Yesterday's gospel reading, John 12:1-8, is amazing/interesting on a number of levels.
Level 1: John 12:1-8 is arguably the strongest evidence from an individual passage in John's Gospel that John knew at least two of the other gospels.
Level 2: (whether or not John knew the other three gospels, or at least Mark and Luke) this story has amazing resonances with three other synoptic gospel stories, while being "John's own" story.
Level 3: This story speak to us as disciples of Jesus: what is our devotion to him? What is our response to the poor?
Level 4: You can race to the bottom of this post if you wish ...
Level 1: John 12:1-8 offers evidence that John knew at least two of the other gospels
Each gospel has a story of a woman anointing Jesus at a dinner party: Mark's and Matthew's are quite similar, and placed chronologically near the end of Jesus' life, and geographically, close to Jerusalem, at Bethany; Luke's occurs during Jesus' ministry in Galilee and is placed before Jesus begins his journey to Jerusalem where he will die (Mark 14:3-9; Matthew 26:6-13; Luke 7:36-50).
Now, John could have composed his story on the basis of some such story (or stories, if Luke's is a distinct, second such story) being orally communicated around the Christian communities, and needing no reference to any of the texts. It is an easily remembered kind of story, "There was a dinner party ... a woman turned up ... she used her hair ...". And such a composition theory could easily account for John agreeing with Mark and Matthew, that the dinner party took place at Bethany: no need for a text lying open before John to have noted that details in the story: "There was a dinner party at Bethany and ...".
But there are some common phrases and words, which of themselves do not prove John knew the texts of Mark (and possibly Matthew) and Luke, but point in that direction.
Consider:
A. John/Mark parallels
John 12:3: murou nardou pistikes polutimou (ointment of nard pure costly)
Mark 14:3: murou nardou pistikes polutelous (ointment of nard pure costly)
(Note that Matthew does not follow Mark closely here. Matthew 26:7 has: alabastron murou barutimou (alabaster phial of ointment very expensive)
John 12:4-6 is paralleled in both Matthew and Mark. The latter offer an argument among the disciples about the waste of money the perfumed ointment represents. John focuses attention on one of the disciples, Judas. John and Mark mention the same sum of money the ointment might have been sold for, three hundred denarii (Matthew mentions a large sum of money rather than a specific amount); all three talk about the money being given to the poor.
John 12:5: dia ti touto to muron ouk eprathe triakosion denarion kai edothe ptoxois?
Mark 14:5: edunato gar touto to muron prathenai epano denarion triakosion kai dothenai tois ptoxois
Matthew 26:9: edunato gar touto prathenai pollou kai dothenai ptoxois.
In response to this avalanche of unimpressed criticism from the disciples, John and Mark record Jesus offering his sympathy to the woman, "Let her alone, ...":
John 12:7: eipen ouv o Iesous afes auten, hina eis ten ...
Mark 14:6: O de Iesous eipen afete auten ti aute ...
Finally, John has the same words as Mark (and Matthew, see below) in respect of the famous saying "You will always have the poor with you but you will not always have me":
John 12:8: tous ptoxous gar pantote exete meth eauton, eme de ou pantote exete.
Mark 14:7: pantote gar tous ptoxous exete meth eauton, ..., eme de ou pantote exete.
B: John/Luke parallels
Whereas Mark/Matthew have the woman anointing the head of Jesus, John and Luke are in parallel over the feet (tous podas autou, John 12:3/Luke 7:38) being anointed and the woman (Luke) / Mary (John) wiping his feet with her hair. If John is drawing on Luke then he simplifies Luke whose account includes tears and a kiss as well as ointment. In the excerpts below I have italicised the words common in Greek to both accounts.
Luke 7:38: and standing behind him at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment [the same word for ointment is used here as John uses in 12:2.
John 12:3: and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair.
C: John/Matthew parallel
This one is arguably weak, since John and Matthew could have independently come to the same decision about something they choose to omit from Mark, but it is worth noting. Mark, in 14:6-7, records Jesus as responding to the disciples criticism of the woman (see above re his first words, "Let her alone ...") with a short speech about how she has done a beautiful thing; the poor will always be with them, when they have opportunity to do good to the poor, and that the disciples will not always have him. Matthew shortens the last part of this speech by omitting talk of doing good to the poor. Thus, in respect of the last part of the speech, John appears to follow Matthew rather than Mark, but offering a similar omission to Matthew (who undoubtedly was following Mark):
John 12:8: tous ptoxous gar pantote exete meth eauton, eme de ou pantote exete.
Mark 14:7: pantote gar tous ptoxous exete meth eauton, ..., eme de ou pantote exete.
Matthew 26:11: pantote gar tous ptoxous extee meth eauton, eme de ou pantote exete
That is, in sum, there is evidence, as cited above, for John knowing and choosing, here and there, to follow the texts of Mark and Luke and, possibly, also Matthew. The evidence does not constitute proof.
Attribution: nothing above is original to me nor new to the world of Johannine scholarship. Many commentaries on this passage pay attention to these parallels. They are readily observable in "synopses" which set out the four gospels side by side - in this case I used both Greek and English synopses.
Level 2: (whether or not John knew the other three gospels, or at least Mark and Luke) this story has amazing resonances with three other synoptic gospel stories, while being "John's own" story.
Irrespective of theories about how John came to compose the story in John 12:1-8, the story has resonances with the synoptic accounts: Jesus is anointed in a poignant scene, set at a dinner party, with expensive perfumed ointment, which occasions sharp criticism from one or more of his disciples, and leads Jesus to support the woman and her action while offering an observation about the permanency of the poor in human history. The poignancy of the scene is that in John's and Mark/Matthew's stories, the anointing of Jesus is an anticipation of his burial, that is, of his death which will occur not many days hence.
If Luke's story is distinct from Mark/Matthew's story (e.g. the former having occurred in Galilee and the latter in Bethany near Jerusalem), nevertheless the manner of John's telling, even though the setting is Bethany, recalls the Lukan story for us as well as the Mark/Matthew story.
Yet John makes this story his own: only he names three people present who are not named in the other stories: Lazarus, Martha and Mary. Lazarus figures in the story not only to underline the anticipation of Jesus' death inherent in the anointing with ointment but also to offer the hint of hope, that death will not be the end of Jesus: he like Lazarus will be raised to life after (and beyond) death.
Martha and Mary, who have figured in John's overall narrative, one chapter earlier, as the earnestly entreating sisters of Lazarus, believing that Jesus can do something about the death of their brother, appear here: one, Martha, undertaking necessary service for the meal to happen; the other, Mary, being the named anointing woman. But their figuring in the story is itself resonant with another story, told only by Luke, in 10:38-42, in which Jesus is at their house, with Mary sitting at the feet of the Lord (and doing precisely no housework) and Martha doing all the housework and complaining to Jesus about Mary's lack of involvement. Mary, perhaps annoyingly for Martha, is commended by Jesus for her attention to him and his teaching!
In John 12:1-8 there is no specific approbation for Mary in comparison to Martha, and Martha has no complaints. But Mary serves (12:2) and Mary anoints the feet of Jesus.
If John knew not the synoptic texts, he seems to have imbibed their spirit from the ethos-sphere!
Level 3: This story speak to us as disciples of Jesus: what is our devotion to him? What is our response to the poor?
The story John/Mark/Matthew tell is sophisticated and nuanced (so is Luke's story). On the one hand the story sets in motion 2000 years of expensive, extravagant devotion to Jesus: churches, cathedrals, stained glass windows, works of art in paint and in marble, lives devoted in sacrificial ways to being with Jesus (e.g. through the prayer work of religious orders).
On the other hand, the story sharply remind us that the poor are (as has been the case and still is) always with us, and the implication, even if we read Matthew and John and not Mark is, nevertheless, the point Jesus makes in Mark's story: "any time you want to [help the poor], you can help them" (14:7). Indeed, a bunch of other texts in the gospels and in the epistles challenge us to make "can help them" into "will help them."
If, focusing on John's story, Mary is a model disciples in respect of extravagant devotion to Jesus, then Judas is a model anti-disciple: we should not be like him, harping on about the waste of money, nor like him being a thief, nor like him being a mouther of words and a non-doer of relevant action.
This story offers, subtlely, the both/and of extravagant devotion to Jesus and of generous provision for the poor.
Level 4: Filling the whole house of the world with the aroma of Christ
The Good News Bible renders John 12:3 in a lovely and inspiring way:
The sweet smell of the perfume filled the whole house.
Is John offering a little descriptive flourish here, or teasing the reader to think outside of the story, to the ongoing story of each of our lives as followers of Christ?
We are the salt of the earth (Matthew) and meant to season and flavour all of life and all lives around us.
Here, John is implying we are the perfume of the world and meant to spread the sweet fragrance of that perfume into every corner and nook and cranny.
If so, John is not alone in such conception. Paul writing in 2 Corinthians 2:14-16 says:
God uses us to make the knowledge about Christ spread everywhere like a swet fragrance. For we are like a sweet-smelling incense offered by Christ to God, which spreads among those who are being saved and those who are being lost. For those who are being lost, it is a deadly stench that kills; but for those who are being saved, it is a fragrance that brings life.
Beyond the obvious challenges in the story: to be devoted to Christ, to help the poor, there is another challenge.
How might we fill the whole house of the world with the aroma of Christ?
As an outsider, I think its an uphill battle for ACANZP because the "mother church" keeps generating awful headlines about church abuse. If ACANZP publicly withdrew from being in "communion" with CofE until survivor concerns and redress are properly addressed and the new Clergy Conduct Measure introduced, I'd probably beat a path to a local Anglican church! But as things stand, I'm unwilling to engage with that implicit relationship with the CofE. I've checked on the new Clergy Conduct Measure at the CofE website and it's expected to be introduced in early 2026. I realise ACANZP is much better, e.g. not having a time limit on complaints, but I can't handle the cruelty of the CofE one year time limit - that's barbaric. The aroma and "whole house" concept doesn't work for me until the CofE is radically reformed.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Peter. A rich post that is sure to be loved by those interested in scriptural analysis, by theology students currently writing on this passage, and Anglo-Catholics everywhere (your building a solid theological defense for the widespread use of incense)!
ReplyDeleteI like your attention to *feet*. This passage made me immediately think of Jesus washing his disciples feet in the lead up to his trial (a passage only mentioned in John). Maybe Mary's act inspired Jesus's too, or it was the same Spirit at work in both of them.
It also made me think of *hair*. I've being following a blog by a Jewish American woman, Frieda Vizel, who left the ultra-orthodox "Satmar" Hasidic community she was born into as an adult. One of the pivotal moments in her decision to leave came after she was married and started practicing the Hasidic custom of married women shaving their hair. Frieda rebelled. The custom itself, which other Jewish groups don't regard as Biblical, was argued to be based in some passages within Song of Songs, as well as other commentaries, in which women's hair is considered extravagant, luxurious, and full of potential (and not necessarily bad) erotic power.
Mary wiping expensive perfume off Jesus' feet has often struck me a powerfully erotic, and full of deep pathos and love. We might celebrate this as the Passion of Mary!
PS. to my previous comment, another case in point. Australia.
ReplyDeleteNew to me this morning, article dated 26-Mar-25.
“What they did with the paedophiles in the ’70s, ’80s, and ’90s by moving them around, and especially with Lou Daniels—they encouraged him and gave him a high position in CEBS,” the Church of England Boys Society. The Anglican Church of Australia was known as “the Church of England in Australia” until 1981. [...]
“Every parish in Tasmania will now have a levy on income from investment for the next maybe five or 10 years, which will also build up the funds that are available for redress,” he said. [Bishop Condie]
I mean, this is a current headline! So there's a real dissonance when messaging about "How might we fill the whole house of the world with the aroma of Christ?" and what I and other folk are reading in the news.
There needs to be humility in response to criticisms of JW too, because some of those are entirely valid and being defensive about it, especially when the church has got so much morally wrong, creates the opposite of a pleasing aroma. We can't just pretend these things aren't real!
Article: https://livingchurch.org/news/news-anglican-communion/tasmanian-bishop-offers-regrets-and-payments/
*
ReplyDeleteRe the aroma Q, and, abusive church in various forms.
In Luke's version of the story, Jesus says of the woman "Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little."
*
The church sinned much, listened far less.
Apologised much, lamented.
How much love hath the church?
When will the church be love-in-action,
loving the unloved, hearing the unheard?
When will the church take on Christ's yoke,
liberating folk from their burdens?
~Liz
*
Note: I should have made the last line, "and liberate folk from their burdens?"
ReplyDeleteWould've read better.
Great verse, Liz! Such an important part of the Messiah hope. How Jesus begins his mission, quoting Isaiah, in Luke...
ReplyDeleteThe Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free...
What Mary we assume experienced that she had found - someone who liberated her from her burdens and made God close at hand. It's so crushing and dispiriting when Church becomes the burden and the wound.
Thanks so much, Mark. I occasionally use verse when I feel deeply about something. I was troubled with how the church has often distanced itself from people who've been hurt (or even preyed on) by an officeholder in the church. Too often, when they've tried to talk about it they've been met with indifference, inaction, even hostility.
ReplyDeleteThe bible ref you shared is beautiful and I love the thoughts added after. Mary experienced for herself 'God with us' and her response was this amazing expression of devotion to Jesus that also spread sweet fragrance to everyone there. How deep is our love?
And if we see the church becoming a burden and wound - how do we deal with that? What do we say, and what do we do? Often the issue is systemic. There may be bullying or power issues, external pressures (e.g. in the UK.. church insurance). Love-in-action calls for courage and persistance, and shouldering the burden with those afflicted until there's some kind of resolution and relief.
"And if we see the church becoming a burden and wound - how do we deal with that? What do we say, and what do we do?" (Liz).
ReplyDeleteYes, that's the big question so many live with.
This morning I've read a (lengthy) article in The Guardian titled "Loathe thy neighbor: Elon Musk and the Christian right are waging war on empathy" which unexpectedly provoked me to more thinking about +Peter's post. [content warning: might be triggering for some - take care if you decide to read it]
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2025/apr/08/empathy-sin-christian-right-musk-trump
I've not previously taken such a deep dive into the RW thinking on the 'sin of empathy'. The article is wide-ranging and includes references to Vance and "ordo amoris", Bishop Buddes's sermon and reaction to it, and much more. It ramped up concerns I already held.
Afterward, something dawned on me. Jesus tells his listeners that he won't always be with them - this is why Mary's devotion has special significance. But in our era, we're far removed from the time of Christ's earthly life. How may we express our devotion?
I recalled Jesus' narrative about his future judgement of the nations in Matt 25 and the separation of sheep from goats, and it's a separation based on righteousness. The blessed are those who feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, visit the sick and those in prison.
This it would seem, is the test of our love. To see, listen, and do good - to love and bear witness to the truth. To do righteousness. I would understand the church officers who deliberately harm others to be wolves or "anti-disciple"s like Judas. They must not remain in positions of influence in the church.
*
From the article....
The white evangelical embrace of Trump – 81% supported him in 2016 – represents the tail end of a broader shift, according to John W Compton, a professor of political science and author of the 2020 book The End of Empathy: Why White Protestants Stopped Loving Their Neighbors.
[...]
“Focused on personal salvation and stripped of any concern with social justice, post 1970s evangelicalism struck a chord with white middle-class Protestants who now had little reason to concern themselves with the plight of the less fortunate,” [John W Compton]
*
The church must be held to account when its devotion to Christ fails and those whom Christ cares about are cast aside and sidelined. Our challenge is to demonstrate our love for Christ through love of neighbour (including those harmed by the church), and practice truth and justice in daily living.
I do not understand an obsession with America's culture wars (about which no one in New Zealand can do anything) while ignoring two salient facts about NZ:
ReplyDelete1. it is an increasingly secular, even anti-religious country (like Uruguay or the Czech Republic);
2. Members of Parliament (over which NZers have some say) have been acting in disturbing ways that even non-religious kiwis find unsettling. Namely:
- three TPM members acted in a very hostile way on the floor of Parliament toward another member and are refusing the house's discipline. If they had acted this way in public, they would have been charged with threatening behaviour.
- a biologically-confused Green MP who ran an internet account with shocking photographs and very disturbing sexualised language has been supported by his party (and broadly by NZ's media). Instead of resigning when found out (as would have happened to any National, Labour, NZF or ACT MP), he has defended his covert conduct (which the Green Party knew about before he became an MP).
Where are the Churches calling these persons to account? It is quite possible that these persons could end up in a coalition government at the next election.
Are these really the people that NZers want to be their parliamentary representative and potential Government?
Why are the NZ churches silent about these abuses?
In the immortal words of Elvis, 'Clean up your own backyard.'
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Hello William
ReplyDeleteAmerica culture wars have a tendency to spill over the borders of the USA ... a bit like its loopy but destructive economic policies.
I do not feel inclined to wade into aspects of NZ politics (such as you reference) because they are fraught in their particularities. For instance, whatever I think about Ben Doyle's media posts, general take on things, he has made a defence and it would be very distracting arguing and counter-arguing with him - which others are doing, within the political sphere, quite capably. And, ultimately, including with respect to TPM, I look forward to the judgment of the voters [which, incidentally, as far as polls go, appears to be a solid 10% or so for the Greens NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO!!!!, and ditto, c. 5% for TPM (though a bit more up and down). My preference, politically speaking, is to focus on the nation dividing issues, such as the proposal re the Treaty - thankfully now voted down.
Dear William,
ReplyDeleteThanks for raising these important issues. Yes, it seems that the culture wars have arrived on our own shore now.
I was so proud to see the Te Pāti Māori MPs performing haka in Parliament in response to the grubby Treaty Principles Bill.
Benjamin Doyle's statement on recent homophobia and death threats was educative and moving to hear.
Peter, what does it mean to "fight" anywhere except on the actual social and religious battlefields of New Zealand which affect actual New Zealanders? This is the very definition of virtue signalling. It is very strange that an MP - and party spokesman on young children! - is engaged in queasy social media posting under the religiosly and sexually offensive name "Biblebelt Bussy" complete with swirling blue logo, gives a completely fallacious "explanation" of his words and photographs - and no Christian challenges him ! I can't avoid the impression that Anglicans are afraid of the Greens, despites that party's multiple scandals. No, much safer to sound off about Trump, Musk etc. (BTW, what have you had to say about Biden since all the not so secret revelations about him have come out, post-election? Nothing on truth telling in politics?) Who has called Doyle to account? No bishop but secular men like Sean Plinket and Michael Laws - showing thast natural law still functions with some.
ReplyDeletePax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Hi William,
ReplyDeleteI am somewhat wary of taking on individual politicians and their foibles, faults and failings when others are doing so. Just this week, for example, my own local MP has been "outed" as a member of a somewhat strange and secretive Christian sect called by various names including Two by Two. I don't think it would be edifying to make public statements etc. Do you really think a church leader would be edifying the church-in-society by wading into arguments over the meaning of "bussy"??? Your impressions about Anglicans are yours and in a true spirit of liberal democracy you are welcome to have them!! But I am not myself aware of a reality undergirding your impressions. Musk and Trump hold between them grave threats to the stability of the world, with immense ramifications for the last, the least and the lost in many nations around the world, including our own. As for Biden, I am not quite sure what revelations you are talking about, but I hold him and the Democrats significantly responsible for the election of Trump!
"I do not understand an obsession with America's culture wars (about which no one in New Zealand can do anything)" [William]
ReplyDeleteJoe Rigney and others are guilty of indulging the sin of enmity.
Railing against an imaginary 'sin of empathy' corrupts Jesus' teaching.
Jesus warned against ignoring the plight of the oppressed and needy: "Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me."
From the article I linked to, and I quote: Rigney connects progressive political values to “a culture of victimhood flowing from toxic female empathy”.
Rigney again: “Bishop Budde’s exhortation was a clear example of the man-eating weed of Humanistic Mercy.”
Jesus welcomed women's inclusion (and didn't relegate women to mere kitchen service).
So, my "obsession" with America's culture wars should come as no surprise.
--- It's very easy to con people into complicity with the sin of ENMITY.
--- We don't want that toxic drivel spilling over into NZ from US Christian Nationalism.
--- I'm confident ACANZP will actively fight such intrusion.
--- +Peter is indeed wise to focus on the big issues
Peter, you should feel free to talk about any religious association affecting MPs because they make laws for all NZers. Keith Holyoake was brought up as Plymouth Brethren, after all. Wouldn't you call that a "somewhat strange and secretive Christian sect"? I know nothing about "Two by Two" but if they have acted criminally, by all means speak out. If they haven't, what's the problem? Is it just because atheist secularists don't like conservative Protestants and Catholics? I know what the default position of RNZ is on moral questions - even to the point of going along with Doyle's performative fantasy that he isn't a man and calling him "they". I am reminded of school children who claimed to be furries. At least you haven't connived in Doyle's gender fantasy, unlike his party leaders.
ReplyDeleteAs for Doyle and his press appearance, there is NO doubt what "bussy" means: it is gay argot for a boy's anus. At least Plunket and Laws don't get the vapours pointing this out, as well as the FBI confirmed meaning of the swirling blue icon as an internet insignia for paedophilia. Doyle was lying when he said it was a koru! Or do you believe him?
You follow the news so I am sure you are aware a number of books have just bern published by Democratic insiders admitting that Biden was clearly showing evidence of severe cognitive decline from the start of his presidency and they covered for him throughout Even Adam Schiff had admitted as much on American TV.
Mark: the TPM's behaviour in Parliament was disgusting physical intimidation. I am amazed that you cannot see that. And there was nothing "educative" in what Doyle said: it was utter evasion. There are some very strange people in the NZ Parliament and that is largely a consequence of the MMP system.
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
William, briefly, for the Lord's work is upon me, as Doyle said in his statement to the media- "context is everything". I'm sure you understand that all too well in terms your deep knowledge of biblical language, scripture, and hermeneutics. Taking Doyle's words out of context, with no attempt to understand the context of Queer culture (and why should we if we are believing they are sinful, distorted, woke paedophiles), will generate predictable results, predictable interpretations. Which you do keep repeating about sexually diverse people in NZ and elsewhere, without much variation. It's not very edifying. I do encourage you to seek out and watch Doyle's statement to the media instead.
ReplyDeleteMark, I saw almost the entirety of Doyle's appearsnce in "the Rainbow Room" and heard his answers to all the questions put to him. I have also seen the photographs which he posted on social media which another website captured before Doyle took them down - including one of the child in the "crocheted wharenui" in Christchurch with an obscene comment about "feeling ,,,,,,, by Whiro" which I will not repeat in full here. But you can find it if you go online.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct that I do not know a great deal about the paedophile subculture, a grisly subject for the police, the courts and psychiatrists. (I did have a university colleague once who tried to kill himself when the police discovered child porn on his computer.) But I now know what "Bussy" means and what a swirling blue circle means and I can tell you that Doyle was flat out lying. I also noted that his party leaders did not appear with him on that press appearance, which suggested to me that even Swarisbrick realised he is indefensible.
I have also read several comments by gay persons on Plunket's and Laws' website and they are outraged that Doyle and the Greens have thrown them under the bus by claiming that paedophiliac images and expressions are all a bit of innocent fun and just part of their "absurd and irreverent rainbow culture" (Swarisbrick's words).
Doyle went on endlessly about "living my authentic life". He plainly doesn't know what "authentic" means. It is Jesus Christ who shows us what true and authentic lives are. And that has nothing to do with promoting puberty blockers on boys, as Doyle does.
Finaly, I am glad that you are not going along with Doyle's fantasy that he is not really a man.
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Oh you are right on the last point, William! Well spotted! I should have said "they". As someone once said: you think pronouns are confusing, have you heard about the Holy Trinity!
DeleteI do continue to disagree on how you are interpreting this, and the sources you are trusting. But hey, what's new!
Peter's post on Mary has inspired by own blog thoughts. Anyone interested can find them here..
ReplyDeletehttps://www.tumblingages.co.nz/blog-2/the-passion-of-mary
An explanatory note on 'rainbow communities': we were told on TV by Mr Doyle that there is 'an enormous number' of these 'communities', each with its own argot and inner life; but as mathematicians know, an infinite series of the form 1 + a half + a quarter + an eighth + ... will only ever add up to 2, no matter how many terms you add to it. You can even throw in a few made up intersectional Maori words and it will make no difference to the real numbers. Similarly in a normal distribution population, 'LGBTQIA+' will only ever add up to 2%, however many letters you add to it. Or maybe not, if they have the courage to add 'P'.
ReplyDeleteNew Zealand had a homosexual Deputy PM for three years and I don't recall anyone being greatly bothered about this; so Mr Doyle claiming victimhood for his "community" sounds very hollow. He is evading the very obvious issue.
(Incidentally, I have many times asked 'Queer activists' to tell me what exactly 'Queer' means and I have never been given a clear answer. I concluded it's just another way of saying 'homosexual-ish'.)
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Hello William again,
ReplyDeleteCuriosity got the better of me, and I looked into those other images and info you talk about above, though I felt I was intruding on another's privacy too.
Can I just say, first thing, that if anyone has any serious concerns for the wellbeing of any child in NZ, then they should report that matter directly to the NZ Police so that it can be properly investigated. The Police are the body with the appropriate means and power to best investigate the truth of such a situation, not an ex NZ First businessman who uses social media to develop and spread his opinions and share these with Winston Peters. That is a highly inappropriate way to investigate anyone, including Benjamin Doyle, and declare them guilty or not. In our present age, it is not only highly inappropriate, it is also irresponsible and seriously dangerous, such as is evident in the death threats Doyle and his family has since received.
That all said, I did what others have done - looked at the images and developed my own conclusions. I want to say again: what do I know, what does anyone know, from just looking at images online? We think we I know the truth, and that our opinions are valid, especially in this internet age.
That said....I looked at the images and I wasn't disturbed. It fact, they seemed really innocuous to me. But...but....I am somewhat familiar with Queer culture, and very familiar with the sort of generation Doyle is part of (I think I might be in it too, or an elder of it, gulp!), and which uses slang *all the time*. To someone else, of another generation, say someone like Winston Peters, or my mother, or Sean Plunkett, or someone like the ex NZ First funding businessman who has spread a lot of this, say someone who influenced by Q Anon stuff or at least by conservative Americans media and its obsession with left wing politicians as paedophiles (most paedophiles have of course been right wing, Christian politicians), these images might seem conclusive and sickening. So again, if you're concerned for the safety of this child, please get in touch with the NZ Police. Don't engage in trial by social media. That is so flawed and seriously dangerous. And potentially libelous.
As to the swirling blue thing, I have no idea about all that symbol stuff. It's a swirl emoji wyou can download off your phone. Benjamin is Māori, so the easiest explanation is a koru symbol. Seems weird that if they were a paedophile, and that symbol is about that, they'd be so brazen and open. Most paedophiles, of course, like Graeme Capill, aren't brazen and open, but are experts at grooming and hiding their abuse behind respectable images and words.
I do understand Ben not wanting to censor their self, to make their self invisible, as queer people are often forced to or told too. But I also think Ben needs to protect their privacy more, including images of their child. Again, just my out of context opinion.
I don't support the use of puberty blockers for children and adolescents, just for the record, and have consistently expressed that opinion with other concerned therapists in our national association.
Mark
As I understand, "queer" is about being free from being labelled, typecast, constructed, one way or the other. "Homosexual" is part of the binary of hetero and homo, gay and straight. Queer assumes more fluidity, more idiosyncratic identity, less tight labelling.
ReplyDeleteBut it's more than that, too. It's also like Quaker or Gay or the N word - abusive epithets that have been taken on and subverted by a subculture. So Queer is also about being transgressive, about surviving within a dominant narrative in which one is consciously or unconsciously threatened, by creatively subverting dominant discourse.
But that's just over the top of my head. And I'm looking in from the outside, though, deep down, we're all a bit queer in somewhere or t'other.
Can't say I'm keen on this thread's latter content, if it's my fault I'm regretful. It's interesting though, to read Mark's responses, thank you Mark.
ReplyDeleteMy final words before the turn:
"The church must be held to account when its devotion to Christ fails and those whom Christ cares about are cast aside and sidelined. Our challenge is to demonstrate our love for Christ through love of neighbour (including those harmed by the church), and practice truth and justice in daily living."
William seems to think NZ Churches and their leaders should be publicly calling individual public figures to account over lifestyle issues offending *his* particular brand of morality (and thereby try to maintain some kind of purity in our politics).
+Peter responded, "I do not feel inclined to wade into aspects of NZ politics (such as you reference) because they are fraught in their particularities."
Is the church and its leaders called to take a public stand on individuals in politics? In certain circumstances perhaps so, but surely that would require collective discernment not just a knee-jerk reaction by one leader.
The church serves as salt, light, leaven. To witness to the love of God revealed in Christ Jesus.
To serve in this way it may well need to speak out publicly on broader issues, and ACANZP as far as I'm aware does this very well. I commend, and appreciate, their careful approach to these matters.
Liz 10/4: ‘This morning I've read a (lengthy) article in The Guardian titled "Loathe thy neighbor: Elon Musk and the Christian right are waging war on empathy"’
ReplyDeleteThe Guardian article is indeed concerning and quite shocking in the conclusions that some people have drawn about empathy. The word seems to me to have similar roots to compassion, which, of course, Jesus felt at times for the people he shared with. So it is a Christian virtue to be encouraged.
But, because no one person or country is God, it seems to me that there need to be limits or boundaries to how compassion is acted on.
That is part of the human condition and requires a degree of humility in acknowledging it. That can be for individuals, or countries, for example in immigration.
The actual implementation of limits or boundaries in any relationship or in a national policy is very difficult to discern wisely as they vary with every individual and situation. But limits there must be for our lives and for society to function well.
Maybe the current sense of empathy has gone beyond that?
Hi Moya, you probably guessed I don't have a problem with a country that necessarily, and through its democratic processes, properly formulates immigration policy and then enforces that fairly (unlike the horrible "dawn raids" in our own country's history). But you've been watching what's going on in the States, right?
DeleteIn the lead-up to the US 2024 election, do you remember how, after much difficulty, the Democrats and Republicans actually managed to hammer out a bipartisan deal on how to manage the border? But Trump didn't want the issue solved - it was politically advantageous for him that it remained a big issue. So he intervened and Republicans no longer supported the deal they'd helped put together. There needs to be proper border policy, sure - but the issue has been enormously politicised, propaganda-ised, and the migrants themselves dehumanised.
The current situation impacts, or is likely to impact, many Christians. See the recent RNS article about a report in which the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Association of Evangelicals are co-authors (with others).
The report's title is: “One Part of the Body: The Potential Impact of Deportations on American Christian Families,” -- the article about the report is at:
https://religionnews.com/2025/03/31/evangelical-catholic-groups-one-on-12-christians-could-be-deported-by-trump/
Mark:
ReplyDelete1. Doyle is a man, he is not a plural being. Do not connive in dishonesty as well as crimes against the English language. As C S Lewis famously said in Mere Christianity, a man who sincerely thinks he is a poached egg is properly called a lunatic. Follow the science.
2. Doyle is no more a Maori than David Seymour is.
3. The swirling blue emoji is an internet secret (no more) symbol of paedophilia, as the FBI have established. It is a complete lie to say it is an uncurling fern.
4. "Bussy" is paedophile slang for a boy's anus.
5. "Queer" does indeed mean homosexual-ish in one's sexual desires. It has nothing to do with minority tastes in food or shoes or music. Adding it to the alphabet LGBT etc doesn't add to the numbers, it's just the same pack reshuffled and relabelled to give the false impression that there are more.
6. "Creatively subverting dominant discourse": did you have a straight face when you wrote that? Please, Mark, give up the cultural Marxist agitprop.
7. Capill deserved prison, I don't think he ever boasted that his crimes were "living his authentic self". I hope he has repented and amended his life - although one must note that the paedophiliac sexual orientation is very hard to change (some activists say it is natural and inborn). Furthermore, conversion tberapy including prayer to change unwanted sexual orientations like paedophilia are being banned in many western places like NSW.
8. I prayed for Capill when I heard of his terrible crimes and I have prayed for Doyle that he will one day find his true authentic self in Jesus Christ his Saviour from sin and rebellion against God. I hope you and all Christians in New Zealand are praying that he will meet the Lord as his Saviour, not his Judge.
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Dear William
ReplyDeleteA couple of comments:
1. Whether you are right or wrong about your definitions above, Doyle has given an "other" explanation. Your quest for church leader engagement with the matter would be simply unedifying because it would reduce to an argument over the meaning of slang for things best not discussed with the world and its media egging the situation on via their inevitably embarrassing questions.
2. A further reason for church leaders not to engage - specifically in this situation as one ramped up on social media by controversial persons [see Mark's outline above] - is that we know it has resulted in death threats towards Doyle and his family. Almost anything a church leader (or other public figure such as Plunket and co) say agin the man/his vocab/his social media profile is going to raise the already horrifically hot temperature the matter has generated. Again, it is simply unedifying for the church of God for a church leader to be caught up in such a carry on.
Peter:
ReplyDelete1. You have had no compunction as a church leader in condemning Donald Trump and J. D. Vance, and you praised Bishop Budde for publicly challenging her President in a church service. You opined, as a Protestant, that Vance had a poor understanding of Catholicism and needed to do his RCIA again. Do you actually understand Catholicism better than the US Vice President? I see little familiarity with Thomism in your writing, as I would expect to find with a Catholic bishop.
I recall also that Joe Biden frequently described himself as a Catholic, despite attacking Catholic teaching on abortion and the sanctity of life, promoting "transgender" men in his Administration, and even officiating in the same-sex marriage of his staffers. Did you ever criticise Biden for his anti-Catholic words and actions? I don't recall you ever doing so. I cannot avoid the impression that you are selective in your criticisms, and I find your echoing of Mark's word 'edifying' a little strange (as well as quaint in tone). What does 'edifying' mean except 'building up in Christian faith and godliness? As for 'edifying' speech: was John the Baptist being 'unedifying' when he challenged the sexual morals of a political leader? Would you have told him to shut up?
2. The issue about Doyle is not just about the paedophile argot and insignia he used but the opinions and pictures displayed in his now-suppressed social media account. You have not asked why he suddenly closed this account and what it reveals about him. But I suspect you don't really believe his 'explanation'. As the American philosopher and natural law theorist J. Budjezewski said in the title of one of his books, whatever bluster we say about ourselves ('living my authentic life' etc), there is always 'The Revenge of Conscience'.
3. I do not know what the truth is about these claimed death threats. I do know, however, that they began not when Doyle's social media account was revealed but when he publicly promoted puberty blockers for children.
4. "Posie Parker" received death threats and was in actual physical danger from "trans-activists" when she came to Auckland. Did you speak up on her behalf? Did you condemn the attacks on her?
5. Finally, if I may, a quotation from Martin Luther's Tischreden:
'Also it does not help that one of you would say: “I will gladly confess Christ and His Word on every detail, except that I may keep silent about one or two things which my tyrants may not tolerate,... For whoever denies Christ in one detail or word has denied the same Christ in that one detail who was denied in all the details, since there is only one Christ in all His words, taken together or individually.'
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
William, ages ago (when Biden was president) after you'd repeatedly praised Natural Law on this ADU blog and you'd referenced J. Budziszewski as the leading proponent, I decided to look into him. I went to his blog, looking through various posts until reaching this particular one (13-Feb-23) where he completely backs an article by Victor Davis Hanson and links to it in the post, and it has this gem:
ReplyDelete"Currently, the most totalitarian people in America are likely to wear flip flops, have a nose ring or pink hair, and disguise their fascism with ’60s-retread costumes."
Another one:
"What anarchy we live in when the richest among us are the most radical and wish to destroy for all others what they enjoy."
My interest in J. Budziszewski and Natural Law instantly evaporated! It was clear even then which "side" was most inclined toward totalitarianism, anarchy, and destruction. They didn't hide their desire to "burn it all down" and I didn't doubt their sincerity.
Just for fun, I've checked J. Budziszewski's latest blog-post:
First it features a photo of 5 sharp, pointy scalpels.
"Whatever you may think of the DOGE up in Washington, we need something like a DOGE purge at the Vatican. This will require a strong pope who is utterly committed to the defense of the faith."
"He will have to overhaul Vatican finances, but that’s only the beginning."
What a joy he is :(
Oh Liz, I had no idea! Thank you
DeleteYes, Liz, that's JB (I can never remember how to spell his Polish name)! You have to remember that he fights on two fronts: the popular internet blog scene and the highly erudite world of historical political philosophy, his academic field at the University of Texas in Austin. And as one who spent a lot of his life in the university world, I have to tell you that academics of a conservative Christian outlook are as rare as hen's teeth. One estimate is that 95% of the teaching staff in the humanities and sociology in America are Democratic Party supporters.
ReplyDeleteThis is not because liberals are more intelligent than conservatives, although they often tell themselves that.
It is because a sea change has taken place in the humanities in western education since the 1960s. Up till then the professoriate much more closely reflected the political outlook of the wider culture. Then mass higher education became state policy and these things happened and the trend continues today.
1. University curricula abandoned classical and demanding reading, so the average knowledge level declined precipitously.
2. Universities largely abandoned Classics and even modern foreign languages, as high schools did before them, so ever fewer young people understood western civilisation. IOW, universities became businesses with customers buying a "product", and the fraud was run through the student loan system.
3. The better students went into the (then) largely apolitical worlds of STEM and medicine, the less able students into the politicised fields of psychology, sociology, education and other "soft sciences". These fields became increasingly female, especially as feminism exploded in academia, and leftwing. In general, the softer the "science", the more left wing and radical its exponents, and the more they hated western civilisation. . The more you hear an academic talk about "lived experience" (what experience isn't lived?), the more you can be sure that subjective, materialist cultural Marxism undergirds it all.
The first indications of these trends were already visible in 1942 when C. S. Lewis wrote 'The Abolition of Man', prompted by his awareness of what was being taught in sixth form English in England.
If you wish to understand Natural Law, 'The Abolition of Man' is the best place to start. You can read it online. Then Budzsizweski's "Written on the Heart", a historical introduction that begins with Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics and how Aquinas develops these from the New Testament.
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Hi William
ReplyDeleteIn response: me in caps:
"Peter:
1. You have had no compunction as a church leader in condemning Donald Trump and J. D. Vance, and you praised Bishop Budde for publicly challenging her President in a church service. You opined, as a Protestant, that Vance had a poor understanding of Catholicism and needed to do his RCIA again. Do you actually understand Catholicism better than the US Vice President? I see little familiarity with Thomism in your writing, as I would expect to find with a Catholic bishop. I REMAIN CRITICAL OF HIS APPLICATION OF ORDO AMORIS TO HARSH POLICIES EMANATING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE.
I recall also that Joe Biden frequently described himself as a Catholic, despite attacking Catholic teaching on abortion and the sanctity of life, promoting "transgender" men in his Administration, and even officiating in the same-sex marriage of his staffers. Did you ever criticise Biden for his anti-Catholic words and actions? I don't recall you ever doing so. I cannot avoid the impression that you are selective in your criticisms, and I find your echoing of Mark's word 'edifying' a little strange (as well as quaint in tone). What does 'edifying' mean except 'building up in Christian faith and godliness? As for 'edifying' speech: was John the Baptist being 'unedifying' when he challenged the sexual morals of a political leader? Would you have told him to shut up? SINCE SO MANY CATHOLICS WERE CRITICAL OF BIDEN I SAW LITTLE NEED TO JUMP IN! I DO NOT EQUATE JB'S PUBLIC CONDEMNATION OF HEROD WITH A CHURCH LEADER JUMPING INTO THE FEBRILE ATMOSPHERE MEDIA CAN GENERATE AROUND SEXUALITY MATTERS. NO, I DON'T THINK IN THAT TIME AND PLACE THAT I WOULD BE ASKING JB TO CEASE FROM HIS PRONOUNCEMENTS.
2. The issue about Doyle is not just about the paedophile argot and insignia he used but the opinions and pictures displayed in his now-suppressed social media account. You have not asked why he suddenly closed this account and what it reveals about him. But I suspect you don't really believe his 'explanation'. As the American philosopher and natural law theorist J. Budjezewski said in the title of one of his books, whatever bluster we say about ourselves ('living my authentic life' etc), there is always 'The Revenge of Conscience'. IF DOYLE HAS HAD SOMETHING TO HIDE [AS COMPARED TO SOMETHING SOMEWHAT EMBARRASSING WHEN BROUGHT INTO PUBLIC GAZE] THEN THE TRUTH WILL OUT AND IT WON'T BE OUTED MORE QUICKLY BECAUSE A CHURCH LEADER GETS ON HIS CASE.
3. I do not know what the truth is about these claimed death threats. I do know, however, that they began not when Doyle's social media account was revealed but when he publicly promoted puberty blockers for children. EITHER WAY, DEATH THREATS ARE HORRIBLE, SHOULD NOT BE MADE, AND ALL PEOPLE ENGAGING WITH DOYLE IN THE PUBLIC REALM SHOULD TAKE A VERY DEEP BREATH.
1/2
2/2
ReplyDelete4. "Posie Parker" received death threats and was in actual physical danger from "trans-activists" when she came to Auckland. Did you speak up on her behalf? Did you condemn the attacks on her? I DO NOT RECALL ANY PARTICULAR REASON FOR ME TO COMMENT ON POSIE PARKER. AS BEST I OBSERVED AT THE TIME, PLENTY OF PEOPLE WERE COMMENTING. I SAY HERE, VERY SIMPLY, FREE SPEECH IS IMPORTANT; ALL EFFORTS TO PHYSICALLY HARM PEOPLE IN PUBLIC LIFE ARE CONDEMNED; OUR POLICE SHOULD BE SUPPORTED IN UPHOLDING FREE SPEECH AND PROTECTING PEOPLE FROM HARM.
5. Finally, if I may, a quotation from Martin Luther's Tischreden:
'Also it does not help that one of you would say: “I will gladly confess Christ and His Word on every detail, except that I may keep silent about one or two things which my tyrants may not tolerate,... For whoever denies Christ in one detail or word has denied the same Christ in that one detail who was denied in all the details, since there is only one Christ in all His words, taken together or individually.'" I AGREE. BUT, BOY O BOY, LUTHER HAS CAUSED SOME HARM THROUGH THE CENTURIES THROUGH THE THINGS HE "AFFIRMED"! IF ONLY HE HAD NOT BEEN SO VICIOUS AGAINST JEWS, MAYBE A NUMBER OF THINGS THROUGH HISTORY WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY DIFFERENT ...
Passover is the most sacred day in the Jewish calendar and has been celebrated by the Jews for over 3000 years. As all readers of this blog know, it marks the Israelites' liberation from Egypt and flight to the Promised Land. For Christians, 'Pesach' foreshadows Holy Week and the work of the Cross, as our Lord was arrested after his Passover meal with his disciples, and St Paul makes the connection explicit with his words 'Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us, so let us keep the feast'. The usual word for 'Easter' is European languages is derived from 'pascha'. A holy feast and time indeed.
ReplyDeleteBut now the Greens, having joined hands to run cover for puberty-blocker advocate Benjamin 'Bussy' MP for his own words and actions, have held a keffiyeh-clad 'Anti-Zionist Passover Seder'- although they are not Jewish or even Christian.
Why are these atheists making a political stunt out of the most sacred day in the Jewish calendar? A meal which ends with the Zionist words 'Next year in Jerusalem', no less. The whole thing looks disturbingly antisemitic. (Did the Greens 'observe' Eid as well?)
I hope all Christian religious leaders in New Zealand will take them to task severely for their mockery and disrespect for Jewish religious feelings. I shudder to think what they will do to Good Friday and Easter Day.
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
William whilst you are whimpering, never forget the anti-Semitism that built the Nazi death camps, a direct inheritance from medieval Christianity. For centuries, Christian Europeans had viewed the Jews as the worst species of heretics and attributed every societal ill to their continued presence among the faithful. While the hatred of Jews in Germany expressed itself in a predominately secular way, its roots were religious, and the explicitly religious demonization of the Jews of Europe continued throughout the period. The Vatican itself perpetuated the blood libel in its newspapers as late as 1914. Both the Catholic and Protestant churches have a shameful record of complicity with the Nazi genocide. So just reflect on your the organisations you are aligned with before you go trumpeting on about others.
DeleteThomas
Thomas, I try to avoid ad hominem comments in blogs because they usually betoken ignorance and small-mindedness in the person making them and a paucity of objective arguments. I also avoid making bizarre accusations of guilt by historical or genetic association. You might like to consider the same before you make remarks about someone you have never met, let along heard whimper.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, I have always supported Israel, loved visiting the land, and I read and speak Hebrew (if rather slowly). There has never been any doubt about my philojudaic outlook.
Further, my mother's family suffered greatly in the Second World War fighting against Naziism and Fascism, one of her brothers dying in North Africa. This was no achievement on my part, but I am proud of their sacrifice.
As for your instruction: my first degree was in German, and I don't really need any lessons in German or Jewish history (although I have taught a few in my time). I have had many German friends and colleagues and never once have I thought them responsible for the Shoah. That would be utter stupidity.
Rest assured I will never accuse you, Thomas, of genocide against the Maori, the Moriori or the Mongrel Mob for whatever your ancestors may or may not have done.
As for the actual topic I wrote about: if you are a supporter of the Greens or Hamas, that is between you and God. I am not your Judge in that matter.
Pax et bonum
William Grenhalgh
I'm sad to hear your mother's brother died in the Second World War, William. My mother's dearly loved older brother died in the war - he was on the navy ship Leander. Especially sad given her father died when she was 4 and her mother when she was 7.
ReplyDeleteLiz, those are heavy burdens to bear. The Leander certainly had an eventful war, with many causalities. My mother was very close to her brother, who was only 21 when he died and was buried in Tripoli in Libya. She was given his regimental cap badge and dog tags, which she always kept in a little case above the fireplace. These family thoughts especially recur to me as the 80th anniversary of VE and VJ Day draws close.
ReplyDeletePax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
William, yes indeed. Those poor young men, and their loved ones who missed them. My mother's brother was also young, only 20. Our comments prompted me to think I may've done a blogpost about him, and I did! When I posted, I'd found he wasn't on the Leander after all. He was on the Neptune. The Neptune hit a minefield about 20 miles from Tripoli, 19 December 1941. "The 764 men including the 150 New Zealanders died..." (There was one survivor). My blog-post has his photo and a link to his 'Biographical Notes' (NZ War Graves Project). Clicking on the link gives an account of what happened to HMS Neptune and those thereon.
ReplyDeletehttps://exploringcolour.wordpress.com/2020/04/27/not-forgotten/
Liz, that's a remarkable story: amazing to think that your uncle and mine, both very young men, died in the same area in the same war. I didn't know the story of the Neptune, and it's moving to consider it was the worst disaster to afflict both the RN and the RNZN. I regret that I discovered the Commonwealth War Graves website only just after my mother died, as I know she would have loved seeing those details and a photo of his grave.
ReplyDeleteWhen Gadaffi was overthrown a few yrars ago and Libya descended into tribal warfare,
William, I also find it remarkable and I'm thankful we've had this conversation. It's sobering to think how many young men died and how profoundly it affected their loved ones back home.
ReplyDelete(posted above before I finished) .... 200 British and Italian war graves In Benghazi were desecrated in 2012.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reuters.com/article/world/british-italian-war-graves-desecrated-in-libya-idUSTRE82307I/
I was interested to see that you used to live in Dunedin and have a love for the Botanic Gardens, as do all Dunedinites. It was my playground as a child - and student.
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Pax et bonum
William Greenhalgh
Thanks William. Hateful extremism is terrible.
ReplyDeleteYou were truly fortunate to enjoy Dunedin Botanic Gardens over many years, they're a wonderful treasure!
The crocodiles in the Croqu-o-dile Cafe are painted over now but before that dastardly deed was done I'd already posted a photo record of the crocodile theme inside:
https://exploringcolour.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/croque-o-dile-cafe-dunedin-nz-crocs-under-the-brolly/
The big event while we lived there was the flowering of the Titan Arum. We saw the flower developing, and viewed the mature flower the same day we moved away.
https://exploringcolour.wordpress.com/?s=titan