WHAT Was Mark Thinking?

  • Thread starter Thread starter K_C
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

K_C

Guest
Did anyone else notice something peculiar about the gospel reading yesterday? Just as on every Palm Sunday, the story of the Passion was presented and, this year, the account came from St. Mark (to my knowledge, the one who ran off wearing nothing…even in times of tragedy God has a sense of humor!)

I found myself perplexed when we approached the end of the gospel - Mark 15:40 - for he wrote:

“There were also women looking on from afar, among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, the younger and of Joses, and Salome, who, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered to him; and also, many other women who came up with him to Jerusalem.”

Then, the very last sentence read stated:

“…and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.”

First of all, I never heard that there were “many other women” at the foot of the cross - only Mary Magdalene (or so was the general consensus), another “Mary”, and finally Mary, the mother of Jesus. That is THREE MARYS. BUT…

Did anyone else wonder that in Mark’s narrative there was no mention of the Blessed Mother? I noticed that, at the end, our reader changed the pronounciation of “Joses” to “Jesus”, assuming that “Joses” was merely a form of the name "Jesus"in use at that time and place. BUT, if that is the case, notice what was said in the previous paragraph:

"Mary the mother of James, the younger and of Joses, and Salome". If the Mary last mentioned was the mother of “Joses”, she was also the mother of James and Salome! (Unless the meaning is “the mother of James, the younger and of Joses…AND Salome, who, when he was in Galilee, followed him…”, which would mean that a Salome was also present???)

As we know, the mother of JESUS was a virgin and had no other children. So I found Mark’s account unsettling - if not an inadvertent affront to Mary, the mother of Our Savior, since he, apparently, omitted her name! At the very least, this passage is confusing. At the worst, it might be used to support arguments that Jesus had a brother and sister! Can anyone clarify?
 
First of all, the Mary mother of James, Joses and Salome, along with the other women mentioned, Mark describes as “looking on from afar.” They weren’t right at the foot of the cross with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the Apostle John.

And secondly, Mary, mother of James is also named the mother of Joses, so she is the one Mark places at the burial. This doesn’t mean that Mary, Jesus’ mother wasn’t there, just that he doesn’t mention her. That may be because it had already been established in earlier accounts that Jesus’ mother was there and/or Mark may not have thought it necessary to mention the obvious.

As to anyone using these verses to prove Mary, Jesus’ mother, had other children, that would be a real stretch since no mention is even made of her in Mark’s text. Besides the fact that the Church, who gave us the Bible, teaches, based on the entirety of Scripture, that Mary was a perpetual virgin.
 
K C:
Did anyone else notice something peculiar about the gospel reading yesterday? Just as on every Palm Sunday, the story of the Passion was presented and, this year, the account came from St. Mark (to my knowledge, the one who ran off wearing nothing…even in times of tragedy God has a sense of humor!)

I found myself perplexed when we approached the end of the gospel - Mark 15:40 - for he wrote:

“There were also women looking on from afar, among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, the younger and of Joses, and Salome, who, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered to him; and also, many other women who came up with him to Jerusalem.”

Then, the very last sentence read stated:

“…and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.”

First of all, I never heard that there were “many other women” at the foot of the cross - only Mary Magdalene (or so was the general consensus), another “Mary”, and finally Mary, the mother of Jesus. That is THREE MARYS. BUT…

Did anyone else wonder that in Mark’s narrative there was no mention of the Blessed Mother? I noticed that, at the end, our reader changed the pronounciation of “Joses” to “Jesus”, assuming that “Joses” was merely a form of the name "Jesus"in use at that time and place. BUT, if that is the case, notice what was said in the previous paragraph:

"Mary the mother of James, the younger and of Joses, and Salome". If the Mary last mentioned was the mother of “Joses”, she was also the mother of James and Salome! (Unless the meaning is “the mother of James, the younger and of Joses…AND Salome, who, when he was in Galilee, followed him…”, which would mean that a Salome was also present???)

As we know, the mother of JESUS was a virgin and had no other children. So I found Mark’s account unsettling - if not an inadvertent affront to Mary, the mother of Our Savior, since he, apparently, omitted her name! At the very least, this passage is confusing. At the worst, it might be used to support arguments that Jesus had a brother and sister! Can anyone clarify?
Click to expand...
If you go further - into the next chapter - chapter 16; you’ll see the same description again. Verse 1 - " When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go and annoint him,…"

James and Salome are not siblings of Jesus. James the younger is the son but I’m still not sure that Salome is a daughter of that Mary because of the way the comma is placed in both passages (maybe I’m just bad at grammer). Salome can be either the daughter that Mary or another of the women described as having “come up with him to Jerusalem.” Either way, they are not brother and/or sister of Jesus - biologically - as kinsmen, yes but not biologically.
 
40.png
Della:
First of all, the Mary mother of James, Joses and Salome, along with the other women mentioned, Mark describes as “looking on from afar.” They weren’t right at the foot of the cross with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the Apostle John.

Yes, I did notice that remark. But why didn’t Mark mention Our Lady or John?

And secondly, Mary, mother of James is also named the mother of Joses, so she is the one Mark places at the burial. This doesn’t mean that Mary, Jesus’ mother wasn’t there, just that he doesn’t mention her. That may be because it had already been established in earlier accounts that Jesus’ mother was there and/or Mark may not have thought it necessary to mention the obvious.

Well, that is a possibility.

As to anyone using these verses to prove Mary, Jesus’ mother, had other children, that would be a real stretch since no mention is even made of her in Mark’s text. Besides the fact that the Church, who gave us the Bible, teaches, based on the entirety of Scripture, that Mary was a perpetual virgin.

Yes, apparently she is not even mentioned. However, this gospel does cause confusion, which is proven by the fact that the reader at Mass chose to change “Joses” to “Jesus”. We all believe that the Blessed Virgin was present at the entombment of her Son. However, it seems strange that Mark would choose to mention two other Marys, yet ignore the presence of the BVM. Because our focus is rightly on Jesus and Mary, the reader confused the mother of Joses with the mother of Jesus. I still maintain that Mark’s account is confusing.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, apparently she is not even mentioned. However, this gospel does cause confusion, which is proven by the fact that the reader at Mass chose to change “Joses” to “Jesus”. We all believe that the Blessed Virgin was present at the entombment of her Son. However, it seems strange that Mark would choose to mention two other Marys, yet ignore the presence of the BVM. Because our focus is rightly on Jesus and Mary, the reader confused the mother of Joses with the mother of Jesus. I still maintain that Mark’s account is confusing.
Click to expand...
Each of the writers of the Gospels had a different target audience and a different focus from the others–that is the way all authors write, inspired or not. None of them was thinking that one day people on a continent they’d never heard of would be listening to their words being read. It’s very easy for us to think they were writing just for us, but they weren’t.

We cannot know why Mark didn’t mention Mary or John, but we have to remember that he wasn’t at the crucifixion. It could be that the majority of his information came from others who had talked to Peter about the scene, who noticed the women more than anything else from their vantage point. And/or, Mark knew that others had already written about Mary and John’s presence and wanted to emphasize other aspects of what was happening. Also, he may have wanted to identify those particular women so that when he later tells us they had brought spices to anoint Jesus’ body his readers would know who he was referring to.

I think it most likely that whoever read the Gospel account misspoke when s/he read “Jesus” instead of “Joses.” It would be an easy mistake for anyone to make–I wouldn’t read anything into it if I were you.
 
DianJo wrote:
*I’m still not sure that Salome is a daughter of that Mary because of the way the comma is placed in both passages…
*
Punctuation did not exist as we know it when Mark was written. This means that it was added later, which makes it a matter of interpretation.

As to Matthew not mentioning the BVM, it could be because he assumed we would take it for granted that she was there. I think that kind of assumption is behind most of the *apparent *contradictions in the Bible.
 
Or maybe she wasn’t there at all but off somewhere private with her Risen Son.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top