Right so my French course has ended. I survived, and the next level is in October. All I have to do is refresh and use what I’ve learned occasionally between now and then. One reason I broke down and took the course is so that I could look at some of the source material for 19th century OC/IC historical research – not all of it is translated into English or German.

Last week – we set the time aside to knock off editing the last chapters of Das Elefant (a.k.a – the PhD thesis from hell). This was successful, but now I’m rather anxiously awaiting a response from my supervisor. Is there a light at the end of this tunnel? I bloody well hope so!

This by way of saying I’ve got a back-log of posts and post ideas to sift through and write up, some of them might seem a bit out of sync with your sense of the progression of time but I still think they’re worth a visit.

Normal service is resuming – thanks for your patience.

What “is” religion? Religion Dispatches has this interesting essay today about a recent American court case in New York that determined that Feminism is not a religion. Well, D’uh! – I thought . . . . but then kept reading. What emerges in the essay is a rather complex morass of versions of a definition, and the complications this creates not only in academia, but also in legal terms. It is a rather curious thing to realise that something I’ve essentially taken for granted all of my adult life – has no commonly held “definition”. Indeed – I’m sitting here typing this and even now, I am unable to produce a working definition of “religion” (which may partially explain why a chapter of my Thesis on cult and devotion has been extraordinarily painful to write!).

This realisation – that we a) take this thing we call “religion” for granted, or better, we “assume” everyone knows what it means; and b) that we don’t have a common working definition – got me thinking about questions relating to its possible effect on theology and praxis; particularly in our OC/IC context where putting your finger on what it means to be “indie” is equally troublesome.

How do we describe the benefits, the possibilities, and the challenges of belonging to a religious tradition – without a working definition of “religion” independent of any characteristically “Christian” or OC/IC markers? Do we even need to be able to do this? One reason why it might be useful is answering the question: “Does religion matter?” or “Why does religion matter?” both for our own benefit, and for apologetic purposes. Moreover, does it not help us to describe, and analyse our reasons for choosing THIS tradition over all others if we have a neutral base-line understanding of this thing we call “religion”?

What effect does our lack of a generally accepted definition of “religion” have on our ability to address the points of both reasonable and militant atheism – or are we only able to do so within the context of our own OC/IC religious tradition?

Finally, does our working assumption, that everyone “knows” what religion is, have consequences for our OC/IC thinkers in developing new avenues of theology and praxis?

I was working on my thesis this morning and while considering aspects’ of Nestorius’ warning about the possible excesses of the title Theotokos – found myself thinking about the Roman Catholic idea of Mary as Mediatrix. I wondered to myself if it was not a bit prophetic on Nestorius’ part to raise issue with the title Theotokos, and went in search of some clarity on the use and meaning of Mediatrix. I found this, among others.

One element of this that surprised me was the heavy emphasis of Mary’s suffering at the cross during Christ’s crucifixion – and that it was in this moment that she truly becomes “mediatrix” and dispensor of grace.

My reading of the patristic sources suggests a . . . . counter argument . . . (perhaps not the best term). Mary’s importance as the subject of devotion emerges in the Late Antique period and is not focussed on her suffering, but instead on her becoming the Theotokos – the one who bore the one who is God – it is in this moment, according to the patristic sources, that Mary becomes the source of “super-abundant grace” (St. Proklos Hom. 1.1).

Patristic writers variously pointed to John’s account of Mary at the foot of the cross, as a demonstration of her post-natal virginity (because in vs. 19.26-7 Jesus – her only son, hands her into the care of John, and not for example James); or a fulfilment of Simeon’s prophecy (Lk. 2.35) that her heart would be pierced by a sword.

From an OC/IC perspective I wonder if the use of Mediatrix and it’s complimentary title Co-Redemptrix are actually helpful titles – after all, Nestorius held that the term too readily lent itself to excessive Marian devotion, distorting the true image of Mary as a woman, participating in the economy, and thus her real value in the tradition.

So, I’m working on Das Elefant – I’ve got two chapters to go – and am enjoying writing about Nestorius’ Marian thinking. So far so good.

Problem is, one translation of his Book of Hereklides is preferred to another, and . . . .it’s in French! I’ve only recenly broke down and decided to succumb and learn French after refusing to do so for over 30 years. Romance languages simply don’t do it for me – and one look at the “seven compound verbs” makes me reach for the hruškovica.

But never fear – technology is here! My lovely Mac comes with an auto translate program which gives one no end of amusement as the following example from Nau’s French edition of Nestorius’ text demonstrates.

Here’s the French: “il en est ainsi au sujet des (deux) natures qui sont séparées dans l’essence, mais qui sont unies par l’amour et dans le même prosôpon.”

Ok. . . .now here’s the mechanical translation from my computer into English: “it is thus about (two) natural which is separate in the gasoline, but which is linked by the love and in same the prosôpon.”

*BOOM* – So essentially if I follow this translation our Lord’s incarnation was a rather explosive event! Poor Mary!

Thankfully this was a test run – and I do have an english translation of this phrase which (assuming McGuckin (pg. 162) is a decent translator) should read as follows: “He is the subject of the two natures which are separated in essence, but united by love, and in one and the same prosopon.”

Wow! Ok, so I’m busy typing away at the last two chapters of the Thesis From Hell (a.k.a – Das Elefant). At the moment I’m working on the chapter dealing with Nestorius’ views of the Theotokos and the emerging cult & devotion to her; and it hits me . . . . this week is the week in 431 when the Council of Ephesus happened. Hmmmmm . . . . Ok that’s a fun coincidence but then . . . . is it not odd too that both my MA and my PhD are on the Theotokos? Well not really there IS a reasonable explanation – I got interested in the emergence of Marian cult & devotion while finishing my BA. . . . OK . . . this is fine . . . . but. . . .erm. . . . this week is also my consecration anniversary . . . Oh. Hmmm . . . .

Funny how things fall into place unexpectedly.

Happy Easter everyone! I’m soooo far behind on projects – other than trying desperately to finish the thesis from hell (Das Elefant) so I’ve yet to post a “proper” Pascha message, or the not quite finished updated version of the Indie Voices web pages, or any of the interviews I conducted just before lent . . . sigh. Most of my energy has been expended on Das Elefant because I’m determined to finish the damn thing soon. I’m almost there, just a little bit further, I can almost feel that final draft in my hand . . . . aaaargh!

Needless to say we’ve been celebrating here at GCHQ and hope you have been too. We’ve decided to leave the WFP logo and link up for a while longer – as many of you are aware the international food crisis is in full swing. I read in this weekend’s paper that if you give up meat one day a week you’ll make a substantial positive impact on your so called carbon footprint. What is more – cattle take up something like 3 times the amount of grain to produce 1kg of meat as something like chicken. Imagine how many people that grain could feed.

I’ve got a stack of ideas for posts sitting on my desk – a few inspired by the recent musings of Fr. Tessone, others by my mulling over ideas surrounding myth and imagery. Hopefully some of those will take shape, and find their way here for you to join in the conversation soon.

In the meantime – I beg your patience as I’m distracted of late. Anyone wanting to chat about the late antique emergence of Marian cult & devotion is welcome.