Tag: Interpreting scripture

Christian teachings about Jesus’ ascension are uncomfortably problematic. First, the image of a king ascending to heaven, residing there as a god worshipped by his

by Deirdre Good Inspite of the fact that scholars since 1988 have made it clear that Abba isn’t Daddy, preachers and theologians continue to assert

Lectio divina is a way of strengthening us in the race by making room for to God read us and speak to us how it is each of us might best serve God’s Reign in our life this very day. In classic Benedictine tradition, there are four moments: Lectio (Read), Meditatio (Meditate), Oratio (Pray), and Contemplatio (Contemplate).

My own reading of the story of the Annunciation, in particular, has been shaped by the way that a number of 20th century poets, male and female, have read that story – seeing it as a story about how the Incarnation happened, and about miraculous and world-changing cooperation between a human being and God. And also in how the story is told in Scripture – especially in Luke’s gospel.

Right around the year 383, an otherwise unknown author named Helvidus wrote a tract on the Blessed Virgin Mary. It doesn’t survive, but apparently he argued that Mary and Joseph really did consummate their marriage physically, and that the individuals referred to in the gospels as the brothers and sisters of Jesus were the biological children of Mary and Joseph.

On one side, you have the Scripture, the creeds, and the faith of the Church; on the other, you have modern biology. According to our biological canons, we all know that human parthenogenesis is not medically attested. Lizards, yes; sharks, yes; humans, not so much. As a result there are two basic positions: either 1) we have miracle or 2) we have a miraculous explanation of a less-than-miraculous situation.