Jesus and Mary Magdalene

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maddalena
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Traditionally speaking, Mary has always been identified with the sexually immoral woman in John 8, and I admit how much I love this tradition (there ARE scriptural reasons for this, by the way, which I think is fairly convincing, even if not “proof”).

When I think of Mary and Jesus’ relationship, it stands out as a special one to me because, when the whole world stood ready to condemn Mary–ready to kill even–Jesus did not condemn but loved. He looked her in the eye and said, “Has any condemned you?” “No,” she replied (crying I know), “no one.” Their eyes meet, and he says, “Neither do I…”

I imagine that Mary felt like there was no one in the whole world like this guy, and this is why she loved him so much and followed him. He rescued her and loved in even in her sin. It was for this that she stopped and followed.

I imagine that, she being at his Crucifixion, she was crying more than anyone, perhaps, save his own Mother.

Mary Magdalene is also one of my favorite saints, and I feel like she should be the patronness of those coming from sexual immorality and addiction and hurt and of those that feel unlovable–because she proves that it’s not so.

My two cents.
 
I think the woman that Jesus intervened was not Magdalene but a woman caught in adultery…she was about to be stoned. Magdalene was unmarried and could not commit adutery.

According to Anne Catherine Emmerich Magdalene was a prostitute early in life. Her estate was called. “magdalena” and it was an affluent home located next to the Roman Army encampment. She plied her trade there much of the time.

She wore gaudy jewellry and makeup and had an entourage of a sort. Do not forget, Magdalene was a sister to Lazarus and Martha (and another sister named Mary). The sister Mary had died sometime afterr the Resurrection.

After the Resurrection the Temple high priests wanted to kill Lazarus because Jesus had raised him from the dead.

Lazarus, knowing this, took his sisters Martha and Magdalene to leave Judea thus avoid execution.

They travelled to the European Continent and landed, it is believed, around Marseilles, a coastal city (Gaul/France). Lazarus had business skills and provided for his sisters.

To this day Paris has three streets named after them: Rue de Lazar; Rue de Marta; Rue de Magdalena. They are close to one another.

Mary Magdalene is a great saint and we all can identify with her because she sinned greatly…I know I have.

There is a book on extracts from Anne Catherine Emmerichs writings named, “Mary Magdalene.”

I bought my copy a few years ago from:

spiritdaily.com

They have a book purchase click on. It is a network of information that concerns Christians in general and Catholics, in particular.

Hope you found this interesting. I write from memory and the book is so engrossing I retain almost all of it. Magdalene is very special.

John :knight1:
 
MaggieOH said:
There is no evidence that Mary of Magdala was the adulteress who was brought to Jesus as a trick. The woman in that motif is another woman.

On the other hand there is strong evidence that Mary of Magdala was indeed a prostitute, and she is named as the woman out of whom seven devils were cast out. She is the woman who washed the feet of Jesus with her tears and then dried his feet with her hair. It follows logically in Luke’s Gospel, where the woman is forgiven and then she is amongst the other women accompanying Jesus.

Maggie
Click to expand...
You are so right, MaggieOH. The woman about to be stoned was caught in ADULTERY. To commit an adulterous act one has to be married. Mary Magdalene was NOT married and therefore could NOT commit adultery.
 
johnstown_johnn said:
… Da Vinci Code does NOT have an iota of spiritual understanding. It attempts to denigrate Jesus’ divinity.:knight1:
Click to expand...
And His Mission , to reveal The Father…

His address to the disciples at The Last Supper is as ‘children’ …

St.John as the youngest of the disciples probably realed the best to our Lord’s Fatherly Heart and is the beloved disciple …

After The Resurrection, could He be not telling St. Magdalene - to not hold onto Him in His previous role as ’ Rabbi ’ …teacher …
He has shed His Blood for the children …and will be ascending soon to The Father …to send us His Spirit …so that we recognise
The Father’s Love …

The serpent had come in The Garden , with the lie thatThe Father does not love us enough …for it knew that breaking that bond , we will turn to other fathers …

He is still at that …

Yet, every child of His, who have seen the extent of His mercy knows - what a Father is …and does …

May The Mother of our Lord help us all , as she did for St. Magdalene , to see the Truth !
 
According to Anne Catherine Emmerich the encounter between Jesus and Magdalene was more than meets the eye. Let me explain:
Code: 
When Magdalene recognized Our Lord by his utterance 
of her name, "Mary" she was impulsed to embrace His feet. 

Jesus admonished her by saying, "Do not touch Me as I have 
not yet ascended to the Father."
When Jesus came from the tomb he walked with great effort and all of His stripes and flesh wounds and open flesh along with the pierced hands, feet and side along with the open scalp from the Crown of Thorns. Almost “zomby-like.”

He emerged with all of his wounds so that He might show them to the Father. The Father, on seeing His Son’s wounds, bestowed REDEMPTION for all mankind through His Son.

Jesus had to appear UNTOUCHED and uncorrupted by living human hands lest they (His wounds) be despoiled.

So much we read in the Gospel although it is sufficient even cursorily understood, is detailed by the saints of the Church in their visions. The Gospels become even MORE a wonder. :knight1:
 
Having read the book Magadalene , from the same author (unsure if the Resurrection scene in it is an abridged version, even though it doesn’t seem so ) somewhat puzzled that the above scenario is not mentioned …

It does say that the author ’ has only an indistinct remembrance’ of our Lord’s explanation of His words to St .Magdalene ; something of the nature that ‘she seemed possesed of the idea that He was alive just as before and that everything was as before’. ( Easy to realise her mistake when we think of the raising of her brother Lazarus !)

If the above also took place , one explanation could be how our Lord often has appeared to saints , as the Suffering Victim, offering all the Merits of His Passion…for the cause of truthful justice …for the infinite debt of sin …so that there could be peace again …and how , in the proper God ordained order of things, women are not part of That Holy Priesthood !

Blessings !
 
No! No! No! No!

There are so many misconceptions about this wonderful Saint. There are also many good books about her (but you have to be careful that they aren’t coming from Wicca, or New Age, or Davinci Code, etc. sources).

She was NOT the adulteress dragged before Jesus. She also probably was NOT the woman who washed Jesus’ feet with her tears and dried them with her hair. (A commentary that I read links that woman with prostitution and commented “How would this woman have even gotten into the Pharisee’s home if the servants were not already familiar with her from prior visits to the master of the house?”)

The only thing the Bible says in this regard is that Jesus cast seven demons from her. This can be literally interpreted, or it could be that she had epilepsy, or even really bad PMS! There is nothing which links her with being a prostitute. This came from an error centuries ago, where she was lumped together in a sermon with the other women.

What we can learn just by casually reading the Scriptures is that she was a devoted follower of Jesus. Since she is the first to whom the Risen Lord revealed Himself, I think we can take that to show their relationship – not anything sexual, but a beautiful, chaste friendship such as we will have with each other in Heaven. I believe that their relationship was so special because Mary Magdalen had exactly what Jesus wants from us: a deep, total, committed love for Him.

We can also learn more by reading Scripture commentaries, and again, there are very many good ones out there - just be careful that you read something from a Catholic source.

I have read that she is one of the few people in the New Testament of whom she is ALWAYS referred to as Mary of Magdala, which indicates that she just wasn’t one of the other Marys (Mary was a very common name then as now), but someone who was very important. Some Scripture scholars say that she was one of the most influential women in the early Church, and was somewhat wealthy and greatly supported the early Church. Her high position in the early Church is indicated by the Scripture writers’ use of her complete identity: “Mary of Magdala. Mary Magdalene. Not just any Mary. Not Mary the Mother of God. But Mary of Magdala who is so very important to us in the early Church. Mary of Magdala who supports the early Church. Mary Magdalene whom the Lord Jesus healed, Mary Magdalene who can tell us so much about the Lord since He chose her to be His intimate friend.”

One of the most beautiful paintings I have ever seen is located on the wall of the refectory of the Passionist Monastery in Jamaica, NY. It is a HUGE painting of the Blessed Mother, St. John and Mary Magdalene walking home after the Crucifixion. The three empty crosses are already far in the distance. If I recall correctly, St. John has his arm around our grief-stricken Mother. However, Mary Magdalene has paused a second and is looking over her shoulder at the empty Cross. On her face is such a mixture of sadness and hope that I have no idea how the artist portrayed it so perfectly, but it is one of the most moving images that I have ever seen.

I think in our own lives, when we are confronted with seemingly insurmountable sadness, we can look to Mary of Magdala, who has experienced the same thing, and ask her to help us not to lose hope, as she never did. She was a good Jewish woman who wanted to anoint the Body of her very best Friend – but would she have risen so early, determined to complete the anointing despite knowing she could never move the large stone by herself, if there had been a spark of hope alive in her heart?

She is one of my favorite Saints, and so I like it when people understand more of who she was and not have a mistaken opinion of her.

“I wish that my heart could beat, that I could live and breathe only for Jesus, I wish that my tongue could utter no other name than that of Jesus; that my eye could see only Jesus; that my pen could write only about Jesus, and that my thoughts could soar to nothing but Jesus. I have often wondered where on earth there might be something on which I could center my love. But neither on earth nor in heaven do I find any such thing but only my beloved Jesus… I am the fruit of your passion, Jesus, born of your wounds. O Jesus, seek me in love; I no longer possess anything; you have stolen my heart…” - St. Gemma Galgani
 
Mary Magdalene, according to Anne Catherine Emmerich, had a dissolute past and was a prostitute (a very affluent one) with an entourage.

She heard the Master speak by happenstance the first time and her soul was stirred.

She became a follower of His not long after. Mary had three siblings (she was the youngest) Lazarus, whom Jesus rose from the dead; Marth and another sister named Mary…to distinguish the latter Mary from Magdalene she was referred to as “Mary the silent.”

Recall the passage when Jesus went to visit the home of Lazarus and Martha complained that she was doing all the work to prepare a some sort of meal. She called to Jesus and said that Mary (the silent) is not helping but, instead, sat near the Lord to listen to Him.

Jesus reponded to Martha, "Martha, you are so troubled by these things…Mary had chosen the most important (listening to His words).

Magdalene was not present at that time; the elder Mary (the silent) died not long after Jesus crucifixion (even possibly before).

Lazarus was a target of the Temple high priest to be killed since he was a living miracle by being raised from the dead.

Lazarus, knowing he was a target for assassination gathered his two sisters Martha nad Magdalene and left Judea and set sail for Gaul (France) and landed in Marseilles (commonly held belief).

They lived out there lives in France and to this day three streets in Paris are named after the three: Rue de Lazar’: Rue de Marta and Rue de Magdalene.

Magdalene sinned greatly and therefore is the patron saint of hopeless sinners as well. She sets an example that Heaven is always reachable even in our final hours of life…it reveals His infinite mercy.

The bible says Jesus expelled seven demons…I believe it was “demons” and not a form of epilepsy…how many varieties of “epilepsy” are there anyway?

Yours in Christ,

John
 
The writings of Anne Catherine Emmerich are a private revelation and as such I would believe the Bible over her writings which have always been, in my opinion, a little far-fetched.

I have the highest respect for Anne Catherine Emmerich; I do not doubt her holiness nor her sincerity. However, personally, I take the words of the Bible over hers. I also give more credence to the brilliant Catholic Biblical scholars and historians through whose writings my opinions have been formed. I did not come up with the idea “epilepsy” on my own (and there are different forms of epilepsy - how many, I do not know as I am not a neurologist.) Additionally, as my original post stated, they may very well have been demons, but there is debate on the subject.

There are things in the Scriptures which we can’t understand without reading and/or studying the works of those who have dedicated their whole lives to the study of the Bible, the ancient languages, Biblical history, etc. etc. A good example of this is the Protestant assertion that the Blessed Mother had other children after she gave birth to Jesus, which they insist on clinging to although those who have studied the ancient languages have told us that there was not a word for “cousin” and so close family members such as what we would call cousins were called brothers or sisters.

I’m sorry if anyone disagrees with me, but I take the words of the scholars over the words of Anne Catherine Emmerich.

“I wish that my heart could beat, that I could live and breathe only for Jesus, I wish that my tongue could utter no other name than that of Jesus; that my eye could see only Jesus; that my pen could write only about Jesus, and that my thoughts could soar to nothing but Jesus. I have often wondered where on earth there might be something on which I could center my love. But neither on earth nor in heaven do I find any such thing but only my beloved Jesus… I am the fruit of your passion, Jesus, born of your wounds. O Jesus, seek me in love; I no longer possess anything; you have stolen my heart…” - St. Gemma Galgani
 
:knight1: Anne Catherine Emmerich (ACE) never contradicts the bible. In some Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have some variances in what they write on the same event. ACE is recommended reading by the Church…she is a venerable and in the process of being cannonized; her details are not in the same category of "private revelations " which is not allowed in this Forum.

Her voluminous books are even in the Vatican Library also in numerous convent’s libraries (Mel Gibson discovered her “Passion” in a convent library). ACE fills in beutifully details of bible passages to enable us to envision those events as if we were actually present…and thus appreciate even more those events.

We ALL believe in the bible…ACE especially. ACE had the stigmata; this is an outward sign of Heaven asigning her to report all that she was shown.

ACE is NOT a maverick or a schismatic or a heretic…she is a VENERABLE in the Church at this point in time. She was a very holy servant of Christ.

You have the option to ignore and even disbelieve her accountings but just what is not believeable? There are NO contradictions whatsoever.:knight1:
 
GemmaRose said:
The writings of Anne Catherine Emmerich are a private revelation and as such I would believe the Bible over her writings which have always been, in my opinion, a little far-fetched.

I have the highest respect for Anne Catherine Emmerich; I do not doubt her holiness nor her sincerity. However, personally, I take the words of the Bible over hers. I also give more credence to the brilliant Catholic Biblical scholars and historians through whose writings my opinions have been formed. I did not come up with the idea “epilepsy” on my own (and there are different forms of epilepsy - how many, I do not know as I am not a neurologist.) Additionally, as my original post stated, they may very well have been demons, but there is debate on the subject.

There are things in the Scriptures which we can’t understand without reading and/or studying the works of those who have dedicated their whole lives to the study of the Bible, the ancient languages, Biblical history, etc. etc. A good example of this is the Protestant assertion that the Blessed Mother had other children after she gave birth to Jesus, which they insist on clinging to although those who have studied the ancient languages have told us that there was not a word for “cousin” and so close family members such as what we would call cousins were called brothers or sisters.

I’m sorry if anyone disagrees with me, but I take the words of the scholars over the words of Anne Catherine Emmerich.

“I wish that my heart could beat, that I could live and breathe only for Jesus, I wish that my tongue could utter no other name than that of Jesus; that my eye could see only Jesus; that my pen could write only about Jesus, and that my thoughts could soar to nothing but Jesus. I have often wondered where on earth there might be something on which I could center my love. But neither on earth nor in heaven do I find any such thing but only my beloved Jesus… I am the fruit of your passion, Jesus, born of your wounds. O Jesus, seek me in love; I no longer possess anything; you have stolen my heart…” - St. Gemma Galgani
Click to expand...
On the one hand you refute that devils were not what was cast out of Magdalene but rather “epilepsy.”

The “epilepsy” notion is from “biblical scholars” and is a theory of theirs…but the BIBLE states it was "DEVILS.’

That leaves us to ask “Are the scholars correct?” or “Is the bible telling the occasion accurately?”

I don’t know who these “scholars” are since we have all sorts especially in these days. We ALL have the option to agree or dis agree with “scholars” but we ALL believe in the Gospels.

SEVEN forms of epilepsy? I don’t think so…and I am NOT a scholar.
 
  1. I am not refuting anything. I said, twice, it very well may have been devils. I also posit that Biblical scholars have mentioned that many medical conditions unknown to the ancient world, but identified by modern science, were referred to as “devils”.
  2. The Bible also states that if our right hand sins, we should cut it off… etc.; if your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out… etc. If you believe, literally, everything in the Bible, then you must be as sinless as the Blessed Mother, since I assume you type your posts with two hands, and view them with two eyes. Since I do no know you, I am not making a judgment, and if you are missing a hand or an eye, I apologize.
  3. The “scholars” that I refer to are all respected Catholic ones – Donald Senior, C.P. is the first name that comes to mind. They are far more learned than I, and possibly far more learned than you, but again, since I do not know you, I am only guessing, and not making a judgment, although you do admit to not being a scholar.
  4. Again, I repeat, I am not a neurologist, and have no idea how many forms of epilepsy there are, and since I really don’t care, I’m not going to look it up. If you are so interested in how many forms there are, I assume you can find that information on the internet.
My initial post was to “stick up for” the reputation of a dear Saint, St. Mary Magdalene, who is not identified as a prostitute in any Book of the Bible – not to argue with you, who seems to put more credence on private revelation than the Bible.

*“I wish that my heart could beat, that I could live and breathe only for Jesus, I wish that my tongue could utter no other name than that of Jesus; that my eye could see only Jesus; that my pen could write only about Jesus, and that my thoughts could soar to nothing but Jesus. I have often wondered where on earth there might be something on which I could center my love. But neither on earth nor in heaven do I find any such thing but only my beloved Jesus… I am the fruit of your passion, Jesus, born of your wounds. O Jesus, seek me in love; I no longer possess anything; you have stolen my heart…” *- St. Gemma Galgani
 
GemmaRose said:
  1. I am not refuting anything. I said, twice, it very well may have been devils. I also posit that Biblical scholars have mentioned that many medical conditions unknown to the ancient world, but identified by modern science, were referred to as “devils”.
If it was a medical condition wouldn’t Our Lord know it was so? He cast out seven devils and that was His intention. On another occasion Jesus, before casting out the devils commanded them to give their names, the voice within the possessed person (devil) said, “We are Legion.”"
  1. The Bible also states that if our right hand sins, we should cut it off… etc.; if your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out… etc. If you believe, literally, everything in the Bible, then you must be as sinless as the Blessed Mother, since I assume you type your posts with two hands, and view them with two eyes. Since I do no know you, I am not making a judgment, and if youare missing a hand or an eye, I apologize.
[BJesus spoke in parables and in figures of speech. He did not mean "cutting of one’s hands: in a literal way No one takes that literally.]
Click to expand...
  1. The “scholars” that I refer to are all respected Catholic ones – Donald Senior, C.P. is the first name that comes to mind. They are far more learned than I, and possibly far more learned than you, but again, since I do not know you, I am only guessing, and not making a judgment, although you do admit to not being a scholar.
Scholars are scholars; the woods are full of them. Rarely do they agree amongst themselves. The “epilepsy” presumption is just that. We are NOT dutiybound to believe all or even one of their theories.
  1. Again, I repeat, I am not a neurologist, and have no idea how many forms of epilepsy there are, and since I really don’t care, I’m not going to look it up. If you are so interested in how many forms there are, I assume you can find that information on the internet.
** We know that demonic possession existed in those days as well as today. Even the Temple high priests denigrated Jesus’ power to expell demons by saying He does it with the power from Hell.

Jesus responded “A house divided against itself will fall.”
**

My initial post was to “stick up for” the reputation of a dear Saint, St. Mary Magdalene, who is not identified as a prostitute in any Book of the Bible – not to argue with you, who seems to put more credence on private revelation than the Bible.

*“I wish that my heart could beat, that I could live and breathe only for Jesus, I wish that my tongue could utter no other name than that of Jesus; that my eye could see only Jesus; that my pen could write only about Jesus, and that my thoughts could soar to nothing but Jesus. I have often wondered where on earth there might be something on which I could center my love. But neither on earth nor in heaven do I find any such thing but only my beloved Jesus… I am the fruit of your passion, Jesus, born of your wounds. O Jesus, seek me in love; I no longer possess anything; you have stolen my heart…” *- St. Gemma Galgani

**I appreciate your last paragraph/prayer…thank you.

Yours in Christ, John**
 
Emmy said:
I agree I think it is very offensive.
Now she is mentioned a few times by name in the
Gospel and there is also Mary and Martha and the woman
who washed Jesus feet with her hair. I can´t find
any proof that that is really St. Mary Magdalena.
so maybe she is?
I just wonder that cause why name her a few times
by name (Mary Magdalena), and other times by
Mary (there were more Mary´s that time) or just woman.

Emmy
Click to expand...
Mary Magdalene had a sister also named Mary. This sister was called, “Mary the silent.” This is the Mary that sat at Jesus; feet listening to Him while her sister Martha complained she was doing all the preparations for food spread with no help from her sister Mary.

Lazarus was their brother. Magdalene was not present at that occasion.
 
Maddalena said:
Ok, Mary Magdalene is my favorite saint, and it really bugs me when people are like, “Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married” or, “Mary Magdalene was pregnant with Jesus’s baby.” One of the reasons why she is my favorite is because I think it’s really amazing how close Jesus and Mary M. were FRIEND-WISE. I had never seen an instance where two people were so close unless they were family or married. My question is what started all of those stupid rumors about them being lovers? Did it start when that movie the Last Temptation of Christ came out? Or have people always wondered that?
Click to expand...
I’ve heard it started in France with a family who claimed relationship…however, it doesn’t really matter where it started - it’s unfounded…I’ve researched the same texts they use to say it and here’s the biggest flaw I found: In Gospel of Mary Magdalene, it says Peter asked “why does Jesus kiss her more than us? Does He love her more?”…they jump on this and say - look He kisses her…well, let add some logic…this is one quesiton my husband’s friends don’t have to ask! HOWEVER, if I were and equal student, a friend like them, THAN they may wonder…
I feel the same way about Mary Magdalene, in fact, I just released my debut novel about her, celebrating their friendship and her faith in Jesus…it’s on amazon.com, barnesandnoble.com, and others - or look at my website www.womanredeemednovel.com…I think you and I are on the same page with her and that you would enjoy it!
 
I visited Amazon and read a synopsis of your book. If I presume correctly Mary Magdalene is not portrayed as a woman of sin.

Mary Magdalene, by her l\earlier life as a woman of ill-repute, has been held up as a great saint for those that are steeped in sin; an example od penitance and drawing close to God. Her story is one of great hope in turning away from offending God.

Might I suggest reading “Mary Magdalene.” It is a work of extracts from Anne Catherine Emmerich’s book on the Passion of Our Lord.

“Magdalene” was attached to her name so to identify her by a prominent recognition: she had an estate called “Magdalene.” She inherited the estate after her parents had died at an early age; her parents were affluent. Lazarus, Martha and another Mary were her siblings.

Mary Magdalene is a ray of hope for poor sinners.
 
johnstown_johnn said:
I visited Amazon and read a synopsis of your book. If I presume correctly Mary Magdalene is not portrayed as a woman of sin.

Mary Magdalene, by her l\earlier life as a woman of ill-repute, has been held up as a great saint for those that are steeped in sin; an example od penitance and drawing close to God. Her story is one of great hope in turning away from offending God.

Might I suggest reading “Mary Magdalene.” It is a work of extracts from Anne Catherine Emmerich’s book on the Passion of Our Lord.

“Magdalene” was attached to her name so to identify her by a prominent recognition: she had an estate called “Magdalene.” She inherited the estate after her parents had died at an early age; her parents were affluent. Lazarus, Martha and another Mary were her siblings.

Mary Magdalene is a ray of hope for poor sinners.
Click to expand...
I am sorry if my synopsis in not clear…however, the title, Woman Redeemed, speaks directly to her as a woman of sin. I agree that it is her forgiveness and redemption is what makes her a pillar of hope. If you go to my website, I explain how her sin is what gives the rest of us hope…I have read several accounts of Mary Magdalene and while we all have a different take on some of the “facts” - as there is so much mystery around her, I think the one thing we have in common is that she shows us how Jesus redeems sinners. I do have her as Lazarus and Martha’s sister, however, much of the research was vague about her wealth, and I had her inherit her father’s business, allowing her into the world of greed, wine, men, etc…

Much of the intrigue of this Saint is that we know so little but she had such an important role in the story of Jesus.
 
Christine_Blake said:
I am sorry if my synopsis in not clear…however, the title, Woman Redeemed, speaks directly to her as a woman of sin. I agree that it is her forgiveness and redemption is what makes her a pillar of hope. If you go to my website, I explain how her sin is what gives the rest of us hope…I have read several accounts of Mary Magdalene and while we all have a different take on some of the “facts” - as there is so much mystery around her, I think the one thing we have in common is that she shows us how Jesus redeems sinners. I do have her as Lazarus and Martha’s sister, however, much of the research was vague about her wealth, and I had her inherit her father’s business, allowing her into the world of greed, wine, men, etc…

Much of the intrigue of this Saint is that we know so little but she had such an important role in the story of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

Yes, Magdalene is a beacon of hope for us sinners. According to Anne Catherine Emmerich (ACE) she had serendipitously came upon Jesus as he was giving a sermon. She was so entranced by His gentle and pure words that she kept a close watch of His scheduled sermons from place to place.

Jesus’ disciples would, in advance, notify neighboring villages that He was to speak at “Mount This” or “Mount That.” (Mounts all had some identifying names.)

Mary M had become a regular follower of the Man from Gallilea…she knew He was unlike all other men…“special” pales in her description.

Magdalene even had an entourage and she was bedecked in gaudy jewellry and makeup in public. She was well-known.

All of us can relate to Magdalene, men and women, both.

I will purchase your book since you’ve stirred my interest.

Yours in Christ,

John
 
johnstown_johnn said:
Thank you.

Yes, Magdalene is a beacon of hope for us sinners. According to Anne Catherine Emmerich (ACE) she had serendipitously came upon Jesus as he was giving a sermon. She was so entranced by His gentle and pure words that she kept a close watch of His scheduled sermons from place to place.

Jesus’ disciples would, in advance, notify neighboring villages that He was to speak at “Mount This” or “Mount That.” (Mounts all had some identifying names.)

Mary M had become a regular follower of the Man from Gallilea…she knew He was unlike all other men…“special” pales in her description.

Magdalene even had an entourage and she was bedecked in gaudy jewellry and makeup in public. She was well-known.

All of us can relate to Magdalene, men and women, both.

I will purchase your book since you’ve stirred my interest.

Yours in Christ,

John
Click to expand...
Thank you John. I am flattered and I hope you enjoy the read…While I was not blessed with the visions of ACE, I did find my 5 years of research to be driven by God. He brought people and resources into my life and I do hope my work is a tribute to the redeemed woman, Mary Magdalene. I would love to hear your feedback after you’ve read it, good and/or bad:)
Thank you again - In His Love,
Chris
 
bengal_fan said:
it is actually talked about in some of the “lost gospels” (not really gospels at all and the authors are definitely in question) written in the first few centuries of the church. it has always been a rumor that has been with us and i don’t see it ever going away.
Click to expand...
What the Gospel in question actually says is that Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene on the the lips. To interpret this as them being together is reading modern values onto it as at the time kissing someone on the lips, regardless of gender was a completely normal greeting, in fact at the ‘Peace Be With You’ part of Mass for the first 500 years it was standard to kiss everyone on the lips. The Germans found this offensive and it got changed to on the cheek, and eventually watered down further
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top