“Mary, Women, and the Church, Part 2”[1]
“Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene went to the tomb early.” John 20:1
“The quest for the Holy Grail is the quest to kneel before the bones of Mary Magdalene, a journey to pray at the feet of the outcast one.” Dan Brown in “The DaVinci Code”
“Mary had seven demons in her, for she was full of all vices.” Pope Gregory I
This Easter the appearance of Mary called Magdalene at the tomb, the first witness of the resurrected Christ, has continued to captivate me. I’m not sure why it hadn’t before, other than to say that the Scriptures are a living, breathing, Spirit-filled document which come to life for us in different ways and different times. Thus, keeping focused on Mary, this week I’d like to consider who Mary WASN’T.
First of all, she wasn’t from Magdala. How do we know? There was no such place. There is absolutely no historical or archaeological evidence of a town named “Magdala” at the time of Jesus. Furthermore, John 11 makes it clear that she was from Bethany. So why is she called Magdalene? Most likely it was a title give of respect to her. In the original language “Magdala” means “tower”. So rather than a place name, Mary is described with an ascription of respect and admiration, most likely for her faith, but also quite possibly due to the high regard with which Jesus and quite possibly at least some of the other disciples held her.
Second, she wasn’t a prostitute. It is Pope Gregory I, in the year 591, who depicts her as such by connecting her with the Mary in Luke 7. However, that Mary lived in Nain, not Bethany, which is as we’ve seen where Mary is from.[2] The Protestant Reformation rejected this view of Mary as a prostitute, though the biased myth remains intact to the present day. Why would she be portrayed in such a negative manner in church history? Consider for a moment the ramifications if a woman held a prominent place in the inner circle of Jesus. How would that impact a primarily patriarchal church organization and structure? More on this in a following blog.
Third, it is doubtful that she was possessed by demons. If you have watched “The Chosen”, she’s depicted as such in quite vivid and somewhat disturbing ways. There is no solid evidence in the New Testament or early church history that she had seven demons cast out from her. “Wait a second,” you might be thinking, “In Mark 16:9 it says she was possessed by demons.” That part of the Gospel of Mark is considered a much later addition to the manuscript. Here it is important to know that there is no one “original” document of the New Testament. The New Testament has been put together from numerous manuscripts and fragments of manuscripts, some of which are more reliable and authentic than others. The most reliable manuscripts for Mark’s Gospel stop at verse eight, and that which follows is excluded. So that description of her can be discarded as dubious at best.
Fourth, she wasn’t Jesus’ wife or the mother of his baby, as depicted in the Dan Brown novel “The DaVinci Code.” There simply isn’t any credible evidence for this. Though it does make for an interesting read. Whether or not she’s depicted in DaVinci’s “Last Supper” is also doubtful, lacking any evidence other than the fact that the person who is supposed to be her does look, to 21st century eyes, kind of feminine.
Fifth, she wasn’t the sister of Martha as described in Luke 10:38-42. This event takes place in a different place in Galilee. However, this occasion does inform the scribe who recorded the John 11 event of the raising of Lazarus. Again, more on this in another blog.
Finally, she wasn’t the woman who is washing Jesus’ feet in Luke 7. Again, this is a separate event.
So where does that leave us? Perhaps surprised or maybe even slightly disturbed that this Mary called Magdalene is not who we thought she was. For me, I’m actually encouraged and even surprised, because as I’ve looked more deeply into this a woman who can and should be an inspiration of faith to the faithful has emerged. Next week I will delve further into what I mean by that. In the meantime, I would invite you to read John 11 and 12.
[1] Some of the information for this blog and the ones that follow comes from a podcast entitled “In Search of Truth: The Bible and Mary Magdalene”, and a sermon entitled “All the Mary’s” by Diana Butler Bass, both of which are based on a textual study of John 11 and 12 by Elizabeth Schrader Polczer, and published in the Harvard Theological Review. It is available for purchase here: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/harvard-theological-review/article/abs/was-martha-of-bethany-added-to-the-fourth-gospel-in-the-second-century/6CBD2C9576A583DD02987FE836C427B7
[2] From here on I will be referring to her as Mary of Bethany.