E
Emmy
Guest
Has any of you read the Gospel according to Mary Magdalene?
Emmy
Emmy
- Status
R
rfk
Guest
Yes, and your point would be… what?
Are you also aware it is not scripture? For any who are curious about the Gospel of Mary, you can read it here: gnosis.org/library/marygosp.htm
Personally, I don’t think it has much to say.
E
Emmy
Guest
Yes I am, I do find it very interesting she doesn´t say
anything bad about Christ only loving words.
Emmy
anything bad about Christ only loving words.
Emmy
Y
yves
Guest
Something else that has struck me – although I do not presume to know the heart and mind of God – is that when Jesus spoke to His mother and to St. John from the cross, He did not address St. Mary Magdalene. If they were married, wouldn’t we expect to read it, “Behold your daughter,” just as much as “Behold your son?”
Anyway, the idea that Christ might have been so thoroughly human has a rather arian slant, doesn’t it?
God bless.
Anyway, the idea that Christ might have been so thoroughly human has a rather arian slant, doesn’t it?
God bless.
A
Authorkat
Guest
I agree. I have read that the erroneous ideas about Mary Magdalene started with the “lost gospels.” There’s an article about them in the latest issue of “St. Anthony’s Magazine.” These “gospels” were not accepted by the Church because of the errors in them.
M
Mike_O
Guest
Theologically speaking, the Da Vinci Code-esque theory that St. Magdalene had carnal relations with the Lord is ludicrous.
We believe as Catholics that God became man to die for our sins that we might partake of eternal life.
Besides mentioning the obvious point that an event of such importance as Christ’s wedding would have been mentioned in the Gospel (I have heard Margaret Starbird say that the wedding in Cana was Christ’s wedding because the “bridegroom” that everyonr congratulated was Christ himself; where there is a more illogical, unsubstantiated claim, I have not found it), the Lord Himself said that a state of celibacy was superior to a state of marriage for those who could accept the teaching.
In a way, then, it would have been a DEFILING of the Lord’s sacrifice, EVEN IF HE HAD MARRIED, to have carnal relations with another person.
As Catholics we should not simply say “I don’t think this happened.” Uncertainty is not worthy of God. We should KNOW this has not happened because it did NOT happen. Had this happened, as St. Paul said of the possibility that Christ did not actually die for our sins, then our faith would mean nothing. But our faith DOES mean a great deal because this did NOT happen.
Dan Brown and his like have ZERO evidence. Brown postulates wildly inaccurate theories and research of modern academic feminist “scholarship” which is not scholarship at all but twisted suppositions masking a clear agenda.
Notice that people like Brown and Starbird place tremendous faith in fradulent Gnostic forgeries of the 2nd and 3rd centuries while DISCOUNTING the EARLIER true Gospels about Christ.
Any historian knows, by simple mathematics, that if you have an event occurring around 30 A.D., you place more trust in an account written in 40 A.D. then you do in 150 A.D.
Yet these people do exactly the opposite.
I pray for everyone who reads the Da Vinci Code and actually believes it, because it is a piece of trash if ever one was written.
We believe as Catholics that God became man to die for our sins that we might partake of eternal life.
Besides mentioning the obvious point that an event of such importance as Christ’s wedding would have been mentioned in the Gospel (I have heard Margaret Starbird say that the wedding in Cana was Christ’s wedding because the “bridegroom” that everyonr congratulated was Christ himself; where there is a more illogical, unsubstantiated claim, I have not found it), the Lord Himself said that a state of celibacy was superior to a state of marriage for those who could accept the teaching.
In a way, then, it would have been a DEFILING of the Lord’s sacrifice, EVEN IF HE HAD MARRIED, to have carnal relations with another person.
As Catholics we should not simply say “I don’t think this happened.” Uncertainty is not worthy of God. We should KNOW this has not happened because it did NOT happen. Had this happened, as St. Paul said of the possibility that Christ did not actually die for our sins, then our faith would mean nothing. But our faith DOES mean a great deal because this did NOT happen.
Dan Brown and his like have ZERO evidence. Brown postulates wildly inaccurate theories and research of modern academic feminist “scholarship” which is not scholarship at all but twisted suppositions masking a clear agenda.
Notice that people like Brown and Starbird place tremendous faith in fradulent Gnostic forgeries of the 2nd and 3rd centuries while DISCOUNTING the EARLIER true Gospels about Christ.
Any historian knows, by simple mathematics, that if you have an event occurring around 30 A.D., you place more trust in an account written in 40 A.D. then you do in 150 A.D.
Yet these people do exactly the opposite.
I pray for everyone who reads the Da Vinci Code and actually believes it, because it is a piece of trash if ever one was written.
R
rfk
Guest
Mike O:
However, speaking as a married person, I do not agree that carnal relations between married spouses defile anything. If, theoretically speaking, Our Lord had chosen to marry and had consumated that marriage, if would have defiled nothing.
If the sacrifice of our Lord on the cross is the ultimate expression of Christ’s love for the Father, then I think only someone who does not truly appreciate the beauty of the ultimate expression of married love could claim that it was a defilement.
My opinion, worth what you paid for it.
Well, first of all, I’'ll start with making it perfectly clear that I believe the Lord was not married to Mary Magdalene. I believe the conventional Catholic position that the Lord lived a celibate life.
However, speaking as a married person, I do not agree that carnal relations between married spouses defile anything. If, theoretically speaking, Our Lord had chosen to marry and had consumated that marriage, if would have defiled nothing.
If the sacrifice of our Lord on the cross is the ultimate expression of Christ’s love for the Father, then I think only someone who does not truly appreciate the beauty of the ultimate expression of married love could claim that it was a defilement.
My opinion, worth what you paid for it.
K
Ken
Guest
Mike O:
Describing sexual relations as defiling rather than edifying is an interesting perspective. Whay are sexual relations defiling?
M
Mamamull
Guest
When a man and a woman enter into the sacrment of marriage and superficially join into the true union of the Holy Trinity – then sexual intercourse when it is practiced under both unitive and procreative bonums there is nothing wrong with it.
When sexual intercourse becomes self-gratification instead of self-donation there is a problem. Many in our society do not even realize that sex is more than mere pleasure for them. Some may enjoy pleasing their partner, but still the concept of self-donation is nil.
Even though many people think the old celibate man in Rome, our Holy Father, has no concept of what sex is or should be, I agree with Christopher West and think our Holy Father has a beautiful and mystical view of our marital unions.
I have been married for 18 years and finally heard about the Theology of the Body. I also read Familiaris Consortio where marriage and sexual union are compared to the Eucharist – the total, free, loving, real, life-giving self-donation of a couple is symobilic of Christ’s ulitmate gift of His life for us.
So sex isn’t bad when it is used for the right purpose and between two married people.
That I am infertile makes me so sad that I can not enter into being a co-creator with God of a new life. However, we have and will adopt again and we can thank Birth moms over and over for their gift of life.
Now, Mary Magdalene was at the foot of the cross with the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Apostle, whom Jesus loved. I have prayed to be a true and loving disciple such as Mary Magdalene. How many men fled and hid, but this woman, who was scorned, remained true and did not let fear of her love for Jesus keep her from being with him.
Those who defile the Magdalene and our Savior may not realize how much damage they are doing – or having done to them – but I can say the Satan truly despises the Blessed Virgin Mary who defied him totally. I presume that Maray Magdalene also gets his hatred for turning to Jesus with total love and abandon. I presume he is still trying to have sins used against her when Jesus redeemed them all.
At Fr. Stan Fortuna’s site, www.francescoproductions.com there are liyrics and I think a free mp3 of his “Theology of the Body”
"There is a plan, God did design, to make you shine. It is divine.
Get with the flow so you can know how God will bless when you say “Yes” to sex.
It is six minutes of intensive and sometimes fun lyrics that does cover the high points of the Theology of the Body.
Familiaris Consortio isn’t a light read, but I have learned so much from it. I would recommend it to see where the Holy Father can teach us about how sex and love and marriage are all ways to know God.
Pax et bonum,
Mamamull
When sexual intercourse becomes self-gratification instead of self-donation there is a problem. Many in our society do not even realize that sex is more than mere pleasure for them. Some may enjoy pleasing their partner, but still the concept of self-donation is nil.
Even though many people think the old celibate man in Rome, our Holy Father, has no concept of what sex is or should be, I agree with Christopher West and think our Holy Father has a beautiful and mystical view of our marital unions.
I have been married for 18 years and finally heard about the Theology of the Body. I also read Familiaris Consortio where marriage and sexual union are compared to the Eucharist – the total, free, loving, real, life-giving self-donation of a couple is symobilic of Christ’s ulitmate gift of His life for us.
So sex isn’t bad when it is used for the right purpose and between two married people.
That I am infertile makes me so sad that I can not enter into being a co-creator with God of a new life. However, we have and will adopt again and we can thank Birth moms over and over for their gift of life.
Now, Mary Magdalene was at the foot of the cross with the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Apostle, whom Jesus loved. I have prayed to be a true and loving disciple such as Mary Magdalene. How many men fled and hid, but this woman, who was scorned, remained true and did not let fear of her love for Jesus keep her from being with him.
Those who defile the Magdalene and our Savior may not realize how much damage they are doing – or having done to them – but I can say the Satan truly despises the Blessed Virgin Mary who defied him totally. I presume that Maray Magdalene also gets his hatred for turning to Jesus with total love and abandon. I presume he is still trying to have sins used against her when Jesus redeemed them all.
At Fr. Stan Fortuna’s site, www.francescoproductions.com there are liyrics and I think a free mp3 of his “Theology of the Body”
"There is a plan, God did design, to make you shine. It is divine.
Get with the flow so you can know how God will bless when you say “Yes” to sex.
It is six minutes of intensive and sometimes fun lyrics that does cover the high points of the Theology of the Body.
Familiaris Consortio isn’t a light read, but I have learned so much from it. I would recommend it to see where the Holy Father can teach us about how sex and love and marriage are all ways to know God.
Pax et bonum,
Mamamull
M
Mike_O
Guest
I think you have misread my post. If the thought itself of Our Lord having carnal relations with a human being does not repulse you, think of the theological implications.
Christ was fully God and fully man. As He was fully God, He loved each of his children unconditionally and as equals. Marrying and having intercourse with one of his disciples would certainly violate the unconditionality and equality of divine love.
Further, the very idea is LUDICROUS. God having relations with people? Absurd, now and always.
Again, I sincerely believe you have misread my post. I do not believe I implied that married love is defilement. To say Our Lord, who expressly stated (I do not have the verse at hand but if you need it I will find it) that the single, celibate state is superior to the married state, marrying and having carnal relations with ANYONE WOULD be a DEFILEMENT, not to mention hypocrisy.
Obviously God does not lie. If someone or something lies, it is not God.
I agree with you entirely that married love is a wonderful expression of love and a gift of God.
But in this case, it is profaning Christ’s sacrifice for the reasons I described above.
M
Mamamull
Guest
Well put!
Pax et bonum,
Mamamull
K
Ken
Guest
Mike O:
I think we understood you perfectly.
C
condan
Guest
What strikes me in the whole debate is not that the marital act between two married people is “defilement” (Of course not and I didn’t perceive the post that way but that’s just me…) but the thought of the marital act between God and another person.
Why would God send the Holy Ghost at the Annunciation and then get married to Mary Magdelene? Seems like a contradictory strategy.
The whole concept is meant to de-deify religion and ultimately render it useless.
R
reggie
Guest
I have to say that I am not offended or put off by thought that Mary Magdalene could have been the adulteress. I think it is a beautiful example of Jesus’ love for sinners and how they are to be forgiven. Jesus saved her life, it makes sense then that she would then become one of His most loyal followers. And that further, she would stay with Him until the bitter end. When someone is mired in sin and lost and then Jesus comes to them and says “Your sins are forgiven” that person usually becomes one of the most devout Christians and ardent followers of Him. Mary Magdalene was most certainly that. I can identify with her. Her love for Jesus was not sexual, it was that of a saved sinner, and to imply anything else is shameful. So, I think that it does no disservice to Mary Magdalene to be thought of in that way, especially if we hold her up as an example of a faithful disciple.
T
TCE
Guest
I think that just to " imply " that Our Lord and Reedemer could be tempt by sins of the flesh is to this degree wrong. We are Catholics and we should not judge or imply any ill about Jesus our Lord. No doubt should come into our minds concerning his conduct. Am appall just reading this. Isn’t it enough that he die for our sins? Why do we crucify him continuously with these types of thoughts?
Regarding Mary Magdalene, I read that she was cast with being a prostitute first because of the town where she lived. It was a town of ill repute, known to be a place where Roman soldiers will go and enjoy themselves. Also because she was seeing at the entrance of the town several times welcoming strangers, a known sign of the life of a prostitute. But again no one is certain of this. She had no relatives in this town which also mark her as being incline to do dubious jobs for her sole survival.
We also have to remember that Jesus liberated women, in what sense? that they were able to pray along with men. Well at least when he ( Jesus ) was present with them. It was prohibited for a woman to listen to the teachings of Rabbi’s at the Synagogue or temple. They were able to do offerings with a male relative i,e. spouse for cleansing purposes and to present the first born in the temple. But women were not in any way or form free to practice religion along with men. In Jesus eyes they were equal for the teachings of God. What a wonderful revelation that was for those times where society rule women to be inferior.
Regarding Mary Magdalene, I read that she was cast with being a prostitute first because of the town where she lived. It was a town of ill repute, known to be a place where Roman soldiers will go and enjoy themselves. Also because she was seeing at the entrance of the town several times welcoming strangers, a known sign of the life of a prostitute. But again no one is certain of this. She had no relatives in this town which also mark her as being incline to do dubious jobs for her sole survival.
We also have to remember that Jesus liberated women, in what sense? that they were able to pray along with men. Well at least when he ( Jesus ) was present with them. It was prohibited for a woman to listen to the teachings of Rabbi’s at the Synagogue or temple. They were able to do offerings with a male relative i,e. spouse for cleansing purposes and to present the first born in the temple. But women were not in any way or form free to practice religion along with men. In Jesus eyes they were equal for the teachings of God. What a wonderful revelation that was for those times where society rule women to be inferior.
K
Ken
Guest
When did marriage and spousal sexual relations become a sin of the flesh?
T
TCE
Guest
. When the marriage is not bless by the Church it becomes sin of the flesh. When you married a divorcee , sins of the flesh, when the spouse is having sexual relations out of the marriage… … etc… etc… etc…
I do not see your answer to my post to make sense. Can you please clarify your point?
L
larryo
Guest
Mike O:
I couldn’t have said it better myself. Good reply.
O
OhioBob
Guest
Mike O:
I haven’t read Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel’s book yet, but I have seen exerpts from it. It looks like a more detailed analysis than Amy’s and equally good. Catholic Answers has a deal - the book and a “special report” included - running now on the web site.
I agree with most of the sentiments posted in this thread. While the tradition seems to be that Mary of Magdala was the woman who had the seven demons cast out - the prostitute - I don’t believe that the Church has defined that officially.
As far my opinion of Saint Mary Magdalene, the Church has chosen to canonize her. That’s good enough for me.
There are a couple of good books out debunking the Da Vinci Code from a Catholic perspective. Amy Welborn’s book is an easy read and counters the “Code” pretty effectively.
I haven’t read Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel’s book yet, but I have seen exerpts from it. It looks like a more detailed analysis than Amy’s and equally good. Catholic Answers has a deal - the book and a “special report” included - running now on the web site.
I agree with most of the sentiments posted in this thread. While the tradition seems to be that Mary of Magdala was the woman who had the seven demons cast out - the prostitute - I don’t believe that the Church has defined that officially.
As far my opinion of Saint Mary Magdalene, the Church has chosen to canonize her. That’s good enough for me.
U
usherMike
Guest
To me it comes down to the value Jesus put on being a good husband & father,to take care of and provide for their family. esus knew the life he would be living and that would go agaist the duties he expected of others . So I know he never would have married anyone or of had a family he knew he wouldnt be around to take care of.
- Status