Below find the homily shared today at our Mary Magdala celebration at the Redig Farm–23 of us joined today for this annual get-together–Mother Nature treated us to a lovely day! We also all enjoyed a great selection of food! Thank you to all who made this possible by your attendance and preparation beforehand. With gratitude–Pastor Kathy

__________________________________________________________________________________________

My friends, this is our 12^th celebration here on the farm uplifting Mary Magdala along with all women—Mary, Jesus’ mother for which the opening hymn, The Canticle of the Turning (a modern-day Magnificat) is primarily dedicated—but to all women as well, to encourage us to strive to answer our baptismal and God-given calls, even when we may have to go against the powers-that-exist to do so. As I said in my opening remarks, The Canticle is a marching song, a song of strength that really shows Jesus’ mother to be a woman of strength, not one to be placed on a pedestal, and ignored.  She was and is a witness to God calling women to say our “yeses” to all that God asks of us!

   And to my brothers here today, this resurrection of Mary Magdala is a day for you as well—it is a day for you to celebrate the women in your lives, to uplift them, and to encourage them to be all that they are called to be, because in all reality, when you do that, you uplift yourselves too, becoming all that you are meant to be. 

   So, back then to Mary Magdala, who women theologians, primarily, and some male historians and authors, have uncovered the truth about over the many years since the Second Vatican Council.  In previous years here, we have established that she was not a prostitute that Jesus saved, but in actuality, a prophet and a priest, in the sense that any man was prophet and priest at the time she lived! But probably the most enduring character trait of this “Mary” was that she was a most loyal friend and follower of Jesus of Nazareth. 

  Also, over the years, I have shared some of our sorry Church history that let us know that a certain pope, Gregory, in the 6^th century, took it upon himself to, “throw,” for lack of a better word, all the “Marys” mentioned in Scripture, except for Jesus’ mother into a composite that reflected one character trait, and one alone, that of “a sinful woman,” –a prostitute. This naming of all the “Marys” incorrectly is a great sin within our Church as it took from them their integrity, their honor, and any reason to take them, or any woman, seriously.  And for us in present times, this is most important in making the case for women being ordained in our Church. And sadly, this type of thinking spills over into the society in general where women have to prove that they are even worthy before ever being considered for jobs, positions, etc.

   For those of you with us last year, you will recall that I shared some new and very exciting news about “our” Mary, that I will repeat today, because unfortunately, it will probably never be heard in the hierarchical church from any of the men. Credit for this news must go to Christian author, Diane Butler Bass and Elizabeth Schroeder, who as a New Testament master’s student in 2017, discovered it.

   The Church has always named “our” Mary as being from “Magdala,” but it seems that in early maps in the time of Jesus, a town or city of “Magdala” cannot be located—the place that our “Mary” is said to be from.  New study done in the last several years by Elizabeth Schrader, studying the Greek, Aramaic, and Coptic languages, made a most interesting discovery!

   In her study, she received access to the earliest texts available and in one such text, Papyrus 66, from approximately 200 A.D., she discovered evidence that in the gospel of John, chapter 11, in the story of Mary, Martha and Lazarus, that “Martha” may have been an addition to the story.  The gospel of Luke, chapter 10: 38-42 has a similar story.  Now, we have always assumed that the two stories are the same and about Mary, Martha, and Lazarus.  Evidence now shows that this is not the case. 

   The first line from the Luke selection says it all: “Jesus entered a village where a woman named Martha welcomed him to her home.”  Now, what should have jumped out for all of us was the fact that Martha would not have had a home as women did not own property if they had a father, brother, or husband.  The reading goes on— “she had a sister named Mary.”  No mention is made of a brother Lazarus in this selection. 

   Let’s go back to Chapter 11 of the gospel of John. What Elizabeth Schrader discovered in the earliest text of John, Papyrus 66, is that it had been changed by someone in the 4^th Century.  “Mary” in the Greek appears like “Maria” in English.  The “i” in Maria is the Greek letter, “iota.”  Upon close inspection, Elizabeth discovered that the “i” was changed to “th” or “theda” in the Greek, giving us “Martha” instead of “Mary.”  Thus, this text was changed from Lazarus having one sister, “Mary,” to two sisters, Mary, and Martha.  Why was this done?

     Elizabeth Schrader makes the case that this was a way to solve an early Church “problem” of leadership—was it Peter or Mary, or perhaps both, who were called by Jesus to lead?  Think what this would mean if the men involved had recognized,  as did Jesus, Mary’s ability to lead! Just as Pope Gregory had found it advantageous to “throw” all the Marys into a composite that was “unflattering,” basically, silencing them, and their valuable work in the Church, someone in the 4^th Century tried to do the same. 

   Further study by Elizabeth Schrader demonstrated clearly that the John text, in its earliest form had Lazarus having one sister, Mary and that she, and not Martha was the one who proclaimed that, “Jesus was the Christ, come into the world” –a text similar to the account in the gospel of Matthew where Peter proclaims the same belief.  You will recall that Jesus then called Peter, “the Rock.” 

   Even Tertullian, Church father from the 2^nd century, labeled by Diane Butler Bass as one of the most misogynist of his time, stated that Lazarus had one sister and that was, Mary.  So what are we to make of this? 

   We get some help if we go back to our key figure, “Mary of Magdala.” Earlier I stated that in Jesus’ time, there was no town or city of “Magdala.”  So why do we assume that the two words written together mean that “Magdala” was where our Mary was from? 

   The women wanting to understand this have dug deeper and found that, “magdala” in the Greek, rather than a “place” was in fact, “a title.”  In the Greek, “magdala” means, “tower,” thus, Mary the Tower, and she was most likely given this title, it is thought, because of her faith— “her tower of faith.”  That is why we now say Mary Magdala, instead of Mary of Magdala.

    It is thought now by many trying to unearth the truth, a few things:  1) The Luke story and the John story are about two different groups of people—John’s story is about Lazarus and his sister Mary who proclaims just like Peter in the gospel of Matthew that, “Jesus is the Christ.”  2) It is thought that this “Mary” is the Mary we celebrate today—not Mary from Magdala, but Mary, the Tower (of faith) by which we can all stand!  3) It is this same Mary, formerly “Mary of Magdala,” now reclaimed as “Mary the Tower of Faith,” who was faithful to the end, at the cross, and who was the first to witness the Resurrection, and proclaim it to the men, which we read in the gospel today.

   Now, I think you can see that if Mary was lifted up as a “Tower of Faith” –given this title because of her actions following Jesus, this will be a problem for the men in the years after Jesus lived who wanted to control the narrative and uplift Peter’s confession over Mary’s –which again, we must remember, was the same! 

   And uplifting Peter and downplaying Mary was accomplished by blending the John and Luke texts to be a nice story about one family, Martha, Mary, and Lazarus and can more easily recede into history.  If “Martha” confesses that Jesus is the Christ and Mary is seen as an impressionable, starry-eyed, young woman who merely sits at Jesus’ feet, we cannot easily “connect the dots” to see Mary instead as a strong, prophetic, and courageous woman who assisted Jesus throughout his ministry, followed him to the cross and witnessed the Resurrection. Nor can we clearly see Mary, or any woman called by our brother, Jesus, the Christ, as natural-born leaders, called to serve at our altars, because they too image God every bit as clearly as any man does!

  Thinking about the changing of Scripture to accommodate men makes me believe even more firmly in Scripture scholar, Sandra Schneider’s statement that, “Scripture was written by men, about men and for men!”

   Now if you are still skeptical about this news, I would want you to know that Elizabeth Schrader wrote her master’s dissertation on her research of the true Mary, and it was picked up by Harvard Divinity School and a professional article followed.  Additionally, Nestle Aland Theology Group in Germany, known for being very “stuffy” read Schrader’s work and simply said, “We might need to change something here.”

   And friends, I too believe this new exegesis to be so, whether the Scripture texts are ever changed or not, as it has been my experience and that of many other women called to ordination within our Church that our God, shown so beautifully to the world in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, one who was constantly turning things on their heads, had no problem seeing women as the image of the divine, nor should we!

   Finally, think what our Church could be if, rather than, “built on Peter the Rock,” which seems to be more about him and others following him, doing their bidding, it was built upon Mary, the Tower of Faith and all, each of us standing with her.  Amen? Amen!