RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Preaching the Whole Magnificat

by Nadia Bolz-Weber 12-22-2009

Again this Wednesday we joined the broader church in singing vespers, the evening prayer which always includes Mary’s song, the Magnificat.  We joined Christ’s church and Christ’s mother in singing about the wondrous things God has done in blessing us and in casting the mighty from their thrones and in feeding the hungry and sending the rich away empty.

Some of you know that the church I went to in High School, and where my parents still attend, is a very theologically and socially conservative congregation in Centennial.  It’s, suburban, white, very upper middle class, and privileged.  Very privileged.  Well a few years ago,  over 10 years after becoming a Lutheran and singing the Magnificat in Vespers countless times and really loving how radical it was, I visited my parent’s church and was amazed to see in the worship folder that the closing song was the Magnificat.

All through the service I kept thinking “I can’t believe that this wealthy suburban evangelical church is going to sing Mary’s song of the poor being fed and the rich being left hungry”.  Finally the moment came.  The congregation sang a praise music setting of…and I can’t make this up…the first half  of the Magnificat.  They proudly sang a nice praise song based on The Magnificat about how their soul magnifies the Lord who had looked with favor on them and that generations will call them blessed because the mighty one has done great things and holy is his name.”  And then the song ended.  I was speechless.  Well, not really.  As I shook the preachers hand on the way out I said that it was theologically irresponsible to allow a profoundly privileged congregation to sing only the first half of Mary’s song.

They may not know what the Magnificat is about, but I do.  I felt pretty proud of that.

Progressives see Mary’s song a bit differently.  Mary isn’t a docile picture of obedience singing about how great it is to be pregnant.  Mary is singing of nothing less than complete overturning of the social and economic order.  She’s basically a first century female Che Guevara calling for revolution.  There’s a reason why the Magnificat is said to of terrified the Russian Czars. Because, the message is that if you find yourself rich and powerful then… watch out!  This young little Jewish girl is not singing about a whole lot of good news for you.  But the poor…their time is coming because now the poor will be the rich and the rich will be the poor.

The liberals understand the Magnificat and feel pretty proud of that.

But this explanation sounds more like retribution than redemption.   Because when the oppressed become the oppressors then the oppression hasn’t actually gone away.  It’s a zero sum gain.  It’s the exact same play with the same plot and the same ending…just with a different cast.  What Mary sings of is not an endless cycle of retribution, but a total dismantling of the entire system.  The child she bears is not coming to make the oppressed the oppressors.  He is coming to disrupt the whole notion of oppression itself.  And the way in which God accomplishes this in the birth of Christ is the same way in which God accomplishes this in the death of Christ: namely vulnerable love.  This divinely vulnerable love is the only way out of our cycle of power and oppression.

This all makes it a bit tough to pull of being prideful about knowing what the Magnificat is really about. For me or for anyone else.   Ironically, to be prideful about understanding the Magnificat is to not understand it at all.  Perhaps it is pride itself which causes the rich to be sent away empty.  And not because God doesn’t want us fed, but because we don’t realize that we’re hungry. Maybe in Mary’s song the wealthy are sent away empty because we simply don’t need God.  We’ve got plenty of daily bread and seem to be able to handle most stuff that comes our way.  But the truly hungry… carry none of these illusions of self-sufficiency.  It is our hunger which God feeds, not our fullness.   The rich are left hungry because there is no entry point for God.

God has always been like this, and the ones like Mary, the ones who see that truth plainly, finally have all of the world’s power.  But this power isn’t the kind we create for ourselves…it’s the power of brokenness and humility. Power-over and retribution and vengeance and oppression be damned.  This vulnerable love of God is what claims us and what gives us hope, real hope, in a way that noting else can.  Even amidst a world in which we are all very aware that the mighty sit on thrones and the hungry are still hungry we can sing her song.  Because Mary doesn’t sing the Magnificat out of ignorance.  I’m certain that the reality of empire and oppression and poverty and the abject powerlessness of her very self in her very context was not lost on the mother of our Lord.  Quite the opposite.  I think she knew.  She knew that because of her lowliness and poverty and insignificance  – because of this and not in spite of this that God was and is doing an entirely new thing. Never had the poor been so exalted than for God to slip into their skin insistently blessing the whole world in a radical way.  She knew you simply can’t speak of such things.  They have to be sung.

(Blog post script: Things change a lot in a few years.  My parent’s church has a new brilliant young preacher who really loves The Gospel.  We meet together once a month with a couple other pastors to talk about our work and our preaching.  If someone had told me 5 years ago that one day I would be in a colleague group with my parent’s Church of Christ preacher I would have laughed like Sarah.  But God is good and not a little mischievous.  Anyway, we met this week.  He too is preaching on the Magnificat today.  The whole thing.  May it be a Gospel Word for his people. Amen.)

Nadia Bolz-WeberNadia Bolz-Weber is a Lutheran pastor living in Denver, Colorado, where she serves the emerging church, House for all Sinners and Saints. She blogs at www.sarcasticlutheran.com and is the author of Salvation on the Small Screen? 24 Hours of Christian Television. This article is an edited adaptation of a recent sermon.

Categories: Theology
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • bjbrown
    That was my initial reaction as well. I am more concerned about the fact that the church only sang the part of the hymn that made them comfortable. Now, I recognize that it may have been because of a time constraint or due to the fact that the pastor was concerned about the flow of the service, etc. However, it does worry me that they cut that song in half.
    We see this done often, don't we? We need to remember the importance of context and of taking an entire passage into account as we look at particular verses. Otherwise, we are being irresponsible in our interpretation.
  • But -- they were cut off from their own people, essentially becoming prostitutes.
  • Lord_Voldemort
    There's only one slight problem: the tax collectors, while much resented, were in fact quite well off and connected.

    That alone is a pretty strong indicator that there is something else going on here.

    LV
  • Lord_Voldemort
    Look, I like free market economics and have the flame messages to prove it, but to say there was no economic development or advancement at all from Jesus time to the 1500s is lunacy.

    LV
  • Lord_Voldemort
    As an aside, I saw Ms. Weber's comment a little while ago -- I missed it the first time around and if I had seen it I would have been kinder.

    As far as defining mercy, this is a big concept and one that is tied in very tightly with love, wisdom, and humility. Off the top of my head, I would say that mercy is the attribute of understanding that it is often best for all involved not to demand full compensation for the wrongs that are done. That'll do for a start, at least.

    LV
  • WaveTossed
    "Actually, one would be tempted to say that they focused on the part Ms. Bolz-Weber needed most to hear, the part that was certifiably not about politics."

    I still don't understand why part of the Magnificat was left out. This action still resembles "cafeteria Christianity," i.e. leave in the parts that support particular beliefs and agendas; leave out the parts that don't support particular beliefs and agendas.

    It's one thing to include the entire Scripture passage and then explain one's interpetation of what it means. It's an entirely different thing to leave out part of Scripture entirely.
  • PASTOR JEFF
    "Biblical Christmas hymns are very, very different. They are explicitly rooted in the history of Abraham, Moses, David, exile, and the longing for return. They are overtly, even uncomfortably, political.

    What does Mary sing about? Not about oping heavenly doors. She sings about the Lord’s mercy to those who fear Him, His generosity to the poor and hungry, His hostility to the proud and rich, the help He gives to Israel. She sings about the fulfillment of the Lord’s determined covenant mercy. And she talks about Abraham, for all this is done to fulfill what He “spoke to our Fathers, to Abraham and to His seed forever.”

    Zacharias? The Lord comes to accomplish redemption for His people, to raise up a horn of salvation in the house of David – a King, and a king from David’s line, a king who is going to deliver us from our enemies and from the hand of all who hate us. The coming of Jesus is a sign that the Lord has “remembered His holy covenant, the oath which He swore to Abraham our Father.” Day has dawned, and light has shone in the darkness – but the darkness is specifically Israel’s darkness.

    What does Simeon sing about? When he takes the infant Jesus into his arms, he blessed God: “Let your servant depart in peace, according to Your word; for my eyes have seen Your salvation.” And what is that? Access to heaven? Forgiveness of sins? No: “the light of revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of Your people Israel.”

    The angelic hymn to the shepherds should be understood in that context. Peace on earth is not some lefty pipe dream. It’s the promise of peace for Israel, and therefore peace for the nations."

    How N.T. Wright Stole Christmas
    By Peter J. Leithart in credenda.org
  • PASTOR JEFF
    LV; Mercy: an interesting topical study. In general God says that with the merciful He will be merciful. How would you define mercy in the light of your dichotomy of spiritual/political teachings?
  • Lord_Voldemort
    Actually, one would be tempted to say that they focused on the part Ms. Bolz-Weber needed most to hear, the part that was certifiably not about politics. I suggest this that until one understands the spiritual teachings of the Bible, the political teachings make no sense, left, right, or center.

    In her eagerness to see the vaguely Marxish sounding bits of the Magnificat shoved into the faces of the oppressive middle-class Lutheran monsters, Nadia Bolz winds up confusing Mary with Che Guevera, which is just absurd and arguably offensive to those who recall Che's record as a tyrant and cold-blooded murderer.

    She also forgets this couplet, the second-to-last:

    "He has come to the aid of his servant Israel,
    to remember his promise of mercy"

    Mercy, not revolution, was God's promise.

    LV
  • BuckeyeDon
    Ted:
    I see that error in my student writing a lot. And I live in central Ohio; most of my students are not from the South.

    In fact, I've seen it so often that it has now become one of the grammatical lessons I give every term. Some students seem shocked to learn that the correct word in that construction is "have" and not "of." I believe that the origin of the error is that when we speak, we use a contraction; i.e., to rewrite Nadia's sentence the way we speak, it would read: 'There’s a reason why the Magnificat is said to've terrified the Russian Czars.'

    Don
  • DHFabian
    Che Guevara was no more a ruthless murderer than most US presidents, or than any other soldier in any other war. Beyond that, he fought for ordinary people, not for his own power and wealth. He fought against the redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the top. He fought against the abuses of wealthy employers. He fought against the powerful who dedicated their lives to enriching the wealthiest at the expense of everyone else. He fought against imperialism, having the audacity to believe that Cuba should be ruled by Cubans. Guevara didn't invade another country, didn't commit genocide. He did stand up for ordinary people.

    Remember what Jesus, Himself, said about the rich? "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God." That's pretty revolutionary. If some politician said that on TV today, he'd be condemned as a socialist, or even a terrorist. Or how about, "Go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor"? Encouraging a culture of dependency -- the Welfare State? Yikes!

    Guevara's agenda was far more consistent with Christ's teachings than that of any modern US politician, or for that matter, than of the US today. So, it's not inconsistent to discuss Guevara in the context of religion/religious values.
  • Dear Fundamentalist;

    Have you never read the words of Christ? 'No one can serve both God and money?' Matthew 6.24 and Luke 16.13. What does this say to those heroes of Capitalism, the Wall St bankers?

    Beware; fundamentalism has a way of making people mean. 'The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life' 2nd Corinthians 3.6.

    This below happened under the Law of Moses, but if this was under the Law of Moses, the more true to the fundamentals we are, how much the more gracious should we be since our gracious Jesus has freed us from the Law?

    "Nehemiah 5

    Nehemiah Helps the Poor

    1 Now the men and their wives raised a great outcry against their Jewish brothers. 2 Some were saying, "We and our sons and daughters are numerous; in order for us to eat and stay alive, we must get grain."

    3 Others were saying, "We are mortgaging our fields, our vineyards and our homes to get grain during the famine."

    4 Still others were saying, "We have had to borrow money to pay the king's tax on our fields and vineyards. 5 Although we are of the same flesh and blood as our countrymen and though our sons are as good as theirs, yet we have to subject our sons and daughters to slavery. Some of our daughters have already been enslaved, but we are powerless, because our fields and our vineyards belong to others."

    6 When I heard their outcry and these charges, I was very angry. 7 I pondered them in my mind and then accused the nobles and officials. I told them, "You are exacting usury from your own countrymen!" So I called together a large meeting to deal with them 8 and said: "As far as possible, we have bought back our Jewish brothers who were sold to the Gentiles. Now you are selling your brothers, only for them to be sold back to us!" They kept quiet, because they could find nothing to say.

    9 So I continued, "What you are doing is not right. Shouldn't you walk in the fear of our God to avoid the reproach of our Gentile enemies? 10 I and my brothers and my men are also lending the people money and grain. But let the exacting of usury stop! 11 Give back to them immediately their fields, vineyards, olive groves and houses, and also the usury you are charging them—the hundredth part of the money, grain, new wine and oil."

    12 "We will give it back," they said. "And we will not demand anything more from them. We will do as you say."
    Then I summoned the priests and made the nobles and officials take an oath to do what they had promised. 13 I also shook out the folds of my robe and said, "In this way may God shake out of his house and possessions every man who does not keep this promise. So may such a man be shaken out and emptied!"
    At this the whole assembly said, "Amen," and praised the LORD. And the people did as they had promised. "
  • Rev Bolz-Webber;

    Where are you from originally?

    You wrote something in the Magnificat piece that looks down-home to me. 'There’s a reason why the Magnificat is said to OF terrified the Russian Czars.'

    I thought for the longest time growing up in Tulsa that the present perfect tense was formed with the preposition 'of' and the past participle of the verb.

    Are you from down around the South anywhere?

    Much to my surprise I wound up as a member of Bethel Lutheran in Madison Wisconsin, despite being an Anabaptist. It's a lively church, faithful and serving its community, eg, the poor and all.
  • passthebuck2
    but Jeff, it's what the Bible clearly teaches...

    well, ok then, at least what the Left Behind books clearly teach....

    but they're synonymous with the Bible, aren't they?
  • passthebuck2
    mind you, I know some who would say calling Mary "the mother of God" is historically irresponsible and theologically reprehensible
  • carlcopas
    Nadia clarified that comment. See earlier in the thread.

    Gerryhat, we did not forego all gift-giving this Christmas, but we cut down considerably and used that money for overseas missions and the local Christian homeless shelter.

    There's a squatter homeless camp not far from where we live. My family and I will be going down that way tomorrow with blankets for those who need them.
  • carlcopas
    Nadia,
    Thank you for the sermon and the clarification. You're one of my favorites on GP.
    Merry Christmas.
  • christopherluke
    I had a similar experience this year where a church cut out the ending of the Magnificat.

    I have to say, though, I believe the statement about Mary that she is "basically a first century female Che Guevara calling for revolution" to be a bit exaggerated and perhaps a little historically dishonest.
  • gerryhat
    anyone out there planning on having the homeless over for dinner today?
    any refugees at your table tonight?
    is there room in your inn?
    anyone decided to fore-go giving and receiving gifts in order to work in a shelter today?

    The only evidence we have of "WWJD?" is to pour over the Gospels and see exactly WHAT JESUS DID.
    The Great Commission leads to the Great Commandment--"teaching them to observe ALL that I have commanded you."

    "As the Father hath sent me...SO I SEND YOU"

    How are we doing?.............
  • Perhaps it is ill-judged of me to comment on something that has been such a rancorous debate. However, it has been impressed on me as I read through the comments how threatened we are by the scripture. Not, as some are arguing, by Nadia's interpretation of it, but the actual words themselves. The illustration of "God will fill the hungry but send the rich away empty" is not limited to this one passage. Throughout Old prophesy and New Testament epistles, the warning to the rich is repeated. Jesus reminds us of it in parables and in admonitions, particularly in the Gospel of Luke. I don't believe that these scriptures are requiring all Christians to take a vow of poverty, or that wealthy people cannot be saved, but warnings to the rich are a prevalent theme in scripture.

    It's here I agree with Nadia, where her message settles into my spirit for long term contemplation. The influence and attendance of the Church continues to shrink year after year in affluent countries, but continues to expand in impoverished nations. And Jesus reminds us "Woe to the rich, blessed are the poor." Is this a coincidence? This is the question Nadia seems to be contemplating at the end of this sermon, and I do believe it is a pivotal for wealthy Christians.

    I am not trying to chastise the wealthy by asking this. But it is a subject for meditation indeed, as we are most likely all privileged, and it applies to all of us. Why do Jesus, James and the prophets remind us, the wealthy, to be on our guard?

    Fundamentalist, you argue that this scripture, and I am assuming the others I am referring to, are speaking of spiritual wealth and hunger, not physical. Perhaps. I would believe it more of this scripture than others. But why this language over and over again? And why are the warnings always to the rich?
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008