Op-Ed Columnist: Peter, Paul, Mary
. . . and God
From: franksmith
Date: Sat Feb 28, 2004 2:41 am
Subject: NYTimes.com Article: Op-Ed Columnist: Peter, Paul, Mary
. . . and God
This article from NYTimes.com
has been sent to you by franksmith@vdolores.com.ar.
Comments later, Frank
franksmith
THE DREAMERS - NOW PLAYING
Set against the turbulent
political backdrop of 1968 France when the voice of youth was
reverberating around Europe, THE DREAMERS is a story of self-discovery
as three students test each other to see just how far they will
go. THE DREAMERS is released uncut with an NC-17 rating. Watch
The Dreamers trailer at: http://www.thedreamers.com
Op-Ed Columnist: Peter,
Paul, Mary . . . and God
February 28, 2004
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
For a provocative look at
the emergence of Christianity two millenniums ago, skip Mel Gibson's
"Passion of the Christ" and examine instead some of
the fascinating recent scholarship on the early church.
Interest in the early church
has blossomed because of "Passion" and the "Da
Vinci Code" thriller. But "Passion" and especially
"The Da Vinci Code" take great liberties with history,
while serious research has gotten much less attention.
Consider the newly published
"Gospel of Mary of Magdala." It offers a new translation
by Karen King, a Harvard Divinity School professor, of the obscure
Gospel of Mary, which was lost for 1,500 years before two fragmentary
versions were found.
The Gospel of Mary offers
a proto-feminist recounting of a scene in which the resurrected
Jesus tells the disciples to preach, and then leaves them. The
disciples are emotional and tearful - until Mary Magdalene takes
charge and bucks them up.
"Do not weep and be distressed,"
she tells them, and, sure enough, they pull themselves together.
Then Mary begins to relate Jesus' private teachings to her, saying,
"I will teach you about what is hidden from you."
But the disciples rebel at
being instructed by a woman. Andrew and Peter virtually accuse
Mary of making it all up, and she starts crying. Levi intercedes,
scolding: "Peter, you have always been a wrathful person.
. . . Assuredly, the Savior's knowledge of her is completely
reliable. That is why he loved her more than us."
Bibles, like history, are
written by the winners. There were innumerable early gospels
and teachings (some 85 percent of Christian literature from the
first two centuries has been lost). Some won approval and entered
the New Testament, and the rest were condemned as heresies or
died out on their own. The Gnostic Gospels and other early writings
suggest that initially the role of women was hotly debated, but
ultimately the idea prevailed that men should dominate.
"God's pattern is for
men to be the leaders, both in the church and in the family,"
Pat Robertson writes in his best-selling book "Bring It
On." He cites I Timothy: "Women should listen and learn
quietly and submissively. I do not let women teach men or have
authority over them."
Likewise, Paul wrote to the
Corinthians: "Women should be silent during the church meetings.
It is not proper for them to speak."
That view is hard to square,
though, with other accounts that portray Mary Magdalene as a
favorite of Jesus'. The "Pistis Sophia" scripture quotes
Jesus as telling Mary Magdalene: "You are she whose heart
is more directed to the Kingdom of Heaven than all your brothers."
And the Gospel of Philip says
of Mary Magdalene: "She is the one the Savior loved more
than all the disciples, and he used to kiss her on her mouth
often. . . . The rest of the disciples . . . said to him, `Why
do you love her more
than us?' "
These gospels aren't necessarily
suggesting a romance between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, and in
any case their value is much debated - traditionalists argue
that they are prized to make ideological points rather than to
clarify history. The Gospel of Mary was written in her name but
not by her, and apparently was written in the early second century,
long after the events it describes.
Still, the dispute over the
role of women can be seen raging in many early Christian writings.
The Gospel of Thomas even quotes Simon Peter as saying, "Let
Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."
Susan Haskins, in her history
of the idea of Mary Magdalene, says that egalitarian principles
in the New Testament initially prevailed in the first-century
Christian community. But then, she writes, Christianity gradually
returned to the traditional patriarchal system of Judaism.
That suppression of female
leadership may be behind the labeling of Mary Magdalene as a
prostitute, starting with a sermon by Pope Gregory the Great
in 591. And recent scholarship has established that Junius, whom
Paul calls "distinguished among the apostles," was
actually Junia, a woman whose name was made masculine by later
translators.
How should we regard these
alternative versions of Biblical events? They are a reminder
that there were competing strains in the early Christian church,
and that different outcomes were possible. My guess is that the
ordination of women would not have been controversial if Mary
Magdalene, rather than St. Peter, had emerged as the first pope.
[long link]
Copyright 2004 The New York Times
Company
...................................................................................................................................
From: Frank Thomas Smith
Date: Sat Feb 28, 2004 7:06 am
Subject: RV: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] NYTimes.com Article: Op-Ed
Columnist: Peter, Paul, Mary . . . and God
Thee are my "comments later": The
Pauline letters mentioned below by the reviewer, which condemn
women to subservient roles, are, in fact "deutero-Pauline"
letters. "deutero" means secondery, which is a euphemism
for false. The were written by political Church hacks.
See http://southerncrossreview.org/14/pagels.htm
and
http://southerncrossreview.org/2/gnostic.html
Frank
...................................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:22 am
Subject: Re: RV: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] NYTimes.com Article:
Op-Ed Columnist: Peter, Paul, Mar . . . and God
Frank:
Thee are my "comments later":
The Pauline letters mentioned below by the reviewer, which condemn
women to subservient roles, are, in fact "deutero-Pauline"
letters. "deutero" means secondery, which is a euphemism
for false. The were written by political Church hacks.
See http://southerncrossreview.org/14/pagels.htm
and
http://southerncrossreview.org/2/gnostic.html
Hey Frank,
The same was done with the Gospel of John
in having Peter view the grave first. He did not. And Father
Jusino shows a great thesis to this truth.
Have you read his thesis? I think it would
be a great complimentary piece to your two above if its something
you think is a possibility.
Dottie
...................................................................................................................................
From: Frank Thomas Smith
Date: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:31 am
Subject: RE: RV: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] NYTimes.com Article:
Op-Ed Columnist: Peter, Paul, Mary . . . and God
Dottie:
Frank:
Thee are my "comments later":
The Pauline letters mentioned below by the reviewer, which condemn
women to subservient roles, are, in fact "deutero-Pauline"
letters. "deutero" means secondery, which is a euphemism
for false. The were written by political Church hacks.
See http://southerncrossreview.org/14/pagels.htm
and
http://southerncrossreview.org/2/gnostic.html
Hey Frank,
The same was done with the Gospel of John
in having Peter view the grave first. He did not.
That may be so, but I was referring to the
fact that the deutero-Pauline letters in question are outright
falsifications, and biblical scholars generally agree on this.
The Gospel of John may have been altered at some time in history,
I don't know, but it was certainly written by the author of John.
Have you read his thesis? I think it would
be a great complimentary piece to your two above if its something
you think is a possibility.
And Father Jusino shows a great thesis
to this truth.
No, I don't know it
Frank
...................................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:59 am
Subject: RE: RV: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] NYTimes.com Article:
Op-Ed Columnist: Peter, Paul, Mary . . . and God
Dottie:
Have you read his thesis? I think it would
be a great complimentary piece to your two above if its something
you think is a possibility.
And Father Jusino shows a great thesis
to this truth.
No, I don't know it
Frank
Hey Frank,
Father Jusino now has a website to advance
his thought on Magdalene as the Beloved Disciple. There is none
of the Mary marrying Jesus and having children things that usually
have been accompanying this idea of Magdalene as the Beloved
Disciple.
www.BelovedDisciple.org
Some comments from renown Catholic scholars
can be found at
http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/advancing_my_thesis.htm
and the specific article I was speaking of
that I found after having realized Magdalene was the Beloved
can be found at:
http://www.beloveddisciple.org/
None of this touches on my thoughts on Lazarus.
And it doesn't need to.
The beginning of looking, to where I felt
Dr. Steiner led me through his work, was The Magdalene and the
Fourth Gospel. And then I found Father Jusinos work that fits
with all that I found through Dr. Steiners Fifth Gospel.
Dottie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
February/March
2004
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
