posted                   

quote:

---

Also remember that celibacy was unusual in ancient Judaism.

---

Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Yeah, there is evidence outside of the gnostic texts, at least in that Mary seemed to be "around" despite the area of real estate that Jesus and the disciples covered over the 3 years.

---

quote:

---

Why does she pop up? Why was she mentioned as being there for the Crucifixion? Why did she become a respected member of the early Christian church (very much like a wife of a rabbi... rebbetzin?). In Roman mention of bringing both Marys to see Jesus on the cross, it doesn't mention "wife" specifically, but why bring this woman along with his mother?

---

quote:

---

The fascination with Magdalene has a long and rich history of its own. Diane Apostolos-Cappadona, a cultural historian at Georgetown University, curated an exhibit last year of Magdalene portraits at the American Bible Society in New York. “She’s gone through conflations and misinterpretations and reinterpretations and retrievals,” she says. “I’ve seen her represented in every medium of art through every Christian period—as the witness to the Resurrection, the seductive temptress, the haggard desert mother signifying penitence, the beautiful woman reborn signifying new life.” But for most people, the image that sticks is the rehabilitated prostitute. Scholars blame Pope Gregory the Great for her bad rep; in A.D. 591, he gave a sermon in which he apparently combined several Biblical women into one, including Magdalene and an unnamed sinner who anoints Jesus’ feet. Although the Vatican officially overruled Gregory in 1969, the image stuck until quite recently. “It became a snowball that grew and grew until her name in legend and art history evoked the whore,” says Jane Schaberg, professor of religious studies at the University of Detroit Mercy and author of “The Resurrection of Mary Magdalene.”

Part of the problem may stem from what scholars have called “the muddle of the Marys.” There are a lot of women named Mary in the New Testament, and it’s not always clear which is which.

But some scholars also think mary Magdalene was defamed because she was a threat to male control of the church. As the “Apostle to the Apostles”—the first to encounter the risen Christ and to take the news to Peter and the other male Apostles—she was clearly more than just an ordinary follower. In several Gnostic Gospels—written by Christians whose alternative views of Jesus were eventually suppressed as heresy—Mary Magdalene rivals Peter for the leadership of the early church because of her superior understanding of Jesus’ teaching. The Gospel of Philip, for example, describes her as Jesus’ close companion whom he often “used to kiss.” Karen King of Harvard Divinity School, author of “The Gospel of Mary of Magdala” and a leading authority on women’s roles in the early church, sees her as a target of jealousy because she threatened Peter’s status. By transforming her into a reformed whore, King believes, the church fathers “killed the argument for women’s leadership”—and for recognizing women as fit recipients of divine revelation. King says the transformation also created a powerful symbol of the prostitute as redeemed sinner, the female version of the Prodigal Son. If Jesus could accept her, he could accept anyone.

In “The Da Vinci Code,” Brown suggests that she still had one more hold on Jesus—as his wife. That theory has been circulating for centuries. Some historians think it is possible because Jewish men of that era were almost always married, but many others dismiss that reasoning. Some argue that Jesus wasn’t conventional in any other sense, so why would he feel the need to be married? Others say that relegating her to the role of wife is belittling. “Let’s not continue the relentless denigration of Mary Magdalene by reducing her only importance to a sexual connection with Jesus,” says John Dominic Crossan, professor emeritus of religious studies at DePaul University in Chicago. “She’s not important because she was Mrs. Jesus. That’s like saying Hillary Rodham Clinton is only important because she’s married to Bill Clinton. Both women are important in their own right.”

---

Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

...1) Magdelene (and Mary the mother) being the first Jesus is reported to have visited after the Resurrection...

---

quote:

---

Here is what John 20:1-2 and 11-18 does with Mary:

quote:

---

(1) Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and saw that the stonehad been removed from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.". . .

(2) But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb; and she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had been lying, one at the head and the other at the feet. They said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?" She said to them, "They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him."

(3)When she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you looooking for?" Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him and I will take him away." Jesus said to her, "Mary!" She turned and said to him in Hebrew, "Rabbouni!" (which means teacher). Jesus said to her, "Do not hold on to me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, "I have seen the Lord"; and she told them that he had said these things to her.

---

Mary gets to give the wrong interpretation of the empty tomb three times: to the disciples, to the angels, and finally to Jesus himself. She does not even recognize Jesus when he appears to her, at least until he addresses her. She is told to announce not the resurrection but the ascension. And if you object that at least she gets to see Jesus, read on to see what John 20 has to say about seeing the risen Jesus rather than, like the Beloved Disciple, believing after seeing only an empty tomb and empty grave cloths.

---

quote:

---

...2) that Magdelene was regarded by the early Christian Church (before "Roman Catholic" was even an idea, and before Paul took over) as a rabbi's wife, especially regarding the gospel (or "good news") of Christ.

---

I really don't know enough about this specific subject to refute you, but I would like references if you have any. The general impression I get from what I have read is that there are two (probably more if you get technical) trains of thought about how the early church viewed her and neither is "official." Of course, those arguing one side or the other would feel that their side is official, but I'd like to examine all the evidence and make up my own mind.

OSC-fan:

I was going to point out some errors in your statements, but dkw and John have beat me to it.

[ March 09, 2004, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: Godric ]

Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

...and the way I reply to dkw is none of your business, he can take care of himself...

---

I think Bob has got some explaining to do...

Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

3And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?" 4He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh'? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." 7They said to him, "Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?" 8He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery."[1]
10The disciples said to him, "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry." 11But he said to them, "Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it."

---

Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS, I've written a bit on Dan Brown's blockbuster that completely reconceptualizes the origins of Christianity in the context of a turgid not-very-suspenseful novel. I wrote a snide review of it back in June; a more detailed FAQ on the book's historical howlers this fall, both published in Our Sunday Visitor; and I ranted about it some on my own website.

And so, I get letters. They bear no stickers, because they come via e-mail, but they are indeed the equivalent of the single-spaced, double-sided prayer for my soul. To wit:

quote:

---

Secrets and lies will all come into the light one day. Which side will you be on? Your review of The Da Vinci Code tells me you are on the WRONG side. The Dark Side, as it may be called.

As a women, you should know better in your heart. It's clear someone has poisoned, and controlled your thoughts in this matter. Enough is enough, so think for yourself. OPEN your mind now, while you still can.

---

. . .

And this one, which I award the prize for Absolutely Most Frightening Letter of 2003:

quote:

---

I recently read your review of The Da Vinci Code and I am writing to inform you that I wholeheartedly disagree with your views. Mr. Brown has done a tremendous amount of research into the earliest history of the Christian church, most of which is easily accessible and is considered fact, by both Christians and non-Christians alike. I am a middle school teacher at a Catholic school, teaching the Old Testament to children between 11 and 12 years of age.

---

The Way, the Truth, the Life, whatever.

---

Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged |