Versión de HTML Básico
Disruptive Christian Ethics
Ironically, politicians succeeded in creating these regulations by further
ing an understanding of a critical link between universal and particular
moral concerns. They argued that the particular (supposedly crime-
producing) motherhood of poor girls and women represented a dire threat
to the universal moral concern of the well-being of society. Here, the link
ing of particular moral concerns with universal ones signals dishonest, polit
ical manipulation of the public to create repressive public policy.
Finally, the outcome of these public policy characterizations of poor
women and girls as non-innocent leads one in a similar direction as inter
pretations of scripture that hold up Mary as a model of passive obedience
for women. In both instances patriarchal goals of reinforcing male con
trol of families and communities are bolstered. Some contemporary wel
fare reform advocates are less than subtle in their support of such goals.
As sociologist James Q. Wilson explained in his testimony at the 1995
congressional welfare reform hearings: “But once you have created a
neighborhood in which all or most of the children are growing up in
single-parent mother-only families, you are creating a neighborhood with
men but no fathers. As a result, the social control that all communities try
to maintain is weakened, because the people who primarily provide that
order, fathers who take responsibility for their children and their neigh
borhoods, are absent.”30The absence of father-ordered communities and
families indeed threatens traditional means of social control.
Situating the Need to Control Women
What about male control and authority within the gospel of Luke and
within the social context in which Luke wrote about Mary and the Mag
nificat? To declare that in liberative Christian social ethics the Magnificat
is a statement by Mary of liberation for poor women, without some atten
tion to the issues of gender and social control surrounding that text, would
be deceptive. It would make it seem, quite erroneously, like the problem of
patriarchy is not pertinent to Luke. Moreover, the aggressive use of power
by contemporary leaders making moral claims about poor women invites
questions about whether there are similar dynamics within Luke’s text and
ancient context. As Bible scholar Jane Schaberg asserts, Mary “represents
the hope of the poor, but she represents that hope
as a woman
.. .”31What
are the messages about gender and power that Luke intends with this text?
To fully grasp the gospel writer’s intentions in his depiction of Mary it
would be helpful to learn something about the lives of the women who
surrounded him. 'There are important issues to consider about which