Why did the lord appear to Mary Magdalene first?

[ConstantLearner]

I remember a verse where Jesus disciples asked him why he loved Mary Magdalene the most. I can’t remember it though. We can assume she was highly favored among his disciples.

Here are the references to Mary Magdalene:

Bible Verses: Mary Magdalene in Scripture--Magda Magdalen Magdala Miriam - Beliefnet

I don’t see anything like that, nor do I remember anything like that, but I don’t remember everything.

Jesus loved everyone, of course. My professors all concentrated on those who formed Jesus’s inner circle: Peter, James, and John, and John was most loved.

 

[ConstantLearner]

The verse you remember is from the Gospel of Thomas iirc. Or Dialogue of the Savior or another apocryphal text. It is not something everyone accepts, but it is a reason why Magdalene would have been mentioned first.

I don’t think so. Early Christians wanted nothing to do with this gospel:

Early Christians regarded the Infancy Gospel of Thomas as inauthentic and heretical. Hipploytus identified it as a fake and a heresy in his “Refutation of All Heresies” and his contemporary Origen referred to it in a similar way in a homily written in the early 3rd century. Eusebius rejected it as a heretical “fiction” in the third book of his 4th-century and Pope Gelasius included it in his list of heretical books in the 5th century.

Early Christian writers wouldn’t have made use of it, and if they had, it would have been edited out of the Bible early on since it was considered heretical.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Mary Magdalene’s story has often been obscured by arguments over where she fits in some historical time line, instead of why she fits there.

No one knows exactly how the hypostatic union worked. Perhaps Jesus didn’t know where to find his disciples since they were said to be in hiding (and he had not yet ascended). Therefore, he spoke to the first person he knew he could trust, i.e., Mary Magdalene, and told her to give a message to his disciples. To go walking through Jerusalem might have put his disciples in further danger.

 

[Dovekin]

The infancy gospel of Thomas is not the same as the gospel of Thomas. Neither was all that popular with early Christians, but if we are going to discuss whether Jesus appeared to his mother, we may as well include the other apocryphal material.

Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene on the lips according to the Gospel of Phillip, a 3rd century Valentinian text. A discussion followed about why Jesus loved her more than them. Them could be the disciples, or might refer to his moher and sister.

Regardless of the source, the answer offered is that Jesus appeared first to Magdalene because he loved her more. It is an interesting answer, and the fact that it goes back 1700 years does not discredit it.

A similar reason is implied in the comments about Jesus appearing to his mother first. He lov d her most.

 

[Dovekin]

he spoke to the first person he knew he could trust,

Basically. It is an historical accident. Jesus could have run into anyone, it just happened to be Mary Magdalene. And each of the evangelists adhered to this history because they were trying to be as accurate in recounting the events as they could be.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Well, could be. I don’t think any gospel writers would have used the Gospel of Thomas, either when writing one of the Synoptics, but I don’t know. Maybe they would have. If they had, however, I think they would have made the meeting between Jesus and Mary Magdalene more affectionate. As it is, he tells her not to cling to him and sends her with a message to the disciples. So, I don’t think they were using either as reference material.

I still think it was because she, and the other women, were there, and they were trusted. A bigger question to me is where he went after and why he didn’t go to the disciples himself if he did know where they were. He could move about in seconds, walk through doors, walls, etc.

I still come back to the writers highlighting the fact that women had important roles in the Church.

 

[Dovekin]

The point of the stories is that even though skepticism is natural, a Christian’s belief in the Resurrection must be based on testimony of eye-witnesses and the contention that this was explained by the Lord himself as a fulfillment of Scriptures, even though some who were very close to Jesus resisted reports that this had happened and those who were most conversant in the content of the Scriptures did not accept this as having happened.

Mary Magdalene as an eyewitness, because we need eyewitnesses. Good answer.

As much as I would like to believe this answer, Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe. This is what Jesus said to Thomas.

But it is a good answer.

 

[MountCarmel]

ConstantLearner - Since Jesus loved His mother so very much that He made her Queen of Heaven, and indeed, Earth, and that she suffered at the foot of the Cross, along with Him {her sword of sorrow], it stands to ‘reason’ that His ‘first thought’ would be to assure His beloved mother that He had risen. As others have reflected, why is it that Our Lady was not at the tomb with the other women? - Most likely because she knew He wasn’t in it.

 

[ConstantLearner]

I don’t think we know she wasn’t there, though I concede she probably would have been mentioned, given her importance.

I do think people have to be careful not to inadvertently “rewrite” the NT to suit their belief or wishes. The NT seems to point to Mary Magdalene as first. Why would Mary not have told Mary Magdalene and the other women? Why would Jesus not have entrusted his own mother, probably the earthly person he loved most, to inform the disciples?

Rewriting scripture brings up other questions, and it leads people astray. I do respect the fact that that’s your personal opinion, though, but I think you should state it is opinion only. And I thank you for your answer.

I still believe it was Mary Magdalene as a representative of sinful Humankind and their welcome in the life of Christ.

In truth, we will never know who he appeared to first. It could have been his mother, it could have been Mary Magdalene, it could have been the gardener, who would not have recognized him (probably). We just don’t know, but the original poster wanted to know why Mary Magdalene appears to be first.

Thank you, though.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

On what basis? The Gospel writers say it was Mary Magdalene. They are all in agreement she was first. I’m not saying he didn’t, just that there’s no Scriptural basis for it.

The only gospel that uses the word “first” is Mark. The rest just mention Mary Magdelene being at the tomb but do not use the word “first”, so all the gospels are not in agreement as to who was “first”, so no one is re-writing the NT if they believe that Jesus appeared to His Mother first. The gospels are not all clear as to who was first.

 

[ConstantLearner]

The only gospel that uses the word “first” is Mark. The rest just mention Mary Magdelene being at the tomb but do not use the word “first”, so all the gospels are not in agreement as to who was “first”, so no one is re-writing the NT if they believe that Jesus appeared to His Mother first. The gospels are not all clear as to who was first.

Well, yes, they ARE rewriting it, and spreading false information, if they say, without qualification, that Jesus visited his mother first. There is no evidence that he did. You, yourself, have stated that it’s not clear who was first, so you must know choosing Mary, his mother, is just speculation.

If someone qualifies the statement as their own personal opinion, that’s another thing altogether. Everyone has opinions, and they don’t have to agree, only be STATED as OPINION. I THINK Mary Magdalene was first. That is my opinion. It is also my OPINION that we’ll never know, except maybe in the afterlife, who was first.

There are people who read this forum who know little-to-nothing about Catholicism, but are curious. It’s just plain wrong to state something with no basis as a fact, without qualifiers, such as “this is my opinion.” If it’s an opinion, fine, this is a DB, and varying opinions will be expressed, but they should be labeled as opinion.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I don’t think anyone said it was anywhere in the New Testament that he appeared to His Mother first, did they?

 

[ConstantLearner]

I don’t think anyone said it was anywhere in the New Testament that he appeared to His Mother first, did they?

Yes. See post #245, I think. No qualifiers, no evidence. It’s opinion, and that’s fine if it would have been stated as opinion. As it stands, it’s false information because no one really knows.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Yes. See post #245, I think. No qualifiers, no evidence. It’s opinion, and that’s fine if it would have been stated as opinion. As it stands, it’s false information because no one really knows.

I agree it appears as if it is someone’s opinion. I didn’t see where they were saying it was scriptural and as has been mentioned before Catholics also follow Tradition. It is perfectly fine accepting early Church saints teaching that He first appeared to His mother, the same as those who believe it was Mary Magdalene. So my question is has anyone said that the Scripture’s say somewhere that Jesus first appeared to His mother?

 

[ConstantLearner]

Right, it’s opinion. My posts are opinion, but are labeled as opinion. No one really knows who saw him first, who he spoke to first, etc. Opinions vary, and that’s fine, but they should be labeled as opinions lest someone get a totally false piece of information.

 

[ConstantLearner]

I agree it appears as if it is someone’s opinion. I didn’t see where they were saying it was scriptural and as has been mentioned before Catholics also follow Tradition. It is perfectly fine accepting early Church saints teaching that He first appeared to His mother, the same as those who believe it was Mary Magdalene. So my question is has anyone said that the Scripture’s say somewhere that Jesus first appeared to His mother?

Do you mean Tradition or tradition? The first can’t be changed, like the Virgin Birth; the second can be changed, like allowing girls to be altar servers. I assume you mean tradition, but I don’t think its right to assume.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

As far as I am aware it is something that has been traditionally held but it is not part of the deposit of faith as something that has to be believed.

 

[Dovekin]

The only gospel that uses the word “first” is Mark. The rest just mention Mary Magdelene being at the tomb but do not use the word “first”, so all the gospels are not in agreement as to who was “first”, so no one is re-writing the NT if they believe that Jesus appeared to His Mother first. The gospels are not all clear as to who was first.

What is the point of this calculation? Are you trying to reconstruct the historical sequence? Will that be more determinative of something than the gospel account? Doesn’t the gospel account have a value beyond that of the actual history?

I could make a case that the mother of Jesus was at the tomb with Mary Magdalene. Or that Jesus must have appeared first to Caiaphas. Or that he appeared to someone in Central America. But what would be the point? Any reconstructed history might be revealing, but it would not be the Gospel.

The Gospels all portray Mary Magdalene as the first to see the Lord after the Resurrection. A “fifth” evangelist stated it outright in Mk 16:9. That is the Gospel. To whom Jesus appeared first, if it was someone other than Mary Magdalene, was not deemed significant enough to include in the Gospel.

 

[PetraG]

The idea that Jesus appeared to his Mother first is not some private idea invented by people posting on this forum. Pope St. John Paul II said that the possibility ought to be kept open:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm51.htm

St. Paul says in 1 Cor 15
For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried; that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. After that he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one born abnormally, he appeared to me.

This leaves Mary Magdalene out altogether, while the Gospels leave out the 500 brothers altogether. As it is written in John: There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written. (John 21:24)

We know that his Mother, not surprisingly, was never included in an account of the witnesses. Why not? Well, because no one is going to believe a mother’s testimony concerning her son. It is dismissed as biased, out of hand. It is reasonable that she was not a witness.

It is undeniable, though, that Mary Magdalene is mentioned often as the first witness who made a report to the Apostles, and that she was not believed initially but was later believed by those who were witnesses to later appearances themselves.

Since St. Thomas did not believe even the rest of the Apostles, however, it seems clear that the disciples as a whole were not in any big hurry to believe in the Resurrection. No one who is left in the story expected it. Certainly none of them would have believed his mom if she had told them she had seen Him, which was a good reason not to make her the first witness to the Resurrection.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

Is she saying the soldiers died or they just looked like they died?