educated women who married later stayed married longer. How many friends do you have who married in college and are now divorced? So not only are women who didn’t marry in college more likely to get married than women without a college degree, they are more likely to stay married.

I also have theological concerns about Patton’s views on women, men, and marriage. The biggest concern is one I have talked about over and over on this website, and it comes straight from Christian conservative circles as well: it’s the belief that a woman’s primary purpose in life is to marry and have children, and everything else in life should be subsumed under those two roles. It has to be that way because woman was made to be a “helpmate” to man. Of course no one wants to talk about how that word is a mistranslation of the Hebrew phrase it interprets (it is not a translation). Ezer Cenegdo literally means a help or power equal to. Woman was created to be a help and a power equal to a man. In English Bibles the King James Version has the most accurate translation: helpmeet. They also never talk about the reason woman was created is because it was not good for the man to be alone. You will never hear any of these conservatives say that a man’s primary responsibility in life is to be a husband and father to the exclusion of everything else because it is not good for a man to be alone. Just because human beings are created for companionship does not mean that one relationship and family unit should override everything else.

In fact, Genesis 1 has a very balanced view of work and family life:

Then Godde said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So Godde created humankind in Godde’s image, in the image of Godde Godde created them; male and female Godde created them. Godde blessed them, and Godde said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth” (Genesis 1:26-28, adapted from the NRSV).

The creation story in Genesis 2 interprets humanity’s dominion over the earth into the man and woman tending the Garden of Eden. Again in that creation account human beings are told to work and reproduce. They were to make the earth fruitful and be fruitful themselves. Work and family have always gone hand-in-hand in the Bible. The main difference today is that men and women no longer work at home as was true in the Bible, but both men and women have always worked to financially provide for their families from the very beginning. This idea that women have to devalue their education and career to be marriageable is not Biblical, and I would go so far as to say it is sin. It encourages us to disobey the greatest commandment: to love God with our whole heart, soul, mind and with all of our strength (Matthew 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27).

I’m not saying marriage and parenthood are not vital roles in life or are not needed. I’m happily married. I have to say it’s one of my favorite sacraments. I’m just saying it’s not the be all and end all of life for women, and we need to stop talking about it that way. Especially as Christians with a call to love Godde above all else and commanded to build her kingdom on earth. Churches should be encouraging their women to do everything in their power to hone their Godde-given skills to build the Kingdom of Godde in our lives, neighborhood, and cities. Kingdom building may start in the home, but it never ends there.

Yes, Susan Patton is wrong. She’s wrong about women. She’s wrong about men. And she’s wrong about marriage. Women and men created in Godde’s image are to be revolutionary world changers bringing the love and peace of Godde into their worlds through the gifts and callings Godde has given them. They should be taught to encourage one another to continue in their faith and education, and to spur each other on to be better Christians and better human beings. They can’t do that if half of them are being told to hide their lights under bushels and pretend to be less than they are for the other half. Potential husbands and wives should be taught that the stronger they are as individuals the stronger they will be as a couple. And this is how Godde intended it.

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

Hilda of Whitby: Abbess and Bishop

Hild coverI am reading Nicola Griffith’s novel, Hild, which tells the story of Hilda of Whitby. It is a richly detailed historical novel that weaves a wonderfully plausible story of the life Hilda could have lived. Griffith’s prose borders on the poetic, and her descriptions of Hild’s spiritual life are sublime. I highly recommend her novel. It’s keeping me up until 1:00 and 2:00 in the morning because I have to know what happens next to Hild. Since I’ve been living and breathing Hild for the last couple of weeks, I’ve decided to re-post my own work of one of my favorite women leaders in the early church: St. Hilda of Whitby.

Hilda was one of the most powerful religious leaders in England during the 7th century. She was the abbess of a dual monastery of monks and nuns in Whitby. She held the same power of the bishops of the day, counseled kings, and five bishops came from her monestary.

Hilda was born in 614 CE to Hereric, the nephew of the king of Northumbria. She was baptized at the age of 13, and at the age of 33 she made the decision to become a nun. She was planning on joining her sister, Hereswith, who had established a convent on the fringe of Paris. She went to East Anglia where her nephew was king to prepare to sail to France, but Aidan, the apostle of Northumbria asked her to return to Northumbria. She obeyed, and he put her in charge of a small group of sisters on the north bank of the Wear river. After a year she was called to be the Abbess of Hartlepool. She stayed there for seven years until she built and organized a new monastery at Whitby on the dark cliffs overlooking the Northern Sea.

For thirty years Hilda was in charge of Whitby which was a monastery for both men and women. She ran a little city: there was a school, people to feed and clothe, travelers to provide lodging for, and discipline to be kept. She was not only in charge of monks and nuns, but also serfs who worked the land around the monastery. Kings, rulers, and bishops came to her for advice and counsel. In the midst of civil wars, Whitby spread the Christian faith. Whitby was a light shining for the gospel of love, forgiveness, and reconciliation in a time of wars and hatred. Venerable Bede tell us:

When she had for some years governed this monastery, wholly intent upon establishing a regular life, it happened that she also undertook either to build or to arrange a monastery in the place called Streaneshalch [Whitby], which work she industriously performed; for she put this monastery under the same regular discipline as she had done the former; and taught there the strict observance of justice, piety, chastity, and other virtues, and particularly of peace and charity; so that, after the example of the primitive church, no person was there rich, and none poor, all being in common to all, and none having any property. Her prudence was so great, that not only indifferent persons, but even kings and princes, as occasion offered, asked and received her advice; she obliged those who were under her direction to attend so much to reading of the Holy Scriptures, and to exercise themselves so much in works of justice, that many might be there found fit for ecclesiastical duties, and to serve at the altar (Ecclesiastical History, Book 4, Chapter XXIII).

While Hilda was the abbess of Whitby, it was one of the spiritual centers of England. She ruled a vast territory around Whitby, even providing soldiers in times of war. This was not unusual for the time. Abbesses managed their own realms and handled the finances to run them. Normally their domains were ruled by the pope bypassing the local bishop. Abbesses also “appointed local parish priests, heard confessions and cared for the material and spiritual needs of their people” (Grenz with Kjesbo, 41). There is also evidence that these women were ordained with the signs of the office of bishop: “the miter, ring, crosier, gloves, and cross”; however, later writings seem to replace “ordained” with “blessed,” obscuring the leadership role these women did play in the early church (ibid).

Hilda came to be known as “Mother” to her community. Many boys came to the monastery to be educated by her. Five of them became bishops: Bosa, Bishop of York; Hedda, Bishop of Dorchester and Winchester; Oftfor, Bishop of Worcester, and John of Gexham.

The story of Caedmon shows Hilda’s ability to bring out the best in others. Caedmon was always despondent because he could not sing after supper as was the custom of the day. One evening after leaving the festivities, he fell asleep and dreamed that Jesus came to him and told him to sing him a song about creation. The next day he told Hilda of the dream and sang the song he composed. Hilda recognized his talent and brought him into the monastery to devote himself to writing songs of Biblical stories in the Anglo-Saxon language. This is the first time since Latin became the official language of the western church that Scripture was translated into the vernacular. For the first time the Anglo-Saxons could learn and understand Scripture because it was in their own language. Caedmon’s poems are the earliest form of Anglo-Saxon poetry in existence (Baring-Gould 226).

In 664 CE HIlda hosted the first Synod of Whitby by order of the king of Northumbria, Oswy (who was her cousin). This synod was called by the king to peacefully solve the differences the Celtic tradition had with the Roman tradition, which included calculating the date of Easter. Historian Joanna McNamara notes, “Hild assumed a prestige usually reserved for bishops when she presided over the synod where the Irish and Roman churches competed for the allegiance of the Northumbrian king” (p. 127). The synod voted to align itself with the Roman branch of the Church. Although HIlda had been raised in the Celtic tradition, she obeyed and changed her monastery accordingly. This synod shaped the way Christianity would grow and develop in England, and “the fact that the synod, attended by all the leading churchmen of the isles, was held at a monastery ruled by a woman is a tribute to Hilda’s importance among her contemporaries” (Ranft, 118).

Hilda died in 680 CE after seven years of weak health. She was 66 when she died. These are Bede’s final words about her:

Thus this servant of Christ, Abbess Hilda, whom all that knew her called Mother, for her singular piety and grace, was not only an example of good life, to those that lived in her monastery, but afforded occasion of amendment and salvation to many who lived at a distance, to whom the fame was brought of her industry and virtue.

O God of peace, by whose grace the Abbess Hilda was endowed with gifts of justice, prudence, and strength to rule as a wise mother over the nuns and monks of her household, and to become a trusted and reconciling friend to leaders of the Church: Give us the grace to recognize and accept the varied gifts you bestow on men and women, that our common life may be enriched and your gracious will be done; through Jesus Christ our Savior, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen. (From the The Saint Helena Breviary, Personal Edition)

Sources:

Sabine Baring-Gould Virgin Saints and Martyrs (Hutchinson and Company, London, England: 1900).

Shawna Renee Bound, Your Daughters Shall Prophesy: A Biblical Theology of Single Women in Ministry (unpublished thesis, 2002).

Edith Deen, Great Women of the Christian Faith (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, Inc., 1959; reprint Uhrichscile, OH: Barbour and Company, Inc.).

Stanley J. Grenz with Denise Muir Kjesbo, Women in the Church: A Biblical Theology of Women in Ministry (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995).

Kate Lindemann, “Hild of Streonshalh 614-680 CE” at Women-Philosphers.com (http://www.women-philosophers.com/Hild-of-Streonshalh.html accessed on November 20, 2008).

Joanna McNamara, Sisters in Arms–Catholic Nuns Through Two Millennia (Harvard University Press, Cambridge: 1996).

Patricia Ranft, Women and Spiritual Equality in Christain Tradition (Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England: 2000).

(No affliate links)

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

Blast from the Past: Geeks and Ghosts: Valentine's Day for the rest of us
We take Halloween very seriously too

I posted this three years ago. An update on what you will read: I still have not learned Latin (BAD SHAWNA!), and we still haven’t gone on the Haunted Chicago’s My Bloody Valentine Tour because it’s too damned cold! Tonight we will be having a romantic dinner at home: lasagna, salad, homemade bread, and sundaes, and we’ll watch The Olympics. May be we’ll get in a macabre movie or two over the weekend. Happy Valentine’s Day everyone!

You remember the TV show Freaks and Geeks? It had the tagline: “What High School was like for the rest of us?” This is what Valentine’s Day is for the rest of us, whose romantic tastes fall on the more….macabre and nerdy side of things.

I should preface this that for our first date My Then-Best-Friend-Morping-into-My-Boyfriend took me on The Haunted Chicago Tour (the first date weekend also included Neil Gaiman and Shaun of the Dead). It was perfect. Even if you’re not a believer of things that go bump in the night, The Haunted Chicago Tour is worth the money because of all of the weird, macabre, and gory Chicago history that you learn during this 2.5 hours. But I’m a believer of things that go bump in the night, so I was really hoping to see the monk ghosts who supposedly haunt Hull House. Everyone else was trying to see Demon Baby up in the second story window while I was wondering around the garden outside of the house praying to see monk ghosts. I should also mention the year before when My Best Friend was trying woo me, so he could become My Boyfriend, he lent me Neil Gaiman’s Neverwhere and American Gods to show me he was interested. Our first date fell around his birthday, so I brought along Anansi’s Boys for his present, then we went on The Haunted Chicago Tour (and watched Shaun of the Dead). That’s who we are.

February is one brutal month of Chicago, and I got my first taste when I flew up to spend one of the weekends around Valentine’s Day with The Boyfriend. The highs that weekend were two degrees. We’d just gotten together, and hadn’t seen each for over two weeks, so cuddling for warmth on the couch watching movies sounded romantic (and warm) for both of us. Did we watch Casablanca? Ever After? Sleepless in Seattle? Oh hell no. Here was our “romantic” movie line-up: Donnie Darko, Being John Malkovich, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, and Groudhog Day. We may have watched a couple of Pixar movies because we totally love Pixar. Knowing us: The Incredibles was also on the line-up. We did brave the frigid Chicago weather for a wonderful meal at Gioco’s. But that’s not what I remember. What I remember are airplane engines falling out of the sky, people taking over John Malkovich, and Bill Murphy committing suicide and taking Phil with him.

This picture was NOT taken in February

Then there was our first Valentine’s Day as Husband and Wife. Sometime before February (and yes the weather was brutal), we were watching Mythbusters, and Kari was wearing a shirt that said Geek. And Geek was written in Greek letters. I blew out one of The Hubby’s eardrums by jumping up and down on the couch and yelling and screeching: “I HAVE TO HAVE THAT SHIRT!” You see, being the total nerdy dork I am, Greek was my favorite subject in college, and I pursued an M.A. that was almost nothing but Greek and Hebrew. I’ve called myself a Greek Geek for years. I. HAD. TO. HAVE. THAT. TSHIRT. And guess what The Hubby gave me for Valentine’s Day? Yeah baby. (I don’t remember where we ate out at.)

Another Valentine’s Day I received a collection of books to teach myself Latin because a couple of weeks before I had mentioned that I love learning dead languages, and I wanted to add Latin to Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. The Hubby is my biggest supporter when it comes to learning more geeky subjects and becoming a bigger nerd. God, I love that man. (Don’t remember where we ate at.)

Tonight we’ll be staying in and watching Being Human and Castle. Because that’s just who we are. We’ll be going out to Gioco’s for dinner on Wednesday because we don’t want to deal with all the crowds (and next year I probably won’t remember where we ate at). It’s who we are. And may be next year we’ll go on Haunted Chicago’s My Bloody Valentine Tour (scroll down about half way down the page).

C’mon, you know you want to join us.

Now I am off to write a wonderfully macabre Valentine poem for my nerdy macabre Husband.

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

Giving Men the Titus 2 Treatment

Earlier this week Rachel Held Evans published a brilliant blog post, If Men got the Titus 2 Treatment. What if we universalized specific commandments to men to be for all time in any culture the way we universalize verses like Titus 2:5 for women? The result is a brilliant satire of what Christian men would hear if proof-texted verses were used to dictate their lives. My favorite is this one:

Take a look around our culture and you will see millions of men who earn a living by working in climate controlled office buildings. Such work may be mentally strenuous, but far too often, it can be accomplished without even breaking a sweat.

The curse of Genesis 3 clearly describes man’s primary activity as difficult physical labor. “By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground,” God declares in Genesis 3:19….

So men who wish to honor God with their lives and humbly submit to His will should make physical labor their primary occupation, and resist the urge to give in to our culture’s glorification of “white collar” work, which is a departure from biblical principles of masculinity.

Now, some men will say they find office work more stimulating and rewarding than manual labor, or that it provides more financial security in their particular situation, but these men are more interested in pursuing selfish ambitions and wealth than submitting themselves to the Word of God. Our culture’s rampant obesity epidemic among men can be clearly traced to this departure from God’s perfect design. And it threatens to undo our whole society, negatively affecting our children and generations to come.

This post clearly shows what happens to theology when Christians do not do the hard work on interpreting Scripture for their own times and lives. As post-Industrial Revolution and post-technological people we cannot go back to the agrarian, everyone works at home, model that was normal for biblical times. We have re-interpreted the Bible for men working outside of the home and made that interpretation normal. For the last 45 years second-wave feminist theologians have been interpreting the Bible for women who work outside of the home. For the last decade third-wave feminist theologians have taken up the banner and interpreted the Bible for our technologically connected world. Now its time to make those interpretations normative, just as we did for the men.

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

New post on Christian Feminism Today: Mutual Submission in This Time in This Place

I have a blog post up at Christian Feminism Today discussing the Household Codes and mutual submission in the New Testament and for today: Mutual Submission in This Time in This Place:

I think we do ourselves a disservice if we simply fall back to the New Testament Household Codes and say that’s the way it should be. That set of Household Codes won’t work in this time and place, but what Household Codes will? One where children see parents sharing power and not insisting on having their own way all the time? One where couples decide that a smaller house and fewer things is the way to go, because neither one wants to spend that much time at work and they’d rather spend more time together? A code that encourages workers to take their vacation time instead of being workaholics?

Yes, it’s much easier to just fall back to Ephesians 5 and say let’s do this! The Bible says it, so it’s good enough for me! But does that convey a contemporary Christian message of mutual submission? Or is it just a cop-out, so we don’t have to do the hard work of figuring out how to be Christians in this time and this place? I don’t have the answers, and honestly, I believe it’s a question that needs to be worked out in our faith communities.

This blog post is part of the One to Another syncroblog at Rachel Held Evans’ blog this week.

“Submit One To Another: Christ and the Household Codes,” which will focus on those frequently-cited passages of Scripture that instruct wives to submit to their husbands, slaves to obey their masters, children to obey their parents, and Christians to submit to one another (Ephesians 5:21-6:9, Colossians 3:12-4:6; 1 Peter 2:11-3:22).

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

Sermon: The Bent and Burdened Woman

The Bent and Burdened Women
Luke 13:10-17

Luke is one of my favorite books and my favorite Gospel. So it was a given for me that this is what I was going to preach on. Luke is full of stories of underdogs. Luke tells the stories of the poor, sick, and women. I come from a poor, working class, blue collar family, and Luke is our Gospel. Probably one of the reasons I like it so much as well as Luke has a lot of stories about women. Luke focuses on the marginalized and poor, which includes widows, lepers, tax collectors and others society has outcast. The outcasts take center stage in Luke. Sinners and misfits—that’s who Luke’s Gospel is about and for. At this point in Luke Jesus has already encountered several outcasts: for starters the disciples are a motley crew consisting of fishermen, tax collectors, and zealots. Then there are the lepers, more tax collectors, paralytics, and sinful women. In Luke we have the stories where Samaritan is a good guy, and a rebellious son who is forgiven and restored. The religious leaders accused of Jesus being a friend to the worst kinds of sinners. And they were right. He was and still is.

Today we meet another one of those misfits: a woman whose back is so bent that she’s literally bent over. All she sees is the ground. She can’t straighten up and she can’t look up. She talks to people’s feet, and they answer her stooped and bent back. But today her life is going to change. And today Jesus is going to get into another controversy with a Jewish leader. Because this day is the Sabbath, and Jesus is going to choose to “work” today. Back in chapter 6 of Luke, Jesus had run-ins with the religious authorities over what could and couldn’t be done on the Sabbath.

(more…)

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

Five years ago on Shawna R. B. Atteberry: You mean I can be a feminist homemaker? Really?

In order to start writing for the blog again, I decided to take a look at what I have done in years past. This one popped up for me right away as I still have a love/hate relationship with housework. I love a clean house; I hate cleaning. And as a feminist the idea that I should do the brunt of the work rubs me the wrong way, even if I do work from home, and it’s convenient. I decided since I have never resolved this sticky issue, to post this post again. Earlier this summer I was glad to see that I’m not the only Christian feminist woman who just doesn’t know how to resolve the tension between feminism, house work, and being a good Christian. Melanie Springer Mock, Kendra Irons, and Letha Scanzoni took up this very issue at Christian Feminism Today in The “Final Feminist Frontier”–Housework. (You’ll also want to check out Melanie and Kendra’s awesome blog: Ain’t I a Woman?)

(Originally posted 8/28/2008) I’ve never been a great housekeeper. Normally I’m barely a passable housekeeper. I watched my mom work all day then come home and clean and clean and clean. I decided that I was not going to do that. (I made it very clear to my husband before we married that I would not be doing all the housework.) Housework was not that important. It didn’t help that for the last two years I’ve struck out as a freelance writer and do a lot of work from home, where a lot of the time I feel like a glorified housewife. But lately my feelings have been changing, and I have been wanting a cleaner house and less piles. I’ve always been a pile person, and it used to not bother me. But now it’s getting cumbersome and tiresome. I think it’s because I’m getting older, and I just don’t have the energy to dig through piles to find one piece of paper or a book. Plus I really do like being able to see the top of my coffee table and not have to crawl over a pile of books to get into bed.

Of course this put me into a crisis mode. After all I’m a feminist. I’m a feminist who came out of the group of Christians who think the highest calling for a woman is to be a wife, mother, and yes, housewife. So for me to admit that keeping house wasn’t that bad (and might even better), was nothing short of an existential crisis. And before you start gloating, Mom, I’m still not going to clean like you do. I still think you cleaned far too much. There has to be a happy medium between piles and dust and spotless clean. Then an online friend, k8tthleate introduced to me a wonderful book: Home Comforts: The Art and Science of Keeping House by Cheryl Mendelson. The book begins with these words:

I am a working woman with a secret life: I keep house. An off-and-on lawyer and professor in public, in private I launder and clean, cook from the hip, and devote serious time and energy to a domestic routine not so different from the one that defined my grandmothers as “housewives.”

I think what I like most about Mendelson is her emphasis on house-keeping. Oh yes, there is cleaning, but that is just one part of keeping a home and making it a place of welcome for the family, comfortable to live in, and a space we feel comfortable inviting friends into. I’ve discovered that’s what I want to do: I want to keep a home. I want to be able to invite people over without having to do a hurricane cleaning out before they come over (again not as easy to do now I’m no longer 20-something). I’m taking baby steps: putting stuff away, finding homes for things, and vacuuming and mopping on a more regular basis (once a month really isn’t enough). And we’ll see how it goes.

Are you doing things you didn’t think you’d do? Are there things you’re changing your mind about?

Updated 8/21/2013: I am still a lousy housekeeper with multiple piles, and my floors wished they were mopped once a month. And unlike what I wrote five years ago about liking the concept of “house-keeping,” I’m not too keen on the idea right now. I’m definitely more on the hate side of my love/hate relationship with housecleaning right now.

What about you? What are thoughts regarding the keeping and cleaning of your home? Where do you fall on that love/hate continuum?

Published by Shawna on | Permalink

God Places the Solitary in Families: Childfree doesn't mean childless

I’ve written an article in response to Time Magazines cover story on women choosing not to have children for EEWC: Christian Feminism Today. In God Places the Solitary in Families: Childfree doesn’t mean childless, I discuss my own decision not to have children as well as how my definition of family differs from our current culture’s definition. Here’s something to wet your appetite:

This week’s TIME Magazine cover story reports on women who have made the same decision I have: to not have children. There were two huge reasons I was not impressed with the article. First they only covered one reason why women are not having children: for the freedom and the additional time and money that comes with being childfree. The article made this choice seem like an arbitrary decision, one made in order to be able to take more vacations and buy more stuff. The Time writer did not consider the complex life situations that lead a woman or a man to decide not to have children.

Please let me know what you think.

Published by Shawna on | Permalink