…Today — the official feast day of Mary Magdalene — is a good time to restore her honor.
Lest anyone see this as feminist-inspired rhetoric, the Vatican stated in 1969 that Mary Magdalene (sometimes referenced as Mary of Magdala and Mary Magdala) was not a harlot.
But, poor woman, the stories are still going around. Probably because it is a good story.
Mary Magdalene, it is usually told, was among the women who used their tears to wash Jesus’ feet. (These women are unnamed in Scriptures).
Mary Magdalene was at the Crucifixion. She was among the group of women who discovered the empty tomb after Jesus rose from the dead. She first saw the risen Christ.
Biblical scholars, however, say Mary Magdalene might not have even lived. Or, they say, her image is a compilation of Marys — including Mary of Bethany (Lazarus’ and Martha’s sister).
“We know virtually nothing about this woman,” notes Jean Porter, a professor of theology at Notre Dame University. “The figure of Mary Magdalene is most probably a consolidation of at least two, possible three, women mentioned in Scriptures.”
[Full Story]
I just love these well rounded and researched articles, especially where they quote unnamed Biblical scholars as if they were some homogeneous group who all agree with each other. You keep hearing quotes from these scholars but they always remain anonymous. Maybe these Biblical scholars have never lived and were only a compilation of liberal Biblical scholars imagined by the writer. Whenever you see something on A&E or Bravo that is somehow Biblically related they almost always trot out the same one or two scholars. And coincidentally they are always “Biblical scholars” who don’t believe in the resurrection or anything else from the Bible.
Now what I would like to see is a tag team match between those scholars who say that Mary Madalene didn’t really exist with those who say that she married Jesus. I would pay to see the Jesus Seminar Smackdown on Pay-Per-View. Or better yet a grudge match between Attila the Scott Hahn against Charles “Peter is not the Rock” Curran.
3 comments
Thank you for defending the honor of my patron saint (selected by me upon my entry into the Church on 1/12/73).
Our understanding of the Bible and theology would increase exponentially if we could just find new jobs for all these so-called “Biblical scholars” and “theologians.” I’d be willing to hire a couple of them in our company as robot operators, although I’m sure they’d miss their perks.
As Zeitgeist creator Peter…
Comments are closed.