When Disciples Come of Age - Christian Identity in the 21st Century

#77 Living into a New Consciousness

by Diarmuid O’Murchu

Excerpts adapted from Chapter 9 of the Précis by Helene O’Sullivan, M.M.

 Chapter 9

The Subverted Horizon of Female Discipleship

 Elizabeth Johnson wrote: 

Desiring to impress his readers in the Roman Empire with the trustworthiness of this new movement, Luke consistently depicted men in public leadership roles and, in order to conform with the empire’s standards, kept women decorously under control in supportive positions. Having eyes mainly for elite men, he fudged women into an insignificant background ignoring the leadership roles they in fact held. Consequently, Acts [of the Apostles] does not contain a representative picture of church leadership in the early decades. It tells only part of the story.

Mary Rose D’Angelo provides a useful overview of the feminist reconstruction of women in early Christian times and specifically in Luke’s Gospel.

First is the story of Martha and Mary. Here Luke dualistically splits the two, castigating the active one (described by the Greek noun for missionary service, diakonia) and exalts the passive, pious Mary.

As Warren Carter and other scholars suggest, Mary and Martha are better understood as pairs of sisters in ministry (similar to Tryphaena and Tryphosa in Rom. 16:12 and Euodia and Syntyche in Phil. 4:12).

Just as there were pairs of brothers in early Christian discipleship, it seems there were also pairs of sisters with Martha and Mary as missionary companions deserving equal recognition.

Second, we come to a more serious issue, which, to the best of my knowledge, no Scripture scholar has yet publicly acknowledged ~ namely, our interpretation of the Pentecost event described in Acts 2:1-11.

In the process of re-missioning the Twelve with the power of the Spirit, Luke either is totally unaware or deliberately obscures the primary group who bore witness to the Risen Christ that was commissioned to go forth and preach: Mary Magdalene and her followers.

Luke is so preoccupied with ensuring a solid apostolic foundation for his two great heroes; Peter and Paul that he ignores and distorts the more foundational post-resurrection witnesses.

And why did he choose Mary, the mother of Jesus, to be with the Twelve (in a role where typically she says and does nothing)? Is Luke so guilty about what he is dismissing that he feels he must have a woman there somewhere? He opts for Mary, the mother of Jesus, when in fact he should have chosen Mary Magdalene, the Apostle of the Apostles, as she was known even within the early patristic tradition.

New Archetypal Horizons

A growing corpus of research on women’s historical participation in faith development, within and outside the church, is now available and needs no further elaboration here. Instead I want to focus on that which is still regarded as esoteric and insubstantial, namely the empowering female archetypal wisdom that has been suppressed throughout several millennia of patriarchal domination, possibly dating as far back as ten thousand years.

Scientific research, focused primarily on rationality and objectivity, is unable to acknowledge or negotiate the underlying wisdom, which belongs to another sphere of knowledge—one focused on intuition, imagination, and mystical experience. Not even the Jungian concept of the archetypal does full justice to this phenomenon. Jung gives archetypes too much of a fixed meaning, devoid of evolutionary possibility; it is the very nature of archetypal break-through to remain open to the ever more expansive horizons of creativity and greater breakthrough.

The ancient description of womanhood in terms of the Virgin (Maiden), Mother, and Crone (Wise Woman) provides a useful starting point for engaging the archetypal depths of the female. This tripartite structure is often traced to ancient goddess worship, frequently misconstrued as a pagan devia-tion.

Paul Reid-Bowen and Raven Grimassi claim that the Triple Goddess is an archetypal construct appearing in a number of different cultures throughout human history, and manifesting in a range of individual goddesses. In broad outline, each of the three elements can be described as follows:

• The Virgin or Maiden represents the power of birthing, enchantment, inception, expansion, and the promise of new beginnings and is symbolized by the waxing moon. In archetypal terms, she gives birth to all creation, from galaxies right down to minuscule bacteria.

• The Mother represents ripeness, fertility, sexuality, fulfillment, stability, power, and life, and is symbolized by the full moon. In archetypal terms, the Mother is great nurturer, not the one who gives birth.

• The Crone or Wise Woman represents the waning moon, wisdom, mature age, repose, death, and endings that yield not so much to painful termination but to turbulent, reinvigorating transformation. Several biblical women are best understood in such archetypal terms. Both Adam and Eve carry archetypal import, which biblical literalism and the prevailing patriarchal ethos grossly undermine. Eve represents the Great Mother Goddess, inhabiting the garden of God’s creation,

Archetypal Women in the New Testament

In the Christian Scriptures, we encounter some very engaging depictions of the triple archetype:

Mary, mother of Jesus (Maiden);

Mary Magdalene (Mother); and

Elizabeth, Mary’s older cousin

(Wise Woman). 

In the present work I am addressing one aspect of the evolutionary shift in the twenty-first century, namely the invitation to a new threshold of adult coming-of-age in the realm of faith. In the present chapter I examined the implications for the biblical reconstruction of female identity and a more empowering role 

The Mary we must wrestle with today—particularly for the coming-of-age examined in this book—is that of Mary Magdalene. First, we need to clear away the penitential overtones of Mary’s alleged link to prostitution, a castigation voiced initially by Pope St. Gregory (540–604 C.E.), long discredited by Scripture scholars.

Mary Magdalene will always defy any attempt at a historical portrayal, primarily because we know little or nothing about her as a historical person, and also because her true significance belongs to that deeper realm I describe as the archetypal. In her, the ordinary and extraordinary are integrated in subtle and hidden ways.

Mary Magdalene’s brand of discipleship includes all the household wisdom outlined earlier in this chapter, but she also seems to have been endowed with a mystical wisdom whereby she entered the soul of Jesus

at a depth beyond that of other disciples,  a mystical intimacy that is likely to defy

 every attempt at a rational reconstruction. 

Mary of Magdala has been the subject of intense study over recent decades. The tension between Mary and Peter, along with Peter’s alleged resentment and jealousy, is a recurring theme in the written sources, with Mary consistently penetrating the more discerning depths. This is probably one of the main reasons she has been sidelined in the Christian tradition, and the major writings related to her have never been given strong recognition.

However, as Ann Graham Brock highlights, Mary Magdalene is frequently replaced by Mary, the mother of Jesus, a patriarchal ploy adopted not merely to diminish the significance the Magdalene, but also to buffer early Christians against the powerful role that many women played in early Christian discipleship.

The elevation of St. Mary Magdalene to the status of a first-class liturgical feast by Pope Francis in June 2016 should alert all Christian churches to her emerging significance in the consciousness of our time. The quality of her discipleship is not about priestly ordination or a feminine face for patriarchal authority.

It is much more about the adult coming-of-age that Jesus seemed to desire for all Christian followers, of the past and present. Mary’s quality of presence, leadership, and discernment mark a long-subverted tradition, the truthfulness of which can no longer be denied and disregarded.