My lover speaks; he says to me, Arise, my beloved, my beautiful one, and come! For see, the winter is past, the rains are over and gone. Songs 2, 10-11 “Behold, from henceforth, all generations shall call me blessed; for the Almighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name.” Luke 1, […]Arise, My Beloved, and Come — Ave Maria
Reclaiming The Magdalene
Guest AuthorWomen of Intimacy
The following article is by Cheryl McGrath. For those who have an appetite, the website she writes on, BreadForTheBride.com, is a rich banquet of spiritual food. I highly recommend subscribing to it.
This article, however, is from another (archived) site that she has many articles on. Enjoy!
❤︎ Reclaiming The Magdalene ❤︎
Mary Magdalene statue, holding onto the crossWho was Mary Magdalene? How much of what we think we know about her is myth, innuendo, or fabrication? Can we clear away the false from the true, remove the layers of unsubstantiated church tradition, Hollywood fiction, rock musicals and imaginings of modern novelists to discover the real Mary Magdalene, friend and disciple of Christ and eye witness to both His crucifixion and resurrection?
Mentioned by name in each of the gospels, it is believed Mary was called the Magdalene as a reference to her home town, Magdala, on the shores of Lake Galilee. Many scholars believe she was unmarried, as married women were usually known as ‘wife of’, rather than by their birthplace.
Though she is most often depicted in art and film as a young woman, we have no indication in scripture of Mary’s actual age and no reason to assume she was not in the same age group as Jesus’ mother and some of the other older women who sometimes travelled with Him.
Historically, Mary of Magdala has frequently been confused with several other women in the gospels also named Mary. This confusion between the ‘Marys’ has been instrumental in creating the inaccurate picture of Mary Magdalene still held by many. Mary, or the Hebrew Miriam, was a common Jewish name in Jesus’ time, and other Mary’s mentioned by the gospel writers include the Mary who was Jesus mother, Mary of Bethany, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary the mother of James and Joses.
We do know Mary was just one of a number of women Jesus had healed, some of whom travelled with Him and supported Him financially (Luke 8:1-3). Mary’s hometown of Magdala was a thriving centre for the sale of fish and it’s not beyond reasonable possibility she may have been an independently wealthy woman with a commercial background in this trade.
In some Christian traditions Mary’s greatest claim to fame has been that of a repentant prostitute who after conversion became a symbol of chastity and virtue. However, there is nowhere in the Gospels or other New Testament writings that state or even imply Mary was ever a prostitute. Luke tells us Jesus delivered Mary of seven demons. While we may wonder about the nature of her oppression what is clear is that she was severely unwell and Jesus healed her. There is nothing in scripture, however, to suggest her oppressive illness was in any way sexually related.
The picture the gospels paint of Mary is one of faithfulness, strength, and devotion to Christ even at personal risk. Contrary to the traditional but false stereotype of a repentant prostitute, Mary should rightly be remembered as one of the ‘many women’ who remained at the crucifixion after the majority of Jesus’ male disciples had fled, and the first person to whom Jesus chose to reveal Himself after His resurrection (Matt. 27:55-56; Jn. 19:15; Mark 16:9).
Mary of Magdala was also entrusted by Jesus with conveying the momentous news of His resurrection to His disciples, prompting Thomas Aquinas, an early church father, to call her an ‘apostle to the apostles’ (Jn. 20:17).
For the first six hundred years of Christianity Mary was known and respected as a prominent disciple and close, trusted friend of Jesus. As the young church increasingly succumbed to the influence of the Roman world around it, hierarchical male dominance, once rejected by Jesus, re-emerged, and women were relegated to subservient roles under male authority. Within this climate, Pope Gregory 1 (c540-604) gave a series of sermons in the year 591 that dramatically altered the image of Mary of Magdala held by the Christian church.
In his sermons, distributed throughout the then Christian world, Pope Gregory 1 incorrectly aligned Mary with the unnamed ‘sinner woman’ of Luke 7:36-48who poured her alabaster jar of ointment over Jesus. With no Biblical basis he furthermore identified Mary’s seven demons with seven deadly sins: Lust, Greed, Gluttony, Sloth, Wrath, Envy, and Pride.
“She who Luke calls the sinful woman, we believe to be the Mary from whom seven devils were ejected. And what did these seven devils signify if not all the vices? ….It is clear brothers that the woman previously used the unguent to perfume her flesh in forbidden acts. What she therefore displayed more scandalously she was now offering to God ….She turned the mass of her crimes to virtues in order to serve God entirely in penance.” (Homily XXXIII)
The false teaching of Pope Gregory 1 redefined Mary’s story and perpetuated myths about her that have passed down through the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Reformation and into our own modern Church era¹. The Mary Magdalene of the gospels and early church was lost somewhere in history and kept there by a male-dominated church for which the idea of a strong, female role model with leadership skills equal in status to the male apostles was undesirable².
The true Mary of Magdala was further obscured through paintings and artwork that depicted her as a repentant sexually fallen woman, cementing her newly-created reputation as a former prostitute, despite the fact that scripture alludes to no such history for Mary. (This is the reason why you will sometimes see Renaissance paintings of Mary dressed in red – traditionally the colour symbolising harlotry).
Sadly, organized Christianity and Christians in general have been complicit in perpetuating the myths about Mary and continue to do so. Even in the 21stcentury contemporary Christian films are still being produced depicting Mary of Magdala as a woman who had made a living as a prostitute.
Throughout the centuries Mary Magdalene has been persistently misrepresented by church leaders and in popular legend as a notorious former prostitute turned repentant saintly mother figure. The Bible depicts her as neither of these, but as an ordinary Jewish woman healed from serious ailments by Jesus, who became His faithful disciple.
Mary Magdalene is one of us, a woman doing her best to follow Christ in a world that is opposed to Him. She is neither to be revered or objectified to serve the purposes of fallen men; she should, however, be respected as a foundational member of the Body of Christ, honoured as the first person sent by Christ to preach the gospel, and celebrated as yet another life whose course was eternally impacted by our Saviour Jesus Christ.
Paradoxically, Mary’s story historically parallels the story of womankind since The Fall destroyed the perfect harmony and equality between the original man and woman. The Fall resulted in the default setting of equal partnership between the genders becoming dysfunctional. Sadly, for many men, including in the Christian church, it is still easier to view women as sexual temptresses than deal with their own gender bias.
So many false images of Mary Magdalene have been conveyed and insinuated through sermons, artwork, film, novels and misinformation, I believe it’s time for all sincere Christ-followers to start rejecting her misrepresentation and celebrating Mary for the woman the Bible says she was. It’s time for truth honouring Christians to reclaim the Magdalene.
Mary of Magdala, the woman who walked with Christ alongside His male disciples, who stood by faithfully at His crucifixion, the first person He chose to meet after His resurrection, His apostle to the apostles, has been stolen from us. Those of us who have knowledge of the truth about Mary can take an important role in correcting that which is false by spreading the truth about her. We can start by challenging the myths and false assumptions that surround her whenever we hear them repeated.
Will you help reclaim the Magdalene?
¹Matthew 27:56, 61; 28:1; Mark 15:40, 47; 16:1-19;Luke 8:2; 24:10; John 19:25; 20:1-18
²It should be noted that The Eastern Orthodox church took a different view of Mary Magdalene and have always held her to be a different person to the woman who was ‘a sinner’ in Luke 7.
³It was not until 1969 that the Catholic Church declared Pope Gregory was mistaken and that Mary Magdalene was not the penitent woman in Luke 7:36-50. Furthermore, the Church clarified that Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene were two different people.
Further Suggested Reading:
5 Things You Should Know About Mary Magdalene, Junia Project
What The Bible Says About Mary Magdalene, New Life
MORE IN HIS SECRET GARDEN
A Precious, Simple Life & Sitting at the Feet of Jesus
There is a certain phrase of Jesus that won’t leave me lately. It’s comforted me as I lay in bed at night, when certain unknowns of tomorrow tried to steal my…
Take Me Back
I woke with a beautiful song in my head today; one that I must have heard on the radio at some point. It was called, “The Night We Met.” I then heard a quiet…
The Story of the Red Easter Egg, Why We Have Colored Eggs on Easter, and Who Should Have Been the First Pope
Apr 10, 2020
EasterEaster eggHoly LandMagdaleneSergei Ivanov
Mary Magdalene is my favorite woman of the Bible. She, courageous and steadfast, should have been the first pope instead of Peter. The legend of Magdalene and her visit to the Roman Emperor Tiberius is the source of the tradition of coloring Easter eggs. As it turns out, there may be at least a grain of historical truth to that story.
It is known that Mary of Migdal was a wealthy woman. That she had a title, unlike most women of her day, shows that she was an important person. I’ve been to her home town of Migdal, right near Capharnaum on the Sea of Galilee. Until the Romans obliterated it in the brutal war of revolt around 70 A.D., Migdal was a prosperous town renowned for its dried fish. The local fishing entrepreneurs sold dried fish to places as far away as Damascus. Mary was probably a fish-monger.
Migdal’s recent archaeological excavations revealed a synagogue that quite probably was the place where Jesus launched his public career. Mary became one of his loyal followers. In all likelihood she contributed some of her considerable wealth in support of his preaching and ministry. And who knows? They may have traveled together and been extremely good friends.
The Church of Saint Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem, at the foot of the Mount of Olives.
When the Romans crucified Jesus, all of the apostles fled the scene. Not his mother Mary, and not Mary Magdalene either. Legend has it that Magdalene was the first person Christ appeared to after his Resurrection. She ran to tell the apostles that she had seen the Lord. They didn’t believe her until they ran to the tomb themselves. She was a believer; they had to be convinced.
Though it is not officially chronicled anywhere, the story goes that Mary Magdalene stayed around and was a leader of the followers of Jesus in the dark and difficult early years after his death. And here’s where some of the possible historical truth mixed with the legend comes in.
First, the legend. Because she was a wealthy woman, she was able to get an audience with the Roman emperor Tiberius. She supposedly went to him to denounce Pontius Pilate for being so cruel at the trial of Jesus. At that audience, she also said that Christ rose from the dead and that she had seen Him.
She held out an egg to the emperor and said “Christ is Risen!” To which Tiberius replied that there was as much chance of a human being returning to life from the dead as there was of the egg in her hand turning red. And the egg promptly turned red!
Interior of the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene. The canvas with painting of Mary and Roman Emperor Tiberius hangs above the iconostasis.
That’s a nice story, and that’s why we have colored Easter eggs. But here’s the grain or strand of potential truth. The Jews of Palestine did send word to Rome that Pontius Pilate was a thoroughly bad guy and that they would not put up with him as governor any more. They may have threatened to revolt. But whatever they said worked. Tiberius agreed that that trial was unlawfully conducted. Pilate was fired from his job and soon disappeared from history.
Somebody had to carry the message or lead the delegation. It could have been Mary of Migdal, the richest woman in town.
Many icons painted in the Byzantine Catholic style show Mary Magdalene holding a red egg. So too does the canvas above the iconostasis in the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene, on the slope of the Mount of Olives in the Garden of Gethsemane. The iconostasis, in Eastern Orthodox churches, separates the nave from the sanctuary. The canvas shows Magdalene in the court of Tiberius. In her hand she holds a red egg.
I’ve been to Jerusalem twice, and both times the Church of Saint Mary Magdalene was closed to the public. I’m sorry that I didn’t have a chance to go inside. The church is unmistakably Russian, built in the Muscovite style with golden onion domes.
It was built as a memorial to Empress Maria Alexandrovna by her son, Czar Alexander III and his brothers. Grand-Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, brother of Alexander III, and his wife Grand Duchess Elizabeth (Princess Elizabeth of Hesse-Darmstadt), grand-daughter of Queen Victoria and sister of the last Empress of Russia, presided at the consecration of the church in 1888 as representatives of the Emperor.
Grand Duchess Elizabeth and commissioned the Russian artist Sergei Ivanov (1864-1910) to paint large murals depicting the life of Mary Magdalene. They were brought to Jerusalem for the consecration and hang in the church today. The painting with Magdalene, Tiberius, and the red egg is just one of them.
The synagogue at Migdal, the archaeological site that is called “Israel’s Pompeii.”
And there you have it. Mary Magdalene, the courageous and wealthy woman who should have been the Catholic Church’s first pope, gave us one of the best examples ever of steadfastness and loyalty. She also gave us the Easter egg.
Why Trouble The Woman?
BY CHERYL MCGRATH on FEBRUARY 14, 2018 • ( 8 )
Before gender equality became written into our laws, before #metoo and #churchtoo, long before the time’s up movement and the current “he said, she said” media frenzy, there was a time in human history when man and woman lived together on this planet in perfect harmonious co-existence.
When God introduced the first woman (Hebrew “Íshshah”) to the first man, he immediately recognised her as his own fabric and substance. She was uniquely of himself, and he knew it, joyfully declaring:
This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman,
because she was taken out of man (Gen. 2:23 NKJV). ¹
Or as the Jewish Bible says it: “….she shall be called Isha, because she was taken out of Ish.”
Adam’s delight-filled exclamation reveals he understood exactly what stood beside him. This new being was not an ‘add on’ or an optional extra. What he actually saw was himself in another form, the female ‘’ish”. The woman was an essential part of the man, removed from him and fashioned by God into a fully-functioning being who, alone out of all of God’s other creation, he could identify and communicate with because they had originally been one single being. He needed her to complete him. And God said it was exceedingly good! (Gen. 1:31)
Let’s move forward a little into Genesis 3 and the catastrophic results of Adam and Ishshah’s fall. The very next utterance recorded from Adam, after their fall, is extremely telling:
“The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.” (Gen. 3:12)
Not only does Adam accuse Ishshah, he also accuses God of giving him something undesirable, something that has caused him to disobey. No longer is Ishshah the one called “woman…bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh”; she has become objectified as ‘the woman You gave to be with me’.
Adam’s attitude here seems to indicate that immediately after the fall he was already starting to see the woman as a possession whose sole purpose was to meet his needs. The relationship has suddenly spiralled from one of mutual belonging, comfort and giving to one another, to the woman belonging to the man without reciprocity. The decline of woman has begun.
Immediately after the impending consequences of their actions are spelled out by God we notice another interesting development in the relationship between Adam and Ishshah. Adam, who is obviously already beginning to act out the ‘ruling over’ prophecy of Genesis 3:16, stops calling his wife by the intimate name ‘woman”, and begins to call her by another name: Eve (Heb. Chavvah) (Gen. 3:20).
Biblically, names are significant. Ishshah, or “woman”, formed by God from the very essence of the man, has now gone from “bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” to “life-giver” or “mother of all living” (the literal meanings of Eve). There are a number of interpretations we can attach to this sudden change of name imposed by Adam, but it seems clear the intimate, equal partnership they knew before the fall is gone, and woman’s role in the relationship is about to change dramatically.
While Adam still needs Ishshah, the focus of his need has altered. Her new name reflects the new focus. The sense of oneness that formerly bound them is rapidly disappearing. The delight in being the same substance is being replaced by the man’s need for progeny and the woman’s need to be needed.
A new focus and function has been assigned to the woman in their relationship – reproduction. Her ability to satisfy the man’s sexual needs and produce children for him will dictate their relationship down through history, silencing her voice in world affairs and diminishing woman’s perceived value in both their eyes. Both men and woman have suffered greatly for it.
There’s an important aside I’d like to inject into this picture at this point. Women, listen up. Young women and girls, take note. Motherhood is not what you were created for. You may have been immersed in a church or family culture that has given you a very different message, but hear me out.
I remember being in churches where the only time women were allowed to ‘share’, (no it was not acceptable to call it ‘preaching or teaching’), was on Mother’s Day. Mother’s Day was an annual (secular} event when the church women were supposedly ‘honoured’ by little gifts or floral bouquets, children would sing about the wonderful attributes of their mums, and husbands might humble themselves by serving morning tea, or similar scenarios. Sound familiar?
And the day immediately following that yearly event everything would of course return to normal, where mothers were expected to take up their submissive role in home and church once again and feel satisfied and fulfilled. Except “normal” has too often included ignoring or covering up of known domestic abuse by church leaders, unbendable patriarchal teaching, all male leadership and the suppression of spiritual gifts given by God to His church merely because those gifts come in female form. It seems in some circles honouring motherhood is OK as long as those mothers know their place. And if you’re not a mother, well it’s expected you will be one day, and if not, then why not!
I am not denigrating motherhood. I am very glad to be a mother of both daughters and sons in four different ways: a biological mother, a foster mother, a grandmother and a spiritual mother. Motherhood is a beautiful role, as equally is fatherhood, both of which when done well can give us precious insights into the mothering/fathering heart of God. But motherhood is not the ultimate reason for a woman’s existence, and in many cases may not even be included in God’s perfect plan for her life. And I want any female reading this to know that’s OK!
Minutes away from crucifixion, a woman in the watching crowd cried out to Jesus: “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!” To a Jewish woman of His time to be the mother of a prophet or holy man was the greatest aspiration possible. Jesus disagreed. “More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” He responded (Luke 11:28). His response elevates women to more than a reproductive role and highlights their God-given ability to hear the word of God for themselves.
The purpose of a woman’s existence is the same as a man’s: to glorify God in whatever way He calls us, and that calling doesn’t always include biological parenting.
Back to our study on the decline of Ishshah, where we left first Adam seemingly determined to cement his newfound rulership by downgrading his former co-heir, woman. Fortunately, that’s not where the story ends, for God had a plan and the plan centres on last Adam, Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 15:45).
Jesus used the word ‘woman’ often when directly addressing a specific female. He used it at least twice in addressing Mary, His mother (Jn. 2:4; 19:16). He used it when speaking directly to an accused adulteress, a gentile, a Samaritan and a disabled woman (Jn. 8:10; Matt. 15:28; Jn. 4:21; Luke 13:10-13).
When Jesus used the term ‘woman’ as an address He did not intend it, as we may do in modern western culture, in a cold and distant way. Nor was it ever a rebuke. Rather, the name ‘woman’ on His lips was an intimate acknowledgment of a woman’s intrinsic value, and a manner of conveying that she was worthy of His full attention.
In the remarkable intimate scene in the garden immediately after His resurrection Jesus speaks the words “Woman, why do you weep?” directly to Mary Magdalene. It is only after He has addressed her as ‘woman’ that He uses her individual name of Mary (John 20:14-16). There was no-one else present and no reason for Jesus to specify to whom He was talking, so why would He deliberately choose to first address her by the very direct term “woman”?
It is because everything had changed for all of womankind. The rule of first Adam was over. Through the death and resurrection of Christ the last Adam, womankind was reinstated and restored to the dignity and esteem she had known in that other garden at the time of her creation.
“Let her alone! Why do you trouble the woman?” Jesus demanded after some of His disciples had attempted to devalue a woman’s extraordinary prophetic act of worship (Mark 14:3-9; Jn.12:1-7). The male disciples’ attitude to women, informed by their patriarchal culture and their own ambitions, did not go unrebuked by Jesus, who knew well the historical suffering of women under male rule. The altercation, as Jesus defended the woman against male criticism, was sharp. For Judas, mulling over whether he would submit to Jesus or betray Him, it was the final straw. Very soon afterward he made his fateful decision to betray Jesus to the authorities (Mark 14:10).
The word ‘trouble’ Jesus used here is the Greek “kopos” from a root word meaning to “cut” or “beat”. It conveys a far sharper and more graphic meaning than the words ‘trouble’ or ‘bother’ most often used in our modern English translations do.
The dim reality is that despite improving gender laws, awareness campaigns and sometimes questionable public shaming, both women and men will continue to be ‘troubled’ by what happened in that first garden long ago. The oldest and deepest division in the heart of mankind, after separation from God, is not racism, as cruel as racism can be. It is the division between the genders.
Hollywood celebrities and famous names do not have a premium on the war between the genders, they simply get the most media attention. Across the world the female of our species continues to be troubled, emotionally cut, beaten and traumatised at the hands of men with power in the world and sadly within the church, because humanity has been broken, bruised and divided by the disease called sin that separates us from God.
I believe there is only one way back to the unity and mutual support man and woman once knew and were created to enjoy. Only when we as individuals are reconciled to God through Christ, can we receive the healing that can enable us to be fully reconciled as men and women, joint and equal heirs with Christ and co-workers in His Kingdom (Rom. 8:17).
Rather than remaining complicit in the suppression of women and their spiritual giftings, Christianity should be demonstrating to the world that only in Christ can male and female be one again (Gal. 3:28).
Christ’s penetrating and most confronting question still echoes throughout the earth. It’s time for that question to be considered more deeply than ever before by the Body of Christ:
Why do you trouble the woman?
Any honest answer will require intense soul searching and great courage by many who doggedly hold fast to patriarchal views.
But answered it must and will be, one way or another.
¹ In several of the Semitic dialects bone is used for self. Thus, in the Jerusalem Lectionary (ed. Miniscalchi, Verona, 1861) we read: “I will manifest my bone unto him” (John 14:21), that is, myself; and again, “I have power to lay it down of my bone” (John 10:18), that is, of myself. So, too, in Hebrew, “In the selfsame day” is “in the bone of this day” (Genesis 7:13). Thus bone of my bones means “my very own self,” while flesh of my flesh adds the more tender and gentle qualities.” Ellicott’s Commentary For English Readers