The Gospel Of Mary 1st Edition Esther De Boer

download

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-gospel-of-mary-1st-edition-
esther-de-boer-5284062

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

The Gospel Of Mary Magdalene 2014th Edition Jeanyves Leloup

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-gospel-of-mary-magdalene-2014th-
edition-jeanyves-leloup-48977812

The Gospel Of Mary Of Magdala Jesus And The First Woman Apostle Karen
L King

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-gospel-of-mary-of-magdala-jesus-and-
the-first-woman-apostle-karen-l-king-1409268

The Gospel Of Mary Philip Freeman

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-gospel-of-mary-philip-
freeman-46983908

Eschatology And The Saviour The Gospel Of Mary Among Early Christian
Dialogue Gospels Society For New Testament Studies Monograph Series
Vol 176 Sarah Parkhouse

https://ebookbell.com/product/eschatology-and-the-saviour-the-gospel-
of-mary-among-early-christian-dialogue-gospels-society-for-new-
testament-studies-monograph-series-vol-176-sarah-parkhouse-50258302
Models Of Authority And Debate In The Gospel Of Mary Bokyung Kim

https://ebookbell.com/product/models-of-authority-and-debate-in-the-
gospel-of-mary-bokyung-kim-37366000

Forbidden Oracles The Gospel Of The Lots Of Mary Annemarie Luijendijk

https://ebookbell.com/product/forbidden-oracles-the-gospel-of-the-
lots-of-mary-annemarie-luijendijk-49191990

The Gospel Of Philip Jesus Mary Magdalene And The Gnosis Of Sacred
Union Jeanyves Leloup

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-gospel-of-philip-jesus-mary-
magdalene-and-the-gnosis-of-sacred-union-jeanyves-leloup-2296080

Lazarus Mary And Martha Socialscientific Approaches To The Gospel Of

John Philip Francis Esler Ronald Piper Esler

https://ebookbell.com/product/lazarus-mary-and-martha-
socialscientific-approaches-to-the-gospel-of-john-philip-francis-
esler-ronald-piper-esler-33506582

The Gospel Of Mark 2010th Edition Healy Marywilliamson Peter S

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-gospel-of-mark-2010th-edition-healy-
marywilliamson-peter-s-49001364
 library of new testament studies

The Gospel
of Mary
Beyond a Gnostic and a Biblical
Mary Magdalene

Esther A. de Boer
JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
SUPPLEMENT SERIES
260

Editor
Mark Goodacre

Editorial Board
Craig Blomberg, Elizabeth A. Castelli, David Catchpole,
Kathleen E. Corley, R. Alan Culpepper, James D.G. Dunn,
Craig A. Evans, Stephen Fowl, Robert Fowler, George H.
Guthrie, Robert Jewett, Robert W. Wall
The Gospel of Mary

Beyond a Gnostic and a Biblical

Mary Magdalene

Esther A. de Boer

T&.T CLARK INTERNATIONAL

A Continuum imprint
L O N D O N • N E W Y O R K
Copyright © 2004 T&T Clark International
A Continuum imprint

Published by T&T Clark International

The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX
15 East 26th Street, Suite 1703, New York, NY 10010

www.tandtclark.com

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage
or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

Typeset by TMW Typesetting, Sheffield

EISBN 9780567082640
 CONTENTS

Preface vii
Abbreviations ix

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION 1

Chapter 2
THE GOSPEL OF MARY 12

Chapter 3
CHARACTER AND PURPOSE OF THE GOSPEL OF MARY 35

Chapter 4
MARY MAGDALENE ACCORDING TO THE GOSPEL OF MARY 60

Chapter 5
MARY MAGDALENE ACCORDING TO THE GOSPEL OF MARK 101

Chapter 6
MARY MAGDALENE ACCORDING TO THE GOSPELS OF
MATTHEW AND LUKE 127

Chapter 7
MARY MAGDALENE ACCORDING TO THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 157

Chapter 8
THE NEW TESTAMENT GOSPELS AND THE GOSPEL OF
MARY ABOUT MARY MAGDALENE 191

Chapter 9
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 200

Bibliography 209
Index of References 230
Index of Authors 245
 PREFACE

This book is a revised version of my PhD thesis accepted by the Theological

University of Kampen (The Netherlands) in December 2002. When I was a student
in 1982,1 came upon the Gospel of Mary by chance while reading Elaine Pagels'
book The Gnostic Gospels. I vividly remember the shock when I saw the words
'the Gospel of Mary' in print before me. A Gospel named after a woman? I de-
voted the last years of my theological studies at the Free University in Amsterdam
to this Gospel: I learned Coptic, studied New Testament and Gnosticism, attended
the conference 'Images of the Feminine in Gnosticism' in Anaheim in 1985, wrote
the Dutch equivalent of a MA thesis on Mary Magdalene in the New Testament
Gospels and the Gospel of Mary and planned a larger study on the subject.
After I finished my studies, I began work as an army chaplain in Seedorf, Ger-
many, and later as a minister in the Reformed Church in Ouderkerk aan de Amstel,
The Netherlands. In these circumstances, what I originally intended to be a larger
study resulted in a small book intended for the general public: Mary Magdalene:
Beyond the Myth. As reactions to this book came in, however, the desire to
undertake a more scholarly study returned. But how could I pursue such a project?
I then learned that the Theological University of Kampen had a special fund for
ministers. For three years 'my' parish would be paid to allow me to spend half of
my time on the study that was so important to me.
I would, therefore, like first of all to express my gratitude to the Theological
University of Kampen and the parish of Ouderkerk aan de Amstel for offering me
this wonderful opportunity. In the hectic round of preparing sermons, doing
funerals, attending church assemblies and all the other work a minister does, it was
a gift of grace to be entitled (even obliged) to retreat for two days a week in the
library of the Free University in Amsterdam (Kampen was too far away) to work
on the subject that I found so compelling.
For their continuing interest and kindness I thank Prof. Tj. Baarda (Free Uni-
versity, Amsterdam) and Prof. R. van den Broek (University of Utrecht), who
supervised the initial planning and the start of the larger study, when I was still a
student. I thank Prof. A.P. Bos (Free University, Amsterdam) for his comments on
Chapters 2 and 3 of the present study and Prof. C. den Heyer (Theological Uni-
versity of Kampen) for his comments on Chapters 5, 6, and 7 in their initial stage.
Special thanks are due to Dr J. Helderman who taught me the Coptic language and,
as a referee, read the entire manuscript of the thesis.
To both my supervisors, Dr C. Vander Stichele (University of Amsterdam) and
Prof. R. Roukema (Theological University of Kampen), I wish to express my
viii The Gospel of Mary

sincere gratitude. I thank Dr Vander Stichele for her critical and challenging com-
ments on various drafts of the work and for the opportunity and encouragement to
publish parts of my research. She also kept me informed about and in touch with
the international academic world. It is thanks to Prof. Roukema that this study has
been undertaken and completed. I am very grateful for the discussions that
preceded the project, mostly in the train on our way to a church meeting, for his
close involvement in the project and for his criticism and support during the
research, the writing and the completion of the book.
The work is written in English. I could not have done this without the help and
encouragement of Paula Pumplin. Starting in the early stages, she corrected what-
ever I wrote in the hope that my English would improve. She later patiently read
and reread all the drafts of the manuscript and critically commented on my use of
the English language. I wish to emphasize that any sins against the language that
remain are mine.
Finally, I would like to thank Prof. M.C. de Boer (Free University, Amsterdam)
and Prof. S.E. Porter (McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, Canada). They
recommended the manuscript for publication in the Journal for the Study of the
New Testament Supplement Series. I am very glad that the work will now be
accessible to a wider audience.
Last, but certainly not least, I thank my children: Maartje and Jan for their pati-
ence and baby Simon for his presence. I thank my husband, Klaas Spoelstra, for his
care and support for us all. To him I dedicate this work.

Esther A. de Boer
Berg en Terblijt, The Netherlands
October 2003
 ABBREVIATIONS

AB Anchor Bible
ApocJohn Apocryphon of John
1 ApocJas First Apocalypse of James
ATR Anglican Theological Review
BG Berolinensis Gnosticus
BJS Brown Judaic Studies
BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin
BZ Biblische Zeitschrift
BZNW BeiheftezurZAW
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CH Corpus Hermeticum
ConBNT Coniectanea Biblica, New Testament
DialSav Dialogue of the Saviour
EKKNT Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament
EpAp Epistula Apostolorum
EvT Evangelische Theologie
ExpTim Expository Times
GosMar Gospel of Mary
GosPhil Gospel of Philip
GosThom Gospel of Thomas
GosTruth Gospel of Truth
HeyJ Heythrop Journal
HTKNT Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament
HTR Harvard Theological Review
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JJS Journal of Jewish Studies
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
LCL Loeb Classical Library
NHC Nag Hammadi Codices
NHMS Nag Hammadi Studies and Manichaean Studies
NHS Nag Hammadi Studies
NovT Novum Testamentum
NovTSup Novum Testamentum, Supplements
NTS New Testament Studies
POxy Papyrus Oxyrhinchus
PRyl Papyrus Rylands
PS Pistis Sophia
RNT Regensburger Neues Testament
SJC Sohpia of Jesus Christ
SVF Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta
TDNT Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (eds.), Theological Dictionary of
x The Gospel of Mary

the New Testament (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; 10 vols.; Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-)
75* Theological Studies
TU Texte und Untersuchungen
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
ZKG Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschichte
ZKT Zeitschrift fur katholische Theologie
ZNW Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

The Gospel of Mary, the only known Gospel that is named after a woman, has
aroused new interest in the figure of Mary Magdalene and the beginnings of
Christianity. What was her impact and what was her message? What became of her
and her ideas? These are questions which are raised not only by scholars but which
also appeal to a larger public. Books about Mary Magdalene are popular. Marianne
Fredriksson's novel, According to Mary Magdalene, for example, became a best-
seller.1 This novel tells the story of how Mary Magdalene comes to realize that
Peter and Paul are altering Christ's teaching to suit their own goals and how she
struggles to spread his undistorted teaching herself. In the introduction to the novel,
Fredriksson explains that she decided to write this book after reading the Gospel of
Mary. The present study examines the Gospel of Mary to discover what it reveals
about Mary Magdalene and to determine the origin of this portrayal.

1. Survey ofResearch

1.1. Saint Mary Magdalene

In the Western tradition of the Church, Mary Magdalene is the sinful sister of
Martha and Lazarus, who washed Jesus' feet with her tears and lovingly anointed
them with precious oil. In return he absolved her of her seven deadly sins. As a re-
sult she became a serious devotee of his teaching. Her ardent love for him com-
pelled her to go to his tomb to anoint his dead body. This made her thefirstwitness
of his resurrection. With Lazarus, Martha and others, she proclaimed the Gospel in
France. She then withdrew to live the life of a hermit, as penance for her former
sinful life.
Most modern exegetes consider Saint Mary Magdalene of the Western Church
to be a product of the early Middle Ages when legends were used to supplement
the biblical texts in order to provide exemplary and attractive models of faith. In
the early Middle Ages, stories were drawn from several biblical narratives and
texts from different Gospels were harmonized. Especially Peter Ketter in his study
The Magdalene Question, published in 1935, has shown the harmonization of texts
which is at the basis of the composite figure of Saint Mary Magdalene.2 The

1. Fredriksson: 1999.
2. See also Sickenberger 1926 and Holzmeister 1922.
2 The Gospel of Mary

medieval story of Saint Mary Magdalene is based on a combination of the four

different New Testament Gospel narratives about a woman who anoints Jesus and
on the interpretation of demons as sins. The Gospel of John introduces Mary, the
sister of Martha, with the words 'who had anointed the Lord with ointment and
wiped his feet with her hair' (Jn 11.2).3 In the Gospel of Luke it is 'a woman of the
city who was a sinner' who wipes Jesus' feet with her hair and anoints them (Lk.
7.37). Thus Martha's sister was identified with the anonymous sinner in Luke.
Directly following this narrative, Luke tells his readers of the women who followed
Jesus. Thefirstone he mentions is Mary Magdalenefromwhom, as he says, 'seven
evil spirits had gone out' (Lk. 8.2). These seven evil spirits were interpreted as the
sins of the anonymous woman-sinner of the previous story.
Mary, the sinful sister of Martha and Lazarus, became Mary Magdalene. As
such she did not only anoint the feet of Jesus, but also his head just before the day
of his arrest (Mk 14.3-9; Mt. 26.6-13). When the disciples become angry about this
(Mt. 26.8), Jesus defends the equally unnamed woman, saying: 'I assure you that
wherever the gospel is preached all over the world, what she has done will be told
in memory of her' (Mk 14.9; Mt. 26.13).
Other stories of unnamed women were also drawn on. In Luke, Jesus says of the
anonymous woman-sinner that she 'loved much' (Lk. 7.47). This fits in well with
the narrative of the unnamed Samaritan woman in the Gospel of John who was said
to have had several husbands (Jn 4.18) and also with the anonymous adulterous
woman who was saved from stoning by Jesus (Jn 8.1-11). Thus Mary Magdalene
became the sexually promiscuous woman who, inspired so many Christians
throughout the ages to care for prostitutes and for those who because of their weak
social position, succumbed to prostitution.4 Even her name, 'Magdalene', became
the word with which to describe an adulterous woman or a woman prostitute.5
By anointing Jesus, Mary Magdalene did penance for her many sins. Her new
state of life was thought to be described in Lk. 10.38-42. In this narrative Mary,
Martha's sister, is sitting at the feet of Jesus, and is listening to what he has to say,
while Martha is busy serving the many guests. When she asks Jesus to let Mary
help her, he answers 'Mary has taken the good part and it will not be taken of her'
(Lk. 10.42). Thus Mary Magdalene became the symbol of the ascetic and contem-
plative life, and even of the Church itself.6 Mary Magdalene's love for Jesus was
illustrated not only by the anointing scenes, but also by her presence at the cruci-
fixion, and by her desire to anoint his dead body. As a result an ointment jar is one
of her main attributes in art.7
Old Testament texts were also drawn on,8 such as the Song of Songs in which
the loving zeal of Mary Magdalene was believed to be described. As a symbol of

3. Translation of biblical texts. Revised standard version.

4. Haskins 1993: 170-75, 317-27.
5. Haskins 1993: 176.
6. Haskins 1993: 91-94.
7. Anstett-Janssen 1974: VII, cols 516-41.
8. For instance in liturgy. See Mary Magdalene's feast day in the Roman Missal and in the
Roman Breviary, both from before the Second Vatican Council.
 1. Introduction 3

the Church, Mary Magdalene became the Bride alongside the Bridegroom, one of
the metaphors for Christ. In the same way she became the Queen alongside the
King, for example in Psalm 45.
The composite Saint Mary Magdalene has become a popular subject in recent
scholarly work. Many studies have been devoted to her and one may expect more
to come. Studies have been published about the portrayal of Mary Magdalene
throughout the centuries. In 1975 Marjorie Malvern wrote Venus in Sackcloth. The
Magdalen's Origins and Metamorphoses. She reviews the biblical writings on
Mary Magdalene, the Gnostic writings, the Church fathers, some plays of the
Middle Ages and books and movies from the twentieth century. She includes art as
well as literature. In 1993 Susan Haskins published Mary Magdalen: Myth and
Metaphor, which also examines the portrayals of Mary Magdalene from the first-
century four Gospels unto modern writers and artists, but in much more detail than
the book by Malvern.9 A similar procedure was followed by Ingrid Maisch, who in
1996 published Maria Magdalena. Zwischen Verachtung und Verehrung.
Each study describes the images of Mary Magdalene and, in addition, tries to
evaluate them. According to Malvern, the metamorphoses of the composite Saint
Mary Magdalene incorporate the remembrance of holy harlots and goddesses of
love, wisdom and fertility. Malvern argues that the metamorphoses are mythical
and reveal the need of a female counterpart next to the Jewish Christian male
God.10
Haskins argues that Mary Magdalene's myth has changed Mary Magdalene into
an effective weapon of the Church against the female sex. According to Haskins, in
the figure of Saint Mary Magdalene the ascetic Church rejected sexuality with
women as its embodiment. In her view, the biblical image of Mary Magdalene was
deliberately adapted so that, instead of being a woman who proclaimed the Easter
Gospel, she became a woman who served as a role model for a misogynistic
Church.11
Maisch concludes that Mary Magdalene's metamorphoses reflect the masculine
images of women: prostitute, wife, lover, ecstatic, saint. She argues that Mary
Magdalene must be rediscovered as a biblical saint with modern virtues such as
solidarity with the dying, compassion with the tortured, loyalty beyond death,
courage, creativity and perseverance.12
Other studies show a fascination with the tradition of the composite Mary
Magdalene and focus on her representations in art, in letters, in poetry, novels and
plays, in mysticism and in esoteric traditions. In 1986 an exhibition in Florence
was documented in an impressive catalogue with thorough articles. The same hap-
pened in 2002 in Ghent.13 Two conferences devoted to Mary Magdalene were held

9. See also the chapters on Mary Magdalene in Warner 1985:224-35 and Moltmann-Wendel
1980: 67-95.
10. Malvern 1975: 173-80.
11. Haskins 1993: 96-97.
12. Maisch 1996: 189-90.
13. Mosco 1986; Baert 2002.
4 The Gospel of Mary

in France in 1988 (Avignon) and in 1999 (Vezelay).14 Margaret Starbird con-

centrated on esoteric traditions.15
Some books focus on the Middle Ages. Victor Saxer published an extensive
study on the cult of Mary Magdalene in the Western Church from its origins up to
the end of the Middle Ages.16 Elisabeth Pinto-Mathieu studied Mary Magdalene in
the literature of the Middle Ages; Marga Janssen studied her medieval representa-
tion in Western iconography; and Katherine Ludwig Jansen studied unpublished
sermons of the Middle Ages.17
The latter, in the epilogue of her book, emphasizes the importance of the tradi-
tions about Saint Mary Magdalene. In her view, when returning to the biblical
figure of Mary Magdalene, we not only gain 'historical' accuracy, but also lose
much, for example Mary Magdalene's representation as a preacher and apostle of
the apostles.18
In the tradition of the Eastern Church, Mary Magdalene and Mary the sister of
Martha remained separate and each have their own feast day. In the Eastern tra-
dition Mary Magdalene is not celebrated as the penitent sinner as in the Western
tradition, but as 'ointment bearer' and as 'equal to an apostle'. Eva Synek studied
the portrayal of Mary Magdalene in the Eastern tradition and concluded that a
number of Church Fathers depict Mary Magdalene as a disciple and an apostle.19
In 1963 the Second Vatican Council of the Roman Catholic Church decided that
the Calendar of Saints should be evaluated. Since then the calendar reads at Mary
Magdalene's day, 22 July, that it 'celebrates only the one whom Christ appeared
after the resurrection and in no sense the sister of St. Martha, or the woman who
was a sinner and whose sins the Lord forgave'.20 Officially the biblical Mary
Magdalene has replaced the Saint. The composite figure of Mary Magdalene the
Saint, however, has been extremely popular throughout the ages and still is today.
The portrait of the composite Mary Magdalene is kept alive in places of pil-
grimage, such as in Vezelay, where it is, oddly enough, officially acknowledged
by local Roman Catholic authorities.21

1.2. A Gnostic Mary Magdalene

The present study is not about the traditions and origins of Saint Mary Magdalene,
but belongs to the field of research on specific portrayals of Mary Magdalene in
early Christianity. This study focuses on the portrayal of Mary Magdalene in the
Gospel of Mary, in order to contribute to the scholarly debate on the Gnostic Mary
Magdalene.
Beginning in the eighteenth century, papyrus codices have been found which are

14. Duperray 1989; Montandon 1999.

15. Starbird 1993.
16. Saxer 1959.
17. Pinto-Mathieu 1997; Anstett-Janssen 1961; Jansen 2000.
18. Jansen 2000: 336.
19. Synek 1995.
20. Calendarium Romanum Generale 1969: 97-98, 131.
21. Pierre-Marie 1995: 7-21.
 1. Introduction 5

believed to be among the Gnostic writings, in which a Mary occurs, who is com-
monly identified as Mary Magdalene.22 In 1773 the Codex Askewianus was found,
containing the writing Pistis Sophia. In 1896 the Papyrus Berolinensis, containing
the Gospel of Mary, and in 1945 the Nag Hammadi Codices were found with the
Gospel of Thomas, the Dialogue of the Saviour, the Gospel of Philip, the Sophia of
Jesus Christ and the First Apocalypse of James. These writings arefromthe second
and third centuries.23
In these writings Mary Magdalene is one of the disciples, learning from Jesus.
She asks questions, she is spoken to and spoken of. Both in the Gospel of Thomas
and in the Sophia of Jesus Christ she asks about the nature and purpose of
discipleship.24 In the Sophia of Jesus Christ she asks how the disciples can find
knowledge.25 In the Dialogue of the Saviour she is one of the three disciples (the
other two are Matthew and Judas) who receive special instruction. She asks about
the meaning of sorrow and joy.26 She also asks her brothers where and how they
will keep all the things that the Lord tells them.27
Furthermore, Mary Magdalene has a role as interpreter. She knows the Scripture
and sayings of Jesus and discusses their meaning. In Pistis Sophia she quotes Isaiah
and the Psalms. She memorizes what Jesus said and what Paul has written.28 She
also quotes sayings of Jesus in the Dialogue of the Saviour.29 The author adds:
'She uttered this as a woman who knew the AH'.30 Mary Magdalene's insight is
highly esteemed. In Pistis Sophia she is repeatedly praised by the Lord, because
she phrases pertinent questions accurately and purposefully.31 Her heart is said to
be more attuned to the Kingdom of Heaven than those of any of her brothers.32 In
the Gospel of Philip and the Gospel of Mary the disciples state that the Lord loves
her more than any of them.33 In the Gospel of Philip she is said to be the constant
companion to the Lord.34
The First Apocalypse of James relates that the Lord had twelve male and seven
female disciples.35 When James says of the female disciples, 'I am amazed how

22. Shoemaker 2001, for instance, defends the conjecture that the Gnostic Mary may be a
compositefigure,in which Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus are merged. More about
this in Chapter 2, section 1.6.
23. Other writings have been found too. For a survey of early Mary Magdalene texts (including
the New Testament), see for instance Bovon 1984 and Atwood 1993. For a review of publications
on early Mary Magdalene texts, see Thimmes 1998.
24. GosThom 21; SJC 114.8-12.
25. SJC 98.9-11.
26. DialSav 126.17-20.
27. DialSav 131.19-21.
28. PS 17-18; 60; 62; 113.
29. DialSav 139.8-11.
30. DialSav 139.11-13.
31. PS 25.
32. PS 17.
33. GosPhil 64.1-5; GosMar 18.14-15.
34. GosPhil 59.6-11.
35. 1 ApocJas 38.16-17; 42.20-24.
6 The Gospel of Mary

powerless vessels have become strong by a perception which is in them', the Lord
instructs him to learn from them and he mentions a few names, including Mary
Magdalene.36 In both Pistis Sophia and the Gospel of Mary, Mary Magdalene shares
her insights and teaches the disciples. For this she is praised, but also attacked. In
some writings it is Peter in particular who shows hostility. In the Gospel of Thomas
he says: 'Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life' (GosThom 114). In
the Gospel of Mary he argues: 'Surely he [the Lord] did not speak to a woman
without our knowledge and not openly. Are we to turn and all listen to her? Has he
chosen her above us?' (GosMar 17.16-23). And in Pistis Sophia he states: 'My
Lord, we cannot tolerate this woman anymore: she does not allow any of us to say
a word, whereas she speaks often' (PS 36).
The finding of the Gospel of Mary makes Mary Magdalene the only historical
woman who has a Gospel to her name.37 In the Gospel of Mary at least half of
what has remained of the gospel is a revelation dialogue between Mary and the
Lord, while in the other half she is one of the central figures. The Gospel of Mary
is commonly studied as an important witness to the status of Mary Magdalene in
early Gnostic circles. Antti Marjanen represents the general opinion when stating:
'A good indication of the esteem Mary Magdalene enjoyed among Gnostics is the
fact that an entire Gnostic Christian gospel is written in her name'.38

1.3. Various Opinions of the Gnostic Mary Magdalene

As in the case of Saint Mary Magdalene, questions have been raised about where
the Gnostic portrait of Mary Magdalene comesfromand how it is to be evaluated.39
In her book The Gnostic Gospels Elaine Pagels suggests that the Gnostic Mary
Magdalene gives evidence of a debate about the position of women in the church in
the second and third centuries. Mary Magdalene symbolizes the more unorthodox
viewpoint on women, whereas Peter symbolizes the orthodox stand. Mary Mag-
dalene is used by Gnostic authors to suggest that women's activity challenged the
male leaders of the orthodox community.40
In contrast to this, Pheme Perkins in her book The Gnostic Dialogue argues that
Mary Magdalene does not symbolize a debate about women leadership roles, but a
debate about Gnostic insights. In her view, Mary Magdalene was used as a me-
diator of revelations because she was afigureclosely associated with Jesus and one
to whom esoteric tradition could be attached.41
According to Malvern, the Gnostic Mary deals not only with gnosis, but also

36. 1 ApocJas 38.15-23; 40.24-26. For this interpretation, see Marjanen 1996: 132-37.
37. There is also a Gospel of Eve (Schneemelcher 1990:288-90). Some scholars, however, also
deny that Mary Magdalene would have been a historical woman; cf. Bultmann 1961: 308. Heine
1989 convincingly argues against this conjecture.
38. Marjanen 1996: 94.
39. For a survey of the history of the scholarly work on the Gnostic Mary Magdalene, see
Marjanen 1996: 6-20.
40. Pagels 1981: 76-81; see also Schmid 1990: 89.
41. Perkins 1980: 131-37, esp. 136 n. 10.
 1. Introduction 7

with 'the desire to link the Magdalen with Jesus'.42 The Gnostic portrayal, in her
view, corresponds especially with the resurrection story of the Gospel of John,
which would evoke images of fertility goddesses, and encourages imaginations to
go beyond the figure of the canonical Gospels.43 As such both the Gnostic Mary
Magdalene and the Saint 'reveal the efforts of early Christians to create a feminine
counterpart for their man-God' .44 Susanne Heine refers to Lk. 8.1 -3 where, accord-
ing to her, Mary Magdalene is presented as the closest companion to Jesus. She
argues that Gnostic authors took Mary Magdalene to be the female counterpart of
Christ in the Pleroma. Together with him she would be presented as an emanation
of the highest God.45
Peter Brown, on the contrary, argues that Gnostic circles with their portrayal of
Mary Magdalene valued the Mary Magdalene of the New Testament Gospels as
'an image of the sweet and irresistible absorption of the woman, the perpetual
inferior other, into her guiding principle, the male'.46 Haskins quotes Brown
with approval.47 In addition, Maisch points to Gnostic dualism and states that
Mary Magdalene would have had her place in Gnostic circles at the cost of her
femaleness.48
Others maintain that the Gnostic Mary Magdalene is not only an image but also
has a solid historical core. Robert Price argues that the conflict in the Gnostic
writings between Mary Magdalene and the male disciples reflects a first-century
debate about Mary Magdalene being the apostle of a non-hierarchical, egalitarian
Christianity. As a result, the biblical writers minimized her role.49 Karen King
concludes on the basis of the Gnostic writings that Mary Magdalene was afigureof
apostolic importance and a prophetess, more important than her official portrait in
the New Testament suggests. Mary Magdalene's absence, for instance from the
Acts of the Apostles, in her view, is part of a strategy to exclude women from
apostolic leadership roles.50 In addition, Jane Schaberg sees evidence in the resur-
rection story of the Gospel of John that Mary Magdalene was regarded by some as
a successor to Jesus, as Elisha was a successor to Elijah.51

1.4. Different Gnostic Portrayals of Mary Magdalene

The Finnish scholar Antti Marjanen was thefirstto go into detail with the study on
the Gnostic Mary Magdalene. In his dissertation The Woman Jesus Loved pub-
lished in 1996, he states that three aspects are not sufficiently dealt with in other
studies about her.52 First, one must consider the possibility that Mary Magdalene

42. Malvern 1975: 30.

43. Malvern 1975: 16-56.
44. Malvern 1975: 30.
45. Heine 1986: 139-42.
46. Brown 1989: 103-120 (113).
47. Haskins 1993: 54.
48. Maisch 1996: 36. See also Wisse 1988: 297-303 and Williams 1988.
49. Price 1990; see also Koivunen 1994: 210-11.
50. King 1998a: 39-40 and King 1998b: 21-41.
51. Schaberg 2002: 304-317.
52. Marjanen 1996: 28-29.
8 The Gospel of Mary

may have a different role in the various Gnostic writings. Secondly, her position
must not be viewed in isolation, but must be dealt with in the context of what is
related about the other disciples, especially the male ones. Thirdly, one must take
into account that the positive characterizations of Mary Magdalene are 'accompanied
by statements in which images of the feminine are used as negative symbols'.53
Marjanen shows that there are different Gnostic Mary Magdalene traditions.54
He identifies several common features: Mary Magdalene is given a significant
position among the followers of Jesus; she is introduced together with some of his
best known disciples; and most of the texts portray her in the period after the
resurrection. However, the differences Marjanen points out are significant.
According to Marjanen, in the Gospel of Thomas Mary Magdalene is a woman
disciple who needs deeper understanding, whereas in the Sophia of Jesus Christ
and the Dialogue of the Saviour she is the disciple who, together with two male
disciples, receives special instruction on which the writings claim to build. In the
Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Philip, Mary Magdalene is singled out as the
disciple most spiritually loved by Jesus, and is as such a model for the other
disciples. In Pistis Sophia Mary Magdalene is comparably prominent, but, Mar-
janen argues, as in the Gospel of Philip, the proclamation of the Gospel is specific-
ally entrusted to the male disciples. In the First Apocalypse of James, however,
James is advised to turn to Mary Magdalene and three other female disciples to
learn from them how to actually preach the Gospel.
Marjanen also points out that not only in the Gospel of Thomas, but also in the
Dialogue of the Saviour, the Sophia of Jesus Christ, the First Apocalypse of James,
and in his view in the Gospel of Mary as well, language is used that is male
oriented and devalues women.55 Last but not least, the conflict between Mary and
Peter, which is generally interpreted as symbolizing a conflict between Gnostic and
non-Gnostic orthodox Christians, in his view, must be limited to the Gospel of
Mary only. In the Gospel of Philip the male disciples' envy does not turn into a
conflict and in the Pistis Sophia Peter's ideas are as Gnostic as Mary's. In the
Gospel of Thomas the debate concerns the position of women.56
Marjanen also goes into the question of the nature and the origin of the Gnostic
Mary Magdalene traditions. According to him no literary dependence between the
writings can be established. In his view two aspects are significant when looking
for the roots of the Gnostic Mary Magdalene traditions. The testimony in the
Gospels of Mark and John that Jesus after his resurrection appeared to Mary
Magdalene would make Mary Magdalene 'an attractivefigurefor a Gnostic myth-
making process'. 57 Secondly, the Gospel of Thomas, the Sophia of Jesus Christ
and the Dialogue of the Saviour are in his view evidence thatfromthe beginning of
the second century Mary Magdalene emerged as a Gnostic disciple.

53. Marjanen 1996: 29.

54. Marjanen 1996: 216-25.
55. Marjanen 1996: 220-21.
56. Marjanen 1996: 222-23.
57. Marjanen 1996: 223.
 1. Introduction 9

1.5. Gnostic Women Disciples

The German scholar Silke Petersen also devoted her dissertation to the Gnostic
Mary Magdalene, but in such a way that she focuses not just on her, but on all the
women disciples in Gnostic writings, namely Mary Magdalene, Salome, Martha,
Arsinoe, several unnamed women disciples (among them Jesus' seven women
disciples) and Mary, the mother of Jesus. In 1999 her book was published under
the title 'Zerstort die Werke der Weiblichkeitl' Maria Magdalena, Salome &
andere Jungerinnen Jesu in christlich-gnostischen Schriften.
Petersen studies the role and position of women disciples in Gnostic writings.
The fact that so many women disciples have a role in Christian Gnostic literature
might lead one to conclude that they were quite important in Christian Gnostic
circles. In Petersen's view, however, before concluding this, one should first
compare this circumstance with the presence of male disciples in Gnostic writings
and the references to women disciples in non-Gnostic texts. She concludes that for
each Gnostic writing in which a woman has an important role there are two
writings in which a man has such a position. At the same time, whereas in all the
New Testament Gospels women play a role in the Easter story, there are several
similar stories in Gnostic writings in which women play no role at all.58
Petersen focuses on the particular significance of women disciples in Christian
Gnostic texts. How and why did the New Testament tradition of women disciples
become part of these texts and what kind of Gnostic theology lies behind it? In the
central part of her book Petersen examines in detail the women disciples' repre-
sentation in the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the Sophia of Jesus Christ,
the Dialogue of the Saviour, the First Apocalypse of James and in the Gospel of
Mary and Pistis Sophia, as well as in Patristic anti-Gnostic documents, and in
Manichaean Psalms. In contrast to Marjanen who focuses on each separate writing,
Petersen gives a cross-section and focuses on each of the women disciples.
The central part of her book is preceded by a section in which she introduces the
different texts and critically re-examines the genre of the Gnostic dialogue. In the
last part of the book the author identifies the one aspect of the Christian Gnostic
texts in which women disciples appear to play a role in common: they all contain
general comments on femininity and masculinity.59 Petersen places these com-
ments in the broader context of what is to be found on this subject in the literature
of late antiquity.60
According to Petersen, the Christian texts of antiquity show a fatal alternative:
either women become like men or, as women, they are to be submissive to men.
Petersen argues that the superiority of mind (asexual and masculine) to body
(sexual and feminine), which in her definition is fundamental to Gnostic thinking,
is at the root of the Gnostic Christian discipleship of women. She concludes that
women joined the Christian Gnostic community on the condition that they put
aside their feminine nature and become male.61

58. Petersen 1999: 304-307.

59. Petersen 1999: 307-308.
60. Petersen 1999: 309-334.
61. Petersen 1999: 336-37.
10 The Gospel of Mary

Another German scholar, Erika Mohri, in her dissertation, Maria Magdalena

Frauen ub Evangelientexten des 1. bis 3 Jahrhundert, published in 2000, argues
that the changes in the portrayals of Mary Magdalene, not only in Gnostic, but also
in other texts, reflecting the continuing discussion about the place of women in the
communities and about the imagery of God and the world.62 Mohri emphasizes that
sexist imagery and self-confident women occur in the same texts. She explains this
by arguing that through sexual asceticism women can escape matter and become
equal to men. She suggests that sexual asceticism may have been experienced by
women as a liberation from the burden of childbearing.63 Moreover, Mohri argues
that, in spite of its androcentrism, the androgynous Gnostic imagery of God opens
up to women the possibility of experiencing themselves as close to the Divine.

2. The Present Research

2.1. Task
Two basic viewpoints can be distinguished in recent scholarly work: (1) Gnostic
authors have constructed a Gnostic Mary Magdalene using the biblical portrait of
her as a vehicle for Gnostic teaching, and, (2) biblical authors neglected the im-
portant role of Mary Magdalene, of which Gnostic authors preserved evidence. In
addition, on the one hand the Gnostic Mary Magdalene is valued as a female
apostolic leader, as an advocate of women and of egalitarian discipleship, and as a
revealer of Gnostic insights. On the other hand, scholars point to the specific
dualism, and the subsequently negative female imagery in Gnostic writings, and
reject a positive evaluation of the Gnostic Mary Magdalene.
To be able to evaluate these different viewpoints on the Gnostic Mary Mag-
dalene, the present study focuses on the Gospel of Mary, which is considered to be
the most important early witness to the esteem of Mary Magdalene in Gnostic
circles. We will investigate the following.
1. The dualism involved in the Gospel of Mary: is it a specific Gnostic dualism
and does it contain a negative use of female imagery?
2. Mary's teaching in the Gospel of Mary: what is the specific content of her
teaching?
3. The Gospel of Mary's view on Mary Magdalene: does this gospel advocate
the apostolic leadership of women, an egalitarian discipleship and a non-
hierarchical way of being the church?
4. The portrayals of Mary Magdalene in the New Testament Gospels: to what
extent can the portrayal of Mary Magdalene in the Gospel of Mary, her
relation to the Saviour, her position among the disciples, her function in the
story, be understood from the New Testament Gospels?
By answering these questions I hope to contribute to the present debate about the
Gnostic Mary Magdalene.

62. Mohri 2000: 374-77.

63. Mohri 2000: 219-28 in an excursus on the Gospel of the Egyptians.
 1. Introduction 11

2.2. Approach
Chapter 2 is an introduction to the Gospel of Mary. It will go into its three
incomplete manuscripts, the provenance of the original document, its date and
composition, the persons in the story and the identification of Mary as Mary Mag-
dalene. This chapter also presents a translation of the nine pages from the Coptic
manuscript, followed by a study of the meaning of the Gospel of Mary, and of the
definition of the term 'Gnostic'.
Chapter 3 examines the purpose of and the dualism in the Gospel of Mary and
the question whether it is to be seen as a Gnostic document. Chapter 4 focuses on
the author's portrayal of Mary Magdalene in the Gospel of Mary. What is her
relation to the Saviour, what is her position among the disciples and what is her
function in the story? The author speaksfromthe viewpoint of Peter, of Andrew, of
Levi, of the Saviour, and of Mary herself. Through the interaction of these views,
through the extra knowledge and view of the narrator, through Mary's teaching and
through certain indications in the text, we shall examine the development of the plot
in which the author's view of Mary Magdalene becomes apparent.
To be able to investigate the origin of the portrayal of Mary Magdalene in the
Gospel of Mary the next three chapters examine the New Testament Gospels, since
they contain the earliest written material on Mary Magdalene. Chapter 5 studies the
portrayal of Mary Magdalene in the Gospel of Mark. Almost at the end of the
Gospel, Mark for thefirsttime declares that a considerable number of women had
been following Jesus. What to think of these women? What is their function in
Mark's story? And what about Mary Magdalene in their midst? In order to answer
these questions this chapter not only focuses on Mark, but also on the historical
situation at the time. Chapter 6 investigates the Gospels of Matthew and Luke and
Chapter 7 examines the Gospel of John.
Chapter 8 will evaluate the portrayals of Mary Magdalene in the Gospel of Mary
and the New Testament Gospels. In conclusion, chapter 9 reflects on the questions
raised in chapter 1.
 Chapter 2

THE GOSPEL OF MARY

This chapter is an introduction to the Gospel of Mary. It will cover its three in-
complete manuscripts, the provenance of the original document, its date and com-
position, the persons in the story and the identification of Mary as Mary Magdalene.
This chapter also presents a translation of the nine pages which survived in the
Coptic manuscript, followed by a study of the meaning of the Gospel of Mary. It
will investigate in what way the Gospel of Mary, although obviously different from
the New Testament writings, contains similar themes. In addition, it will examine
the reasons why the Gospel of Mary is considered to be a Gnostic writing and the
debate about the definition of the term 'Gnostic'.

1. Introduction

1.1. Three Incomplete Manuscripts

The second-century Gospel of Mary is by far the most intriguing early text in
which Mary Magdalene has a part, since this text portrays her speaking extensively
about her knowledge and experience of the Lord. Three incomplete manuscripts of
the Gospel of Mary have survived.1 In 1896, C. Reinhardt discovered a fairly large
fragment of a Coptic manuscript, which is now called the Berlin Codex, that con-
tained four writings: the Gospel of Mary, the Apocryphon of John, the Sophia of
Jesus Christ and the Act of Peter.2 This Coptic manuscript dates from about the be-
ginning of the fifth century, or the end of the fourth century and is written in the
Sahidic dialect, which was generally used by the Egyptians at the time.3 The codex
was discovered, wrapped in feathers, in a niche in a wall at a Christian burial place
near the ancient city of Panopolis, in Upper Egypt.4

1. For an introduction into the research on the Gospel of Mary see Tardieu and Dubois 1986:
99-107. Luttikhuizen (1986: 38-60), was the first to translate and publish the Gospel of Mary in
Dutch with a short commentary. Photos of the manuscripts can be found in King 2003b: XI, 19-27,
91.
2. It is now in the Egyptology Department of the National Museum in Berlin under the name
Papyrus Berolinensis 8502. It is also called Berolinensis Gnosticus. See for text and comment Till
andSchenke 1972.
3. This is based on linguistic evidence and the form of the codex (Tardieu and Dubois 1986:
101).
4. Tardieu and Dubois 1986: 99-100.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 13

From this manuscript it becomes clear that the Gospel of Mary contained nineteen
pages, only nine of which (7.1-10.23,15.1-19.5) have survived. The beginning of the
Gospel and some of Mary's words are missing, but the end of the Gospel and the title
are preserved. The manuscript is a Coptic translation of a Greek original. Two Greek
papyrus fragments of the Gospel of Mary, both dating from the third century, were
found near the ancient city of Oxyrhynchus, one of the principal Hellenized centres
of Egypt. The first, P Ryl 463 discovered in 1938, which contains GosMar 17-19,
dates from the beginning of the third century.5 The second, POxy 3525 found in
1983, contains GosMar 9.1-10.6 The Greek fragments were written by different
hands and appear to be two separate later copies of the Greek original of the
Gospel of Mary.7
In third-century Oxyrhynchus, Greeks from Macedonia and Persia formed the
highest class.8 There was also a Jewish quarter. At this time the economic situation
was declining; Roman taxations were doubled and there was a great gap between
rich and poor.9 The first recorded persecution of Christians in Oxyrhynchus dates
from about 250. At the beginning of the third century there were two churches and
Christianity was widely flourishing.10

1.2. Provenance
The origin of the Gospel of Mary is unknown. Some argue, not very convincingly,
that the Gospel was perhaps written in Egypt.11 This suggestion is based on the
Gnostic myth that, according to most exegetes, lies behind the text and on the fact
that all three manuscripts of the Gospel of Mary were found in Egypt. The latter,
however, is most probably due to the Egyptian climate.12 Furthermore, the Gospel
of Mary is first of all a Christian writing and all the early Christian and Jewish
papyri which have been found in Oxyrhynchus originally came from outside
Egypt. In addition to the Gospel of Mary, the following Christian texts dating from
the first three centuries have been found there: the Gospel of John, the Gospel of
Matthew, the Gospel of Thomas, the LetterfromJames, the Gospel of Luke, Paul's
letter to the Romans, the Letter to the Hebrews and the Gospel of Peter.13 None of
these were written in Egypt. Why would the Gospel of Mary be the exception?

5. P Ryl 463; see Roberts 1938: 18-23.

6. P Oxy 3525; see Parsons 1983: 12-14. Liihrmann (1988: 321-38) compares the two
fragments. See also Mohri 2000: 261-65.
7. Roberts 1938: 20; Liihrman 1988: 336; Marjanen 1996: 97.
8. MacLennon 1968: 13.
9. MacLennon (1968: 30), in his economic and social study of Oxyrhynchus, based on a large
number of papyri which are testimonies of everyday life, concludes about the third century that
'the evidence as a whole presents a dreadful picture of unbroken trouble and exaction and
depression, or ruthless profiteering and cynical violence'.
10. MacLennon 1968: 84-85.
11. Pasquier 1983: 13-14.
12. Petersen 1999: 5 7. Roberts (1979), on the basis of papyri, argues that early Christianity in
Egypt was not, as some have suggested, specifically inclined to Gnosticism.
13. See van Haelst 1976: 409-410 and Grenfell and Hunt no. 80 1994, no. 84 1997, no. 85
1998, no. 86 1999.
14 The Gospel of Mary

The handwriting in the religious and philosophical papyri that have been found
in Oxyrhynchus suggests that there were professional scribes and scriptoria in this
town.14 The papyri sent from abroad to be copied probably would have come via
Alexandria, since the Oxhyrynchites had clear economic, cultural and personal
links with this town. There is also written evidence that books were indeed
acquired via Alexandria.15 Judith Hartenstein suggests that the Gospel of Mary
may have its origin in Syria, on the basis of the important role of Levi and the
Syrian provenance of other writings in which Levi plays a role.161 suggest that the
provenance of the Gospel of Mary may also have been in Asia Minor, because of
similar imagery in the Pauline letters and in the Gospel of John. As we will see in
Chapter 3, the context of the first recipients of the Gospel of Mary is probably one
in which Stoic philosophy flourished.

13. Date
Various dates have been proposed for the Gospel of Mary. Some scholars argue
that it dates from the beginning of the second century on the basis of the early
second-century debates over women's leadership.17 Others maintain that it dates
from the middle or the second half of the second century because of the direct or
indirect dependence of the Gospel of Mary on the New Testament Gospels18 and
because of the Gospel's closeness to Middle Platonist themes.19 The end of the
second century has also been put forward, because it allows the Gospel of Mary to
be situated in the context of the School of Bardesanes and Aramaic philosophy.20
Since the Greek fragments found in Oxyrhynchus appear to be later copies of a
Greek original of the Gospel of Mary and the original version probably came from
outside Egypt, it should be dated some decades before the date of the oldest
papyrus fragment, P Ryl 463: thus, some decades before the beginning of the third
century. The possibility of an earlier date, however, must not be excluded, since, as
I will show, the imagery of the Son of Man, who is in his disciples, and who made
his disciples true Human Being, who are at the same time to clothe themselves with
the perfect Human Being, is very close to the imagery of Christ in the Pauline
letters.21 The similarity of the Gospel of Mary to the New Testament Gospels could
also be due to the fact that they are based on similar oral and/or written tradition.

1.4. Composition
Concerning the composition of the Gospel of Mary, Walter Till has suggested that
the Gospel of Mary as we now know it is the result of a redaction, in which the
original Gospel and a dialogue with the Saviour are rather clumsily put together.

14. Comfort 1992: 59-61.

15. Turner 1952.
16. Hartenstein 2000: 131-32.
17. King 1995: 628 and De Boer 1997: 76-79.
18. Marjanen 1996: 98.
19. Pasquier 1983: 3-4.
20. Tardieu 1984: 25.
21. See Chapter 3, section 3.1
 2. The Gospel of Mary 15

According to him, the original Gospel of Mary begins at 10.1 of the Coptic manu-
script.22 His argument is that Mary does not occur in the first part of the manuscript.
This is not convincing, however, since the first six pages of the Coptic manuscript
are missing. Why would one assume that Mary is not present on these pages?
Furthermore, according to Till, GosMar 9.5-10.1 would form the link between
the two original writings. Wilson, in his study of the New Testament references in
the Gospel of Mary, supports this last thesis, since the New Testament allusions in
his view are concentrated in the link between the two writings. However, he shows
them to occur in 8.14-23, instead of 9.5-10.1P Henri Puech argues that the Gospel
of Mary must be a later redaction of two writings since it consists of two genres: a
post-resurrection dialogue and an account of a vision. Like Till, he suggests that
the work originally entitled the Gospel of Mary only fits the second part of the
Coptic manuscript.24
Anne Pasquier offers a different view, according to which pages 9.21-17.9 (or
up to 17.15) were not included in the original Gospel of Mary. Pasquier suggests
this because of the strange way in which Peter contradicts himself in 10.1 and
17.18-22.25 This may, however, also be a development of the plot.26 In my view,
there is no valid reason to assume that two different writings lie behind the Coptic
Gospel of Mary, since, as will become clear, there is a unity in form and content
throughout the Gospel as we have it.27

1.5. Persons: Actors and Audience

The first six pages of the Coptic manuscript of the Gospel of Mary are missing. On
pp. 7 and 8 of the Gospel of Mary we suddenly enter into the end of a dialogue. We
know nothing about the beginning of the dialogue. On p. 7 two questions are
raised, one by Peter (7.10) and one by someone else (7.1) whose name is missing
and was probably mentioned earlier.
Jesus apparently addresses more people than Peter alone, since he uses a plural
when speaking to them (7.14-22; 8.5-9). In the course of the Gospel it becomes
clear that in addition to Peter, Mary, Andrew and Levi are also present. It is possi-
ble that there are more brothers (9.14; 17.11; 18.2) present than the three men-
tioned. If we assume this to be the case, then Andrew and Peter in 17.10-22 speak
to others in addition to Levi.
There might be also more sisters (10.1) present than Mary alone. If this is the
case, then we can assume that the women Peter refers to in 10.1-3 are actually
there. The Coptic word for 'brothers' CNHY in GosMar 9.14; 17.11 is the translation
of d5EA<|>oi (P Oxy 3525.9; P Ryl recto, 5-6). Whether this masculine plural
includes women is not quite clear. Peter, indeed, addresses Mary as 'sister', C(l)N6,

22. Till and Schenke 1972: 26; see also Puech 1959: 253.
23. Wilson 1957: 236-43.
24. Puech 1959: 252-54.
25. Pasquier 1983: 7-10 and 96-101.
26. See Marjanen 1996: 104, who adds that he owes this suggestion to Prof. King. See also
Chapter 4, section 3.3.
27. See also Tardieu 1984: 22-23; Luttikhuizen 1988: 158-68; King 1995: 626-27; Marjanen
1996: 100-104; Petersen 1999: 59, and Mohri 2000: 271-72.
16 The Gospel of Mary

but when Andrew in 17.10 turns to the brothers she is clearly not included. In 9.14
the narrator relates that she embraces her brothers, and thus places her over and
against them as a sister. This does, however, not necessarily mean that the word
'brothers' is meant exclusively. The rest of the women mentioned in 10.1-3 may
also be included.
If they are, as in the Sophia of Jesus Christ, then they, as well as the brothers,
receive the teaching of the Saviour and the mission to proclaim the Gospel. They,
as well as the brothers, weep when he is gone and pose their desperate question.
They, as well as the brothers, are embraced by Mary and are encouraged by her
words. Peter and Andrew not only turn to the brothers in 17.10-22, but to their
sisters as well, but they do not take part in the discussion. Only Levi intervenes. If
women are mentioned on the first six missing pages as being present or as partici-
pants in the dialogue, on the extant pages, they have no active role whatsoever.
However, it remains uncertain whether the word 'brothers' in the Gospel of
Mary is meant inclusively or not. As in the Dialogue of the Saviour it is also
possible that Mary is alone with her brothers. In the Gospel of Mary these brothers
may be limited to Peter, Andrew and Levi. This is as much as we can say. Only the
missing pages of the Gospel of Mary could really help to settle the question
whether there is an audience in the Gospel of Mary and whether this audience
consists of both men and women. Because of this uncertainty I translate CNHY as
'brothers (and sisters)'.

1.6. Mary as Mary Magdalene

Less than half of the Gospel of Mary has been preserved: ten of nineteen pages of
the Coptic manuscript are missing. The remaining pages always speak of Mary
(MAP 12 AM) and do not specifically identify her. The Greek papyri fragments both
have MaptapiJr]. Perhaps the Mary meant is identified on the pages that are missing.
Mary was a very common name in Palestine.28 In the New Testament various
Marys occur: Mary the mother of Jesus,29 Mary the mother of James and Josef,30
the other Mary,31 Mary of James,32 Mary the mother of Joses,33 Mary the sister of
Martha,34 Mary of Klopas,35 Mary the mother of John Mark,36 Mary in Rome37
and Mary of Magdala.38 It is difficult to decide whether these names all refer to
different persons.39 Their names are in Greek both written as Mapia and Mapia|j.
Which, if any, of these Marys is meant by Mary in the Gospel of Mary?

28. Ilan 1989: 191-92. See also Ilan 1995a: 53-55 and 174-75.
29. Mk 6.3; Mt. 1-2; 13.55-56; Lk. 1-2; Acts 1.14.
30. Mt. 27.56.
31. Mt. 28.1.
32. Mk 16.1; Lk. 24.10.
33. Mk 15.47.
34. Lk. 10.28-42; Jn 11; 12.1-11.
35. Jn 19.25.
36. Acts 12.12.
37. Rom. 16.6.
38. Mk 15.40,47; 16.1, 9; Mt. 27.56-61; 28.1; Lk. 8.2; 24.10; Jn 19.25; 20.1-18.
39. See for instance Mayor 1906.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 17

Most exegetes of the Gospel of Mary assume that Mary in the Gospel of Mary
must be identified as Mary Magdalene.40 An important argument is that the name
of Jesus' mother in Coptic texts is spelled MAP IX, whereas the name of Mary
Magdalene is also spelled MAP 12AM or MAP 12AMMH. In addition, in the Greek texts
of the Church Fathers Jesus' mother's name is usually spelled Mapia and not
MapiaMMn as in the Greek papyri fragments of the Gospel of Mary.41 Another
important argument is one of characterization: only the traditions of Mary
Magdalene would make her the one who could play all Mary's roles in the Gospel
of Mary.42 As King states: 'It was precisely the traditions of Mary as a woman, as
an exemplary disciple, a witness to the ministry of Jesus, a visionary of the
glorified Jesus, and someone traditionally in contest with Peter, that made her the
only figure who could play all the roles required to convey the messages and
meaning of the Gospel ofMary\43
Other scholars suggest that Mary should be identified as Mary the mother of
Jesus.44 Luchessi mentions two arguments: the tradition that the risen Christ
appeared to his mother and that his mother and the Twelve are interlocutors in
post-resurrection dialogues.45 Marjanen argues against these arguments: the tra-
dition of the risen Christ appearing to his mother is a late one and only in the
Questions of Bartholomew and Pistis Sophia Mary does the mother of Jesus par-
ticipate in a post-resurrection dialogue.46
According to Stephen Shoemaker, the Gnostic Mary of the second and third
century may be a composite figure, in which Mary Magdalene and Mary the
mother of Jesus are merged.47 Like Luchessi, he refers to the Syrian tradition of the
risen Christ's first appearance to his mother. Unlike Marjanen, he insists that this
tradition originates from the harmonization of the New Testament Gospels in
Tatian's Diatesseron48 and may be dated as early as the second century.49
Shoemaker also defends the conjecture that the Mary attacked by Peter in PS 36
and 72 must not be identified with Mary Magdalene, but with the mother of Jesus,
because she is 'blessed among all women on earth' (PS 19) and 'blessed by all
generations' (PS 56) which in Shoemaker's view would refer to Lukan 'epithets' of
Jesus' mother.50 However, could no other Marys be called blessed because the
Gospel of Luke attributed blessedness to the mother of Jesus?51 Moreover, the

40. Till and Schenke 1972: 26; Pasquier 1983; 23 note 75; Tardieu 1984: 20; King 1995: 601;
Marjanen 1996: 94-95; Petersen 1999: 102; Hartenstein 2000: 130.
41. Marjanen 1996: 63-64.
42. King 2002.
43. King 2002: 74.
44. For instance Bauer 1909: 448; Heiler 1977: 101; Livingstone 1977: 325.
45. Lucchesi 1985: 366.
46. Marjanen 1996: 94-95 note 2.
47. Shoemaker 2001. See also Shoemaker 2002.
48. See also Baarda 1975: 254-57 and Murray 1975: 372-84.
49. Shoemaker 2001: 560-69. Marjanen (2002) goes into Shoemaker's arguments.
50. PS 19 - Lk. 1.42; PS 56 - Lk. 1.48. Shoemaker 2001: 572-73.
51. Luke already contradicts this: see Lk. 11.27-28 where a woman from the crowd exclaims to
18 The Gospel of Mary

disciples in Pistis Sophia are called 'blessed beyond all men' (PS 352).
The more general accepted interpretation is that the blessed Mary in Pistis
Sophia is Mary Magdalene.52 Ann Graham Brock thoroughly examines the
unidentified Marys in Pistis Sophia and demonstrates that the texts show numerous
distinguishing, identifying phrases such as 'the other one', 'the blessed one', and
the 'pure spiritual one', helping the reader to identify Mary as Mary Magdalene.
She concludes that 'in a volume that philosophically tends to negate the physical
realm, Mary the Mother's status does not appear to be an especially high one'.53
In my view, the following considerations are convincing with regard to the
identification of Mary in the Gospel of Mary as Mary Magdalene. In the Gospel of
Mary it is Peter who is opposed to Mary's words, because she is a woman. Peter
has the same role in the Gospel of Thomas and in Pistis Sophia.54 In Pistis Sophia
the Mary concerned is identified as Mary Magdalene.55 Already the New Testa-
ment Gospels show a rivalry about Mary Magdalene and Peter and raise the
question to whom the risen Christ appearedfirst:to Mary Magdalene or to Peter.56
Furthermore, Levi in the Gospel of Mary states that the Saviour loved Mary 'more
than us'. The disciples in the Gospel of Philip make a similar statement about Mary
Magdalene.57 In addition, in the Gospel of Mary, Mary is supposed to know more
about the Saviour than the rest of her brothers and sisters. In the New Testament
Gospels it is Mary Magdalene who knows more than the others. As we will see, the
knowledge of Mary in the Gospel of Mary is especially close to the knowledge of
Mary Magdalene in the Gospel of John.

2. Translation of the Coptic Manuscript

The translation presented in this section is of the Coptic text as given by Pasquier
in her commentary, which is based on a thorough study of the original manu-
script.58 The words within square brackets are those which are difficult to read. The
translation is literal in the sense that, if a Coptic word occurs more than once, I
tried to translate it each time with the same English word. The words or phrases
within brackets are not in the Coptic text. I added them to show my interpretation
of the meaning of certain verses. The first pages, pp. 1-6, of the manuscript are
missing.

Jesus 'Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you suckled' and Jesus answers
'Indeed, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it'.
52. See also Marjanen 1996:173-74, who argues that Mary the mother of Jesus in Pistis Sophia
is always specifically introduced in a new passage.
53. Brock 2003: 47.
54. GosThom logion 114; PS 36 and 72.
55. Close to the discussion with Peter: PS 59 and 83.
56. Mk 16.9; Mt. 28.9; Jn 20.1-18 against Lk. 24.34.
57. GosPhil 63.30-64.9.
58. Pasquier 1983: 28-47. For the Greek text of P Oxy 3525 and P Ryl 463 with text-critical
notes see Luhrmann 1988: 324-25 and 328-30.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 19

[7]
[...] will [matter] then (2) be [destroyed] or not? The Saviour said,
(3) 'All natural phenomena, all that has been moulded, all that has been brought
into being (4) exist in and with each other, (5) and will be unloosened again up to
(6) their own root, since the (7) Nature of matter is unloosened up to what belongs
to (8) her Nature alone. He who has ears (9) to hear, let him hear.
(10) Peter said to him, 'Since you have told (11) us everything,
tell us this also (12): What is the sin of the world?'
(13) The Saviour said, 'Sin does not exist, (14) but you are the ones who sin (15)
when you do things which are like the nature of (16) adultery: that is called sin.
(17) Because of this the Good One came (18) into your midst, to those who belong
to all natural phenomena, (19) in order to restore Nature up (20) to her Root. Then
he continued (21) and said, 'That is why you become sick and (22) die, for [...]

[8]
[He who] (2) understands, let him understand.
Matter [brought forth] (3) passion that, (4) since it proceeded from an opposite
nature, has no form. (5) From then on confusion exists (6) in the whole body. That
is why I said (7) to you, 'Be fully assured and (8) do not be persuaded (by what is
opposite to Nature), (9) since you are already persuaded (by the Good One) in the
presence of the various forms (10) of Nature. He who has ears (11) to hear, let him
hear'
(12) When the Blessed One had said this, (13) he embraced them all, saying,
(14) 'Peace be with you. My peace (15) bring her forth to you. Beware that (16)
no one leads you astray, saying, (17) 'Lo here!' or 'Lo (18) there!', for the Son of
Man (19) is within you. (20) Follow him. Those who seek him will (21)findhim.
Go then and preach (22) the gospel of the kingdom. Do not

[9]
(1) 'lay down any rule other than (2) the one I appointed for you, and do not give
a law (3) like the lawgiver so that (4) you are not imprisoned by it'. (5) When he
had said this, he departed.
But they (6) were grieved and wept greatly, (7) saying, 'How shall we go (8) to
the nations and preach (9) the gospel of the kingdom of the Son (10) of Man? If
they did not (11) spare him, how will (12) they spare us?'
Then Mary (13) stood up, embraced them all, (14) and said to her brothers
(and sisters), 'Do not (15) weep and do not grieve and do not be in (16) two
minds, for his grace will be (17) with you all and will shelter you. (18) Rather let
us (19) praise his greatness, because he (20) has prepared us. He has made us
(true) Human Being'. When (21) Mary had said this, she turned their hearts (22) in-
ward, to the Good One, and they began (23) to discuss the words of the [Saviour].61

[10]
(1) Peter said to Mary, 'Sister, (2) we know that the Saviour loved you (3) more

59. P Oxy 3525.9: embraced them and kissed them all...

60. P Oxy 3525.11-12: Rather, let us thank his greatness, because he has joined us together
and...
61. P Oxy 3525.13-14: After she had said this she turned their mind to the Good One and they
began to discuss the sayings of the Saviour.
20 The Gospel of Mary

than the rest of women.62 (4) Tell us the words of the Saviour which you (5)
remember, the things that you know (6) and we do not, nor have we heard them'.
(7) Mary answered and said, (8) 'What is hidden from you I shall tell you'.63 (9)
And she began to say to them (10) these words: T , (11) she said, 'I have seen the
Lord in a vision and I (12) said to him, 'Lord, I have seen you (13) today in a
vision'. He answered, he (14) said to me, 'Blessed are you, because you are not
wavering (15) when you see me. For where the mind is, (16) there is the treasure'.
I said (17) to him, 'Lord, now, does he who sees (18) the vision see it with the
soul (19) or with the spirit? The Saviour answered, he (20) said, 'He does not see
with the soul (21) nor with the spirit, but with the mind which [is] (22) between
the two that is [what] (23) sees the vision and that [...]'

[pp. 11-14 are missing]

[15]
(1) him and Desire said: (2) 'I did not see you, on your way downwards, (3) but
now I see you, on your way (4) upwards. But how can you deceive me, when (5)
you belong to me?' The Soul answered (6) and said, 'I have seen you. You did not
see me (7) nor recognise me. I was (8) (like) a garment to you, and you did not
know me'. (9) When she had said this, she went away rejoicing (10) loudly.
'Again she came to the (11) third Power, which is called (12) Ignorance. [She]
(13) questioned the Soul, saying, (14) 'Where are you going? In (15) wickedness
you were held prisoner. Yes, you were held prisoner. (16) Do not judge then!'
And (17) the Soul said, 'Why do you judge (18) me when I do not judge you? I
am taken prisoner (19) although I did not take prisoners. I am not recognized, (20)
but I have recognized that the All is being unloosened, both the earthly

[16]
(1) 'and the heavenly things'. When the Soul (2) left the third Power powerless,
(3) she went upwards and saw the fourth Power.
She took on seven (5) appearances. The first appearance (6) is Darkness, the
second (7) Desire, the third (8) Ignorance, the fourth is the Jealousy of (9) Death,
thefifthis the Kingdom of the Flesh, (10) the sixth is the Foolish Learning (11) of
the Flesh, the seventh is the (12) Hot Tempered Wisdom. These are the seven (13)
[power]s of Wrath. They ask (14) the Soul, 'Where do you come from, (15) you
killer of people?', or, 'Where are you going, (16) you who leave places power-
less?' The Soul answered, (17) she said, 'What imprisons me (18) is pierced.
What turns me (19) is left powerless and my Desire (20) has been fulfilled, and
Ignorance (21) has died. From a world I am unloosened

[17]
(1) 'through a world and from a (2) model through a model which is (3)fromthe
side of Heaven. And the fetter of oblivion (4) is temporal. From this hour on, (5-6)
at the time, of the decisive moment in the aeon, I shall receive the Rest in (7)
Silence'. When Mary had said (8) this, she fell silent, since it was to this point that
the Saviour (9) had spoken to her.

62. P Oxy 3525.16: like no other woman.

63. P Oxy 3525.18: what is hiddenfromyou and what I remember...
64. P Ryl 463 recto 5: had spoken.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 21

(10) But Andrew answered and said to (11) the brothers (and sisters), 'Tell me,
what do you say (12) about what she has spoken? (13) I at least do not believe that
(14) the Saviour said this. For these teachings (15) seem to be according to
another train of thought'. Peter answered (16) and spoke about (17) these same
things, he (18) reflected about the Saviour: 'After all, he (19) did not speak with a
woman apart (20) from us and not openly. (21) Are we to turn and all listen to
her? 22 Has he chosen her above us?'

[18]
(1) Then Mary wept, she said to (2) Peter, 'My brother Peter, what are you (3)
thinking? Do you suppose that I (4) devised this, alone, in my (5) heart, or that I
am deceiving the Saviour?' (6) Levi answered, he said to Peter (7), 'Peter, you
have always been (8) hot-tempered. Now I see you (9) arguing65 with the woman
as (10) these adversaries66 do. If (11) the Saviour has made her worthy, who are
you (12) indeed to reject67 her? Surely, (13) the Saviour knows her (14) very well.
That is why he loved her more (15) than us.68 Rather let us be ashamed (16) and
clothe ourselves with the perfect Human Being. (17) Let us bring him forth to us,
as he (18) commanded us. Let us preach (19) the Gospel, without laying down
(20) any other rule or law than (21) the one the Saviour said'.

[19]
When [(1) Levi had said] this, they began (2) to go forth [to] proclaim and to
preach.

(3) The Gospel

(4) according to
(5) Mary

3. The Gospel of Mary and the New Testament Writings

The Gospel of Mary is generally considered to contain Gnostic reinterpretations of

themes that are known from the New Testament. In the commentaries on the Gos-
pel of Mary many New Testament parallels are noted. As we will see, the Gospel
of Mary also reminds one of Old Testament writings. In this section we will
examine the Gospel of Mary as different from the New Testament Gospels and
specify the similar themes in the New Testament and the Old Testament writings.

3.1. ^4 Different Gospel

The Gospel of Mary is clearly different from the Gospels in the New Testament.
Whereas the New Testament Gospels describe the work of Jesus in his earthly
lifetime, the Gospel of Mary describes a post-resurrection dialogue which is rather
philosophical.

65. P Ryl 463 verso 3: and now you discuss...

66. P Ryl 463 verso 4: like her adversary does.
67. P Ryl 463 verso 6: despise...
68. P Ryl 463 verso 6-7: since, surely, he loved her, because he knew her thoroughly.
69. P Ryl 463 verso 14-15: After he had said this, Levi departed and began to proclaim...
22 The Gospel of Mary

Post-resurrection dialogues with Jesus do occur in the New Testament, but they
are not about notions such as matter and nature, let alone about the origin of a
vision, the relation between soul, spirit and mind, and the dangers the soul has to
conquer on its way to the eternal Rest. When Luke relates that Jesus appeared for
forty days following his resurrection to the apostles he had chosen, speaking about
the Kingdom of God, he only records one question and answer. The disciples ask
whether Jesus will restore the kingdom to Israel in their time (Acts 1.3-8). The
other post-resurrection dialogues in the New Testament Gospels are about opening
the Scriptures (Lk. 24.27,45) and the commission to preach repentance and forgive-
ness of sins (Lk. 24.47), to make disciples (Mt. 28.19) or to take care of the 'sheep'
of the shepherd Jesus (Jn 21.14-17) and to be sent as Jesus was sent (Jn 20.19-23).
Perhaps the philosophical tone of the post-resurrection dialogue in the Gospel of
Mary is closest to the dialogues of the earthly Jesus in the Gospel of John. These
are about being born anew (Jn 3.1-21), about the spring of eternal water inside a
person (Jn 4), about the Son and the Father (Jn 5), about the Bread of Life (Jn 6.35-
59), about the resurrection (Jn 11.21-27), and the farewell dialogues about Jesus'
way upwards, his glorification and the coming of the Spirit (Jn 13-17).
Another significant difference between the Gospel of Mary and the New Testa-
ment writings is that Mary Magdalene in the New Testament is clearly not singled
out to speak about her knowledge and experience of the Lord. The Gospel of John
is the exception with one line in indirect speech: 'that she had seen the Lord and
that he had told her these things' (Jn 20.18). Moreover, in the Gospels of the New
Testament the disciples are nowhere portrayed as hesitating to preach the gospel.
Only in the second ending of Mark they are portrayed weeping, but this is not
because they are afraid to proclaim the gospel, but because they grieve about the
death of their master (Mk 16.10).

3.2. Familiar Themes

Although the Gospel of Mary is different from the Gospels in the New Testament,
at the same time, the Gospel of Mary is also strangely familiar. The reader who
knows the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John and who is also acquainted
with the Pauline letters and other canonical letters, the Old Testament prophets and
the Psalms will find many echoes of this literature in the Gospel of Mary.70
For instance, the strange philosophical remarks about matter and nature in
GosMar 7.1-9 are embedded in two familiar metaphors. The metaphor of 'root'
reminds one of New Testament parables about sowing and growing71 and the
metaphor of 'adultery' calls to mind the prophets Hosea, Jeremiah and Ezekiel who
compare the bond between God and Israel to a marriage bond and describe the
unfaithfulness and sin of Israel as adulterous behaviour.72 The 'unloosening' (B(DX

70. See, for New Testament echoes, Wilson 1956/57: 236-43; Evans et ah 1993: 415-20 and
Petersen 1999: 59-61 and 139-53.1 found some additional references and also looked at the Old
Testament.
71. See Maurer 1977 about p"i£a- The root is the life-sustaining force of the plant. See for the
metaphor Mk 4.6, 17; Mt. 13.6, 21; Lk. 8.13; Eph. 3.17; Col. 2.7.
72. See Kuhlewein 1984 about 'dzanah'. The Septuaginth mostly translates the Hebrew
 2. The Gospel of Mary 23

6 BOA) of the cosmos is familiar too. It recalls the unloosening (B(D\ 6 BOA)73 of the
elements and the heavens on the day of the Lord in the second letter of Peter (2 Pet.
3.10,12). It also is reminiscent of the shaking of earth and heaven in Hebrews, in
order that what cannot be shaken may remain. The author encourages the readers to
be thankful that they have received a kingdom that cannot be shaken (Heb. 12.26-
28). The unloosening of the cosmos also reminds one of Paul's letter to the
Romans where he assures his readers that the creation will be set free (B(DA 6BOA)
from the servitude of corruption unto the freedom of the glory of the children of
God (Rom. 8.21).
The 'sin of the world' in GosMar 7.12 reminds one of 'the Lamb of God, who
takes away the sin of the world' in the Gospel of John (Jn 1.29, 35). The repeated
encouragement to understand in GosMar 7.8-9; 8.1-2; 8.10-11 is similar to the
encouragements in the Gospel of Mark, Matthew and Luke and in the Revelation
of John.74 The appeal not to be led astray reminds one of Jesus' admonitions of the
coming persecutions in Matthew, Mark and Luke.75
The title, the 'Son of Man', recalls Jesus' self-designation in the New Testament
Gospels.76 The remark 'the Son of Man is within you (n6TN2OYN)' in GosMar
8.18-19 especially reminds one of the references in the Gospel of John where the
Son of Man who came out of heaven will go up to heaven (Jn 3.13; 6.62)77. The
Johannine Son of Man, after being 'lifted up', which means being crucified and
returned to the Father's presence in heaven, will, as the one who is thus glorified,
live within (2PAI NZHTOy) his disciples (Jn 12.23; 17.5, 24-26).78 This also
reminds one of the way the Pauline letters speak of the crucified and resurrected

'dzanah' with the Greek Tropveuco or MOIXEUCO. See for the metaphor Hos. 4.12; 9.1; Jer. 2.20; 3.1,
6, 8; Ezek. 16 and 23 and also Exod. 34.15; Deut. 31.16; Judges 2.17; 8.27, 33; Pss. 73.25-27;
106.34-39; 1 Chron. 5.25. The same metaphor is used in the New Testament; see Mk 8.38; Mt.
12.39; 16.4; Jas 4.4.
73. For the Coptic New Testament references see Horner 1969. For biblical texts in Coptic see
also Schiissler 1995.
74. Mk 4.9; 7.16; Mt. 11.15; 13.9,43; Lk. 8.8; 14.35; Revelation 2.7, 11, 17, 29; 3.6, 13,22;
13.9.
75. Mk 13.5-6, 21; Mt. 24.4-5, 23; Lk. 21.8.
76. The Synoptic references, however, refer to the earthly activity of the Son of Man (Mk 2.10,
28; 10.45; Mt. 8.20; 9.6; 11.19; 12.8,32; 13.37; 16.13; 18.11; 20.28; Lk. 5.24; 6.5,22; 7.34; 9.58;
12.10; 19.10), his suffering (Mk 8.31, 38; 9.9, 12, 31; 10.33; 14.21, 41; Mt. 12.40; 17.9, 12, 22;
20.18; 26.2, 24, 45; Lk. 9.22, 26, 44; 11.30; 18.31; 22.22, 48; 24.7) and the future returning in
judgment (Mk 13.26; 14.21, 62; Mt. 10.23; 13.41; 16.27,28; 19.28; 24.27, 30, 37, 39,44; 25.31;
26.64; Lk. 12.8, 40; 17.22,24, 26, 30; 18.8; 21.27, 36; 22.69).
77. Son of Man passages in John: 1.51; 3.13, 14; 5.27; 6.27, 53, 62; 8.28; 9.35; 12.23, 34;
13.31. Compared to the Synoptics the most typical trait of the Johannine Son of Man theology is
the notion that the Son of Man descended from heaven and is going to return; cf. Phil. 2.1-11. See
Schnackenburg 1964-65: 123-37, who argues that this trait is due to the Jewish concept of
Wisdom.
78. One could also think of Jn 6.53 'truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son
of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you' and Jn 6.56 'he who eats my flesh and drinks
my blood abides in me, and I in him', indicating the Eucharist (see Brown 1966: 284-85), but
perhaps also relating to the Jewish Wisdom theology (Prov. 9.5-6).
24 The Gospel of Mary

Christ who lives within those (N2HTTHYTN) who believe in him.79 In the letter to
the Colossians this 'Christ in you' (N2HTTHYTN) is described as the word of God
made fully known. It is the content of the mystery hidden for ages and generations
but now made manifest to his saints (Col. 1.27).80
The appeal to follow the Son of Man and the promise that those who seek him
will find him, remind one of the words of Jesus in John, where he says in three
different places that he will go away and will be sought after.81 He explains to the
disciples that he is going to his Father, so that they will know the way and be able
to follow him (Jn 14.19-23). Seeking and finding God is also a theme in the liter-
ature of the Old Testament.82
The danger of being imprisoned (A MX 2 T 6) by laws and rules in GosMar 9.1-4
reminds one of Paul's words in his letter to the Romans about a law in his members
that leads to sin and death, which imprisons (AMA2T6) the law of his mind that
rejoices in the law of God (Rom. 7.6, 22-23). According to him, the law of the
Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set us free from the law of sin and death, in order
that the law of God may be fulfilled through the strengthening of his Spirit which
lives in us (Rom. 7.21-8.11). In the Gospel of Mary as we have it, it is not clear
precisely what this one rule is that the Saviour gave. In the New Testament the
whole law of God is fulfilled in one commandment: the commandment to love.83
To this end Jesus' followers arefreedfrombondage to sin and law and are warned
not to submit to any yoke of slavery again, for instance to circumcision or to
specific feasts.84
The departure of the Saviour in GosMar 9.5 reminds one of his departure at the
end of Luke (Lk. 24.50-51) and the beginning of Acts (Acts 1.9). It also reminds
one of Jesus' farewell speech in the Gospel of John where he makes known his
imminent departure. The disciples will be grieved, but Jesus encourages them to
rejoice (Jn 14 and 16.16-23). In GosMar 9.12-20 it is Mary who has this role of
encouragement. She says that he prepared (AqCBTCDT) them and made them (true)
Human Being (Npo)M6) whereupon the disciples begin to study the words of the
Saviour. This reminds one of the second letter to Timothy where the knowledge of
Scripture enables one to be instructed for salvation through Jesus Christ, and
results in a complete human being of God (npa)M6 MnNOYTe e<*XHK 6BOA),
prepared (AHCBT(DT) for every good work (2 Tim. 3.17).
When Levi later refers to Mary's words (GosMar 18.16) he encourages the

79. Gal. 2.20; 4.19; Rom. 8.10. See also Jn 14.20.

80. There is no significant difference between n6TN2OYN and N2HTTHYTN. Various forms of
2OYN are used as inward experience opposed to outward appearance; see for instance Mk 7.21,23;
Mt. 7.15; 23.25,27,28; Lk. 11.40; Rom. 7.22 and 2 Cor. 4.16 in Homer 1969. This would also be
the case in GosMar 8.15-20: the Lord is not here nor there (outward appearance), but inside
(inward experience).
81. Jn 7.34, 36; 8.21; 13.33.
82. Deut.4.29; 1 Chron.28.9;2Chron. 15.2;Prov.7.15;8.17;Jer.29.13.Cf.Mk7.7-8andLk.
11.9-10.
83. See for instance Lev. 19.18; Mk 12.31; Mt. 22.39; Jn 13.34-35; Rom. 13.8-10; 1 Cor.
12.31-13.13; Jas 2.8.
84. For instance Jn 8.32-36; Gal. 4.9-11; 5.1-14; Rom. 6.18; 1 Pet. 2.16.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 25

disciples to clothe themselves with the perfect Human Being (np(l)M6 NT6 AIOC);
this reminds one of the letter to the Galatians where baptism is explained as 'cloth-
ing oneself with Christ' (Gal. 3.27). In the letters to the Ephesians and the Colossians
the readers are encouraged to clothe themselves with the new Human Being (Eph.
4.24; Col. 3.10). Earlier in the letter to the Ephesians one is encouraged to attain
the perfect Human Being (np(DM6 NT6M OC),85 the measure of the stature of the
fullness (xo)K 6BOX) of Christ (Eph. 4.13). In the letter to the Romans the readers
are encouraged to clothe themselves with the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 13.11).
The fear of the disciples to proclaim the gospel (GosMar 9.5-12) reminds one of
Jesus' predictions of future suffering in the New Testament Gospels.86 In Matthew,
for instance, Jesus says to his disciples that he sends them out as sheep in the midst
of wolves (Mt. 10.16). Since a servant is not above his master and they call the
master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his
households? (Mt. 10.24) And he goes on to say: 'Do not fear those who kill the
body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body
in hell'(Mt. 10.28).
The portrayal of Mary as knowing more than her fellow disciples (GosMar 10.4-
6) seems familiar too. In Matthew, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary are the
only ones who are told that the risen Christ will be seen in Galilee (Mt. 28.5-7). In
Mark, Mary Magdalene, Mary of James and Salome receive the same message and,
although the man in white says that Jesus told this to his disciples and Peter, the
remark that he will be seen in Galilee is not mentioned earlier.87 In John, the
unique knowledge of Mary Magdalene consists of having seen the Lord and of
being told by him about his imminent ascension and about the new bond between
his Father and his disciples (Jn 20.17-18). In the Gospel of Mary her new knowl-
edge consists of having seen the Lord in a vision and of being taught by him about
this and about the ascension of the soul (GosMar 10.9-17.9).
The word for vision in the Gospel of Mary is 20p AMA (opa|jcx) which occurs in
the Acts of the Apostles and in Matthew. Seeing visions seems quite common in
the New Testament writings. Peter has a vision about clean and unclean food (Acts
10.3,17,19). Stephen calls Moses' experience with the thorn bush a vision (Acts
7.31). Cornelius has a vision of an angel of God (Acts 10.3). Paul has a vision of a
man from Macedonia (Acts 16.9-10). There are also appearances of Jesus in a
vision. In Matthew, Jesus transfigures in his earthly lifetime on a mountain before
Peter, James and John. His face shines like the sun and his garments become white
as light. Peter, James and John are commanded to tell no one this vision until the
Son of Man is raised from the dead (Mt. 17.9). The other New Testament appear-
ances of Jesus in visions are post-resurrectional. Thus he appears to Ananias and to
Paul (Acts 9.10; 18.9). All these visions include seeing and hearing and most of
them also questioning and answering.

85. In Nestle and Aland, the Greek of Ephesians does not read avSpcoTros as one would
expect, but instead avrjp as a direct reference to the masculine \i\6s TOU 6EOU in the same verse.
86. Mk 13.9-13; Mt. 10.16-36; Lk. 21.12-19; Jn 16.1-4.
87. Mk 16.7. In Mk 14.28 Jesus only says that he will go before them to Galilee.
26 The Gospel of Mary

An equivalent word to opapa is OTrraai a (appearing). The vision of Zechariah

in the temple is called an oTrraaia (Lk. 1.22). In Acts Paul calls his meeting with
Jesus on his way to Damascus an oirraaia (Acts 26.19), and the two going to
Emmaus declare that the women at the tomb of Jesus, when they did not find his
body, saw a vision (oTrxaoia) of angels (Lk. 24.23). Last but not least Paul, in his
second letter to the Corinthians, relating his visions and revelations of the Lord
(2 Cor. 12.7) tells about a person who was caught up into the third heaven and later
into paradise, hearing things that cannot be told (2 Cor. 12.1-4). Paul adds that he
does not know whether this experience was in the body or out of the body.
In the Gospel of Mary it is the soul which ascends. The personified soul declares
that she first descended (GosMar 15.2-3). This reminds one of the descending and
ascending of the Son of Man in John (Jn 3.13; 6.62), who will come again and take
his disciples to himself (Jn 14.2-6; cf. 1 Thess. 4.16-17). It also reminds one of
Eph. 4.8-9 where Jesus is said, after having descended, to have ascended, leading a
host of captives. In Heb. 4.14 Jesus is called the Son of God who passed through
the heavens, thus becoming a forerunner on the readers' behalf (Heb. 6.20). The
powers which the soul has to conquer (GosMar 15.11; 16.4) remind one again of
the letter to the Ephesians, according to which the principalities and powers in the
heavenly places, because of Christ and through the church, will be made known
with the manifold wisdom of God (Eph. 3.10).
The boldness of the soul's answers to the powers in the Gospel of Mary reminds
one of the same letter when it says about the principalities of the heavenly places:
'in Christ Jesus our Lord we have boldness and confidence of access through our
faith in him' (Eph. 3.11-12). The readers are encouraged to put on the armour
of God:
For we are not contending againstfleshand blood, but against the principalities,
against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the
spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places (Eph. 6.12).
The mind (NOyc; vous) being described as a treasure (GosMar 10.15-16) reminds
one of Paul's first letter to the Corinthians where he quotes Isaiah's question 'who
has the mind (vous) of the Lord that he may instruct him?' (Isa. 11.13). And he
answers: but we have the mind (vous) of Christ (1 Cor. 2.16). In his letter to the
Romans the vous is the inner Human being, which is able to distinguish between
the good and the bad (Rom. 7.22-23). The vous is able to honour the law of God,
but is held prisoner by the flesh, causing death (Rom. 7.26). If the Spirit of God
who raised Christ lives within one, this situation changes, enabling one to become
free and alive (Rom. 7.24-25; 8.10-15). In the second letter to the Corinthians Paul
calls the knowledge of God's glory in Jesus Christ, a treasure which we have in
earthen vessels, referring to his hardships as an apostle (2 Cor. 4.6-11). He encour-
ages his readers by saying that, although the outer human being is decaying, the
inner one is renewed from day to day (2 Cor. 4.16). Furthermore he asks them to
change themselves and to live their lives in accordance with their renewed vous
(Rom. 12.2). In the letter to the Ephesians this renewal through one's vous is the
same as clothing oneself with the new Human being (Eph. 4.23-24).
 2. The Gospel of Mary 27

The fact that Mary is described as not wavering (ATKIM) when she sees the Lord
in a vision (GosMar 10.13-15) reminds one of the Psalms, in which the righteous
and those who trust in the Lord are described as those who will not waver.88 In a
sermon of Peter in Acts one of these psalms is quoted: 'I see the Lord always
before me; because he is at my right hand I shall not be shaken' (Pss. 16.8). Seeing
the Lord before him and not wavering is for Peter, quoting this Psalm, a situation
full of hope and joy (Acts 2.25-28). In the second letter to the Thessalonians the
readers are encouraged not to be moved (KIM) and not to be troubled and deceived
by false teaching (2 Thess. 2.2).
Peter's statement that the Saviour would not speak to a woman concealed from
the group of disciples (GosMar 17.8-20) reminds one of the disciples' marvel in
John when they come to Jesus andfindhim talking with a woman (Jn 4.27). Peter's
question whether they are all to listen to a woman (GosMar 17.21) reminds one of
the apparent difficulties that men have with teaching women in various New
Testament letters.89
What does it mean that the Gospel of Mary, although obviously different from
the New Testament Gospels, contains so many themes and phrases that are similar
to those which occur in the four New Testament ones, the Pauline letters, the Old
Testament prophets and the Psalms?

4. A Gnostic Text?
According to most exegetes the Gospel of Mary belongs to the genre of the Gnostic
dialogue.90 If they do not all agree on the exact genre, they do agree that the Gos-
pel of Mary is a Gnostic text.91 This would account for both the differences and the
similarities with the New Testament and Old Testament writings.

4.1. The Genre of Gnostic Dialogue

Pheme Perkins, on the basis of thirteen works,92 concludes that a Gnostic dialogue
consists of a revelation discourseframedby narrative elements. In the introduction

88. Pss. 15.5; 16.8; 17.5; 21.7; 26.1; 30.6; 36.11; 46.5; 62.2; 93.1; 96.10; 112.6; 125.1. See
Budge 1898 (who holds the numbering of the Septuagint 14.5; 15.8 etc.).
89. 1 Cor. 14.34-36; 1 Tim. 2.9-15; 1 Pet. 3.1-7. See also 1 Cor. 11.1-3; Eph. 5.22-24; Col.
3.18.
90. Rudolf 1996: 108; Perkins 1980: 31; Pasquier 1983: 10-12; Marjanen 1996: 99.
91. The option of the Gnostic dialogue is criticized by Petersen (1999: 35-43, 49-55) and by
Hartenstein (2000:5-15). In their view the genre of the Gnostic dialogue is not clear enough. They
opt for 'Erscheinungsdialog' (Petersen) or 'Dialogevangelium' (Hartenstein) and only include
those dialogues in which the Saviour actually appears and disappears. This means that they also
include the non-Gnostic Epistula Apostolorum. However, according to Hartenstein (2000:254) this
does not interfere with the 'relation' of the 'Dialogevangelien' to Gnostic teaching, since she labels
the Epistula Apostolorum as anti-Gnostic. Petersen (1999:40) simply states that the 'Erscheinungs-
dialoge' are about Gnostic knowledge, although she includes the Epistula Apostolorum.
92. Perkins's research is based on the Prayer of the Apostle Paul; the Apocryphon of John; the
Nature of the Archons; the Book of Tomas the Contender; the Sophia of Jesus Christ; the Dialogue
of the Saviour; the First Apocalypse of James; the Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles;
Apocalypse of Peter; Zostrianus; Letter of Peter to Philip; the Gospel of Mary; Pistis Sophia.
28 The Gospel of Mary

the narrator speaks in general terms about the place of revelation, the time and the
recipients. The place is most often a mountain, for example the Mount of Olives;
the time is usually after the resurrection and the recipients are in almost all cases
names known from the New Testament. The Saviour appears to them at the mo-
ment when they are persecuted, proclaim the Gospel or reflect on Jesus' words.
They are anxious, sorrowful and confused, or sunk in prayer. The Saviour intro-
duces himself with 'I am' sayings, makes clear the purpose of his coming and
rebukes the disciples for their unbelief.
Then follows the revelation discourse proper, through questions put by the
disciples. The proclamation often consists of information about the origin of the
cosmos, redemption and the true, this is Gnostic, teaching about baptism, the cruci-
fixion and the interpretation of the scriptures, usually the New Testament ones. By
far the majority of the revelation discourses concentrates on questions about re-
demption. At the end the disciples are given the task of handing on what they have
been told to those who are worthy, or of protecting the revelation against those who
dispute it. Their reaction is one of gratitude and joy.
The content of the Gnostic teaching consists of the belief that God is radically
transcendent. The God who created the world, the Demiurge, is seen as a lower
deity. The highest God has nothing to do with this world, except with human
beings. They are bound to him in their deepest selves, but they have forgotten this.
It is the task of the Saviour to remind the human beings of their bond with God and
thus of their true identity. Moreover he has to overcome the demonic powers which
keep human beings imprisoned in this cosmos. For a Gnostic believer, the com-
plete realization of redemption consists in the return to God after death (the journey
of the soul). Already in this life believers must strive to be free of matter and its
passions by following an ascetic lifestyle.93
In Perkins's view the Gnostic dialogues must be seen in a polemical context.
They were used as tools in missionary propaganda, containing the hermeneutic key
to true Christianity.94 They form an important part of the Gnostic debate with non-
Gnostic, orthodox Christianity and handle in general three subjects: the nature of
God, of salvation, and of authority. Perkins comments that the ideas about
salvation and authority in Gnostic dialogues differ hardly, if at all,fromthe various
Christian views of the second century, but they do differ in the third century and
later. Salvation in the second-century sense is about Christ's victory over the de-
monic powers of death, which is manifested in the resurrection.95 As to authority,
in the second century, Gnostic as well as orthodox Christians adhere to the
apostolic tradition. Gnosis in the second century is no secret teaching, but is
viewed as Jesus' teaching to all the apostles and the true legacy of the Church.96
However, as to the nature of God, the conviction that God is radically transcendent

93. Perkins 1980: 189.

94. Perkins 1980: 25, 73, 157-62.
95. Perkins 1980: 179-80.
96. Perkins 1980: 195-96.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 29

and has nothing to do with the cosmos stands in strong contrast to the other views
of the divine which are characteristic of the second century.97

4.2. The Gospel of Mary as a Gnostic Dialogue

If one considers the Gospel of Mary it appears at first tofitPerkins's description of
the Gnostic dialogue remarkably well. The Gospel as we have it contains a reve-
lation discourse between the disciples and the resurrected Lord; even two revela-
tion discourses (GosMar 7.1-9.4 and 10.10-17.7), framed by narrative elements in
GosMar 8.12-10.10 and 17.7-19.2. The recipients are known from the New
Testament: Peter, Mary, Andrew and Levi. The Gospel of Mary deals with the
nature of the cosmos (GosMar 7.1-8.6) and with redemption. New Testament
Scriptures are interpreted (GosMar 8.14-9.4). The Saviour reminds the disciples of
their true identity (GosMar 8.17-19); they are told of the lawgiver, who might be
the Demiurge, keeping the soul imprisoned (GosMar 9.1-4), and Mary describes a
journey of the soul (GosMar 15.1-17.7). The explanation that sin is adultery
(GosMar 7.16) may refer to an ascetic lifestyle.98 The adversaries in GosMar 18.10
may belong to a polemical context and refer to 'orthodox' Christians. These
indications seem to be compelling evidence that the Gospel of Mary belongs to the
genre of the Gnostic dialogue.
Although most of the exegetes of the Gospel of Mary differ in their specific
comments, they agree in that the purpose of the Gospel of Mary is to reveal
Gnostic insights. Till believes that the original Gospel of Mary begins in GosMar
10.1 where Peter asks her to relate the teaching which the Saviour has given only
to her.99 According to Till, the purpose of the Gospel of Mary is to depict Mary
Magdalene, the first witness of the resurrection, as a proclaimer of Gnostic
teaching, of which the ascent of the soul forms the central part.
Pasquier suggests that the dialogue between the Saviour and Mary about visions
and the ascent of the soul (GosMar 9.21-17.9/15) does not belong to the original
Gospel of Mary.100 In her view Peter's comment in GosMar 17.16-22 is not about
this account, but about Mary's words when she addresses the weeping disciples
(GosMar 9.12-20). Peter objects, above all, to the word 'us' in the sentence 'He
made us (true) Human Being' (GosMar 9.20). According to Peter, Mary is not a
(true) Human Being but a woman. In Pasquier's view, Peter thus represents the
orthodox thinking of the second century, that the appearances of therisenChrist to
women did not in themselves give them the right to preach the message of the
resurrection, far less exercise authority over the Christian community. By contrast,
the Gospel of Mary allows the readers to hear an unorthodox voice. Peter is por-
trayed as an opponent. His view of women runs contrary to that of the Saviour.
According to Pasquier, the Gospel of Mary shows that Mary can take preaching
upon herself because only she has already really become (true) Human Being. She

97. Perkins 1980: 166-69.

98. According to Tardieu (1984: 226), adultery refers to the act of sexuality. See also Till and
Schenke (1972: 27). Cf. Mohri 2000: 202-203 and Morard 2001: 155-71.
99. Till and Schenke 1972: 26. See also Wilson and MacRae 1979: 455.
100. Pasquier 1983: 7-10 and 96-101.
30 The Gospel of Mary

has achieved the Gnostic androgynous unity; her soul is reunited with its heavenly
male element, showing the way back from the material world to the divine one.101
According to Pasquier, the purpose of the Gospel of Mary is to use Gnostic
arguments in the struggle against orthodoxy, which forbids women to exercise
authority.102
According to Tardieu, the Gospel of Mary takes a stand in the debate about the
role of Mary Magdalene. She is Jesus' substitute and his exegete. The Gospel of
Mary, which Tardieu regards as a unity, serves as a simple and attractive intro-
duction to the other works included in the Berlin Codex. In Tardieu's opinion the
first six missing pages of the Gospel of Mary must have dealt with the Creator and
his creation. In his interpretation there is a clear development in the Gospel of
Mary, which offers a short survey of the essential doctrines of Gnosticism. The
Gospel of Mary thus elaborates on the Creator and his creation, on sin and its con-
sequences, on salvation through Gnosis and on the ascent of the soul after death.103
Hartenstein focuses on the two revelation dialogues and the discussions among
the disciples. Whereas the dialogues contain knowledge about how to be saved,
the discussions among the disciples deal with concrete questions about persecution
and suffering, about the new teachings of Mary and about the possibility of a
woman passing on divine revelation.104 According to Hartenstein, the purpose of
the Gospel of Mary is to strengthen the beliefs of the Christian Gnostic readers
themselves.105
Thus, these exegetes, despite their differences, are all convinced that Gnosticism
is at the centre of the Gospel of Mary. It is important to note, however, that, what
Perkins describes as the most typically-second century Gnostic trait, the radical
transcendence of God, seems to be missing in the Gospel of Mary. The Gospel of
Mary as we have it contains no creation myth that portrays the creator as a lower
deity (the Demiurge) and the creation as a fall.

4.3. Debate
In 1986 M. Tardieu and J.-D. Dubois in their Introduction a la Htterature gnostique
could still state about the Gospel of Mary: 'la nature gnostique du document n'a
pas ete contestee'.106 In 1994 Karen King was thefirstto do this.107 In her opinion,
the Gospel of Mary provides no internal evidence to indicate that a fully developed
Gnostic myth must be behind the text. Thus, according to her, the Gospel should be
explicated in its own terms, without importing Gnostic myth. She adds: 'The reader
will have to determine how successful that attempt has been'.108

101. Pasquier 1983: 15-17.

102. Pasquier 1983: 24-25.
103. Tardieu 1984: 20-25.
104. Hartenstein 2000: 132.
105. Hartenstein 2000: 134.
106. Tardieu and Dubois 1986: 107. Translation: the gnostic nature of this document has not
been contradicted yet.
107. King 1995.
108. King 1995: 629 note 10.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 31

In her commentary, King indeed proves that it is not necessary to import Gnostic
myth. The question, however, still remains whether some internal elements should
be called Gnostic. For instance, Marjanen, while acknowledging that the Gospel
contains no creation myth or Demiurge, nevertheless emphasizes that both matter
and the human body represent that which does not originate from the heavenly
sphere, but which belongs to the realm of darkness, desire and ignorance, and, as
such, originates from the world. Moreover, according to him, the ascent of the soul
after death and beyond archontic powers has its closest parallels in Gnostic texts.109
Petersen uses a similar argument. In her view the description of the ascent of the
soul and the dissolution of matter are typical themes of a Gnostic theology.110
Hartenstein emphasizes the use of Gnostic terminology and themes in the Gospel
of Mary, such as, in her view, being ill, the Son of Man inside, to be made human,
Mary not being shaken, silence and rest as purposes, the liberation of the fetter of
sleep and the putting on of the perfect human being.111 In my opinion, the only
indication of a specifically 'Gnostic' context of the Gospel of Mary is the lawgiver,
who might be the Demiurge, keeping mankind imprisoned in creation.112
No scholar really elaborates on the Gnostic character of the Gospel of Mary.113
It seems as if the Gnostic character is taken for granted.114 Perhaps this is due to
the fact that the fifth-century Coptic version of the Gospel of Mary is part of the
Berlin Codex, which also contains the Apocryphon of John and the Sophia of Jesus
Christ, which are seen as typically Gnostic, as well as the non-Gnostic Act of Peter,
which may allow a Gnostic allegorical interpretation.115 Furthermore, at the begin-
ning of the third century, Hippolytus relates that the Naasenes associate their
Gnostic teaching with a Mariamme, which may be Mary Magdalene.116 Moreover,
the third-century Pistis Sophia, which is clearly Gnostic, assigns Mary Magdalene
a major role.
We must remember, however, that the third-century Greek fragments of the
Gospel of MaryfromOxyrhynchus were not found in a specific Gnostic context. In
addition to the Gospel of Mary, the following texts dating from the first three

109. Marjanen 1996: 94 note 1 and p. 121.

110. Petersen 1999: 60, and 134 note 194.
111. Hartenstein 2000: 132-33. Hartenstein translates 'sleep' where others translate 'oblivion'
(GosMar 17.3).
112. Basilides, according to Hippolytus's Refutation of all Heresies VII.24.4, calls the Gnostic
Demiurge the Lawgiver.
113. Except Schroter 1999, who concludes that the Gospel of Mary belongs to the grey zone
between Christianity and Gnosticism (178 note 2 and 186-87). See also Morard (2001: 160,171)
who situates the Gospel in the prophetic and ascetic movement of the early church.
114. See Till and Schenke 1972: 25; Wilson and MacRae 1979: 453; Pasquier 1983: 5; Perkins
1980: 133; Tardieu 1984: 22; Mohri 2000: 253.
115. For a Gnostic allegorical interpretation of the non-Gnostic Act of Peter, see Brashler and
Parrott 1988: 529.
116. Hippolytus, Refutation of all Heresies V.7.1 and X.9.3. Some argue that this form of the
name Mary mostly refers to Mary Magdalene; see for instance Marjanen 1996: 63-64. Petersen
(1999: 157-62) argues for a clear connection between the Naasenes and the journey of the soul in
the Gospel of Mary.
32 The Gospel of Mary

centuries were found in Oxyrhynchus: the Gospel of John, the Gospel of Matthew,
the Gospel of Thomas, the letter from James, the Gospel of Luke, Paul's letter to
the Romans, the Letter to the Hebrews and the Gospel of Peter.117 These findings
reflect a pluralistic Christian context, but not a specifically Gnostic one. This cir-
cumstance and the fact that the Coptic version of the Gospel of Mary appeared two
centuries later in a Gnostic context seem to support King's suggestion that the Gos-
pel of Mary was not originally Gnostic, but only later was read through Gnostic
lenses, as were the letters of Paul and the Gospel of John.118 But is this really true?

4.4. The Term 'Gnostic': Dualism in Creation as a Criterion

In the last decade a lively debate arose on the question of what the term 'Gnostic'
should imply. This led Marjanen to a radical change of opinion on the Gnostic
character of the Gospel of Mary. In an article subtitled 'Mary in the So-Called
Gnostic Christian Texts' (italics are mine)119 he explains:
Afterfinishingmy own work on the so-called Gnostic Mary texts (Marjanen, The
Woman Jesus Loved) I have redefined my conception of Gnosticism such that I no
longer regard the Gospel of Thomas, the Dialogue of the Savior, and the Gospel of
Mary as gnostic. Even if the anthropology and the soteriology of these writings
correspond to that of Gnosticism (or Platonism) with the emphasis on the return of
the preexistent soul to the realm of light as a sign of ultimate salvation, none of
these writings contains the other central feature of Gnosticism. They do not
contain the idea of a cosmic world created by an evil and/or ignorant demiurge. 120

A crucial issue in determining the Gnostic character of a manuscript is the fact

that so-called Gnostic writings include themes that occur throughout antiquity. If
these themes occur in a certain text, but the creation myth and the Demiurge are
missing, as in the Gospel of Mary, it is very difficult to decide whether they are
meant in a specifically Gnostic way. The so-called 'Gnostic' elements mentioned
by Marjanen (before his redefinition), Petersen and Hartenstein are widespread
phenomena both in Jewish and Christian thought and in Greek philosophy. The
ascent of the soul is a general theme in antiquity,121 as is the theme of 'not waver-
ing'.122 A negative attitude towards matter,123 the fetter of oblivion which im-
prisons people, and the need to be reminded of one's real nature belong to Platonic
philosophy.124 The Son of Man inside is found in the Gospel of John and the
putting on of the perfect Human Being in the Pauline Letters.125
Last but not least, the 'lawgiver' (vojJoBexris) is a general term. In Jewish

117. See Van Haelst 1976: 409-410 and also Grenfell and Hunt no. 80 (1994), no. 84 (1997),
no. 85 (1998), no. 86(1999).
118. King 1995: 629 note 10.
119. Marjanen 2002.
120. Marjanen 2002: 32 note 3.
121. See for instance Culianu 1983.
122. See Williams 1985.
123. Especially in neo-Platonic philosophy; see Bormann 1972: 986.
124. See for instance Roukema 1999: 76-77.
125. Schroter 1999.
 2. The Gospel of Mary 33

thought the word may apply to God, who for Gnostics would be the Demiurge, but
it can also refer to Moses and the Rabbis. This is also the case in Christian termi-
nology. The lawgiver stands for God or for Christ, but also for the church govern-
ment. The lawgiver can also refer to the civil government of a city or a state.126 As
for being held prisoner by the law, this is an idea also expressed by Paul without
assuming that there is a true God who is not the God of creation (Rom. 7.6).
In his book Rethinking 'Gnosticism'; An argument for Dismantling a Dubious
Category, Michael Allen Williams challenges scholars to abolish the term 'Gnostic'
or at least to use the designation very cautiously and critically. He states that in
antiquity there was no such thing as a clearly defined Gnostic religion; instead, the
label 'Gnostic' is a modern way of categorizing certain late antique writings in
order to understand them better. He warns against misunderstanding certain texts
by assuming that they belong to afixed'Gnostic' religion, rather than allowing the
texts to speak for themselves.
King concludes that Gnosticism is a blanket term that covers a lot of early
Christian movements. She argues that the term only existed as a tool of orthodox
identity formation, deriving from an early Christian discourse of orthodoxy and
heresy which has now taken on an independent existence.127 In her book What is
Gnosticism? she shows that the early Christian polemicists' discourse of orthodoxy
and heresy has been intertwined with twentieth-century scholarship on Gnosticism.
This is an important insight, since, as she writes:
At stake is not only the capacity to write a more accurate history of ancient
Christianity in all its multiformity, but also our capacity to engage critically the
ancient politics of religious difference rather than unwittingly reproduce its strate-
gies and results. 128

Instead of the term 'Gnostic', Williams coined a new term, which is more
technical, namely 'Biblical demiurgical tradition'. He prefers this term because
most Nag Hammadi Codices and related documents contain Jewish or Christian
elements and start from a distinction between the highest God and the lower
Demiurge of the world.129 With this definition he is close to Perkins in that she too
concluded that the radical transcendence of the Divine is the most common
characteristic of the writings which she studied. King observes that the distinction
of a true God and the creator God of Genesis is a popular choice to define Gnosti-
cism.130 However she does not agree, since she rejects typological methodology,
because it does no justice to the fact that 'the so-called Gnostic works provide
evidence of a wide variety of ethical orientations, theological and anthropological
views, spiritual disciplines, andritualpractices confounding any attempt to develop

126. Lampe 1961: 919b. See also King 1995: 607. Hartenstein (2000: 145) suggests Jesus to be
the lawgiver, because of the direct context. Jesus has given a law, his disciples should not give
laws themselves.
127. King 2003a: 20-54.
128. King 2003a: 19.
129. Williams 1996: 263-66.
130. King 2003a: 226 and 335 note 21.
34 The Gospel of Mary

a single set of typological categories that will fit everything scholars have labeled
Gnosticism'.131
If we, however, should decide to call the Gospel of Mary a Gnostic gospel, this
would be a modern way of categorizing it as related to those Nag Hammadi
Codices and other documents that start from a dualism in creation.132 We do not
presuppose a more or less clearly defined Gnostic movement and we only call the
dualism in creation a criterion to call the Gospel 'Gnostic' as a modern way of
categorizing it in order to understand it better.
The question is whether the Gospel of Mary as we have it gives internal clues
that point to a dualism in creation. It seems that only the missing pages of the Gos-
pel of Mary could really answer the question of whether the Gospel presupposes
a dualism in creation or not, since in the Gospel as we have it no creation
myth occurs.
We may, however, also examine the question from a different point of view: is
there any internal evidence that the Gospel of Mary starts from another tradition?
Petersen and Hartenstein agree with King that the ideas of the Gospel of Mary on
p. 7 about matter and sin need not be read in a Gnostic context, but they are of the
opinion that it could belong to a Gnostic context as well.133 In contrast to
Hartenstein, who argues that the Gospel of Mary gives no indications against a
Gnostic reading, I believe it does.134 The next chapter examines a new perspective
on matter and Nature in the Gospel of Mary, which may point to a non-Gnostic
context, in which Nature is a positive power directly stemming from the Divine.

131. King 2003a: 213.

132. See also Roukema 1999: 120-25. According to him Gnosis must be viewed as a radical
form of the Hellenization, and especially Platonizing, of early Christianity (118-25). He refers to
Harnack 1931: 250.
133. Petersen 1999: 134; Hartenstein 2000: 132; King 1995: 628.
134. Hartenstein 2000: 133.
 Chapter 3

CHARACTER AND PURPOSE OF THE GOSPEL OF MARY

This chapter will investigate the themes of matter and Nature in the Gospel of
Mary by comparing it to related ideas in Stoic philosophy. We will also study
similar thoughts in the works of Philo of Alexandria. We will focus on the extant
pages of the discourse between the Saviour and his disciples in the Gospel of Mary
and more specifically on its traces of ideas on cosmology (GosMar 7-8). In
addition, I will examine the themes of the other writings in the Berlin Codex and
present my thoughts on the character and the purpose of the Gospel of Mary.

1. Matter and Nature

In the Gospel of Mary the way the words <>| yc I c (nature) and rueoc (passion) are
used and the way <t>yc I c (nature) and 2Y*H (matter) are interrelated show an
affinity with Stoic philosophy. Stoicism holds a monistic view of the origin of the
world. In Stoic philosophy, matter is formed by Nature into a harmonious cosmos.
One can either act according to Nature (Kara <)>uaiv) or against it (rrapa <|>uai v);
to be guided by rrdSos is clearly Trcxpa <|>uaiv. The material world does not
originate in the act of a lower God; the creation is a self-transformation of God.
Nor do Stoics differentiate between a material and a spiritual world; according to
Stoic philosophy everything that exists is basically material. The world originates
from a state of pure fire in which God and the universe are coextensive. God as
purefirechanges into hot air and condenses into moisture, which then changes into
the four elements which constitute the cosmos: fire, air, water and earth.1
Obviously, the Gospel of Mary is not a Stoic document, since the 'body', which
probably refers to the human as well as the cosmic body, is not in harmony but
in confusion (GosMar 8.5-6). Moreover, the Gospel of Mary does not speak of
one material world, but presupposes two worlds: one earthly and one heavenly
(GosMar 16.21-17.3). However, although it is clear that the Gospel of Mary is not
Stoic, Stoic philosophy can help to clarify some of its basic ideas.
Pasquier is the only other scholar who calls attention to the Stoic language in the
Gospel of Mary.2 She argues that Stoic categories are used in order to reveal
Gnostic insights. In her view the Gospel of Mary characterizes Nature (GosMar

1. Long and Sedley 1987:1, 279.

2. Pasquier 1981: 390-404. See also Pasquier 1983: 48-56 and especially pp. 50 and 52.
36 The Gospel of Mary

7.17-22) and the nature of matter (GosMar 7.1-8) as two opposite natures. The
disciples must choose Nature or perish with matter.
In Stoic philosophy, however, matter is only a thought-construct and does not
exist in itself: Nature and matter are intertwined, Nature is material. The nature of
matter in the Gospel of Mary, read within a Stoic context, is nothing but Nature
itself. Another objection to Pasquier's thesis is her reading of GosMar 8.2-4, where
she has added the word 'union'. Passion in her translation arises from 'une (union)
contre nature' which she herself defines as a union between matter and Nature,
whereas a more straightforward reading, as we will see, would be that matter has
been acted upon by an opposite nature, just as in Stoic philosophy matter is formed
by Nature. But the most important objection to her thesis is her interpretation of
<t>ycic NIM which occurs twice (GosMar 7.3 and 7.18). In the first occurrence
(GosMar 7.3) Pasquier interprets the expression as the nature of matter. In the
second (GosMar 7.18) this is interpreted as Nature.
On p. 7 of the Gospel of Mary we plunge into the end of a dialogue the begin-
ning of which and its context we can only speculate about, since the first six pages
of the Coptic manuscript are missing. Thefirstquestion on p. 7 is about the destiny
of matter (7.1-2): 'Will matter thus be destroyed or not?' (eyxH ee NAoycoGn XN
MMON). The Saviour's answer in GosMar 7.3-4 is about all natural phenomena
(<t>yc I c NIM), all that has been formed (nAACMA NIM), and all that has been brought
into being (KTI c I c NIM).
It is customary to interpret these words to refer to the material world in contrast
to spiritual nature. The general opinion is that the Saviour's answer is about the
fate of matter.3 There is, however, one problem. When the words 4>yc I c NIM occur
again in GosMar 7.18-19, where the Saviour assures his disciples that the Good
One came into their midst, 'to those who belong to <(> yc IC NIM , in order to restore
<(>YC I c up to her Root', the same commentators who interpret the first <j>yc I c NIM
as referring to matter, interpret <(>yc I c NIM the second time it occurs as referring to
spiritual nature.4
Only Pasquier defends this inconsistent choice, arguing that thefirst4>yc I c NIM
has to be interpreted in a material way, because the question is about matter alone,
and because nxACMX and KT I c I c also refer to the material world alone.5 These
two reasons, however, do not justify the contradictory interpretation. Clearly, the
Saviour's answer to a question can be quite unexpected as can be seen on the same
page, the second question being about the content of sin, where the Saviour
answers that sin does not exist (GosMar 7.12-13). Furthermore the words TTAao|ja
and KTIGIS do not need to refer to matter contrary to spiritual nature. They may
also be meant in a Stoic way. In Stoic philosophy matter and spirit (or Nature) are
intertwined, matter being passive. In a Stoic sense the words denote the forms God

3. Till and Schenke 1972: 27; Pasquier 1981: 391-92 and 1983: 50; Tardieu 1984: 226; King
1995: 603.
4. Till and Schenke 1972: 27 and 63; Tardieu 1984: 226; King 1995: 604. Pasquier (1981:
393) notes the antithesis between what she calls the first (material) and the second (pneumatic)
nature; see also Pasquier 1983: 52-53.
5. Pasquier 1983: 50 note 7.
 3. Character and Purpose of the Gospel of Mary 37

or Nature made of substance. Interpreted this way <t>yc I c NIM in GosMar 7.3-4 as
well as in 7.18-19 refers to all natural phenomena (all Nature) as an appearance of
the Divine.
As in Stoic philosophy the Saviour in GosMar 7.3-4 does not seem to dis-
tinguish between material or spiritual realms in the cosmos, as does the disciple
who limits his or her question to the fate of matter alone, thus suggesting that
matter is the source of evil. The Saviour explains in GosMar 7.4-8 that all exists in
and with each other (2N N6 y e PHY [M]NMMAY) and does not repeat the verb 'destroy'
(oycDGn), which the disciple uses, but introduces the verb 'unloosen' (BO)A GBOA).
The answer of the Saviour is apparently unexpected in more than one way.

2. Cosmology in the Gospel of Mary

In this section we will examine Stoic thoughts on matter, Nature and the source of
evil, because they can help us to understand the ideas of the Gospel of Mary on
matter, Nature, an opposite nature and on the mixture of these. We will also turn to
the exegete Philo of Alexandria (± 20BC-45CE), who makes use of dualistic
(Platonic) as well as Stoic categories, as does the author of the Gospel of Mary, to
express the deeper meaning of Jewish Scripture. 6 With the help of these two
sources we will try to interpret GosMar 7.1-8.10 and investigate whether the
Gospel of Mary is to be seen as a Gnostic text in the sense that its remarks on
cosmology betray a dualism in creation.

2.1. Stoic Philosophy on Matter, Nature and the Source of Evil

2.1.1. Mixture and the Stability of the Cosmos. The idea that all things are mixed is
an important part of Stoic physics. Diogenes Laertius says:
The world is created when the substance is turned from fire through air into
moisture; then the thicker parts of the moisture condense and end up as earth, but
the finer parts are thoroughly rarefied, and when they have been thinned still
further, they producefire.Thereafter by mixture plants and elements and the other
natural kinds are produced after these. (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent
Philosophers 7.142)7

At the heart of the creation is God:

God, intelligence, fate and Zeus are all one, and many other names are applied to
him. In the beginning all by himself he turned the entire substance through air into
water. Just as the sperm is enveloped in the seminal fluid, so God, who is the
seminal principle in the world, stays behind as such in the moisture, making

6. Morris (1987: 872), argues that Philo could be called a Platonist, but just as well a Stoic or
a Pythagorean. This is why Dillon (1977:139-83), calls him a Middle Platonist. Morris (1987: 873-
80) emphasizes that Philo was first of all a Jew, since he regarded the Torah of Moses as the
supreme authority. Furthermore, Philo does not present his thoughts systematically, but in
conjunction with Old Testament texts. Thus in Morris's view he can better be called an exegete
than a philosopher (p. 880). See for this view also Runia 1990: 189.
7. Quoted in Long and Sedley 1987:1, 275.
38 The Gospel of Mary

matter serviceable to himself for the successive stages of creation (yeveoiv). He

then creates first of all the four elements,fire,water, air, earth. (Diogenes Laertius,
Lives of Eminent Philosophers 7.135-36)8

As such:
They [the Stoics] say that god is mixed with matter, pervading all of it and so
shaping it, structuring it, and making it into the world. (Alexander, On Mixture
225.1-2)9
Stoics referred to several types of mixtures as analogies from everyday life,
through which they explained and confirmed their belief in the stability of the
cosmos.10 The Stoics maintained, for instance, that a single drop of wine, which
spreads through the ocean, keeps its essential quality, since, if one puts an oiled
sponge in a mixture of wine and water the two can be separated. As the drop of
wine which spreads through the ocean, by keeping its essential quality, changes the
whole substance, so does the pneumatic force pervade and influence all substance,
thus holding the cosmos together and causing stability and harmony.11 In Stoic
philosophy matter is the substance of the cosmos. Everything is basically material,
but matter never exists alone; it is always permeated by this pneumatic force,
which is God himself. This pneumatic force is also called Nature, since in Stoicism
God and the divinity of Nature are one and the same.12

2.1.2. Nature and the Source ofEvil. Nature refers to the power or principle which
shapes and creates all things, which unifies and gives coherence to the whole and
the potential for growth. Nature is a fiery breath, self-moving and generative.
Nature is necessity and destiny, God, providence, craftsperson and right reason.13
Nature holds the cosmos together and is the source of stability and growth, the pure
fire transformed in an active fiery breath: God himself, who is also called Logos,
Pneuma, Zeus or other names.14 As it was said:
The Stoics made God out to be intelligent, a designing fire which methodically
proceeds towards creation of the world (eni ysveoei Koopou), and encompasses
all the seminal principles according to which everything comes about according to
fate, and a breath pervading the whole world, which takes on different names
owing to the alterations of the matter through which it passes. (Aetius, Placita
1.7.33)15
As Seneca says: 'What else is Nature than God and Divine Reason in the world and
its parts?' (De Beneficiis IV.7.1). Nature is personified and called upon in a

8. Quoted in Long and Sedley 1987:1, 275

9. Quoted in Long and Sedley 1987:1, 273.
10. See Todd 1976: 36-49 and 70-72. See also Long and Sedley 1987:1, 273-74 and 294.
11. Long and Sedley 1987:1, 270-72.
12. Long 1974: 149.
13. SVFII937,549,1211,1132-3,913, SVF1158,176 and SVF III 323. See Long 1974:148.
14. Long 1974: 147-54. Stoics are, however, not to be seen as 'materialists'. Long argues that
'Stoics are better described as vitalists' (Long 1974: 154).
15. For the quotation see Long and Sedley 1987:1, 274.
 3. Character and Purpose of the Gospel of Mary 39

religious way as the one ultimate deity, as Marcus Aurelius does, when he says: 'O
Nature, from you is all, in you is all, to you all is related' (Meditations IV.23).
Nature creates and arranges all for the good of the whole.16
How did the Stoics reconcile their thoughts about the cosmos being harmonious
and all being arranged for the good of the whole, with the problem of the source of
evil? In Stoic philosophy cosmic evil is seen as a misjudgment: as a human
description of things necessary for the good on a universal scale.17 Moral evil is
also seen as a matter of misjudgment: of allowing oneself to be guided by powers
of passion, rather than consciously subjecting them to reason, which results in the
freedom to act in a morally good way.18 The Stoics have an optimistic view on
evil. Both cosmic and moral evil, according to the Stoics, are essentially mis-
judgments. Passion is an important cause of these misjudgments, but even passion
is seen as a misjudgment itself. The origin of evil, in this Stoic concept, thus
remains an embarrassing problem.19

2.1.3. Passion and the Divine Within. It should be noted that passion in Stoic
philosophy is not to be confused with sexual desire. Passion is, instead, a general
overpowering unhealthy state of mind. It is the source of all unhappiness, the four
primary passions being appetite, pleasure, fear and distress.20 These four primary
passions should be understood in this way:
under appetite: anger and its species.. .intense sexual desires, cravings and yearn-
ings, love of pleasures and riches and honours, and the like. Under pleasure: re-
joicing at others' misfortunes, self-gratification, trickery, and the like. Under fear:
hesitancy, anguish, astonishment, shame, confusion, superstition, dread and terror.
Under distress: malice, envy, jealousy, pity, grief, worry, sorrow, annoyance,
mental pain, vexation. (Stobaeus, Anthologium 2.90.19-91.9) 21

Allowing oneself to be guided by passion is acting contrary to nature (TTapd

(|)uot v). In mainstream Stoic philosophy passion is a result of false judgments and
'a movement of soul which is irrational (dfXoyos) and contrary to nature (napa
<|)uaiv)\22 The Stoic Posidonius, however, ardently rejects the view that passion
arises from false judgment. Instead, he argues that the soul itself exists of rational
and irrational, animal-like faculties. The irrational faculties result in passions which
in their turn cause false judgments.23 Posidonius refers to a divine power within, a
strength which enables one to choose daily for reason over passion. He says:

16. Long 1974: 148. Pohlenz (1948: 68) describes this as 'ein ganz neues LebensgefuhF.
Nature is no longer a mere mechanical force, but a living and leading deity, a shaping power in the
cosmos as well as in human life: Zeus himself.
17. Long 1968: 332-33.
18. Long 1968: 337-41.
19. Kidd 1971: 206.
20. Long and Sedley 1987:1,419-20.
21. As quoted by Long and Sedley 1987:1, 412.
22. Long and Sedley 1987:1, 410, quoting Stobaeus 288.8.
23. Kidd 1971: 207. See also Sandbach 1975: 135-36.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Land of
Song, Book 3. For upper grammar grades
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: The Land of Song, Book 3. For upper grammar grades

Compiler: Katharine Hamer Shute

Editor: Larkin Dunton

Release date: October 10, 2012 [eBook #41016]

Most recently updated: October 23, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Dianne Nolan and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE LAND OF

SONG, BOOK 3. FOR UPPER GRAMMAR GRADES ***
THE LAND OF SONG
Book III.
FOR UPPER GRAMMAR GRADES
SELECTED BY
KATHARINE H. SHUTE
EDITED BY
 LARKIN DUNTON, LL.D.
HEAD MASTER OF THE BOSTON NORMAL SCHOOL

SILVER, BURDETT & COMPANY

New York BOSTON Chicago
1899

Copyright, 1899,
By Silver, Burdett & Company.

C. J. PETERS & SON, TYPOGRAPHERS, BOSTON.

Plimpton Press
H. M. PLIMPTON & CO., PRINTERS & BINDERS,
NORWOOD, MASS., U.S.A.

Compilers' Preface.
The inestimable value of literature in supplying healthful recreation,
in opening the mind to larger views of life, and in creating ideals that
shall mold the spiritual nature, is conceded now by every one who
has intelligently considered the problems of education. But the basis
upon which literature shall be selected and arranged is still a matter
of discussion.
Chronology, race-correspondence, correlation, and ethical training
should all be recognized incidentally; but the main purpose of the
teacher of literature is to send children on into life with a genuine
love for good reading. To accomplish this, three things should be
true of the reading offered: first, it should be literature; second, it
should be literature of some scope, not merely some small phase of
literature, such as the fables, or the poetry of one of the less
eminent poets; and third, it should appeal to children's natural
interests. Children's interests, varied as they seem, center in the
marvelous and the preternatural; in the natural world; and in human
life, especially child life and the romantic and heroic aspects of
mature life. In the selections made for each grade, we have
recognized these different interests.
To grade poetry perfectly for different ages is an impossibility; much
of the greatest verse is for all ages—that is one reason why it is
great. A child of five will lisp the numbers of Horatius with delight;
and Scott's Lullaby of an Infant Chief, with its romantic color and its
exquisite human tenderness, is dear to childhood, to manhood, and
to old age. But the Land of Song is a great undiscovered country to
the little child; by some road or other he must find his way into it;
and these volumes simply attempt to point out a path through which
he may be led into its happy fields.
Our earnest thanks are due to the following publishers for
permission to use copyrighted poems: to Houghton, Mifflin & Co. for
poems by Longfellow, Whittier, Emerson, Holmes, Lowell, Aldrich,
Bayard Taylor, James T. Fields, Phœbe Cary, Lucy Larcom, Celia
Thaxter, and Sarah Orne Jewett; to D. Appleton & Co. for a large
number of Bryant's poems: to Charles Scribner's Sons for two poems
by Stevenson, from Underwoods, and A Child's Garden of Verses; to
J. B. Lippincott & Co. for two poems by Thomas Buchanan Read;
and to Henry T. Coates & Co. for a poem by Charles Fenno Hoffman.
The present volume is intended for the seventh, eighth, and ninth
school years, or higher grammar grades. It is the third of three
books prepared for use in the grades below the high school. As no
collection of this size can supply as much poetry as may be used to
advantage, and as many desirable poems by American writers have
necessarily been omitted, we have noted at the end of this volume
lists of poems which it would be well to add to the material given
here, that our children may realize the scope and beauty of the
poetry of their own land.
 CONTENTS
PAGE
Abide with Me 72
Adversity 92
Annie Laurie 168
Annie of Tharaw 199
Antony's Eulogy on Cæsar 221
Antiquity of Freedom, The 13
Apparitions 253
Auld Lang Syne 112
Awakening of Spring, The 68

Ballad of the Boat, The 119

Bannockburn 52
Before Sedan 109
Beggar Maid, The 98
Birkenhead, The 108
"Blessed are They that Mourn" 151
Bonnie Dundee 53
Bonnie Lesley 167
Boot and Saddle 231
Building of the Ship, The 46
Cavalier, The 230
Consolation, A 261
County Guy 96
Crossing the Bar 269
Cumnor Hall 27

Deathbed, The 152

Death the Leveler 60
Deserted House, The 238
Dora 160
Downfall of Wolsey, The 177

Each and All 172

Elaine 248
Elegy written in a Country Churchyard 184
Evening (Milton) 212
Evening (Scott) 97

Faith 206
Fall of Poland, The 181
Flow Gently, Sweet Afton 196
Forbearance 260

Glenara 104
Good Great Man, The 59
Growing Old 253
Harp that once through Tara's Halls, The 183
Helvellyn 101
Hervé Riel 141
Hester 165
High Tide on the Coast of Lincolnshire, The 17
Home Thoughts from Abroad 69
Horatius 31
Hymn Before Sunrise in the Vale of Chamouni 214
Hymn of Trust 159
Hymn to Diana 101
Hymn to the North Star, 211

Ichabod 178
Immortality 202
In Heavenly Love abiding 245
Ivry 136

Jacobite's Epitaph, A 236

Jacobite in Exile, A 232
Jaffar 57
John Anderson 113

Knight's Tomb, The 103

Lady of Shalott, The 76

Last Leaf, The 239
Last rose of Summer, The 15
Light of Other Days, The 111
Light shining out of Darkness, The 134
Lochiel's Warning 61
Lochinvar 50
London, 1802 229
Lord of Himself 58
Lost Leader, The 180
Lucy 192

Man and Nature 74

Man that hath no Music in Himself, The 91
Morning 75
My Doves 206
My Love 254

Neckan, The 116

Night and Death 201
Nora's Vow 255

Ode on the Death of the Duke of Wellington 226

Of Old sat Freedom 49
O God, our Help in Ages Past 140
Oh Fairest of the Rural Maids 195
Oh, wert Thou in the Cauld Blast 260
On First looking into Chapman's Homer 218
On his Blindness 46
On the Receipt of My Mother's Picture 241
On the Sea 120
Outlaw, The 257
Ozymandias of Egypt 61

Patriot, The 150

Petition to Time, A 104
Pillar of the Cloud, The 135
Poet and the Bird, The 115

Qua Cursum Ventus 210

Quality of Mercy, The 30
Quiet Work 213

Raising of Lazarus, The 204

Recessional 270
Rhodora, The 174
Romance of the Swan's Nest 82
Rosabelle 24
Rugby Chapel 147

Safe Home 133

St. Agnes' Eve 246
Sands of Dee, The 16
Say not, the Struggle Naught availeth 45

Seven Sisters; or, the Solitude of Binnorie, The 106

She walks in Beauty 99
She was a Phantom of Delight 200
Sir Galahad 249
Sleep 156
Sleep, The 153
Snowstorm, The 67
Song from "Pippa Passes," 73
Song of the Camp, A 169
Song of the Western Men, The 56
Song: "Who is Silvia? What is She?" 256
Sonnet on Chillon 14
Stanzas for Music 196

Telling the Bees 86

Thanksgiving to God for His House, A 157
There'll Never be Peace 231
Three Fishers, The 236
To a Mountain Daisy 95
To a Skylark (Shelley) 261
To a Skylark (Wordsworth) 26
To the Daisy 92
Triumph of Charis 198
True Knighthood 252
Twilight Calm 70

Ulysses 218

Village Preacher, The 190

Waterloo 266
Wendell Phillips 149
Where lies the Land to which the Ship would go 114
White Ship, The 121
 INDEX OF AUTHORS.
PAGE
Arnold, Matthew.
Quiet Work 213
Rugby Chapel: A Selection 147
The Neckan 116

Browning, Elizabeth Barrett.

Man and Nature 74
My Doves 206
Romance of the Swan's Nest 82
The Poet and the Bird 115
The Sleep 153

Browning, Robert.
Apparitions 253
Boot and Saddle 231
Growing Old: A Selection 253
Hervé Riel 141
Home Thoughts from Abroad 69
Song from "Pippa Passes" 73
The Lost Leader 180
The Patriot 150
Bryant, William Cullen.
"Blessed are They that Mourn" 151
Hymn to the North Star 211
Oh Fairest of the Rural Maids 195
The Antiquity of Freedom 13

Burns, Robert.
Auld Lang Syne 112
Bannockburn 52
Bonnie Lesley 167
Flow Gently, Sweet Afton 196
John Anderson 113
Oh, wert Thou in the Cauld Blast 260
There'll Never be Peace 231
To a Mountain Daisy 95

Byron, Lord (George Noel Gordon).

She walks in Beauty 9
Sonnet on Chillon 14
Stanzas for Music 196
Waterloo: A Selection 266

Campbell, Thomas.
Glenara 104
Lochiel's Warning 61
The Fall of Poland 181
Clough, Arthur Hugh.
Qua Cursum Ventus 210
Say not, the Struggle Naught availeth 45
Where lies the Land to which the Ship would go 114

Coleridge, Samuel Taylor.

Hymn before Sunrise in the Vale of Chamouni 214
The Good Great Man 59
The Knight's Tomb 103

Cornwall, Barry. (See Procter.)

Cowper, William.
Light Shining out of Darkness, The 134
On the receipt of my Mother's Picture 241

Dobson, Austin.
Before Sedan 109

Douglas, William.
Annie Laurie. 168

Emerson, Ralph Waldo.

Each and All 172
Forbearance 260
The Rhodora 174
 The Snowstorm 67

Garnett, Richard.
The Ballad of the Boat 119

Goldsmith, Oliver.
The Village Preacher 190

Gray, Thomas.
Elegy written in a Country Churchyard 184

Hawker, Robert S.
The Song of the Western Men 56

Herrick, Robert.
A Thanksgiving to God for His House 157

Haywood, Thomas.
Morning 75

Holmes, Oliver Wendell.

Hymn of Trust 159
The Last Leaf 239

Hood, Thomas.
The Deathbed 152
Hunt, Leigh.
Jaffar 57

Ingelow, Jean.
The High Tide on the Coast of Lincolnshire 17

Johnson, Ben.
Hymn to Diana 101
Triumph of Charis 198

Keats, John.
On First Looking into Chapman's Homer 218
On the Sea 120

Kingsley, Charles.
The Sands of Dee 16
The Three Fishers 236

Kipling, Rudyard.
Recessional 270

Lamb, Charles.
Hester 165

Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth.

Annie of Tharaw 199
The Building of the Ship: A Selection 46
Lowell, James Russell.
My Love 254
Wendell Phillips 149

Lyte, Henry F.
Abide with Me 72

Macauley, Thomas Babbington.

A Jacobite's Epitaph 236
Horatius: A Selection 31
Ivry 136

Mickle, William F.
Cumnor Hall 27

Milton, John.
Evening: A Selection 212
On his Blindness 46

Montgomery, James.
Immortality 202

Moore, Thomas.
The Harp that once through Tara's Halls 183
The Last Rose of Summer 15
The Light of Other Days 111
Newman, John Henry.
The Pillar of the Cloud 135

Procter, Bryan Waller.

A Petition to Time 104

Rossetti, Christina G.
Twilight Calm 70

Rossetti, Dante Gabriel.

The White Ship 121

St. Joseph of the Studium.

Safe Home. Translated by J. M. Neale 133

Scott, Sir Walter.

Bonnie Dundee 53
County Guy 96
Evening 97
Helvellyn 101
Lochinvar 50
Nora's Vow 255
Rosabelle 24
The Cavalier 230
The Outlaw 257
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com