Mary Magdalene

I've been away a while on retreat, just returning last weekend, which is why there hasn't been a lot of posting here. One of the things that happened while I was away was the first full feast of Mary Magdalene, which had only been a memorial until now. This created a dilemma for a lot of Catholics. On the one hand, Mary Magdalene is a saint and much beloved one. She plays a significant role in the gospels, much more significant than many apostles whose only role in the gospels is to be name-checked. On the other hand, it causes considerable uneasiness in that the move to raise her day to a full feast raises her status in a way that challenges the way people think about women and their role in the Church.

Some critics raise concerns about what this having taken so long says about the Church's treatment of women, and they are entirely right to do so. That it has taken this long to recognize her special importance is a scandal. It is still a scandal that Saint Martha day is not a feast and that her sister Saint Mary of Bethany has, who also merits a feast, for all intents and purposes, no place in the calendar.

Others resist this, fearing that elevation of Mary Magdalene and other holy women who served Jesus will open the way for female priesthood. The problem with this fear (it hardly deserves to be called an argument) is that it inadvertently undermines their side. For a male priesthood, founded on a notion of separate but equal roles, is undermined if we treat these women as second-class, and therefore not equal. To repeat, remember that all we know about for certain about saints Matthias, Bartholomew, Simon and Jude is their names and they all rate a full feast.

I think, however, there is another fear on the part of those who resist the full recognition of these holy women of the gospels and that is that it could change the way doctrine about Mary, the Mother of God is received. It does not change what is taught and believed about Mary but it could change the way it is received in the prayer and devotion of Catholics.

I'll come clean about this and admit that I think (and I very much emphasize that "I think") this would be a good thing. Mary, as was made clear by the Second Vatican Council, is a member of the church. She does not stand over and above it. Look at the calendar, however, and she has been, until this year, the only woman to rate a feast. All others receive only a memorial. When we think about feminine virtue, Mary is such a large presence as to overwhelm all others. This needs to be corrected.

I could say more and perhaps will some day.