Mary Magdalene: Prostitute, Wife or Something More?
April 2nd 2008 09:46
In 591, Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany and the woman who anointed Jesus became the one person. It sounds like something Hollywood would do. Take three minor characters in a book and roll them into one major character.
But it wasn’t done by Hollywood. It was done in a sermon by Pope Gregory 1 and the Catholic Church took it on board for almost 1500 years. The reasons why he did so remain unclear. There is nothing in the bible to suggest that this was the case. But so he said and so the world believed.
Hollywood may not have created the merge, but they certainly embraced it. Most Hollywood movies portray Mary Magdalene as the forgiven prostitute. The Catholic Church revoked its position on Mary Magdalene in 1969. The one person became three again. Hollywood was slower to take on this view. Mary the former whore was a much better movie character. Public imagination, without any real surprise, tended to follow the Hollywood image of Mary Magdalene instead of the Catholic Church’s new one.
There have been many different views on Mary Magdalene for a very long time. Whether the idea of her as wife is fact or fiction, the theory wasn’t some crazy idea dreamt up by Dan Brown. He was following a long line of people who believed the same thing. It’s just that – at least until the Da Vinci Code – they were very much in the minority.
Now it seems that people’s perceptions of Mary Magdalene are changing. Some still see her as the forgiven prostitute. Some have gone the Da Vinci Code way and believe she was Jesus’ wife. There is a great book by Anne Summers called Damned Whores and God’s Police. It’s about women and the colonization of Australia. Why the title Damned Whores and God’s Police? Because that’s how women were thought of in those days. If you were female, you were either a prostitute or a wife, a damned whore or one of god’s police.
Thankfully women no longer have to side with either of these roles. Women are so much more than either prostitutes or wives. But it seems we are still asking the question about Mary Magdalene. Was she a prostitute or a wife? Or was she, like all women, so much more than this?
Mary Magdalene was the first person to see Jesus after he rose from the dead. She was told by him to tell the apostles what she has seen, earning her the title of “Apostle to the apostles”. The first evangelist. The first preacher of the good news. A very important person in her own right.
One theory as to why Pope Gregory I declared that Mary Magdalene was the sinner was to devalue her role as a woman. I believe there is probably some truth to that. But I don’t think turning her into Jesus’ wife necessarily elevates her at all. In fact, it is just a different way of playing down her very important role. As if being the wife of Jesus would suddenly give her worth.
She has worth. She doesn’t need to be the wife of Jesus in order for that to be the case. Mary Magdalene was an important person in Christian history. She played a huge role in the story of Jesus’ resurrection. She was not a prostitute. She was not a wife. She was a woman – and so much more than either one of these options.
But it wasn’t done by Hollywood. It was done in a sermon by Pope Gregory 1 and the Catholic Church took it on board for almost 1500 years. The reasons why he did so remain unclear. There is nothing in the bible to suggest that this was the case. But so he said and so the world believed.
Hollywood may not have created the merge, but they certainly embraced it. Most Hollywood movies portray Mary Magdalene as the forgiven prostitute. The Catholic Church revoked its position on Mary Magdalene in 1969. The one person became three again. Hollywood was slower to take on this view. Mary the former whore was a much better movie character. Public imagination, without any real surprise, tended to follow the Hollywood image of Mary Magdalene instead of the Catholic Church’s new one.
There have been many different views on Mary Magdalene for a very long time. Whether the idea of her as wife is fact or fiction, the theory wasn’t some crazy idea dreamt up by Dan Brown. He was following a long line of people who believed the same thing. It’s just that – at least until the Da Vinci Code – they were very much in the minority.
Now it seems that people’s perceptions of Mary Magdalene are changing. Some still see her as the forgiven prostitute. Some have gone the Da Vinci Code way and believe she was Jesus’ wife. There is a great book by Anne Summers called Damned Whores and God’s Police. It’s about women and the colonization of Australia. Why the title Damned Whores and God’s Police? Because that’s how women were thought of in those days. If you were female, you were either a prostitute or a wife, a damned whore or one of god’s police.
Thankfully women no longer have to side with either of these roles. Women are so much more than either prostitutes or wives. But it seems we are still asking the question about Mary Magdalene. Was she a prostitute or a wife? Or was she, like all women, so much more than this?
Mary Magdalene was the first person to see Jesus after he rose from the dead. She was told by him to tell the apostles what she has seen, earning her the title of “Apostle to the apostles”. The first evangelist. The first preacher of the good news. A very important person in her own right.
One theory as to why Pope Gregory I declared that Mary Magdalene was the sinner was to devalue her role as a woman. I believe there is probably some truth to that. But I don’t think turning her into Jesus’ wife necessarily elevates her at all. In fact, it is just a different way of playing down her very important role. As if being the wife of Jesus would suddenly give her worth.
She has worth. She doesn’t need to be the wife of Jesus in order for that to be the case. Mary Magdalene was an important person in Christian history. She played a huge role in the story of Jesus’ resurrection. She was not a prostitute. She was not a wife. She was a woman – and so much more than either one of these options.
| 31 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Anonymous