St Mary Magdalene

[cappie]

Without doubt Magdalene’s finest hour arrived on the most glorious morning in history. For it was she whom Jesus chose to appear, charging her with the awesome responsibility of spreading the news concerning his resurrection. John’s account of this encounter is amongst the most moving passages in scripture and regularly brings a tear to my eye. It is infused with love, sensitivity and hope, the first ray of light to dispel the darkness of our human condition. Perhaps it is no co-incidence that Jesus chose to appear to the disciple who had, formerly, been the greatest sinner?

The current Bishop of Durham, +Tom Wright, recently drew attention to this passage.In his opinion, Jesus choice in appearing to Magdalene is clear evidence that women are important in the ministry of the church. Equal to men in their calling to Christian service. I would agree wholeheartedly, Magdalene is indeed proof that Christ takes women’s ministry seriously and called, (and still calls), women to work for his kingdom. Who could deny this glorious truth?

But sadly the Bishop of Durham then uses this truth, rather bizarrely, to justify the Anglican innovation of ordaining women as priests and bishops. He argues that this encounter proves women were called to the apostolic ministry, equal to the 12 apostles in the work which was to follow. Hmmm!? Only an Evangelical, with a rather weak understanding of priesthood, could make the mistake that he does.

For if we look more closely at the scriptural passage we see that Christ calls Mary to be an Evangelist, not an Apostle. The distinction here is crucial. Her duty is to spread the good news, to tell others of Jesus love and resurrection. She is called into wonderful and profoundly important service but that service is, in no way, sacramental. Thus it does not, as the Bishop suggests, make her an apostle in the conventional sense. I would argue that instead of backing the argument for women’s ordination, it does the opposite, adding credence instead to the Catholic belief that God treats man and woman as equals but with different roles and functions in the service of his kingdom.

But let us not focus on the priesthood today but the ministry of all believers. May St. Mary Magdalene inspire us to do just that as we seek to do his will on earth, as it is in heaven.

[saintwannabe 777]

Amen, father, right on as usual.

[relientfoot08]

Amen. Well put. Thanks.

[deusluxmea]

i read a good quote by St Francis De Sales

[quote]Simon the leper called Magdalene a sinner, because she had once lived a life of sin; but he lied, for she was a sinner no longer, but rather a very saintly penitent, and so our Lord Himself undertook her defence.[/quote]

It was in a topic called "On Slander" - wise words!

[CatherineM]

To me, it also shows that women were in his close circle, therefore had he wanted to ordain women, he certainly could have, and would have. The fact that he didn't wasn't because of a lack of available, worthy candidates.

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1929464' date='Jul 23 2009, 01:28 PM']To me, it also shows that women were in his close circle, therefore had he wanted to ordain women, he certainly could have, and would have. The fact that he didn't wasn't because of a lack of available, worthy candidates.[/quote]

I often wonder if Christ came today if he would have chosen any women as Apostles. In the Church's wisdom it has usually tried to do what is necessary to "avoid scandal" and I wonder if Christ was doing the same in his ministry. Obviously Pharisees would have called just about every word from His mouth scandalous... but being the Christ he had every authority in matters theological so taking on the Pharisees about all of the ways that they fenced the law was part of his mission. So while He was not afraid to "shake things up" with religious leaders (Who had every access to the truth) perhaps it is possible that He didn't chose any women as disciples because he new their teaching authority would not be taken seriously in the world (and thus undermine the goal of spreading the gospel in Jerusalem, Judea, Sumaria and to the ends of the earth).

(as a footnote... I am not trying to make a case for a female priesthood. I am just throwing it out there for discussion.)

[CatherineM]

I'm not sure a woman would have been looked as any worse than a former tax collector when it came to teaching authority. He certainly didn't care about appearances or shaking things up, that's for sure.

[Guest Jon]

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1929570' date='Jul 23 2009, 01:07 PM']... In the Church's wisdom it has usually tried to do what is necessary to "avoid scandal"...[/quote]

[color="#000080"]Can you give examples ?[/color]

[VoTeckam]

I just found out yesterday that it is part of Church tradition that Mary Magdalane was a prostitute. I always thought that was just a popular misconception since there is no mention of this in the gospels (people often confuse the many Marys in the gopels). Any ideas how this came to be?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1932992' date='Jul 27 2009, 07:41 AM']I just found out yesterday that it is part of Church tradition that Mary Magdalane was a prostitute.[/quote]

I think it would be more apt to say that St. Mary Magdalen was the "sinner" in [i]Luke[/i] 7, since this is the gospel for her feast. As far as I am aware, there is nothing that states that she was a [i]prostitute[/i].

It is also good to note that Mary Magdalen is identified as the sister of Lazarus in the collect of her feast. Most collects from the [i]usus antiquior[/i] actually date from the first millennium, so this particular collect is likely handing on an ancient tradition.

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1933018' date='Jul 27 2009, 11:43 AM']I think it would be more apt to say that St. Mary Magdalen was the "sinner" in [i]Luke[/i] 7, since this is the gospel for her feast. As far as I am aware, there is nothing that states that she was a [i]prostitute[/i].

It is also good to note that Mary Magdalen is identified as the sister of Lazarus in the collect of her feast. Most collects from the [i]usus antiquior[/i] actually date from the first millennium, so this particular collect is likely handing on an ancient tradition.[/quote]


Lazarus's sister is Mary of Bethany not Mary of Magdala.

I read that it was Pope Gregory I that fueled this misconception but giving a homily that piled Mary of Bethany, Mary of Magdala and the anonymos sinner that washed Christ's feet AND the woman caught in adultery. Are there extra biblical sources to lead us to these conclusions? IMO such conclusions can not be drawn based on what we are given from the gospels.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1933051' date='Jul 27 2009, 10:21 AM']Lazarus's sister is Mary of Bethany not Mary of Magdala.[/quote]

As I said before, in the liturgy Mary the sister of Lazarus [i]is[/i] Mary Magdalen.

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1933051' date='Jul 27 2009, 10:21 AM']I read that it was Pope Gregory I that fueled this misconception but giving a homily that piled Mary of Bethany, Mary of Magdala and the anonymos sinner that washed Christ's feet AND the woman caught in adultery. Are there extra biblical sources to lead us to these conclusions? IMO such conclusions can not be drawn based on what we are given from the gospels.[/quote]

The [i]Catholic Encyclopedia[/i] [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm"]article[/url] on St. Mary Magdalen explains why Lazarus' sister and the sinner in [i]Luke[/i] 7 are identified as Mary Magdalen.

This is the sermon of St. Gregory the Great on St. Mary Magdalen, by the way. It is a lesson for Matins on her feast:
"Mary Magdalene, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, through love of the truth, washed away in her tears the defilement of her sins, and the words of the Truth are fulfilled which he spake : Her sins, which are many, are forgiven ; for she loved much. She who had remained chilly in sin, became fiery through love. When even his disciples went away again unto their own home, Mary still stood without at the sepulchre of Christ, weeping. She sought him whom her soul loved, but she found him not. She searched for him with tears ; she yearned with strong desire for him who, she believed, had been taken away. And thus it befell her, that being the only one who had remained to seek him, she was the only one that saw him. It is the truth that the backbone of a good work is perseverance."

Edited July 27, 2009 by Resurrexi

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1933057' date='Jul 27 2009, 12:31 PM']As I said before, in the liturgy Mary the sister of Lazarus [i]is[/i] Mary Magdalen.



The [i]Catholic Encyclopedia[/i] [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm"]article[/url] on St. Mary Magdalen explains why Lazarus' sister and the sinner in [i]Luke[/i] 7 are identified as Mary Magdalen.

This is the sermon of St. Gregory the Great on St. Mary Magdalen, by the way. It is a lesson for Matins on her feast:
"Mary Magdalene, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, through love of the truth, washed away in her tears the defilement of her sins, and the words of the Truth are fulfilled which he spake : Her sins, which are many, are forgiven ; for she loved much. She who had remained chilly in sin, became fiery through love. When even his disciples went away again unto their own home, Mary still stood without at the sepulchre of Christ, weeping. She sought him whom her soul loved, but she found him not. She searched for him with tears ; she yearned with strong desire for him who, she believed, had been taken away. And thus it befell her, that being the only one who had remained to seek him, she was the only one that saw him. It is the truth that the backbone of a good work is perseverance."[/quote]

The quote doesn't address the "why's" that I am looking for. Obviously the Holy Father was not so careless in his studies to confuse women in the Gospel so why is it that these women were blended together whe the gospels do nothing to link them?

[CatherineM]

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1933059' date='Jul 27 2009, 10:38 AM']The quote doesn't address the "why's" that I am looking for. Obviously the Holy Father was not so careless in his studies to confuse women in the Gospel so why is it that these women were blended together whe the gospels do nothing to link them?[/quote]


Remember that Popes are human, and are capable of making an honest mistake. One homily out of hundreds isn't exactly ex cathera. We have many more resources at our disposal today than people did 1500 years ago. He may also have done it to illustrate a point that we are too far removed from today to discern.

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1933105' date='Jul 27 2009, 01:54 PM']Remember that Popes are human, and are capable of making an honest mistake. One homily out of hundreds isn't exactly ex cathera. We have many more resources at our disposal today than people did 1500 years ago. He may also have done it to illustrate a point that we are too far removed from today to discern.[/quote]


But based on the readings for her feast (which Rexi cited) it wasn't just a slip up. I certainly don't mind accepting that these women were one in the same. I would just like to know how the Church came to that conclusion.