My Appearance on PAX-TV’s
Encounters With The Unexplained
by Ramon K. Jusino, M.A.
On
Friday, April 12, 2002 I appeared on Encounters
With The Unexplained, a television series on the PAX-TV network. They
did a segment entitled, “Who Was Mary
Magdalene?” The series is hosted by Jerry Orbach (from NBC’s Law & Order). Participants in the
broadcast included Dr. Craig Blomberg, Dr. Rosemary Ruether, and others. Given
the limits of a 30-minute format, I think the Encounters show did an excellent job of presenting some serious
information about Mary Magdalene to their television viewing audience.
They
pointed out that the Scriptures do not say that Mary Magdalene was ever a
prostitute. The history of why she is known as a harlot was explored. They
discussed a sermon given by Pope Gregory I in 591 A.D. in which he identified
Mary Magdalene with the anonymous sinful woman in Luke 7:36-50. Jesus was
portrayed as treating women with dignity and respect at a time in history when
women were, as they said, “objects of scorn.”
The
most amazing thing about the broadcast, however, is that they were willing to
explore the question of Magdalene authorship of the Fourth Gospel on national
television. That’s where I came in. I was asked to appear on the show because
of my article entitled “Mary Magdalene:
Author of the Fourth Gospel?” which can be accessed for free online at
www.BelovedDisciple.org. They did a very good job of presenting my case, given
the time limitations involved.
After
I appeared on camera, viewers heard some comments from Dr. Craig Blomberg,
author of The Historical Reliability of
the Gospels. At the end of the broadcast, Dr. Blomberg said the following
regarding my thesis:
**There is no known instance of an ancient Jewish,
Greek, or Roman literary source, nor any biblical literature, in which a woman
wrote as if she were a man. In the original texts of the Greek New Testament
the Beloved Disciple is referred to with masculine pronouns. And while there is
only a small body of literature from women in the ancient world, when they did
write they wrote in their own names and were accepted in that role. Mary
Magdalene was a real live participant in the life and ministry of Jesus, and an
eyewitness to his Crucifixion and Resurrection. But she is not the anonymous
author of the Gospel of John.**
In
his on-air comments, Dr. Blomberg raises three objections to my thesis:
- There
is no known instance of any ancient literary source in which a woman wrote as
if she were a man.
- In
the New Testament, the Beloved Disciple is always referred to with masculine
pronouns.
- The
few women that did write in the ancient world wrote under their own names and
were accepted in that role.
I
answer these objections as follows:
In
response to Blomberg’s first objection I point out that if, indeed, there were
cases of women writing as if they were men, we probably would not know about them. If the purpose of
that pseudonymity was to obscure or conceal the identity of the actual author,
then it stands to reason that the obscuration would probably not become
apparent, especially after the passing of many centuries.
The lack of known cases, thus far, does not mean that it is not the case here. The evidence in this case, or the lack thereof, will determine whether Mary Magdalene is a likely candidate for being the Beloved Disciple. The fact that prior cases of women writing as if they were men may not have been proven conclusively, does not preclude that from being the case with the Fourth Gospel.
In addition to this, history is replete with numerous, well-documented, examples of women using male pseudonyms in
art, literature, and science as recently as the 19th century (e.g., George Sand, George Eliot...etc.). The use of male pseudonyms by
women has been a fairly common practice throughout history. There may be no currently known cases of this in the literature handed down to us from biblical times.
But, the prevalence of this practice throughout most of history since then makes it very probable that it took place back then as well.
Blomberg’s second objection was dealt with at great length in my essay. According to my thesis,
the final redactor(s) of the Fourth Gospel used masculine pronouns when
referring to the anonymous Beloved Disciple in order to obscure the fact that
the Disciple was female. The how and why of the use of masculine pronouns can
be found in my essay.
Blomberg’s third objection misses a very important point. The issue here is not whether women
were accepted as writers, per se. At
issue here is whether women were accepted as leaders in most early Christian
communities. The author of a Gospel would have had to possess apostolic clout and
credibility. Women would definitely not
have been accepted in that role by most male orthodox Christian leaders of the early church.
Indeed,
Blomberg is factually incorrect if he
is saying that women in the early church wrote books in their own names and
“were accepted in that role.” In fact, there were early Christian sects, such as
the Montanists and the Valentinians, that were rejected by “orthodox” church
leaders, in part, precisely because they allowed women to teach and write books in
their own names. Blomberg's point here is that women would have had no motive to write using men's names because they could have written in their own names without fear of rejection. He is clearly wrong if he is speaking of early orthodox Christian communities.
Esther
de Boer presents strong documentation which shows that women in some early Christian
communities did write books in their
own names only to have them rejected as heretical by orthodox leaders. These
leaders did not believe that women had the authority to write books in their
own names because, in their opinion, this would be giving women teaching
authority over men.
De Boer
published an article in an online peer-reviewed theology journal from the
University of Bern (Switzerland) called Lectio
Difficilior. Her article is entitled “Mary
Magdalene and the Disciple Jesus Loved.” She cites my essay in her work and concurs, in large part, with my
assertion that Mary Magdalene was probably the author of the Fourth Gospel.
Mary Magdalene and the
Disciple Jesus Loved
by
Esther A. de Boer
Lectio Difficilior (August, 2000)
http://www.lectio.unibe.ch/00_1/m-forum.htm
The following is an excerpt from de Boer’s article:
===================================================
Schüssler Fiorenza refers to the fourth century Dialogue Between a Montanist and an Orthodox
which, through means of a discussion between a montanist and an orthodox
Christian, shows their respective viewpoints.[30] The orthodox viewpoint may
reflect a very early stand, since it corresponds to the arguments in the first
century letters, which claim that woman is to be submissive to man.
The following quotation from the Dialogue
comments on women’s authority, concentrating on those women who wrote books,
like the second century Montanist prophetesses Prisca and Maximilla:
Orthodox:
We do not reject the
prophecies of women. Blessed Mary prophesied when she said: “Henceforth all
generations shall call me blessed.” And as you yourself say, Philip had
daughters who prophesied and Mary, the sister of Aaron, prophesied. But we do
not permit women to speak in the assemblies, nor to have authority over men, to
the point of writing books in their own name: since, such is, indeed, the
implication for them of praying with uncovered head (…) Wasn’t Mary, the Mother
of God, able to write books in her own name? To avoid dishonoring her head by
placing herself above men, she did not do so.
Montanist: Did you say that to
pray or to prophesy with uncovered head implies not to write books?
Orthodox: Perfectly.
Montanist: When Blessed Mary
says: “Henceforth all generations shall call me blessed,” does she or doesn’t
she speak freely and openly?
Orthodox: Since the Gospel is
not written in her name, she has a veil in the Evangelist.
Would a Gospel then, primarily based on the
authority of Mary Magdalene be acceptable? Later in the discussion the
Montanist asks the following crucial question:
Montanist: Is it because they
have written books that you do not receive Prisca and Maximilla?
Orthodox: It is not only (italics EAB) for this reason, but
also because they were false prophetesses, following their guide Montanus.
[30] Schüssler Fiorenza 1983, p.307-309. She
uses the English translation of Gryson 1972, p.129-131. The Greek text was
first published by Ficker 1905, p.447-463.
Schüssler Fiorenza, E. In Memory of Her. A
Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins. London: SCM
Press, 1983.
===================================================
For more documentation on this, please read Section 4 of
deBoers' article at:
http://www.lectio.unibe.ch/00_1/m-forum.htm
Interestingly, Dr. Blomberg rejects Magdalene authorship
of the Fourth Gospel in favor of his opinion (according to his books) that St.
John of Zebedee is the Beloved Disciple. I contend that the internal evidence
weighs more heavily in favor of Mary Magdalene than John of Zebedee.
John
19:35 and 21:24 clearly say that the Fourth Gospel was written by the anonymous
Beloved Disciple who was an eyewitness to the Crucifixion. The Fourth Gospel
places this Disciple at the Crucifixion. Yet, the other three Gospels (called
the Synoptic Gospels by scholars) do not mention John, or any of the male disciples, as being present at the Crucifixion. In
fact, the Gospel writers go out of their way to emphasize that only the female disciples of Christ remained with
Jesus by the Cross. And, three out of the four Gospels specifically name Mary
Magdalene as being with Jesus when he was crucified. This alone clearly makes
Mary Magdalene a very viable candidate for being the Beloved Disciple. It
should also exclude any of the men from being identified as the Beloved
Disciple because none of them are named as witnesses to the Crucifixion in any
of the New Testament Gospels.
The
New Testament Gospels list the witnesses to the Crucifixion as follows:
- Matthew 27:55-56 -- Many women who followed Jesus from Galilee were there when Jesus
was crucified. Mary Magdalene is specifically mentioned as being there. There
is no mention of John or any of the other male apostles. However, interestingly
enough, John’s mother is there.
- Mark 15:40-41 -- Here, again, many women who followed Jesus from Galilee were there.
Mary Magdalene is specifically mentioned as being there. There is no mention of
John or any of the other male apostles.
- Luke 23:49 -- The only disciples mentioned are the women who followed Jesus from
Galilee. There is no mention of John or any of the other male apostles.
- John 19:25-27 -- This is an important passage discussed at length in my essay. Mary
Magdalene is specifically mentioned as being near the Cross of Jesus. Other
women are mentioned as well, including the mother of Jesus. Also mentioned is
the “anonymous” Beloved Disciple. Masculine pronouns are used in reference to
this Disciple. For reasons outlined in my essay, I contend that the Beloved
Disciple and Mary Magdalene are actually the same person even though the final
canonical version of the Fourth Gospel seems to describe them as two separate
persons.
The
testimony of these Gospels bears witness to the fact that none of the male
apostles of Jesus stayed with him while he was dying. This was undoubtedly a
reluctant admission on the part of the Evangelists. Think about it -- if John,
or Peter, or James...etc., were eyewitnesses to the Crucifixion and were with
Jesus when he died -- wouldn’t the Gospel writers boldly proclaim this? If John
was by the cross with Jesus, then why don’t Matthew, Mark, or Luke mention his
being there? In fact, the Fourth Gospel doesn’t mention John being there
either!
If
the Gospels are to be accepted as historically reliable, then it is clear from
their testimony that the only disciples to witness the Crucifixion of Jesus
were women. It, then, stands to reason that if the Fourth Gospel makes the
claim that it was authored by a disciple who was an eyewitness to the
Crucifixion, then that disciple must
have been female (masculine pronouns notwithstanding). What we have here are
three Gospel writers who clearly state that only the female disciples witnessed the
Crucifixion. And one Gospel writer who makes ambiguous masculine references to an anonymous eyewitness to the Crucifixion
-- an eyewitness that the writer refuses to
name.
If
we are to believe that the Beloved Disciple of the Fourth Gospel is male, then
we must also believe that the other three Gospel writers either did not know
that any of the Twelve Apostles were near the Cross, or, that
they all decided to omit the Apostles' names from the scene and make them seem afraid
to be there even though they did have
the courage to be by Jesus’ side. Why would they have done that? Why would they all have testified to facts that made the male apostles seem cowardly
unless those facts were true?
The
motive for obscuring Mary Magdalene’s identity as the author of the Fourth
Gospel is, on the other hand, very clear in light of the Orthodox attitude
towards Gospels written by women, which is cited above. I have outlined my
thesis about how this happened in my essay that can be found at
www.BelovedDisciple.org
Overall, I was very happy with the treatment that my thesis got on the broadcast.
This was the first time that authorship of the Fourth Gospel by Mary Magdalene
was discussed on national television, as far as I know.
Hopefully,
as Jerry Orbach said during the show, it will give scholars something new to
think about.
-------------------------------------------
Posted on April 21, 2002
