Sermons

“Maiden, Mother… Crone?”
Rev. Greg Ward
Unitarian Universalist Metro Atlanta North
May 14th, 2006

Meditation:
It’s mother’s day today. And that has gotten me thinking. And what I’ve decided can be summed up in three words: ‘it’s a shame.’

Of course, I don’t mean that it’s a shame that we have mother’s day. I would never begrudge a holiday started by Unitarians. What I think is a shame is that we seem to have squeezed everything we celebrate about women into that one role of mothering. And that we have squeezed everything about that one role into this one day. That’s what I think is a shame.

On the whole, I think I’m pro-mothering. My issue is that we just haven’t taken the concept far enough. I’d like to see mothers – and women in general – to get more attention. And power. And influence. So here’s my thought: I think they should unionize. Have some PR done. Get a little momentum going. I think it may change the way society looks at things. And that could only help the state of affairs in the world. Take invading other countries, for example. How different would that be if we needed a note from our mother. Or our penchant of being so wasteful with our natural resources. Don’t you think that would change if we had someone constantly reminding us of the starving people in China?

It was thoughts like these that got me to wondering how the world might be a better place if global law was pulled from the very things we used to hear being screamed out of the kitchen window.

Besides terribly profound advice like that, I do believe that our mothers would be more reluctant to start wars that they knew would kill the children. They wouldn’t destroy so much of the planet they knew would someday be the home of their grandchildren. Let so many babies face mal-nutrition and so many elderly face abandonment in their final years. I think if mothers made the rules, there would be more funding for schools and community building and the men would have to hold bake sales to build a stealth bomber.

I think the world would be a better place if more mothers were in charge. Not my mother, mind you. But other mothers. Maybe your mother.

And then, once we had that, we could expand. Encourage women to claim more of their gifts and talent and wisdom besides mothering. Address how they’ve been undervalued because they have been relegated to such a small portions of this man’s world. I think the problem is, after 5,000 years of being taught to think in patriarchal terms, we have stopped being able to imagine the world any other way.

Can you imagine a world run by women? Where women’s wisdom was the foundation for civilization? For society? For government? Religion? This morning, I invite you to imagine.

Sermon:
At the end of this sermon I’m going to ask us what we should do about the role of women. But now, just for fun, type the question, ‘what if women ran the world’ into your Google search engine. What do you find? Nothing, because it was a hypothetical question. But I’ll tell you when I did it, I found a lot more than I expected.

I did find the pithy, sarcastic humor I expected from the internet. The first thing that popped up was a list of 37 signs you’d see if you were living at a time when women ran the world. And I could tell, from that list, that women clearly don’t run the world because most of the 37 signs listed had the ring of ‘revenge mentality’ to them as though they were written by a woman living in a man’s world.

But scattered through the list were also signs that went beyond women taking jabs at men. That were more in the realm of social commentary. Like

And then there were a few that were just plain ‘wise.’ That I thought were actually more profound and prophetic than funny. Like

I actually typed this into my Google search engine a couple months ago. I confess to starting this sermon with something of a bias: A belief I can’t seem to prove, but feel strongly about: that the world is experiencing so much conflict and violence precisely because so much of the leadership - so much of the ideology and philosophy spurring us forward - is coming from men. I wasn’t looking for pithy sarcasm or even under-utilized wisdom per se when I turned to the internet. I wanted to know if anyone had done any research about modern societies where women wielded comparable influence or control.

What I found was an article in Businessweek magazine . And the question the author – a male – started with was essentially the same as mine: ‘given all the violence and atrocities perpetrated by men and male-run governments in places like Bosnia, Rwanda, and Iraq, wouldn’t we be better off if women had more influence in the world?’

Some of the research done by the author was telling, including this statement released by an international political think tank: “when women (and other minorities) reach a "critical mass" of around 30% in an elected body, they often start to act together as a group outside party lines.”

I became curious as to what the results of such influence might show? I found that high percentages of women’s influence showed up predominantly in the governments of Nordic countries. Women hold 45.3% of the seats in Parliament in Sweden, 38% in Denmark, 38% in Finland, and 36% in Norway, according to the IPU. Twelve countries now have 30% of their parliamentary seats occupied by women, including the Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Argentina, and Mozambique. And by and large the standard of living is very high and the crime and internal violence is very low in these countries.

Then I began to wonder about the countries who occupy the lower percentages of women in power? In this category the article listed, as you might guess, the Middle East countries: Iran, 4.1%; Egypt, 2.4%; Jordan, 1.3%; and Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates at 0% - counties where women’s contributions are low and internal – as well as external - conflict is high.

If you’re curious as to where the U.S. ranks? 59th - in the middle of the pack - with 15.1% of congressional seats going to women in 2006.

Now, when a sermon is percolating, I like to try out my ideas on the unsuspecting public to get their reaction. Which is how I got into this conversation with a young man at the recent Peace March in Atlanta. We had just watched a couple of anti-Bush posters go by and somewhat carelessly, wondered out loud whether we would have been so quick to attack another country if a woman had been in charge. All of a sudden a friendly conversation became somewhat contentious. I could see his tone and tenor change – as though he was now forced to defend his gender against a traitor. He made some comments about my being a Hillary supporter, which I let pass. I brought up the article and the research it showed that the countries with the lowest participation of women were countries like Iran, Jordan, Egypt, etc – countries mired in conflict. He brought up the issue of terrorism – saying that so much of the violence around the world was due to terrorist groups. And then – seeing that I was wearing my collar – he launched into a friendly counter-attack.

“What about religion?” he said. “Isn’t the reason we have so much terrorism – the source of so much of the world’s violence – the fact that we’ve got religion?” Then he looked at me with smug grin and said, “You know the reason we have suicide bombers is not because women didn’t get elected to government– it’s because of their religion.”

He paused dramatically in the way that men do after they deliver the fatal death blow to their opponent. He looked so much like Clint Eastwood blowing the smoke from his Colt .45 that all I could do was shrug my shoulders. “You’re right,” I said. “It IS because of their religion – that it doesn’t have enough women.”

I could tell by the way he rolled his eyes that it was best to end the conversation at that point. It wouldn’t have looked good to have two men – one of them in a collar – get into a fight at a peace march – Even though it would have completely proved my point. So I politely let it drop. Just like the subject of women in power has been dropped, repeatedly, throughout history.

One of the reasons this issue has been stuck in my head is because of some radical feminist ideas that were part of the seminary where I trained. And also because, there, I had come across a couple books. “The History of Patriarchy,” by Gerda Lerner and “When God was a Woman” by Merlin Stone have never gotten much mainstream attention. I thought it might be their time when Dan Brown’s the DiVinci Code made it popular to suggest women were not always suppressed in religion. But they didn’t. The problem was that the DiVinci Code had titillating fiction to capture people’s attention. All Lerner and Stone had was archeological evidence and cultural anthropology.

I went back and researchd what I had read 10 years ago: a story pieced together by artifacts dug from the earth. A story from approximately 10,000 BCE where signs of many well planned agricultural communities were discovered – some with elaborate irrigation and sanitation systems. Signs of extensive trade and cooperation with other settlements thousands of miles apart.

I remembered two things that were remarkably significant about those findings. First, the evidence uncovered about what life was like in those civilizations – that they were built without any fortifications or defenses of any kind – that there appeared no evidence of any weapons – only pottery and art and stone carvings and jewelry as well as writings, mathematics, astronomy and other signs of creative development.

That broad evidence of communal life was uncovered, revealing equal distribution of resources with no evidence of hierarchy between men and women. Evidence that time was marked by lunar cycles not by linear solar method.

Secondly, and perhaps even more telling, many of these civilizations seemed to mark their connections with the earth and agriculture to the fertile traits of women. Many of these settlements were rich with female images and carvings, statues, and idols. Women as fertile lovers, as nurturing mothers, as wise grandmothers and sages, as powerful Goddesses having influence over the elements; these images often far outnumbered male artifacts.

It wasn’t sure whether these early settlements were actually matriarchal – where women were in charge. But there was evidence that they were matrilinear – the heritage was passed down through the maternal lineage (much like Judaism is today). These were polytheistic communities which existed in peace with nature and with each other. At least, until about 4,000 BCE.

That’s when tribes from the colder regions of central Asia migrated in - tribes that left markedly different archeological footprints. The extent of their creative development focused largely around manufacturing more elaborate weapons - clubs and knives and battle axes - which seemed to be regarded as sacred objects. There were far fewer signs of communal life associated with these tribes – possessions seemed to accumulate around the males and often the males were buried along with many women and children.

Religious idols and figures of worship – still polytheistic – were more male oriented, warrior-like, not associated as much with the earth as with distant places in the mountains or in the sky – as though their gods were separated from them and the earth - inaccessible. These tribes were mostly migrant and nomadic, moving herds of livestock in search of better pasture land, leaving behind any area that had been depleted of natural food.

These patriarchal nomadic tribes have come to be known by various names: Kurgan, Indo-European, Indo-Germanic and Aryans. All these people belonged to a common race known to anthropologists as the Alpine race. They were white skinned and much larger than the dark skinned races of the Goddess culture.

We do not know for sure what initially motivated these people to leave their traditional home lands. Maybe some natural catastrophe, a dramatic change in climate, maybe the pressure of other tribes moving in and competing for limited resources. But evidence shows that around 5,000 to 2,800 BCE these people pushed West. And came in waves, leaving destruction and devastation in their wake. They plundered and burned the unfortified cities and towns of ancient Europe, and killed a large percentage of the original inhabitants. Archaeologically, this has been well documented, with site after site showing the same horrific evidence, along with a sharp decline of the original culture.

Much of what we have of written history comes from descendents of these tribes – most notably, the Sumerians, the Babylonians and eventually the Hebrews who eventually claimed their place in Canaan. They said it was given them by divine right.

We often imagine one of two things when we think of the Hebrews – essentially our ancestors - whose history we take as our own. We like to imagine either that the land was given to them by divine right and they peacefully matriculated into the area. But we know from the Old Testament, that was not how it was.

From the book of Numbers Chapter 33:49-56 "When you shall pass over the river Jordan, entering into the land of Canaan, destroy all the inhabitants of that land: beat down their pillars and break in pieces their statues, and waste all high places."

Or - the other thing we like to imagine is that the land was given to the Hebrews by divine right and the people before them were mean, violent, amoral peoples who deserved to be conquered. Many passages from the Bible claim this as the case. But history is written by the victors who have always been quick to justify their motives. And even quicker to get rid of the stories and influences of the people they conquer.

So we have no absolute proof of the nature of the civilizations that existed prior to all this conquering and violence that extends into the modern era. We have no iron clad evidence of what it was like to have societies where women – and their wisdom and philosophy – had much more influence on how to respond to the challenges of their day – whether these societies enjoyed more peace, less war and higher quality of life.

I should even be completely honest and say that there are those historians and writers who claim this is all hooey. There are books, like the one by Cynthia Eller wrote entitled, “The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why an Invented Past Won’t Give Women a Future” - that say this kind of speculation – theories like mine – beliefs that increasing women’s influence within the wisdom and leadership pools will bring about more peace among peoples and peace among nations – that these ideas are pulled more from our imagination than from our history.

But when our history has been violently destroyed – and what we do have of it illuminates violence that is projected into our future – isn’t it about time we used our imagination a little more?

Think about what has survived from these matriarchal moments in civil and religious history. One of the things that is making a resurgence today is the ancient notion of the triple Goddess: Maiden, Mother and Crone. These are the three stages of a woman’s life. The three phases where women are encouraged to find and exercise their power.

In today’s patriarchal society, these phases are stripped of their power and relegated to incredibly small spheres of influence in our world. The maiden’s influence today is reduced to sexual attraction – and granted, in this role, women have discovered the power to make men behave like idiots. But in terms of world influence the power is captured in its ability to entice markets and get people to buy things – where money flows to companies primarily owned by men. We would do well to notice that the stronger the patriarchal influence in religion and culture, the more real sexuality is demonized.

The role of mother – as I started off saying, is celebrated. Women are recognized and applauded for these roles – as long as they stay strictly within the realm of child-bearing. But not if they try to take this creative and nurturing impulse to other arenas outside the home - like into politics or religion or ways of regarding the earth as maternal and nurturing and something to be supported instead of strip-mined. When women go into this realm they lose the appreciation they received when they were having or caring for children. No wonder the news is filled with women who still want to have more children in their fifties and sixties!

But by far, the world has suffered most by women losing the once celebrated role of ‘crone.’ Even the name is associated with hag or something used up or useless. But it was a role that was once so venerated in society – where vital contributions of wisdom and experience were expected from women in these years. Women were once recognized and encouraged into cronehood – and society prospered because of it.

Nowadays, when a woman approaches this time in life, instead of looking for places to celebrate and contribute the wisdom that comes with age, too many focus on trying to look younger instead. Does it seem odd that tummy tucks and hair dyes are not really things men spend much time thinking about? Does it seem like the world might be losing out because of these double standards?

I think so. And so I ask you, if you think women might become better – if the world might become better – if there was a place for their voice in our politics – in our religion –in our culture – besides what they have to contribute as mothers?

I am not advocating that women assume their place in the world because it is their divine right. Or that they should overthrow the men because our current systems are oppressive and need to be conquered. That reasoning is the same kind of patriarchal thinking that made us such a violent civilization for the last 5,000 years.

I am asking for more than that. I’m asking that we imagine the world that might have been, that might still be. A world filled with possibilities beyond nailing down toilet seats and PMS Simulators. A world where women can lead and men can nurture. A world where women are valued not because they can entice men – and not because they can produce men – but because they can teach men – and women – all that the world has been missing in the world – the possibility that peace may live on the far side of patriarchy. That we can learn how to cooperate instead of how to conquer. That it takes everyone – men and women – to lead wisely and to give birth.

Peterson, Thane, “What if Women Ran the World,” Buisnessweek Online – April 15th, 2003

Inter-parlimentary Union Website – www.ipu.org

And where does the U.S. rank? 59th - in the middle of the pack - with 15.1% of congressional seats going to women in 2006.

Unitarian Universalist Metro Atlanta North
11420 Crabapple Road, Roswell, GA 30075
Telephone: 770-992-3949
Webmaster | Homepage