Why did the lord appear to Mary Magdalene first?

[ConstantLearner]

Fair enough. I’m not trying to change your mind. I respect your opinion.

I still go with Mary Magdalene, but I’m not trying to convince anyone else to do so. And I still believe we don’t know, definitively.

We’ve gotten away from the topic, though. The poster wanted to know why the gospel writers all chose Mary Magdalene to be first, not who, in fact, was first.

 

[JohnR77]

We’ve gotten away from the topic, though. The poster wanted to know why the gospel writers all chose Mary Magdalene to be first, not who, in fact, was first.

Your statement is not accurate. The poster stated by his or her choice of words who was first, Mary Magdalene, according to his words. This is false and is rightly refuted on this thread.

John

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Given her importance in Christian theology, I believe the Gospel writers would have written it down had he appeared to her prior to Mary Magdalene.

No. Not necessarily. There are many things Tradition has taught us about the Blessed Virgin that are not in the Bible or stated clearly in the Bible, yet she is the Queen of All Saints.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Your statement is not accurate. The poster stated by her choice of words who was first, Mary Magdalene, according to his words. This is false and is rightly refuted on this thread.

Okay, accepted she said Mary Magdalene was first. And she wanted to know why.

A range of opinions has been expressed, with varying degrees of merit, but I don’t think anyone has shown who was first. The bottom line is: We may feel we know, but we don’t, in actuality, know.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The poster wanted to know why the gospel writers all chose Mary Magdalene to be first, not who, in fact, was first.

The gospel writers do not all chose Mary Magdalene to be first.

 

[ConstantLearner]

The gospel writers do not all chose Mary Magdalene to be first.

Who doesn’t?

John 20:1-18
Mark 16:1-8
Matthew 28:1-8
Luke 24

Luke has him appearing to his disciples, but again, it is Mary Magdalene, in the company of the other women, who is first at the tomb.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Who doesn’t?

John 20:1-18
Mark 16: 7:
Matthew 28: 1
Luke 24

The poster wanted to know why the gospel writers all chose Mary Magdalene to be first, not who, in fact, was first.

John 20 - Mary Magdalene goes to the tomb , it was dark and the stone was removed. Jesus doesn’t appear to her until after she had gone and told the others about the stone being rolled away.
Okay, so who is to say, He wasn’t appearing to His Mother when she arrived at the tomb and before she told the apostles. Where are the words, “Mary Magdalene first” in this account. Not there.

Mark 16 - Mary Magdalen is with Mary the mother of James, and Salome. They get there the stone is already rolled away. Again, who is to say He wasn’t with His Mother before they got there. The stone had already been rolled away. This is the only account that uses the word “first”. Could Mark have been talking about “first” of all the disciples or the “first” He spoke with or the “first” who saw Him in that group of women.

Matthew 28 - Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, go in the morning, arrive at the tomb, the stone is rolled away and an angel is sitting there but they did not see Jesus at the tomb but on the way to tell the disciples. Again, no mention of Mary Magdalene as being “first” in this account. Where was Jesus? Could He have been with His Mother?

Luke 24 - Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and others all go to the tomb. The stone is rolled away. They see two men. Here, again, there is not mention of Mary Magdalene being the “first” that Jesus appeared to. The stone was already rolled away. You have to agree it is possible, He already left and could have been visiting His Mother.

One more account in Luke 24 verse 22 - 23 - Disciples on the road to Emmaus tell Jesus that, “certain women also of our company affrighted us, who before it was light, were at the sepulcre. and not finding his body”…, so where was Jesus? Could He have been with His Mother?

I have to say it seems we have spoken of this before. Maybe read each account. See what they all say and note the differences. Each focuses on what they felt was important. Mary Magdalene is in each account but not necessarily portrayed as some are trying to portray her. I realize you are not Catholic, but studied Catholic theology so you probably know that we look to the Church to aid us in understanding Scripture.

 

[ConstantLearner]

I have to say it seems we have spoken of this before. Maybe read each account. See what they all say and note the differences. Each focuses on what they felt was important. Mary Magdalene is in each account but not necessarily portrayed as some are trying to portray her. I realize you are not Catholic, but studied Catholic theology so you probably know that we look to the Church to aid us in understanding Scripture.

I’ve read each account in the original language since it was required for school, otherwise I would have stuck to English.

As I said before, he could move about in an instant. He could have been to China or Peru. There’s no indication to me that he was visiting his mother, so I’ll stick with Mary Magdalene since she has to inform the disciples. But really, we don’t know and probably never will. It’s all personal opinion, and that’s fine.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

He could have been to China or Peru. There’s no indication to me that he was visiting his mother, so I’ll stick with Mary Magdalene since she has to inform the disciples. But really, we don’t know and probably never will. It’s all personal opinion, and that’s fine.

So, just my thought, and again realizing you are not Catholic but, yes, have studied Scripture, probably find it difficult to lean on the Church for interpretation. You are welcome to your opinion, please realize that traditionally the Catholic Church has also looked at it differently and Mary Magdalene being “first” is not necessarily Biblical. Catholics are free to have either opinion as to who He appeared to first. Pope John Paul II asked us to ponder on Him first appearing to His Mother.

Also, as you probably know but maybe don’t agree with, the Catholic Church holds the Blessed Mother in a very high position and know Jesus and His Mother’s hearts are united in a very special way and He would honor Her in a most blessed way by relieving her of her grief, which is why she said, “all generations will call me Blessed”.

I was protestant for 13 years and studied Scripture intensively and now in the Catholic church am re-reading and studying under a different light and seeing things very differently. My own interpretation fell down to the ground and some of it looks silly to me now.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Thank you. Yes, I realize you are free to make a different interpretation than Mary Magdalene, and I respect that freedom since the Bible leaves room for it. I’m also aware that St. Pope JPII seemed to agree with you. And you may be right. The Bible does not say where Jesus was when Mary Magdalene and the other women found the tomb empty, so I realize you have to look to other sources for the answer. I admit, I find Mary Magdalene a strange choice if she was first.

I might have given the impression that I don’t respect your opinion, but I do. I do not know where he was. You could very well be correct. Hopefully, some day all of us will know the answer.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I might have given the impression that I don’t respect your opinion, but I do. I do not know where he was. You could very well be correct. Hopefully, some day all of us will know the answer.

I didn’t get that impression. You’re right hopefully some day we will all know the answer.

 

[Dovekin]

When he had risen, early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. Mark 16:9

No one has offered anything that proves that this does not mean “When he had risen… he appeared first to Mary Magdalene.”

There are a number of issues that can be raised about this verse:

1. it is not part of Mark’s gospel, which ends 16:8.
2. it does not agree with the other gospels.
3. it is a relative first, not an absolute. It only means Jesus was first among those Mark mentions.
4. Jesus appeared to people before he was resurrected, in an unglorified image of his body.

There are responses to all of these of course:

1. council of Trent includes it in the canon.
2. does too
3. “when he had risen, he appeared first” seems pretty absolute to me. Greek verb tenses do not give a lot of room.
4. then the whole discussion is pointless. “Mary had a vision of Jesus.” Is categorically different from “The Risen Lord appeared to Mary Magdalene.”

Some arguments are better than others, but none of them prove anything. Using words like “proof” is just bluster, attempts to sway opinion by force rather than reason. And none of these touch on a core issue, what is the value of the gospels?

 

[ConstantLearner]

Some arguments are better than others, but none of them prove anything. Using words like “proof” is just bluster, attempts to sway opinion by force rather than reason. And none of these touch on a core issue, what is the value of the gospels?

No, there’s no proof. I did give my reason for my preference for Mary Magdalene: to show us that women were an integral part of the Church and equal to men despite having very different functions. But there’s no proof she was absolutely first. In one gospel, the women reach the tomb only to find it empty. Mary M. does not encounter Jesus in that gospel. I always assumed Mary, BV was at home, observing the traditional Jewish seven days of mourning, in which immediate family members usually did not leave their homes. Therefore, I did not find her absence strange.

What do you think the highlighting of Mary Magdalene and the absence of Mary, Jesus’s mother are meant to tell readers?

 

[MountCarmel]

Yes, yes, I know all that, including that Matthew, a former tax collector would have been the only one of the Gospel writers on ‘speaking terms’ with the Roman soldiers - that his account runs like a re-count of what a soldier or two may have told him they saw and experienced. I still say that Jesus would have ‘let His mother know He had risen, as a priority’, it was she that was most united with His suffering, and remained with Him, at the foot of the Cross. As is actually mentioned in the Gospels, not everything that happened during Jesus’ time on earth, was/is mentioned in the Gospels.

 

[Dovekin]

It would be an insult to the glory and grace of Jesus Christ if the second person who was less close to Jesus and who had refused some of his grace also participated to a greater extent in the heavenly glories than the first person, who was closer to Jesus Christ and His grace.

The last shall be first is a persistent theme of the Gospel. This is evident by its repetition but also by its illustration in parables. The workers who were there all day receive the same pay as those who come at the later hour; the elder son in the story of the prodigal does not receive a feast with the fatted calf, or a ring and robe that were offered to his brother. If “the closest gets the most” is the argument for Jesus appearing to his mother first, I would abandon the idea without hesitation. Adopting such a secular value system is a mistake.

there was a greater participation by someone other than BVM in the Glories of Heaven such as Jesus’ resurrection by someone who was not as close to Jesus as was BVM that would be an insult to Jesus Christ because He is the sole source of all grace.

A similar response could be given here. Jesus gives freely and by his own choice. If he chose to appear to Mary Magdalene first, that is his choice. It is not constrained by our values, but is his free choice. St Augustine’s argument might be that Mary has the greatest caapacity to love Christ, not that she is always first. If witnessing the Resurrection is viewed as part of a divine reward system, the argument might hold up. The woman who saw Jesus on the first Easter was given a mission, to tell the disciples. It is not just a consolation for the recipient but also a commission to tell others. That Mary Magdalene received that mission takes nothing away from the mother of Jesus, who did not.

The Church’s tradition has declared that the gospels say St Mary Magdalene was the first to see the Risen Lord. Pope Francis raised the liturgical celebration of her to a feast two years ago as a reaffirmation of her importance. This tradition is much stronger than the traditions of Jesus appearing to his mother.

But thanks for at least answering the question of why? I may reject your reasons, but at least they areasons.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

The last shall be first is a persistent theme of the Gospel. This is evident by its repetition but also by its illustration in parables. The workers who were there all day receive the same pay as those who come at the later hour; the elder son in the story of the prodigal does not receive a feast with the fatted calf, or a ring and robe that were offered to his brother. If “the closest gets the most” is the argument for Jesus appearing to his mother first, I would abandon the idea without hesitation. Adopting such a secular value system is a mistake.

The parables are all about what the kingdom of God is like.
They work on a three stage principle, Advent, reversal, new thinking and action. They turn things on their head. Jesus reversed the way of thinking. , challenges the listener to do the same and then act on it.

Augustine has a wonderful account of the Good Samaritan and who each person represents.

Jesus chose a mustard seed, a weed that Jewish farmers were eradicating from their land and crops, rather then an impressive cedar to describe the kingdom of God in one parable.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

By the same token, we could say anyone saw Him that we wanted, since ‘everything’ was not recorded.

I don’t think saying the Blessed Mother saw Him first should lead at all to any other conclusions such as this. The reasoning behind Him appearing to His Mother first is based on their relationship. No one else has that same unity as Jesus and Mary. When following the Church’s teaching on the Blessed Mother’s role in salvation, which no one else has, we can’t make an assumption that He could have appeared to just anybody because the Blessed Mother is not just anybody.

Also it isn’t just people just making guesses or ignoring the gospels, there are saints in the past who have thought the same and Pope JPII said it was a reasonable conclusion.

And none of these touch on a core issue, what is the value of the gospels?

It appears to me that there is one line being taken out of the Bible and mistakenly the rest of the gospels are being ignored. If we only had Mark 16:9 describing the women at the tomb, I would agree Jesus appearing to Mary Magdalen first is pretty set, but when investigating an historical account with several different ways the account is portrayed you need to put them all together and when doing that, looking at all four gospels, Mary Magdalene was not there alone. There were many other women there at the same time. It could be that Mark is saying that Mary Magdalene saw Him first among the women in that group. It takes absolutely nothing away from the value of the gospel, as has been mistakenly stated, but puts them together.

Just my opinion but I wonder if there is a fear of putting the Blessed Mother too high and a need to elevate Mary Magdalene.

 

[Dovekin]

when investigating an historical account with several different ways the account is portrayed you need to put them all together and when doing that, looking at all four gospels, Mary Magdalene was not there alone.

This is what I mean by an historical reconstruction. Our faith in Jesus is based on his life, death and resurrection, on who he was and what he did. So everyone reconstructs as best they can an accurate account of his life.

Fundamental to this process are the gospels. These are inspired accounts of the life of Jesus. They are accurate not just as history, but as testimony to faith and guides to a life of hope. The gospels have a special place in our understanding of Jesus.

With one exception, Mary Magdalene is always listed first whenever she is named in all four gospels. Luke uses the list from Mk 15:40-1 “These women had followed him when he was in Galilee and ministered to him.” and refers to it in Luke 8:3, with Mary Magdalene at its head, “when Jesus was in Galilee.” Mary Magdalene has a clear priority every tims she is mentioned, except at the foot of the cross in John when the mother of Jesus is there.

The tradition strongly reaffirms this priority for the first thousand years. Then the image of Mary Magdalene, apostle to the apostles, drifts more towards the forgiven sinner. The image of the Mother of Jesus usurps Magdalene’s place in some settings, particularly in commentaries on the Song of Songs. Still, Mary Magdalene’s importance was underlined by things like reciting the creed at her commemoration. More recently, Pope Francis raised her commemoration to a feast, like the other apostles.

This is a much stronger tradition than the traditions about Jesus appearing to his mother after the resurrection. It is highlighted in liturgy and in the gospel. There is no feast for Our Lady of the Resurrection to remember Jesus appearing to his mother as far as I know.

The gospels give a priority to Mary Magdalene at the resurrection. Tradition echoes that priority. It may be true that Jesus appeared first to his mother, but that should take nothing away from the priority given to Mary Magdalene. You can hold to it as something that really did happen and is significant, but it is not part of the gospel accounts, and is not a part of everybody’s understanding of our history.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The gospels give a priority to Mary Magdalene at the resurrection. Tradition echoes that priority. It may be true that Jesus appeared first to his mother, but that should take nothing away from the priority given to Mary Magdalene. You can hold to it as something that really did happen and is significant, but it is not part of the gospel accounts, and is not a part of everybody’s understanding of our history.

I think we are in agreement with this, except for maybe the tradition part. I completely believe what the gospels say and also understand them to be the inspired accounts of Jesus’ life. The traditional belief that Jesus appeared to His mother first is based on the Catholic faith’s understanding of the Blessed Mother’s role in salvation, their closeness and quotes from early Christian saints, not from something that can be literally found in the gospels but much of our belief about the Blessed Mother is not literally found in Scripture.

I don’t think the belief that Jesus appeared to His mother first, no matter how or when it took place, takes anything away from the importance of Mary Magdalene.

She is very important to me, as seen by my username.

 

[StarMapp]

A continuation of his teaching that he promised would happen. Who WOULD ever think that she of all people could ever deserve a first visit. Simon wanted her out of his house, but Jesus reminded him that he did not accord to him the deserving honor that she gave him by washing his feet. How dare a thief could EVER enter heaven and sit at the Father’s table before all those who were assembled at the foot of the cross. The "those among you who would be first will be last " calls for a change of our attitude. But then again she is his mother and sister, and all holy men his brother and father aren’t they.