Did Mary and Luke commit sedition? A Malaysian reading.

This Sunday, the lectionary invites us to ponder Luke 1:39-55. The English Standard version supplies it with the titles “Mary Visits Elizabeth,” and “Mary’s Song of Praise: The Magnificat.”

Today, I’ll explain why I think that in her song Mary did something which, in Malaysia, would amount to the criminal offence of sedition.

We often see the word “sedition” in Malaysian media. Why? Because we have nine rulers, or kings, often called Sultans. In Malaysia, sedition laws are often used to criminalize those who question the rulers.

Perhaps the most famous case is that of the late Karpal Singh, an opposition leader. He was prosecuted for comments he made as a lawyer. He was alleged to have committed sedition when he questioned an action of the Sultan of Perak in relation to the Perak State Assembly.[1]

In Malaysia, sedition is any act, speech, or publication that has a seditious tendency. This includes making unfavourable remarks about rulers.[2]

Until January 6, 2021, we seldom saw the word in world media. On that day supporters of Donald Trump invaded the meeting chamber of the US Congress. The invaders wanted to prevent confirmation of Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election.[3] US media described what they did as “sedition.”[4]

Malaysia’s Sedition Act came into force in 1948. It was enacted during the British era as a legislative weapon to counter communist insurgents.

British sedition law dates to the 16th century.[5] But the last time anyone was prosecuted for sedition in the UK was in 1972.[6]

What aspects of Mary’s song could be viewed as seditious?

Luke is the most “political” of the gospel writers. He takes great pains to set his account of Jesus in the political milieu.[7] As I said in an earlier column, Luke even includes a rogues gallery of autocrats.

Modern readers often miss the political sense of the words “Lord” and “Saviour.” Luke uses the word “Lord” more than[8] any other Evangelist.[9] And “Saviour” was one of the Emperor’s titles.

Bible scholar Professor Mark Moore arrestingly describes the shock people would’ve felt if they had heard people address Jesus as “Lord.” He writes,

“In the Roman world, recent converts would have gasped, and political prospects would have choked on its ramifications.” [10]

Why? Prof Moore explains at length. I’ll give you two short quotes:

First, “Because the Roman Senate proclaimed Julius Caesar … Lord and God after his death … This title wasn’t empty words or vapid praise. The label told of Caesar’s unparalleled authority and sway over a vast empire.”

Second, “When the early Christians boldly proclaimed, “Jesus is Lord,” they pitted Jesus against both local leaders and literary legends. In a society where Caesar was Lord, this seemingly foolhardy assertion was a perilous move that could be understood as fomenting rebellion.”

The word “Saviour” carried equally heavy weight. Why? Because the Emperor claimed for himself the title “Saviour.” Just like the title “Sultan” is reserved for royalty in Malaysia.

Biblical scholar Revd Dr Helen Paynter tells of an inscription found in Turkey. [11] She begins by saying that after Julius Caesar died, Italy was awash in civil wars. After some turmoil, Octavian triumphed. He took the name Augustus[12] and proclaimed himself Emperor and “Son of God.”

The inscription praises Emperor[13] Augustus. Dr Paynter tells us:

“[The inscription] makes three very specific claims: (1) The gods sent Augustus as “saviour.” (2) His birth was “good news” (gospel) for the world; (3) By his appearance he would end war.

Dr Paynter does a great job of putting Mary’s song in context in Luke. She does this by reference to Luke’s accounts of the angel speaking to shepherds, the speeches of John Baptist’s father Zechariah, of Simeon who blessed the infant Jesus in the Temple, and more.

The conclusion is simple: The Magnificat, Mary’s song, has great political significance. Jesus will bring a kingdom which challenges everything the government of the day represented. The song has a seditious tendency!

The conclusion is stunning to most modern readers.

The conclusion is unwelcome to most contemporary Christians.

What do you think? Did Mary and Luke commit sedition?

Peace be with you.


[1] He was found guilty twice. Ten years after his “offence,” five years after he died, the Federal Court set aside his conviction. For more, see this article in the New Straits Times.

[2] The maximum penalties are a fine of RM5,000 and three years in prison.

[3] This year, one of Trump’s election promises was to pardon those whom the courts had found guilty of committing sedition on his behalf.

[4] ‘Sedition’: A Complicated History. New York Times.

[5] Treason Act, 1547.

[6] The common law offences of sedition and seditious libel were abolished in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 (link).

[7] “Political milieu” because political awareness is part of the pith and substance of Luke’s writing; politics is not “background,” it’s what God intends to change through Jesus.

[8] In the English Standard Version: Matthew, 52; Mark, 17; Luke, 83; John, 38.

[9] “Evangelist” denotes the authors of the four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

[10] “Jesus is Lord”: A Revolutionary Echo from the Greco-Roman World.

[11] Caesar, the saviour?

[12] The name identifies the holder as possessing divine characteristics (J B Green).

[13] Caesar in Latin.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *