Where are the Women?
Another year, another Easter (2012), another pondering of the Gospels. Some things don’t get any easier but some are very clear — about the only thing the Resurrection accounts are in complete agreement about is that Jesus’ female followers were the first to come to his tomb on the Sunday morning (though even so, John, alone, has Mary on her own). The women were also with Jesus before he died (and at his burial), though Luke appears to introduce the male disciples into the crucifixion narrative and John, of course, has the ‘beloved disciple’ present near the cross.
We all know that Jesus had 12 (male) disciples, who he also commissioned as ‘ministers’/evangelists/preachers. We also know, however, that he had more than 12 followers, who were not all male. The male ‘disciples’, who seem to have some particular status, are nevertheless not privileged to be the first witnesses, it is the women who are entrusted with the Resurrection message, the good news, the kerygma (proclamation). I think we do know this, we know that it is Mary who sees Jesus in the garden. But who were the first preachers (see Acts)? — not the women. Also in Paul’s classic resurrection text, I Corinthians 15, where he argues for the centrality and criticality of the resurrection, who is the first witness that he names? You’ve guessed it — Peter. He was not! Paul had his own version of the message. The women are conveniently forgotten (a more charitable view), even (objectively) written out of the story, if he knew it. He goes on to talk about 500 ‘brothers’ in 15.6. How wrong can he be?!
If the women are the first witnesses then what has happened, what is their role, what is their trajectory, their place? They are entrusted with the message, the male disciples are undoubtedly dependent on them, they are second-order witnesses. According to the Synoptic Gospels the disciples do not even go to the tomb, why not? Is John’s breathless account a piece of belated gender-balancing?
What characterises the women who feature consistently at the heart of the varying narratives? — Faithfulness, commitment, patience — Mary waits at the tomb until Jesus appears. John seems to make some kind of theological point in his Gospel, even awarding ‘points’ to Peter and John, in different degrees, for believing without actually seeing the risen Jesus. Even so, it is only Mary who is able to speak the central kerygma — ‘I have seen the Lord!’ The text is late compared to the Synoptics, but from Mary’s mouth we have this key creedal statement, in effect: ‘I believe in Jesus, the Lord, who is risen’.
We should trace our faith to these sidelined women who proclaimed Christ’s resurrection and be thankful to them as our spiritual mothers.
They are much closer to the action than the ‘apostle’ Paul. We should not conspire to sideline them in ministry, preaching and episcopacy. Was Mary the first Bishop? We don’t all seem to recognise this Gospel kerygmatic imperative (faithful women at the central point of our faith) but it is time to acknowledge that leaving the account with the ‘brothers’ is now seriously out of date, though it always has been.
This is not new, though it may have taken modern biology to tell us that the female is the human default and that, though speaking of the unnatural, one would not expect a specifically virgin conception to produce a male child, which was not known at the time. Likewise ‘Eve’ was not an afterthought, or only in the story anyway. Yes, there aren’t that many key female characters in the Bible and quite a few of them do not, somehow, merit the authors and editors giving them a name, we should ‘name’ them and, on occasion, mourn them or celebrate them. Consistently, and surprisingly (given their seemingly marginal status), they are critical.
Witness Tamar in Genesis 38, she joins the family of the Hebrew patriarchs by marriage and is presumably a Canaanite, African or Arab. She is mistreated by the family and accused (unfairly, discriminatorily and anachronistically) of immorality deserving death, when the law had not been given. We later learn that she is an ancestor of King David. A few more of these remarkable, perhaps ‘questionable’ women (as some would see it) can be seen in the Davidic genealogy ascribed to Jesus in Matthew’s Gospel (this saves me a lot of time!).
Case made? Much to regret in our past? It could have worked out differently. Looking forward to a more inclusive future.
Peace!