What do you think?
Rate this book
The Gospel According to Mary: A New Testament for Women
Tells the story of Jesus as seen through the eyes of a woman
144 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1993
1 person is currently reading
52 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
June 20, 2019
Ugh, no. I'm super miffed that I so dislike this volume because what it was trying to do is so necessary and good. It's so important to highlight the fact that there were, indeed, women around Jesus--and very important and impactful women who were brave and marvelous. But Winter seems to have wasted all of her writing on the frame narrative of this, creating the "Mary" who wrote this gospel, because the gospel itself is just the repackaged normal one. Winter gets caught by the reality that, however much we need to highlight women (and we do), Jesus Himself was still a dude. His twelve besties were still dudes. The big stories are acted out by dudes. That just is, which means a lot of Winter's gospel is just the regular gospel but without continuous chapters; in fact, many of the stories are straight up just lifting the gospels, which is kind of plagiarism in a weird way.
Almost as though she realizes that a lot of her women-centering gospel ends up being heavily populated by men-only stories, Winter occasionally actually changes the gospel story to modernize and de-stigmatize women and that I cannot abide. One example: the woman at the well. In the Biblical gospels, she shows up in John 4. Here, she appears in the "Women in the Life of Jesus" section (that's another thing I really didn't like: breaking apart the story into weird little chapter-type things. The gospels are stories, connected biopics of a man named Jesus and His various adventures and teachings. Taking things like the parables out of context makes them just so many fortune cookie statements, which is proof-texting and that's awful). In John, Jesus asks the woman to go get her husband and we learn she's had several, which underscores the inclusive mindset of Jesus and the real freedom of the woman who accepts this "living water." But here, Winter makes it about the woman's relationship with God and how she's been shopping around spiritual traditions (66). What? That erases her being accepted as a Samaritan, it erases her being accepted as a woman separate from her marital status, and it erases the impact of Jesus' invitation to her. It ignores the cultural and historical reality of the actual gospel story, and it doesn't even elevate the woman more than the original story. Nope.
Sometimes Winter changes the gospel just because; in the scene where Jesus asks Peter, "Do you love me?" John writes it as Jesus telling Peter to feed His sheep. It's a forgiveness scene, bringing Peter into the leadership he'll have in Acts even though he betrayed Jesus. It's a great redemptive moment. Winter makes it about Peter forgiving himself and then loving himself (136). Both of these are great and important things for Peter to do, but that's not what Jesus was doing. That shifts the theological narrative and it also creates weird historical space because no first-century Jewish prophet/rabbi would really care about loving yourself--that's a modern thing. So Jesus becomes un-anchored from His historical self.
I did like the gender-flipping of some of the parable and I appreciate how that got me to think, but that wasn't enough to save this train wreck of a book. I'll keep looking for a decent feminist understanding of Jesus' ministry--this ain't it by a long shot.
Almost as though she realizes that a lot of her women-centering gospel ends up being heavily populated by men-only stories, Winter occasionally actually changes the gospel story to modernize and de-stigmatize women and that I cannot abide. One example: the woman at the well. In the Biblical gospels, she shows up in John 4. Here, she appears in the "Women in the Life of Jesus" section (that's another thing I really didn't like: breaking apart the story into weird little chapter-type things. The gospels are stories, connected biopics of a man named Jesus and His various adventures and teachings. Taking things like the parables out of context makes them just so many fortune cookie statements, which is proof-texting and that's awful). In John, Jesus asks the woman to go get her husband and we learn she's had several, which underscores the inclusive mindset of Jesus and the real freedom of the woman who accepts this "living water." But here, Winter makes it about the woman's relationship with God and how she's been shopping around spiritual traditions (66). What? That erases her being accepted as a Samaritan, it erases her being accepted as a woman separate from her marital status, and it erases the impact of Jesus' invitation to her. It ignores the cultural and historical reality of the actual gospel story, and it doesn't even elevate the woman more than the original story. Nope.
Sometimes Winter changes the gospel just because; in the scene where Jesus asks Peter, "Do you love me?" John writes it as Jesus telling Peter to feed His sheep. It's a forgiveness scene, bringing Peter into the leadership he'll have in Acts even though he betrayed Jesus. It's a great redemptive moment. Winter makes it about Peter forgiving himself and then loving himself (136). Both of these are great and important things for Peter to do, but that's not what Jesus was doing. That shifts the theological narrative and it also creates weird historical space because no first-century Jewish prophet/rabbi would really care about loving yourself--that's a modern thing. So Jesus becomes un-anchored from His historical self.
I did like the gender-flipping of some of the parable and I appreciate how that got me to think, but that wasn't enough to save this train wreck of a book. I'll keep looking for a decent feminist understanding of Jesus' ministry--this ain't it by a long shot.
March 12, 2023
I was excited to read this book because of it's interesting premise. Taking the persistent female presence in the gospels and putting it front and center was, to my mind, a valuable undertaking. The choice to not only recognize and include the women of the church, but to honor their vital place in the body of Christ by telling their stories from their own perspective is still desperately needed in the church today, 30 years after this book was written.
Since my opinion of the book was overwhelmingly negative, first a quick positive. The nearly ubiquitous replacement of men with women in the classic parables is interesting and refreshing. It twists your perspective on the stories just enough to have you thinking deeply about accounts that may have been familiar for decades. (Although if you enjoy SciFi and you're looking for a more interesting and better implemented example of 'default female perspective' I'd suggest 's trilogy).
Unfortunately, the execution is just terrible. Winter's choices in terms of what to add, change, and exclude in gospel narrative are baffling. Why remove Peter sinking in the waves as he walked to Jesus or change the Samaritan woman's husbands to religions? Even today, the constant refrain of 'the woman told them so, but they didn't believe her' is all too familiar to any woman, myself included, but the book veered far too heavily in the direction of 'the men were weak-willed and faithless and only the women really appreciated Jesus at all'. Lots of waffling and tepidness is added to the men of the traditional accounts, and yet women are almost never depicted as anything less than sure and faithful unless those imperfections exist as part of pre-existing event or parable.
Maybe the worst aspect of all was the writing style itself. I was shocked to learn that the author held a theology-tangential professorship, because the 'imitation' of the gospel style was so poorly carried off. Of course all four gospels have their own unique stylistic elements, but they (and much of the Bible in general) have many stylistic commonalities that Winter simply chose to ignore, to the detriment of the book's attempt to present itself as a fictional fifth gospel. Much of it read more like someone naively trying to paraphrase the Bible in their own words and making a hash of it. It isn't modern enough for a modern translation or plain enough for a plain-language translation or florid enough to mimic the King James. It isn't literalist enough to fit the style of the word-for-word translations but also doesn't follow closely enough to the tradition of the idea-for-idea translations to attain their more natural flow of language. Obviously the content of the account is separate from the translation style, but Winter's linguistic choices make the book feel like it's part of no tradition at all.
Maybe my expectations were simply raised too high by the idea behind this book, but it was such a disappointment that I hesitate to spend time reading any of Winter's other work. A lukewarm effort in every respect after the conception of its premise.
Since my opinion of the book was overwhelmingly negative, first a quick positive. The nearly ubiquitous replacement of men with women in the classic parables is interesting and refreshing. It twists your perspective on the stories just enough to have you thinking deeply about accounts that may have been familiar for decades. (Although if you enjoy SciFi and you're looking for a more interesting and better implemented example of 'default female perspective' I'd suggest 's trilogy).
Unfortunately, the execution is just terrible. Winter's choices in terms of what to add, change, and exclude in gospel narrative are baffling. Why remove Peter sinking in the waves as he walked to Jesus or change the Samaritan woman's husbands to religions? Even today, the constant refrain of 'the woman told them so, but they didn't believe her' is all too familiar to any woman, myself included, but the book veered far too heavily in the direction of 'the men were weak-willed and faithless and only the women really appreciated Jesus at all'. Lots of waffling and tepidness is added to the men of the traditional accounts, and yet women are almost never depicted as anything less than sure and faithful unless those imperfections exist as part of pre-existing event or parable.
Maybe the worst aspect of all was the writing style itself. I was shocked to learn that the author held a theology-tangential professorship, because the 'imitation' of the gospel style was so poorly carried off. Of course all four gospels have their own unique stylistic elements, but they (and much of the Bible in general) have many stylistic commonalities that Winter simply chose to ignore, to the detriment of the book's attempt to present itself as a fictional fifth gospel. Much of it read more like someone naively trying to paraphrase the Bible in their own words and making a hash of it. It isn't modern enough for a modern translation or plain enough for a plain-language translation or florid enough to mimic the King James. It isn't literalist enough to fit the style of the word-for-word translations but also doesn't follow closely enough to the tradition of the idea-for-idea translations to attain their more natural flow of language. Obviously the content of the account is separate from the translation style, but Winter's linguistic choices make the book feel like it's part of no tradition at all.
Maybe my expectations were simply raised too high by the idea behind this book, but it was such a disappointment that I hesitate to spend time reading any of Winter's other work. A lukewarm effort in every respect after the conception of its premise.
July 15, 2022
I really enjoyed reading this. It is an imagined version of the gospel originally written in 1993 in which women feature prominently. In my opinion they should be included equally. It is very easy to read and understand.
Read
January 30, 2024Meh. Would only reread for some interesting interpretations of the text
November 15, 2016
Nice dan informative
January 3, 2022
Brilliant, an imagining of a Gospel by Mary, countering the dominant culture.
June 11, 2022
Very interesting perspective on the story of Jesus. This is a quick read telling about Jesus from a mother's perspective. I am not sure as to the author's opinion as to the bible and the "accuracy" of the gospels in the Bible....perhaps not all so accurate?
December 8, 2007
it should have been told years ago.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.