Mary Magdalena, The Original Sin and Female Apostles
http://phistars.blogspot.com/2011/12/mary-magdalena-original-sin-and-female.html
Mary Magdalena, The Original Sin and Female Apostles
In Early Christianity, the role of women in the religious community was ambiguous. In the Gospels, there are a few mentions of women following Jesus. However, the Gospel writers never clearly state that there where women apostle. Interesting enough, some of the Gnostic Text, like the Gospel of Mary, shows Mary Magdalene in constant conflict with the male disciples over who has the correct revelation from Jesus (Ross, Women in Christian Origin Pg. 109). It seems that between 80-160 AC, the role of women began to subvert. This becomes apparent in the reinterpretations of Genesis and the sayings of Jesus. In time, the suppression of women evolved into a redefinition of the original sin. These changes are rooted in the patriarch nature of Roman society.
In the Roman world, religion was not private matter. They did allow mystery religions as long as their citizens participated I public festivals. In Greco-Rome, “religion and the ideologies of the city…were… practically indistinguishable.” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, Women & Christian Origins, pg 86). For the Romans, a religion was a matter of upholding family honor and prestige. The Romans used religion to control their citizenship. Whenever they wanted to chastise a Roman citizen the mere “threat of exclusion” was enough to set them in line (Kraemer and D’Angelo, Pg 86). In these religions festivals the participation of woman was very limited. The only leadership role they served was as Vesta Virgins, who tended the temple of the oven goddess Mater Matuta (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 34). Aside from tending the temple, their role in Roman religious society was limited to sponsoring games, processions and sacrifices. These practices are greatly responsible for the changes in the leadership role of women in Christianity.
Before Christianity became a gentile religion, the role of women was rather ambiguous. In the Gospels, Jesus was said women followers. Overall, the Gospel remains silent about women. In Mark which is considered the earliest of the Gospels, has no “reference to women” in the miracle of the multiplication of Bread and Fishes (Ricci, Marry Magdalene and Many others pg 21). This was a common practice in among Jewish in Palatine during the Time of Jesus. They either denied “physical presence” of women or their words and deeds (Ricci, Pg 23). These values are alien to ancient Jewish practices considering that Torah makes a lot of reference to women. It is speculated that such values where learned from their Greeks and later from the Roman conquerors. Needless to say, Palestinian Jews would rather burn their Torah than allow for a woman learn from it (Ricci, pg 23). This similar trend is seen in writing of the Gospels which were aimed at Jewish audience.
Overall, there are only five references of women following Jesus in the Gospels. These references to the women followers appear in the Synoptic Gospels Mathew, Mark and Luke. As for John his only clear cute reference to the presence of women is his account of “the presence of women near the cross… (John 19:25)” (Ricci, Pg 26) . The earliest reference to their presence appears in Luke, which claimed that Jesus had women followers in Galilee. While Mark and Matthew mentioned them after Jesus left Galilee. Luke is the only Gospel that mentions them before and after passion. An interesting detail in the Mark 14:50, and Matthew 26:56, describe how all the disciples deserted Jesus after his arrest. The only ones who remain faithful were the women while “the male disciples abandoned him” (Ricci, pg 26). Up this point, the Gospel writers managed rather well to avoid mentioning women. However, since all male disciples cowered after Jesus was arrested, the only eye witnesses to his death and resurrection where his women followers. At the time, of his passion all four gospels state that women who followed Jesus since the beginning where present at the cross. This implies up to this point, the gospel writers relied in eye witness testimony from the male disciples. However, at the time of the cross, all but the women fled. Considering the biographical nature of these four books, they required eye witness testimony legitimize their faith that Jesus was the messiah. After all, Christianity revolves around the life of Jesus. Thus, since they had not male testimony to account for the events at the cross they had to rely on the women disciple. Taking this into consideration it is safe to assume that Jesus did have women followers and even a female apostle named Mary Magdalene.
Mary Magdalene is an interesting woman figure in the Gospels. A comparison between the canonical text and the Gnostic text reveals “a rivalry for authority” between the male and female followers of Jesus (Brock, Mary Magdalene, the First Apostle Pg 11). This rivalry appears in the “literary representations of Early Christian figures, especially those of Mary Magdalena and Peter” (Brock, Pg 11). Like the rest of the apostle, Mary Magdalene was a witness to the resurrection and life of Jesus thus making her “qualified to preach … the good news”(Brock, Pg 13). Attempts to suppress this can be seen in early translations of the Gospels which make Mary the mother of Jesus the one who spoke with him after the resurrection (Brock, pg 18). These are some among the many examples of how Mary Magdalene’s apostolic authority began to be diluted.
In order to have a better perspective of this fact and what it implies for women in Christianity, it is best to start with the depictions of Mary Magdalene and Peter in the Gospels of Luke. In the Gospel of Luke, the author makes Peter the first witness to the risen Lord. This serves a double purpose if one considers his subsequent work called Acts of the Apostle. In order to for his Acts of the Apostles to make sense, Peter has to be the first witness in order to “enhance the standing of Peter” (Brock, Pg 19). Plus, it is only in Luke where Peter makes a confession of faith and receives the power to bind and unbind in Jesus names. He also happens to omit the fact that Jesus called Peter Satan in mount Gethsemane. Plus, in the Luke rewrites the other incident at Gethsemane that appears in Mark 14:37 and Matthew 24:40 where Jesus rebukes only Simon Peter for falling asleep (Brock, pg 26). Needless to say, this gospel in specific is meant to legitimize the rule of the Bishop of Rome which at the time of the Council of Nicaea claimed direct apostolic succession from Peter. This text alone assured the apostolic succession to remain in the hands of the male Bishops.
In Luke, Mary Magdalene does not appear in any leadership role. She is portrayed in roles of the Greco Roman society considered “appropriate… for women: beneficiaries and benefactors, not leaders” (Brock, pg 33). Although Luke portrayed women much earlier than the other three Canonical text, he “introduces Mary Magdalene along with other women… ministering to… the disciples (Luke 8:3)” (Brock, pg 33). Her role in the cross is made minimal after the author of Luke by adding that she was accompanied by all his male acquaintances. His final strike at Mary Magdalene’s claims at apostleship was perpetrated in his version of the resurrection. Mary Magdalene met two messengers and not the resurrected Jesus in the sepulcher. The absence of Mary Magdalene “bears implications for early Christian history because Luke never provides divine justification for women to preach” (Brock, pg 35). Luke alone serves as justification for the denial of the existence of women apostles and preachers.
In the proto Gnostic Gospel book John, Peter plays a secondary role. In this gospel, it is Martha and not Peter who confesses that Christ is “the Son of God (11:27a)” (Brock, pg 42). Also after Peter confessed to Jesus that he believed he was a holy man Jesus did not praised him. Plus, time and time again the author of John shows Peter as the “disciple who vocally misunderstands Jesus’ message” (Brock, pg 45). In addition, Jesus publicly rebukes Peter for slicing off the ear of the high priest slave. Peter not only misunderstood Jesus words but also his willingness to be arrested by the Sadducees. Plus, at the time of the resurrection he refused to believe in the resurrected Jesus only if he saw and touched his wounds. This is a clear cut contrast to the positive depiction of Paul in Luke.
In contrast with Luke, in the Gospel of John Mary Magdalena and other women display a strong leadership role. The first time Mary Magdalene appears in the Gospel of John is when she anoints the feet of Jesus with expensive ointment. Judas the disciple who betrays Jesus complains of her actions. Here Jesus stands in her defense. Clearly, the author of John wishes to “contrast Mary, “the true female disciple,” with Judas, the unfaithful male disciple”( Brock, pg 56). The author of John goes a step further in raising the importance of Mary Magdalene by making the sole first witness to the resurrection of Jesus. This conclusion is based on analysis by various scholars that noticed that there is a discontinuity in 20:1 and 20:2 with 20:10 and 20:11 (Brock, pg 57). This has led many scholars to the conclusion that the scene where she runs to Peter and the other disciples after seeing the empty tomb was an addition to the original Gospel of John. Taking this into account it is safe to assume that the original writer of John meant for Mary Magdalene to be the sole first witness to the resurrection of Jesus. In this revision of the text “she is single handedly responsible for sharing the resurrection news with the others, a role that later earns her the title… apostle of the apostles” (Brock, Pg 60). Clearly the author the Gospel of John meant to have other leaders, including women.
It is interesting to note the differences between the Gospel of John and the Gospel of Luke. Luke is clearly design to put Peter above all the other apostle. The nature of the writing and its sequel Acts of the Apostles makes it clear that his author believed that Peter was meant to be the sole leader of the Christian Church. Contrary to this text, the Gospel of John presents Peter in a different light. He does not hold the keys to paradise. Rather he goes to great length to put Peter down and raise the status of Mary Magdalene. The reason for this lays in the proto Gnostic nature of the Gospel of John. The Gospel of John clearly differs from the rest of the canonical text. Traditionally, Gnostic Christian literature has favored Mary Magdalene over Peter. The fact that the Gospel of John makes even more emphasis on the Beloved Disciple probably allowed it to remain a canonical text. Yet, traditional Biblical scholars tended not to consider the Gospel of John as a true canonical text. How it managed to slip through in the council of Nicaea remains a mystery. The again the Gospel of John was necessary for the trinity dogma to work. It is in this Gospel alone that makes Jesus Logos and identifies him as being God incarnate. This also explains the minor alterations made to the text in order to fix the predominance of Mary Magdalene. This proto Gnostic text had to be edited in order for it to be considered canonical. In any case, both texts show the rivalry between Mary Magdalene and Peter as Apostolic witness. Regardless of all the alterations, in Luke, and in the rest of the Gospels, all place her in the scene of the tomb. That alone serves as proof of the original importance of Mary Magdalene over the other entire apostle.
The rivalry between Mary Magdalene and Peter is seen in all its colors in the Gnostic tradition. The Gnostic or “knowing ones” was a sect of Christianity that claimed to have hidden knowledge from Jesus. Like writer of the Gospel of John, they saw Jesus as divine incarnation of Logos and the divine wisdom Sophia. They emphasized in the saving power of experiencing the divine and the radical dualism in the world. The earliest manifestations of Gnosticism appeared during the reign of Emperor Claudius (41 -54 CE). The teacher of the Simonians Simon Magus taught his followers that Helena , a former prostitute, was the “”First Thought”…and…that Helen/Ennoia had descended and created the angels and powers who created the world” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, Pg 260). Other early manifestations appear in a letter of Ptolemy to his disciple Flora. He urges her to read the scripture since she was “worthy of the apostolic tradition” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 261). Among these apostolic Gnostic traditions it is interesting to note how Marcellina traced back her apostolic succession to Martha, disciple of Jesus. Like the Bishop of Rome who claimed to be the successor of Peter, Marcellina a Carpocratian Gnosis teacher traced back her line to “Harpocratians who followed Salome, and others who followed Mariamme, and others who follow Martha”(Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 260). Based on this it is safe to assume that there where female disciples of Jesus with authoritative apostolic tradition.
In many of the other Gnostic literature, such as the Gospel of Philip and the Dialogue of the Savior, Mary Magdalene appears as “the sole female disciple amidst a group of male disciples” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 273). In the Gospel of Mary shows in full color the superiority of Mary Magdalene over Peter. In addition, the Gospel of Mary addresses the issue of the “validity of teaching delivered in private… and (2) the leadership and authority of women”(Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 273). The first is issue for the Gnostics legitimizes all the heretical teachings about Sophia, the eons and Sameal. Anyhow, in the Gospel of Mary appears as the only disciple who actually understands Jesus. In the beginning of this Gospel, Peter acknowledges her wisdom. In one scene he asks her to reveal the “hidden” things that she has received through her visionary experience of the Savior”(Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 274). It is in this scene where author displays the first clash between Mary and the other male disciples. The objections of the entire group where seen in Peter’s dialogue with the rest. He doubted that the savior had “spoken to a woman and not openly…” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 274). The rest feared that Jesus implied that she was more worthy than the rest. His doubt was based not on her message but on the fact she was a woman. The author of the Gospel of Mary shows the predominant gender bias that was the norm at time. Furthermore this Gospel demanded that the followers of Jesus transcend beyond social status and gender differences.
Beyond the Gospel Literature, the next types of writing one must analyze is the letters of Paul. Paul is an interesting historical personage. He was an early advocate for allowing the gentiles to enter Christianity without requiring them to circumcise or follow strictly the Torah. Despite this measures to prevent “un-roman activities” many gentile women converts started to refuse marriage and live active celibate life in the Christian communities (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, Pg240). The active participation of women in these communities in time started to threaten the traditional roman household. In the Acts of (Paul and) Thecla, addresses the “social tensions experienced by women who joined early Christian groups” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, Pg 249). In this story, under the influence of Paul’s message the gentile Thecla refuses to get marry in order to live a life devoted to Jesus. The usual complains of the Romans had during the early times of the church centered on what they saw the warping of family relations. The livelihood of their state depended on the production of legitimate Roma citizens. The last thing they needed was a new religious order that taught Roman women to live celibate lifestyles. This text shows the growing hostility between the Christians and the Greco Roman society.
In order to try to ease the tensions with the Romans many Bishops started to redefine Christianity in a way that went with accordance with the Roman society. Many of these changes surround on regulation that govern solely the behavior of women followers. For example in I Peter 3:1-6, the writer “exhorts the wives of husbands “who do not obey the word” to accept the authority of their husbands…” (Kraemer and D’Angelo, pg 242). This command goes in direct opposition to the early depictions of Thecla who defied her family in order to live a celibate lifestyle. Timothy 2: 8-15 prohibits from teaching or leading public worship. This letter is considered to be authentic of Paul because it has clearly defined the role of Bishops and Presbyters. These offices did not exist during the time of Paul. Thus, it is safe to conclude that this is letter attributed to Paul. It is clear that this Pseudo Paul was using his authority in order to limit the participation of women in the early churches.
Most of the early Gentile critics of Christianity of the second century, accused Christians of teaching women and children to “be disrespectful of authority” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 242). This in order to counteract this accusation the early Christian writers started producing codes of conducts in order to instruct their gentile converts to maintain traditional roman values. Before this, complaints about women followers had not been raised. Only when Christianity became more of a Gentile movement did the problems regarding Roman values begin to arise.
After the second century, Christian leaders began to restrict the participation of women. In time these restrictions evolved into theological reformulations that blamed women for the fall of men. These changes are noted in the manner that the theologians Tertullian and Bishop Clement of Alexandria attack the heretical groups of Christianity. Tertullian highlights the “inappropriate behavior of women” in Gnostic communities (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 264). Clement complains that the Carpocratians “think that their wives should be common property” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, 265). Meanwhile, Clement complains that the Valentinians “reject marriage and begetting children” .He portrays the Gnostic asceticism very negatively. In both cases, Clement uses the participation of women as grounds for speaking negatively of heretical groups of Christians.
In time these negative depiction of women became the norm. Clement ,citing the Gospel according to the Egyptians, said that Jesus came to destroy the works of female. In the original version, Jesus was claiming that “distinctions of the two genders that will… dissolve in a new redemptive state” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo, pg 265). In his reversion, he interprets ““female” means desire and “works” refers to birth and corruption” (Kraemer and D’ Angelo pg 265). Thus, he turned a passage of gender equality into a passage that spoke negatively of the female gender in general. These critiques later evolved into a redefinition of the original sin. In the original interpretation it was the disobedience of both men and women that cost mankind paradise. However, in the Christian reinterpretation it was Eve who was to blame for the Fall of Men.
In conclusion, women’s role in Christianity was shaped by Roman society. Before Christianity became a gentile religion, women played a more active role in Christian communities. This is mostly noted in the claims of Gnostic female leaders that claim to be from the apostolic line of Martha and Marry Magdalene. In any case, for Christianity to survive in a Roman world they had to conform to the values of Roman society. Only when the Christians became more Roman did the persecution of Christian’s ceased. Thus, the apparent lack of participation of women is more of a social construct. Originally, the Christian faith allowed for women to have strong leadership roles. Now, their role became restricted to the role of mere lay followers with no right to preach or lead worship.
D’Angelo, Mary Rose and Kraemer, Ross Shepard. Women & Christian Origins. Oxford University Press 1999
Brock, Ann Graham Brock Mary Magdalene, The First Apostle: The Struggle for Authority. Harvard University Press 2003
Trevett, Christine Christian Women and the Time of the Apostolic Fathers (AD c.80-160): Corinth, Rome and Asian Minor. University of Wales Press Cardiff. 2006
Ricci, Carla Mary Magdalene and Many Others: Women Who Followed Jesus. Fortress Press 1994
.
