The Magdalene Review

Yesterday my son and I sat in the children’s literature section of the UW library, randomly picking up books and giving them a read. I came across several copies of Robert Browning’s “The Pied Piper of Hamelin,” and decided to read it. Much to my surprise, the date Browning gave for the Pied Piper’s “abduction” of the town’s children was July 22nd.

A quick Wikipedia search this morning revealed that the oldest versions of the legend place the children’s removal on June 26th, and that it wasn’t until the 16th century that not only was the date changed, but the rat infestation component of the story was added. It is possible, the article notes, that the disappearance of the children and the rat infestation were two distinct events that became merged in popular memory.

Regardless, this is a July 22nd event that I hadn’t been previously aware of. Apparently there is even a “Ratcatcher’s Day” celebrated on either June 26th or July 22nd to commemorate the work of the Pied Piper.

How very odd.

From my book:

“Clearly, the legend of Helen is meant to be a Gnostic allegory for the fall of Sophia (which is in turn an allegory of the fall of the soul), but the parallels between Simon Magus and Jesus should also make us look more closely at the parallels between Helen and Mary Magdalene.

Both Helen and Mary Magdalene have represented Sophia’s presence in the physical world; wouldn’t the fact that Helen was incarnated as a prostitute have had some bearing on what was thought of Mary Magdalene’s pre-Jesus life as well? This is a question that hasn’t been fully explored by scholars, but as the studies of Mary Magdalene’s roles in Gnosticism continue, it very well could be the earliest indirect reference to Mary Magdalene as a prostitute.”

Apparently, someone in academia picked up the gauntlet I tossed down in this section in 2004. Here is the first paragraph of the conclusion of a 2007 thesis that very studiously explores the theme I mentioned above as well as the importance of MM’s medieval identity as a fallen woman.

“If Mary was in reality not this paragon of penitence, the contrite whore of the medieval imagination, then who was she? There are numerous possibilities, impossible to verify. If not an actual prostitute, her figure was perhaps viewed as a symbolic whore, the fallen soul and companion to her redeemer figure, an itinerant holy man named Jesus, just as Helen was companion to Simon Magus.”

Mary of Magdala: The Evolution of an Image, by Rachel D. Owen

The thesis is marvelous. Owen’s primary goal is to establish that MM’s medieval identity as a penitent, redeemed prostitute wasn’t necessarily without historical basis. Without scriptural basis, certainly, but neither is there anything to conclude with any hard evidence that she wasn’t a redeemed prostitute. On the contrary, there is circumstantial evidence that MM may have been linked to the harlot identity on several different fronts. Not only was a symbol of the fallen soul, counterpart to Helen, but also as an authority figure appreciated by heretical sects at a time when heretics and independent women were often denigrated as prostitutes. In short, there are plenty of logical ways MM could have landed a bad reputation.

Far be it from me to say that the conversation on MM the harlot is over; I’m sure the controversy is really just beginning now that an eloquent argument with academics who favor a wholesale deletion of 1400 years’ worth of tradition has been presented. The publishing of this thesis does represent significant progress from where I’m sitting though; let’s treat MM’s identities as cumulative layers, one upon the other, instead of random veils tossed at her from various directions.

Big congratulations to Rachel Owen for contributing a brave and articulate voice to modern MM scholarship.

Magdalene.org and The Magdalene Review (this blog) now have a Twitter identity! If you’d like updates on what’s happening with the site, the blog, and Mary Magdalene research in general, please follow magdaleneorg.

You never know, I might even give away some books once in awhile as the mood strikes…

I obtained a recording of a UK television documentary from Demand Five called “Mary Magdalene: Saint or Sinner?” and watched it this evening. A fairly typical documentary, it includes dramatic narration asking all of the sensational questions being bandied about in our post-Da Vinci Code culture, a round-up of experts, and actors dramatizing the topics being discussed.

From the Demand Five description of the show:

As the key witness to the Resurrection of Christ, Mary Magdalene occupies a unique place in Christianity – yet she remains one of the most mysterious women in history. Little is known of her life and her appearance in the Bible centres around two key moments – the Crucifixion and her discovery of Christ alive outside his tomb. After alerting the apostles to his return from the dead, Mary all but disappears from the story.

Mary Magdalene has been the subject of much debate throughout history. For centuries, her reputation was tarnished by the popular perception that she was a prostitute, even though the Bible never refers to her as such.

In recent years, popular fiction has put another spin on Mary’s image, with the theory that she may have been Jesus’ wife and the mother of his child. These stories are influenced by a French legend which holds that Mary travelled to Provence after Christ’s death – but scholars remain unconvinced.

All of the requisite topics are covered: the canonical Gospel references, the Gnostic texts, the “rivalry” between Peter and MM, MM’s demons, Gregory the Great’s official conflation MM with other unnamed women, the lack of support for the “harlot” reputation, MM’s journey to France and retirement to the grotto, speculation on whether she was intimate with Jesus, and more.

In all, I was satisfied with the answers provided by the experts. Most comments were made in a sensible context, which isn’t always the case after an interview has been edited into a documentary format. A few comments seem to stray out of character a bit, such as Tal Ilan asking rhetorically, “was she possessed by demons?” I seriously doubt whether Ilan was wondering if MM was actually possessed, after speculating about physiological problems commonly mistaken for demon-possession during the 1st century, and chalk it up to an effect of editing.

Most interesting about this documentary, I thought, was the repeated emphasis both by the narrator and by the experts that, if Christianity is a religion based on the death and resurrection of Jesus, and if Mary Magdalene was the first witness of the resurrection as noted in the Gospels, we could say that Mary Magdalene is the founder of Christianity. I’ve entertained this notion more than once over the years, but ultimately didn’t try to make much traction with it. So I was surprised to see the idea receiving a serious airing in this show, and was glad it was a perspective being discussed. I think I’ll add “Founder of Christianity” to the long list of roles MM has played in Western culture.

Best wishes to all on this, the Feast of Mary Magdalene!

I thought that the following traditional litany, copied from the Catholic Culture website (formatting is mine), would be a fine reading for the day:

According to the tradition of the Western Church Mary Magdalene, who is mentioned in all four Gospels, is also identical with “the woman who was a sinner” and with the sister of Lazarus, though this identification is challenged by the Fathers of the East. She was of Magdala in Galilee, whence her name of Magdalen. Liturgical devotion, to this glorious penitent has been immemorial. This litany is mellow with age; from an old German version this was translated many years ago. Two prayers have been added from liturgical sources, the Secret and finally the Collect from the Mass of her Feast, July 22, which is duplex in Latin Church and has been since end of ninth century, commemorating the Translation of her Relics from Ephesus to Constantinople on July 22, 886.

Lord, have mercy on us.
Christ, have mercy on us.
Lord, have mercy on us. Christ, hear us.
Christ, graciously hear us.
Holy Mary, Mother of God, Saint Mary Magdalene,
Pray for us.
Sister of Martha and Lazarus,
Pray for us.
Who didst enter the Pharisee’s house to anoint the feet of Jesus,
Pray for us.
Who didst wash His feet with thy tears,
Pray for us.
Who didst dry them with thy hair,
Pray for us.
Who didst cover them with kisses,
Pray for us.
Who wast vindicated by Jesus before the proud Pharisee,
Pray for us.
Who from Jesus received the pardon of thy sins,
Pray for us.
Who before darkness wast restored to light,
Pray for us.
Mirror of penance, R Disciple of Our Lord,
Pray for us.
Wounded with the love of Christ,
Pray for us.
Most dear to the Heart of Jesus,
Pray for us.
Constant woman,
Pray for us.
Last at the Cross of Jesus, first at His tomb,
Pray for us.
Thou who wast the first to see Jesus risen,
Pray for us.
Whose forehead was sanctified by the touch of thy risen Master,
Pray for us.
Apostle of apostles,
Pray for us.
Who didst choose the “better part,”
Pray for us.
Who lived for many years in solitude being miraculously fed,
Pray for us.
Who wast visited by angels seven times a day,
Pray for us.
Sweet advocate of sinners,
Pray for us.
Spouse of the King of Glory,
Pray for us.

V. Saint Mary Magdalene, earnestly intercede for us with thy Divine Master
R. That we may share thy happiness in heaven.

Let us pray. May the glorious merits of blessed Mary Magdalene, we beseech Thee, O Lord, make our offerings acceptable to Thee: for Thine only-begotten Son vouchsafed graciously to accept the humble service she rendered. Who livest and reignest with Thee and the Holy Ghost, God for ever and ever.

R. Amen.

May the prayers of blessed Mary Magdalene help us, O Lord : for it was in answer to them that Thou didst call her brother Lazarus, four days after death, back from the grave to life. Who livest and reignest with the Father and the Holy Ghost, Unity in Trinity, world without end.

R. Amen.

Prayer Source: Kyrie Eleison — Two Hundred Litanies by Benjamin Francis Musser O.F.M., The Magnificat Press, 1944

I found a post in this blog from several years ago, in which I commented that it was odd that most Google searches for the keyword “mary magdalene” came from the Philippines and Raleigh, NC. Today I revisited Google Trends to see if the same is still true.

As it happens, it is still true. But more interesting than that is the chart of search and news volume results for the same keywords. The peak of activity in 2004 was the publication of the Da Vinci Code book. The peak of activity in 2006 was the release of the Da Vinci Code movie. As you can see, interest in Mary Magdalene drops off fairly dramatically after that. I believe that the smallish spike in 2007 was due to the “Jesus Tomb” Discovery Channel special.

Google Trends for ‘mary magdalene’

Fascinating!

Two fun pieces of Mary Magdalene news for today.

1. True Blood

The popular HBO vampire series, True Blood, had a Mary Magdalene reference this week. A preacher’s wife (Sarah) was seducing one of the main characters while he was in the bathtub, and the following conversation (give or take a few words here and there) took place:

Sarah: “You know, Mary Magdalene showed her love for Jesus by washing his feet and then drying them off with her hair.”

Jason: “Oh yeah?”

Sarah: “Yes.”

Jason: “But, uh, wasn’t she, uh….a hooker?”

Sarah: “No, not at all. See, everybody thinks that, but it’s not in the Bible.”

Jason: “Oh, okay.”

This is the conversation to the best of my recollection. If the character Jason seems a bit dull above, it’s probably not because of my memory…he’s about as smart as a bag of rocks.

The messages sent about MM in this episode are a bit mixed. On one hand, her honor is defended when Sarah sets the record straight on whether MM was a prostitute. On the other hand, she is invoking MM’s patronage as a sexual woman doing favors for a man in the name of love. This, however, is difficult to avoid; even though it’s clear MM probably didn’t deserve the reputation of a harlot, she remains a red-blooded, sensual figure in Western imagination.

In any case, I’m applauding HBO on their excellent timing in making a not-completely-outrageous reference to MM just before her feast day.

2. La Danza de los Zancos

This week zancos, dancers in the Spanish village of Anguiano, La Rioja, whirl on meter-high stilts up and down the cobbled streets as they move an icon of their patron saint, Mary Magdalene, from the village church down to a chapel by the sea. It appears to be a colorful, festive occasion all to honor MM!

The article I’ve linked to above includes a video.

I’m excited. I’m thrilled. How thrilled am I? I am veritably bouncing with exuberance over something I just read a little while ago.

The early church father, Hippolytus, Bishop of Rome, penned a commentary on Song of Songs sometime in the 3rd century. For those of us who are unlearned in the German language, it has been very difficult to access the commentary which is available only in Greek or a German translation from the 19th century (Werke des Hippolytus, ed. Bonwetsch, 1897). Incidentally, I don’t have any information about what manuscripts of this work might be extant.

The good news is that today I learned that a doctoral student published a thesis earlier this year containing an English translation of the commentary: Hippolytus’ Commentary on the On the Song of Songs in Social and Critical Context, Yancy Smith. Smith successfully defended the dissertation, and as far as I know it is by now available on ProQuest for anyone with access.

I’ll be off to the UW library sometime in the near future to see if I can get a copy. This is great news for Mary Magdalene research since the commentary contains discussions of a “Mary Martha” figure visiting the tomb of Jesus, during which she is compared her to Eve, and may contain a reference to Magdalene as an apostle. In the 3rd century!

Project Redesign is under way!

Curious what the brightened up Magdalene.org will look like? Why not take a look as we continue to develop it?

http://www.magdalene.org/new

Please keep in mind that many links may not work and the design may change slightly before it goes live, but it’s a good opportunity to preview our new look and feel.

Comments? I’d love to hear what you think!

Please send mail to comment [ a t ] magdalene [ d o t ] org.

I’ve been out of the loop for a long time. In 2007, James Cameron and a film crew produced a Discovery Channel documentary about a tomb discovered in south Jerusalem in 1980. Allegedly, the tomb contained the ossuaries of Jesus’ family, including his mother, brothers, and –you guessed it– presumed wife, Mary Magdalene. Not only that, but an ossuary for someone named Judah, or Judas, who is speculated at having been Jesus and Mary Magdalene’s son.

Before you get too excited, let me first recommend that you take their findings with a few grains (or piles) of salt. There are multiple ways to read the inscriptions on the ossuaries, and as it has been pointed out, we’re not talking about names that are very unique in 1st century Palestine. It’s not inconcievable that all these names could be found in multiple family tombs (the odds, as the Discovery Channel painstakingly points out on the site, are 600:1). And unfortunately, there is no inscription that actually includes an epithet that would seal the deal: “magdalene.”

(Personally, I believe that the name “magdalene” wasn’t used until the 2nd century, so even if it WAS Mary Magdalene’s tomb, it wouldn’t surprise me if the epithet was missing. But I digress.)

The filmmakers trot out a number of experts to support their controversial claims, and in the following years, a few other scholars have seen fit to offer alternative explanations. Since I just discovered this topic today, it might take me a little while to digest all of the material. I also have to acquire a copy of the DVD to hear how the material was presented on television.

A damning piece of evidence (to me) that there is more fire than heat here is a page entitled “Patina Analysis and the James Ossuary” in the “Supporting Evidence” section of the site. The thrust of the two paragraphs presented there is that the James Ossuary that generated such a buzz in 2002 was highly likely to have come from the same tomb in which the other ossuaries (presumed to belong to Jesus’ family) were found. The James Ossuary is highly controversial, and has been declared a forgery by the Israeli Antiquities Authority.

Here are a few related links:

The Lost Tomb of Jesus (at the Discovery Channel website)

Mary Magdalene is Now Missing, a paper by Dr. Stephen J. Pfann, disputing the interpretation of the inscriptions on the ossuary presumed to belong to Mary Magdalene.

A response to the “Mary Magdalene is Now Missing” paper, by Dr. James Tabor, the scholar responsible for the Jesus Tomb scholarship.

James Ossuary Wikipedia entry. Scroll down to see the Discovery Channel Documentaries section, particularly the portion about Ted Koppel’s “The Lost Tomb of Jesus - A Critical Look.” Apparently Koppel produced written denials from several of the experts consulted for the documentary, whose conclusions were misstated.