Mary Magdalene WAS The Wife Of Jesus - Apostle Series Article: Women ARE Equals To Men
Thursday, November 15th, 2007By Russ Miles As a result of a previously published ezine article - Reflections:-Talking-to-Self-and-to-God-Can-Yield-Some-New-Revelations—the-Feast-of-Women-and-Health - and other writings, I have had several persons on Myspace (and other Cyber Sites) innitiate contact with me to dispute my belief that Mary Magdalene WAS the wife of Jesus. Hense - this follow-up article: From other respected authors comes the basis of my belief. Although their references are not published in this article due to maximum word length article banks restrictions one can find them by searching out the originals. PBS “From Jesus To Christ” - This FRONTLINE series is an intellectual and visual guide to the new and controversial historical evidence which challenges familiar assumptions about the life of Jesus and the epic rise of Christianity. “One of the mysteries of the Gospel of John is the identity of the disciple Jesus loved. Modern exegetes have offered a number of suggestions as to the identity of the tantalizingly anonymous figure: John Mark, John the son of Zebedee, John the Elder, Apollos, Paul, a Paulinist, Benjamin, Judas Iskariot, Philip, Nathanael, Judas Jesus brother, Matthias, a disciple of the Baptist, Thomas, an Essene monk from Jerusalem, Lazarus, Andrew, or a symbolic figure, representing the Johannine community, the Hellenistic brand of the Church or the ideal Christian disciple. [2] The historical figures which have been suggested vary widely, but they have one thing in common: they are all men. Only recently has another suggestion been put forward. “Ramon K. Jusino, in his article Mary Magdalene: Author of the Fourth Gospel? argues in favor of the possibility that Mary Magdalene could be the Beloved Disciple of the Gospel of John. In his view, Mary Magdalene, who is called the disciple most loved by Jesus in the Gospel of Philip and the Gospel of Mary, [3] is in the Gospel of John, after first being mentioned by name, deliberately turned into the anonymous and male Beloved Disciple. In the two instances where Mary Magdalenes name could not be avoided, namely in John 19,25-27 and 20,1-11, the redactor added the Beloved Disciple to make sure that Mary Magdalene and he would be interpreted as two different people. [4] Jusino suggests, on the basis of the widely respected research of Raymond E. Brown on the Johannine Community, [5] that this was done as part of a later process. [6] According to him, the female beloved disciple is made anonymous and male to be acceptable to mainstream ideology. Brown argues that the Johannine community in a very early stage became divided because of a christological argument. The more heterodox believers defended a very high christology, whereas the more orthodox believers wanted to be part of the mainstream emerging Church which defended Jesus corporeality. To those wanting to take part in the growing institutional Church, Jusino argues, the claim that a female disciple of Jesus had been their communitys first leader and hero quickly becomes an embarrassment. [7] According to him, the other, more heterodox believers of the community held on to their tradition. This is the reason why Mary Magdalene in various heterodox writings appears to be the one loved most by Jesus. Jusino supports his argument by showing where and how the redaction of the text was done. Again, drawing on Brown, he shows that especially in 19,25-27 and 20,1-11, where Mary Magdalene and the male beloved disciple occur together, there are inconsistencies in the text, which reveal the hand of a redactor. [8] In my view, however, there are no significant inconsistencies in these texts. In this article [9] I want to argue, like Jusino, that Mary Magdalene is concealed in the male anonymous disciple, but, unlike Jusino, my argument does not draw on the Gospel of Mary or the Gospel of Philip nor on Browns research on the Johannine community. My argument is not one of a redactional nature, revealing a repressive environment from outside, but is rather based on the Gospel of John considered as a meaningful unity. [10] In my view, a repressive atmosphere with regard to women is fundamental to the Gospel of John as a whole, disclosing a repressive environment within the Johannine community, which corresponds to the one outside. This article, however, does not pretend to offer a final solution to the major problem of the identity of the anonymous disciple Jesus loved. It is presented as one possibility among others and is meant to contribute to the on-going debate. Taking into account the numerous and very different scholarly solutions that have been offered this far, one can only conclude that, if, indeed, the Gospel of John wanted the disciple Jesus loved to remain anonymous, at least to outsiders, the author has proved to be very successful. 1. John 19,25-27 The idea, that Mary Magdalene could perhaps be identified as the disciple Jesus loved, first entered my mind, while I was studying John 19,25-27. If one considers this pericope as a meaningful unity, [11] the interpretation, which views 19,25 as a parallelism and suggests that two women are standing under the cross, instead of four or three, [12] seems the most logical one, verse 25 introducing what happens in verses 26 and 27. In these latter verses John describes Jesus as seeing two persons: his mother and the disciple he loved. This coincides with the interpretation that John in verse 25 also only means two people: the mother of Jesus, for the first time mentioned here by name as Mary of Clopas now that she is on the verge of losing her identity as a mother, and her sister-in-law or niece, Mary Magdalene. There would have been no one else there. The description of the two women also fits perfectly with a peculiar Johannine trait that William Watty discerned: the Gospels massive effort at precision when introducing places or persons, not only giving names as such, but also several connections with other places or persons. [13] So far my main objection against this conjecture was that the disciple Jesus loved in John is obviously grammatically male. [14] But if anonymity in the case of the disciple Jesus loved was so important to the author of John, would indeed the use of masculine gender not guarantee the anonymity in a better way than the use of feminine gender, which would obviously reveal to the readers at least one important feature of the disciple, namely that she is a woman? It also occurred to me that a woman being referred to as male perhaps was not so strange at the time, as it would be to us now. Grace M. Jantzen showed that spirituality in early Christianity gradually became identified with maleness. [15] She gives several examples of the fact that women whose spirituality was beyond question were described as honorary males. [16] She also gives examples of cases of cross-dressing. With regard to Mary Magdalene there is a tradition which speaks of her maleness. In the Gospel of Thomas Jesus promises Peter that he will lead Mary Magdalene in order to make her male so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. [17] In the Acts of Philip the Savior praises Mary Magdalene for her manly character. Because of this he gives her the task of joining the weaker Philip on his mission journey. But she is not to join him as a woman. As for you, Mary, he says, change your clothing and your outward appearance: reject everything which from the outside suggests a woman. [18] James H. Charlesworth, in his impressive monograph on the disciple Jesus loved, leaves open the possibility that this figure could be a woman, perhaps Mary, Martha, or Mary Magdalene, in spite of the masculine grammar. [19] For him, the final proof that the disciple must be male, is not the grammar, but the circumstance that the disciple is called son. [20] However, Johns Jesus does not address the disciple as son, and uses no other masculine address, which would have completed the parallelism: He said to his mother: Woman, behold your son. Then he said to the disciple behold your mother. By leaving out any masculine address, and by only saying Behold your mother, he instead declares the disciple to represent him as a son. This kind of representation does not necessarily mean that the disciple has to be male. That a woman may fulfill the function of a son to a mother is clear from the story of Ruth and Naomi. The female neighbors praise the way Ruth cared for her mother-in-law, by mentioning her to Naomi as: she, who has been more to you than seven sons (Ruth 4,15). The word son directed to the mother of Jesus designates her own son: the dying crucified Jesus. The reader thoroughly relates with Mary when hearing Jesus words towards her: Woman, behold your son. It is only after Jesus words to the disciple behold your mother that the reader suddenly turns to this second person and begins to grasp that Jesus is inviting his mother to understand the meaning of his death and to join his followers. Turning to the disciple Jesus loved, and hearing those words behold your mother the reader is reminded of earlier farewell words of Jesus: I will not leave you desolate; I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more, but you will see me. Because I live, you will live also. In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. He who has heard my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him. (14,18-21) The ultimate importance of the scene in 19,26-27 lies in Jesus invitation to his mother to look away from her dying son to find him, alive, in the disciple he loved. At the same time Jesus words are a solemn declaration to this disciple: he or she may act on Jesus behalf, as if he or she were Jesus himself. To the reader, who remembers Jesus prayer to his Father for all those who followed him, and who in their turn will attract new followers - … that the love with which thou has loved me, may be in them, and I in them (17,26) -, the disciple Jesus loved is the first of a vast number of those disciples yet to come. Both Jesus mother and the disciple react to Jesus words. The disciple by taking Jesus mother to him (or her) and the mother by accepting this. Jesus words to his mother and the disciple he loved, together with their reaction to them, constitute the beginning of the growing koinonia of those who follow Jesus. In this interpretation of 19,26-27 the word son in 19,26 does not say anything about the gender of the disciple Jesus loved. The son is the dying Jesus, who, alive, can be found in the disciple he loved as the one who may represent him. [21] 2. The disciple Jesus loved and John 20,1-18 One can distinguish either five passages about the disciple Jesus loved (13,23-26; 19,26-27; 20,2-10; 21,7.20-24), or six (plus 18,15-16) or seven (plus 1,37-42). The last two passages are about another disciple who, on the basis of 20,2 (interpreted in an explanatory way: the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved), is identified as the disciple Jesus loved. [22] It is important to note, that in John not only one anonymous disciple is mentioned as being loved by Jesus. Jesus also loved, for instance, Lazarus, Martha and Mary (11,5). He loved all his disciples, calling them his own (15,9-17; 13,1.34; cf. 17,6-12), even loving those disciples who are yet to come (10,16; 14,21; 17,20-26). Jesus compares his own with sheep who recognize his voice, when he calls them by name, and who are guided by him to seek good pastures (10,1-10). That Mary Magdalene is one of his own emerges from Johns story about her in which she recognizes Jesus voice when he calls her by name, and listens to his words (20,16-18). [23] In addition, she calls him Rabbouni, which means my teacher(20,16). Moreover, in 20,2 she does not fetch Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved, but John very precisely describes the disciple being with Peter as the other disciple Jesus loved. [24] This suggests that either Mary Magdalene or Peter could be the disciple Jesus loved, who is mentioned earlier in 19,25-27. However, in most of the pericopes where John uses the expression, the disciple Jesus loved is in the company of Peter. [25] This means that Peter cannot be the one and leaves Mary Magdalene as a serious option. When Mary Magdalene discovers that Jesus tomb is empty and she fetches Peter and the other disciple Jesus loved, these two run together, the other disciple outrunning Peter. Then Peter looks into the tomb and sees the linen cloth, but the other disciple not only sees, but also believes. After that, they each return to their own home (20,2-10). After the resurrection the disciples join Simon Peter who went fishing. They are Thomas called the Twin, Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, those of Zebedee and two others of his disciples (21,2). The disciple Jesus loved recognizes Jesus on the shore and tells Peter about it (21,7). When Jesus later asks Peter to follow him, Peter, turning, sees that the disciple Jesus loved indeed follows (21,20-23). John emphasises that this disciple is the same one who was at Jesus chest at the last Supper (21,20). In my view, John here clarifies the expression the disciple Jesus loved as the one who was at Jesus chest, because the reference to the other disciple Jesus loved in 20,2 is about another person. Continuing this line of argument it would be highly probable that the disciple Jesus loved in 21,7.20-23 together with the other disciple Jesus loved in 20,2 are the two unnamed others of his disciples in 21,2. [26] 3. Why this veil of anonymity? Still, there are other anonymous disciples in John. In 1,37-42 two disciples of John the Baptist decide to follow Jesus: Andrew and another who is left unnamed. In 18,15-16 not only Peter (as in Mark, Matthew and Luke) but also another disciple follows Jesus after he has been arrested. This disciple, who is known to the high priest, enters the court, and, after speaking to the maid who keeps the door, the same anonymous disciple brings Peter in. It seems strange that, thereupon, only Peter is asked if he belongs to Jesus disciples (18,17.25.26). Why do those present not attack the other disciple as well? Does this mean that the other disciple is not easily to be recognized as disciple? [27] Why does John insist on anonymity ? Why this veil of mystery? John does not explain this, but at the end of the Gospel it is suggested that there is a we- an inside group who understands and who knows of the disciple Jesus loved, the one who was at Jesus chest, since the author says: This is the disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these things; and we know that his testimony is true. (21,24) Why is the truthfulness of the testimony emphasized? Why would there be any doubt about the validity of the witness, if he is the person whom scholars up until now have suggested is the disciple Jesus loved? Why would the Gospel not simply mention Andrew, Lazarus, or Thomas, or John Mark, John son of Zebedee or any of the others? We will never know. No reasons are given. [28] However, there could have been one very good reason, at least at the time, to question the validity of the witness of the disciple Jesus loved and to hide the disciples identity: if this disciple was a woman. I would even suggest that the other anonymous disciples are perhaps left anonymous for the same reason: because they are women. 4. The legitimacy of a womans authority The disciple Jesus loved apparently was very important to those who wrote the Gospel. But, if indeed this disciple was a woman, her authority as the person behind the writing of John could have been seen as unacceptable, since it was a point of debate if women were allowed to have authority over men. In several canonical first century letters wives are encouraged to be submissive to their husbands, while the husbands are told to love their wives (Ephesians 5,21-33; Colossians 3,18-19; 1 Peter 3,1-7). Paul, when demanding that women wear veils when praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11,1-16), argues that the reason for this is that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband and the head of Christ is God. However, later in the argument he changes from wives to woman in general, referring to the creation: For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. (1 Corinthians 11,8-9) In addition, while 1 Peter 3,1-7 refers to the submissiveness of Sarah to Abraham, in 1 Timothy 2,1-11 the creation analogy is used again: For Adam was formed first, then Eve, continuing thus and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. The author concludes that a woman has to learn with all submissiveness: I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men: she is to keep silent. This text and the perhaps non-Pauline text in 1 Corinthians 14,34-36 about women who are to keep silent in the assemblies [29] were quoted again and again in the centuries that followed to emphasize that women are not allowed to have authority over men. Schssler Fiorenza refers to the fourth century Dialogue Between a Montanist and an Orthodox which, through means of a discussion between a montanist and an orthodox Christian, shows their respective viewpoints. [30] The orthodox viewpoint may reflect a very early stand, since it corresponds to the arguments in the first century letters, which claim that woman is to be submissive to man. The following quotation from the Dialogue comments on womens authority, concentrating on those women who wrote books, like the second century Montanist prophetesses Prisca and Maximilla: Orthodox: We do not reject the prophecies of women. Blessed Mary prophesied when she said: Henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. And as you yourself say, Philip had daughters who prophesied and Mary, the sister of Aaron, prophesied. But we do not permit women to speak in the assemblies, nor to have authority over men, to the point of writing books in their own name: since, such is, indeed, the implication for them of praying with uncovered head () Wasnt Mary, the Mother of God, able to write books in her own name? To avoid dishonoring her head by placing herself above men, she did not do so. Montanist: Did you say that to pray or to prophesy with uncovered head implies not to write books? Orthodox: Perfectly. Montanist: When Blessed Mary says: Henceforth all generations shall call me blessed, does she or doesnt she speak freely and openly? Orthodox: Since the Gospel is not written in her name, she has a veil in the Evangelist. Would a Gospel then, primarily based on the authority of Mary Magdalene be acceptable? Montanist: Is it because they have written books that you do not receive Prisca and Maximilla? We can surmise my fellow readers that the early church leaders opposed women being recognized as equal to men. Yet today the Catholic Church does not allow a woman to enter the priesthood. Some other mainstream denominations have come around - seen a little The Light! Yet not even they recognize The Gospel Of Mary or The Gospel Of Thomas because of the monumental implications that these sacred texts would have. None can question the validity of either Gospel. I may present more of my research and understandings in subsequent articles. * “GOD IS LOVE.” For Me the issues are settled. Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus. AND Women ARE equals of Men. Rascal :)) Russ Miles is author of the novel, For Sale By Owners:FSBO. A Seasoned Real Estate NAR Broker, Rascal Russ was ~ for 5 hard years ~ increasingly disabled by “Incurable” Multiple Sclerosis. Now “Cured”, Rascal writes books & articles on varied subjects. Comments: Rascal.Miles@Gmail.com. Via his personal Rascal’s website, http://www.Jesus4You.ws , “Rascal’s Blog”, & his ezine articles themselves, Rascal maintains personal contact with those that e-mail him, and those whom he believes the God of this Universe has joined together with him as per Destiny’s Devine Plan of Salvation for this Planet Earth! Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Russ_Miles http://EzineArticles.com/?Mary-Magdalene-WAS-The-Wife-Of-Jesus—-Apostle-Series-Article:-Women-ARE-Equals-To-Men&id=398481 no prescription needed for phentermine online pharmacies phentermine phentermine no prescription us buy phentermine online overnight