I also do not doubt that the positive attributes which King ascribed to Mary are true. I think there is plenty in Scripture to support that Mary was a true example of what it meant to be a follower of Christ – therefore, she is a leader and role model for us today. However, I’m not sure on where I stand on the highlighting of non-biblical texts, such as the Gospel of Mary, to prove points not present in Scripture. I believe the Bible to be complete because I trust the process of canonization was under the sovereighty of God. The problem with the view of Mary can definitely be attributed to patriarchal views , but I believe Scripture itself has no part in lessening the role of the woman through the life of Mary – it seems to be quite the opposite.
Week 10 – Exodus-Toward-Egypt – Fernandez (Sugirtharajah)
Fernandez discusses the current situation of Filipino Americans in light of the Israelite exodus. However, he adds a twist as he describes the Filipino Americans as going from their exodus to Egypt as opposed to the other way around as recorded in the Bible. They have chosen to come to a place where they are “colonialized” and treated as “second-class citizens”. This situation is similar within many groups in America today. What should be the church’s response to a people who may be sacrificing the way they encounter God in their culture in order to blend in with others pursuing the American Dream?
Week 10 – Canonization and Marginalizations: Mary of Magdala – King (Sugirtharajah)
Like King, I have also wondered what happened with Mary after Christ’s ascencion as she is not mentioned in the book of Acts. This is surprising considering her story as a faithful disciple of Jesus. King suggests that Mary is not mentioned due to the “patriarchal powers” in charge of canonization that hoped to discourage such female leadership as lived out by Mary (recorded in the Gospel of Mary). As much as I don’t understand why so many issues of great importance are left unclear in Scripture, I trust in God’s sovereignty as the power behind canonization.
Week 10 – Cutchery Tamil Versus Pure Tamil – Israel (Sugirtharajah)
This article deals with the controversial translation of the biblical text into the Tamil language. It seems as though this problem has been present in every place in which Christianity was brought through colonialism. Much of the problem seems to be found in the imposing or hijacking of terms on the Christian colonizers’ part. Maybe the issue of translation would not be so controversial if the natives of the land had more of a participation in the deciding of what would become their ”Christian language”.
Week 10 – Wednesday
I believe that our faith should be grounded in Scripture as it is applied in our current cultural context. I agree with Dr. Bolger that we must evaluate the things that we as the church oppose due to the “gospel”. Often we avoid being associated with certain aspects of society because of the layers of beliefs and practices that we have added to the gospel over time – when in reality the gospel of Christ might respond quite differently. This goes back to the concept discussed in Monday’s class – the church should strive to become non-conformed to the world while still living within the culture; it’s not a matter of being counter-cultural.
Week 10 – How Local Divine Powers Were Supressed – Mbuwayesango (Sugirtharajah)
The practice of Bible translation must be taken with much sensitivity. Good intentions are not enough when it comes to this matter. It takes living within the culture and becoming completely familiar with it. In the situation regarding the Shona people, there is controversy over the use of Mwari as God because Mwari is the same name used for the non-biblical deity worshipped by the Shona. This reminds me of the use of Allah by Arab Christians when referring to God. I don’t think the name itself is the problem so much as the potential confusion that may be present in the lives of people trying to distinguish between the God of the Bible and the non-biblical deity worhsipped by their people.
Week 10 – Monday
I have often heard about Christ’s ministry as “countercultural”, but I like how Dr. Bolger puts more of an emphasis on Christ’s non-conformed ministry within culture. I think this is a subtle yet important distinction to make as we attempt to mimick Christ in our current context. Our goal is not to be countercultural to the point of being “different”. We are to live within our culture and meet with people where they are (this is where Christ met them) while not conforming to aspects of the culture that contradict the way of the Kingdom.
Response to Alex Lazo’s blog
I would agree that it is unfortunate in some cases that people are looked down upon for holding certain views. However, I disagree when it revolves around Michael Cleary. I must admit that it is different in his case. I don’t think that being open and accepting to others’ views is appropriate when their views involve murdering their spouse. In Michael Cleary’s case, it seems as though he is “believing” in these fairy tales in order to explain the murdering of his wife. So, this open acceptance could be quite dangerous as it would allow criminal activity to go unpunished based on alleged beliefs which cannot be contested.
Week 9 – Racial Discourse and Irish History – Gibbons (Castle)
This piece reminded me of how division will always exist. One group of people will always be able to find fault in another in order to prove its own superiority, whether that “fault” is skin color, social status, or cultural difference. This division is ultimately a result of a blindness to God’s inclusive love. As one group claims its own superiority it is simply hiding the fact that they are in the same boat as everyone else – all are sinners in need of salvation. There are definitely differences between the Irish and the English, but I believe division would be present even if they were exactly the same. In fact, isn’t division present in our very households?
Week 9 – Inventing Ireland – Kiberd (Castle)
In his concluding remarks about Irish nationalism, Kiberd states that “a nation could only achieve consciousness through exposure to others.” I believe this concept can be simplified to individual experience. As one who was homeschooled for a few years, I can relate to this concept. Unless I am surrounded by other people, I won’t know what is different about me. I can go on living my life thinking everybody is living in the same way, but it is only when I interact with others that I am able to see what makes me unique as an individual. Whether an individual or an entire nation, interaction should never be altogether avoided.
