Women Within The Christian Context Part 1: Mary Magdalene is Arya Stark

Preface

A few introductory remarks before I dive into the topic at hand. First, this subject matter is not an area of primary research for me and many of you will probably know the literature much better than I do, but there are one or two things I may be able to add to the subject. Even then, it will be a fraction of what has been said on this subject. Secondly, I don’t know if we need another Christian man to tell us how we ought to think about women within the Christian context, however, this has been something I have thought about for years and always wanted to do a post/talk on this topic. desire to write a post vs. uncertainty in navigating gender role/climate? Lastly, I get a little nervous about the word “egalitarianism”. I recognize and understand what is being said of course. I think part of my anxiousness is that our culture is so polarized; that a decision on one point commits us into a specific group. The other part of it is that egalitarianism is a hope without the knowledge of, as NT Wright calls, “our freedom in Christ”. What NT Wright means by “our freedom in Christ” is, the hope that is found on the cross points to a completely separate “philosophy” that is outside of (or not constrained by) egalitarianism. Egalitarianism states that all humans should either get the same or be treated as the same in respects to political, economical, social, and civil rights status. As Christian, maybe we start our understanding of equality, not by “should be the same”, but by “already the same”. “Already the same” as in there is no gender (or race). There is only, individuals, human beings, creatures, God’s people, community, etc. In other words, as the Apostle Paul writes:

“There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28 NIV)

Galatians 3:28

Th book of Galatians is about The Law vs grace. Who is considered inheritors and part of God’s family and who is not. The point Paul is making in the book of Galatians is that God has one family and this family consists of all those who believe in Jesus; this is the family God promised to Abraham and The Law can’t stand in the way of this unity which is now revealed through Jesus. However, the book of Galatians (and more importantly this particular verse) is not at all about how we could relate to one another within this family; it is about the fact that the ground is even at the foot of the cross.

Interestingly, as to the English Standard Version, Paul is a lot clearer in what he is conveying:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28 ESV)

The ESV is considered essentially a “literal” translation that tries to capture the precise wording of the original text. As such, it emphasizes on “word-for-word” correspondence. It’s interesting that Paul is stating ‘no male and female’ rather than using another neither/nor statement. “Neither…nor” is a sentence structure that is used to connect the same kind of word or phrase in the sentence and it make it a negative statement about two things. For example:

“Neither the Houston Rockets nor the Portland Trail Blazers will be able to beat the Golden State Warriors”.

To put it in another way, both teams, unfortunately, will not win against the Golden State Warriors. Not this team and not the other. The verse from the NIV is essentially stating the same thing as the ESV verse, but what’s fascinating, at least for me, is Paul in the ESV is emphatically saying “no” instead of using the same “neither…nor” pattern.

Gospels

We can’t ignore the fact that Jesus chose twelve male apostles. There were all kinds of reasons for this within the practical and cultural world in which they worked and lived in. But every time this point is made, we need to remember that the disciples all forsake Jesus and ran away; and it was the women who came first to the tomb, who were the first to see the risen Jesus.

The Greek word for “apostle” is “one who is sent off”. It refers to an emissary or anyone sent on a mission. As a result, an apostle becomes an ambassador of the one who sent him/her. A representative or promoter of a particular news. We frequently think of the twelve disciples and Paul when we think of the word “apostle”. Then we remember that there are other people that hold the title ‘Apostle’. Andronicus, Junia (a woman), James, Barnabas, Apollos, Timothy, Silvanus, and Epaphroditus. But what makes these particular people, the non-original twelve, “apostles”? More importantly, what qualifies someone, like Mary Magdalene, to be an apostle?

Essentially, it boils down to three criterias:

• To have seen Jesus after the resurrection

• Received the the good news (i.e. Jesus has risen), not through any other means, but through Christ himself

• Is tasked to go and tell others the good news that Jesus is risen

This is incredibly significant because this makes Mary Magdalene, not only ‘The First Apostle’, but it also makes her the ‘Apostle to the Apostles’. If an apostle is a witness to the resurrected Christ and is commissioned to tell that Jesus has risen, then there were women, like Mary, who deserved the title of apostle before the men did.

The promotion of women is not a totally new thing with the resurrection. We see this during Jesus’ public ministry, the story of Mary and Martha in Luke 10. Most of us commonly think of this story in terms of Martha is the active one and Mary is the passive or contemplative one when it comes to having guests in our home; and that Jesus is simply affirming the priority of devotion to him. That devotion is part of the importance of the story, but the far more obvious fact for any first-century reader would be that Mary should be in the back room like every other women. Instead she was sitting where men at the time typically sit. This, I am pretty sure, is what really bothered Martha. Of course Martha was upset about being left to do all the work, but the real problem behind it was that Mary had cut clean across one of the most basic social norms. (One example of this is, if you were to invite me to stay in your house and, when it came to bedtime, I set up my bed in your bedroom. We have our own clear, but unspoken rules about our spaces and so did they). Mary ‘sitting at his feet’ is a phrase that is commonly understood today as the adoring student gazing up in admiration and love at the wonderful teacher. However, to sit at the teacher’s feet is a way of saying you are being a student, picking up the teacher’s wisdom and learning. You wouldn’t do this just for the sake of informing your own mind, but in order to be a teacher yourself.

One of Game of Thrones main female character, Arya Stark, is a great example of how a character subverts cultural norms. For those of you who haven’t read the book or watched the show, the weight of oppression on women in the world of Game of Thrones is demonstrated most clearly in Arya as she repeatedly criticizes the restrictions placed upon her by her gender. She lacks any interest in needlework, but is punished for her refusal to engage in the skill or any other activities for her gender. What makes Arya Stark a compelling character is that she echoes much of Mary Magdalene in the Gospels. That is to say, Arya refused to acknowledge gender roles of her society and actively took interests in male-only activities. Much like Mary did.

I’ll have Part 2 out next week