Customer Reviews

Mary Magdalene: A Biography

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The first reviewer really does sum up this book. This the usual very thorough scholarly and very unenlightening look at Mary Magdalene...no new questions asked, no myths consulted, no real ideas entertained. Why did he bother? With the wealth of the gnostic codices now before us, Mr. Chilton still talks about demons in the Magdalene? He still talks about demons at all? He airily assumes that Mary is from the city of Magdala when quite a few of his fellow scholars question whether the town that exported salted fish was actually called Magdala at the time of Mary? He pays no attention to the ancient documentation that calls her a "priest." He assumes it was she who annointed Jesus with her hair? The book is tiresome. It could have been written fifty years ago. For all I know, it was. Bruce just dragged it out now to catch a little star dust.

I found this book a fascinating read. Chilton has taken limited information about Mary Magdalene from gospel, gnostic, and other sources and drawn some educated conclusions about her as a person, her relationship with Jesus, her centrality in his movement, and her significance in the development of the Christian faith through the centuries. He has also posed an interesting theory about the legends about her and her supposed marginalization in the growth of the faith and church. Childton admits, more than once, that much of what he says cannot be proved decisively, yet he uses the little information available, along with his understanding of culture and history, to present a compelling portrait of Mary Magdalene, her relationship to Jesus, and her influence on the development of the Christian movement. Whether this portrait is on target or not, it is certainly interesting and plausible enough to bring some human spice into our reflection on the faith and its beloved Jesus. After all, we interpret history all the time using the information available, and that's what Chilton has done here in interesting fashion. I find it helpful to reflect on the human possibilities about Jesus, his movement, and those who first loved and followed him. It's fuel for the imagination and brings excitement to the faith, at least it does for me. As for me, such reflection helps me love all the more the one I call Christ, and gives me a new and inspired appreciation for the woman named Mary from Magdala.

Chilton is a recognized authority on early Christianity and his biography of the romantic figure of Mary Magdalene is clearly and concisely written. His earlier book "Rabbi Jesus" was enlightening, so he has some credibility with me. That being said I wasn't overwhelmed by the quality of his scholarship in this book.

I'm no biblical scholar and I haven't read a great deal on Mary Magdalene so I can't pretend to evaluate this book competently, but my impression is that the author makes up for a paucity of authentic material with an active imagination. Chilton perceives Mary Magdalene as one of Jesus' most important apostles. With little real evidence, for example, the author asserts that Mary Magdalene was Jesus's assistant and expert on the practice of exorcising demons. So, it may be. He accounts for the fact that she receives only scant mention in the Bible -- when Jesus cast our her demons and when she, with other women, discovered his empty tomb -- by male chauvinism on the part of the writers of the Gospels. Again, so it may be -- but it also seems possible that Mary Magdalene is not prominent in the Bible for the valid reason that she was not one of the most prominent of the apostles of Jesus. It seems impossible to me to know which scenario may be true.

It was inevitable, I suppose, that myth-makers would speculate about Jesus's love life and given the alliterative quality of Mary Magdalene's name seize on her -- from among several women mentioned in the Bible -- as his consort, lover, and perhaps his wife. The publication of "The Da Vinci Code" has raised this interest to a fever pitch and the author can be forgiven his effort to make a few bucks by capitalizing on this interest-- but he didn't inspire in me much confidence that this book is the definitive work on the life of Mary Magdalene. We don't have enough information to do more than speculate but a better, more authoritative speculation is probably available than Chilton's biography.

Smallchief

This text was a major disappointment to read. The author uses so many "mights", "coulds", "maybes" and "perhapses" that it seems like a text in speculative biography. Maybe she did this. Perhaps she did that. This could have happened. It might have been the case...
He claims that Jesus was not able to read or write, though most scholars give him some capacity for that. Frustratingly, he offers no reason for his statement. Also, he states that since Mary was possessed by seven demons it took Jesus at least a year to exorcise them all. Sadly I got so frustrated with his writing that I didn't even finish reading it. But my margins are riddled with question marks and exclamation points at parts where I was befuddled or frustrated.

This is a well written work and occasionally provides some useful information, especially about the historical evolution of various (incorrect) ideas about Mary Magdalene (MM). BUT, the author invents far too many ideas of his own (e.g., MM is the author of all the exorcism stories in the Gospels) and far too often makes clear mistakes. Here's a brief list of his errors:

- Chilton claims "Luke's gospel says that Jesus exorcised Mary of `seven demons'(p. 25)." It says no such thing. It merely says that Mary had seven demons exorcised from her, but doesn't say who did the deed. The added ending to the Gospel of Mark (16:9) ascribed the cure to Jesus, but Luke never makes this connection.

- Chilton states: "Time and again in the gospels people with unclean spirits and diseases are portrayed as taking the initiative and demanding Jesus' attention...(p. 11)." Not true. Of the eight cases of people with unclean spirits, not a single one seeks Jesus out. In four of the cases (the epileptic boy, the blind and dumb man, the dumb man, SyroPhoenician woman) the caretakers seek Jesus, in two cases the spirit itself seeks Jesus (the man in the synagogue, the man in the cemetery), in one case Jesus seeks the person (bent woman) and in one case (Mary Magdalene) we don't know. But Chilton is completely wrong when he claims that these people sought Jesus out. It never happened.

-Chilton claims "The women had joined Joseph of Arimathea, a sympathetic rabbi who offered his own family's burial cave to be used for Jesus' internment (Mark 15:42-46) (p. 75)." Mark 15 says no such thing. It doesn't say that Joseph is a rabbi, nor does it say that the tomb is a cave, nor does it say that it was Joseph's family burial plot. Nor does it say that the women "joined" Joseph, it merely says they watched where Joseph placed Jesus. What Gospel is Chilton reading from? Certainly not Mark.

Here's a brief list of his failure to consider competing and more popular scholarly opinions:

- Chilton claims that Mary is from Magdala (p. 1). Any historian knows that the city of Magdala did not exist at that time, so it's impossible that she came from there. The most likely explanation for her name is that it refers to Migdal which is the Aramaic word for Tower. There were 3 cities that had the name Migdal at this time, and there's no way of knowing which of those cities the word referred to. More likely it was just a nickname, meaning that either Mary was tall or that she was a "tower of strength" to the movement. Margaret Starbird has provided a wealth of information that the latter is the case. But no serious historian says that she is from Magdala.

- Chilton claims that Mary sought Jesus out in 25 C.E. (p. 1). Of course, such an assertion is sheer nonsense. Neither from the canonical nor the Gnostic gospels, nor from folklore is there any way to estimate when they met. Moreover, there is no reason to suggest that Mary sought Jesus, for we have ample documentation that Jesus often sought out people, rather than vice versa.

- Chilton presents Mary as a peasant (p. 2). While there is no evidence for this, most legends claim she was wealthy, and the fact that Luke lists her along with other wealthy women suggests she was not poor. Chilton is simply inventing things with such speculation.

The enormity of his inventions and mistakes detracts from an otherwise easy-to-read book.

Chilton provides an excellent review of the church's response to the faith of Mary Magdalene. I appreciated his commentary on gnostic thought and, as always, his scholarship is impeccible. This book doesn't read as easily as did his almost-novelesque Rabbi Jesus. Chilton takes much more liberty in drawing conclusions about the Magdalen than the research should allow. Still, the book is well written and provides plenty of food for thought. If your church book club read the DaVinci Code, they should follow it up with Mary Magdalen: A Biography.

As a woman in the healing profession I found this book to be a gem: perhaps the most important book I've read in my life. How indebted we are to Bruce Chilton for his work on the Magdelene who will,no doubt,continue to influence future generations despite what history denies her. A huge obstacle in our Spiritual development has been lifted thanks to this great soul and to the one who made her known to us.

Publishers Weekly, or whoever it was, implies that another book about Mary Magdalene is hardly needed these days. Wrong. When a subject spurs so many to write about it, that means that subjects time has come. People are hungry for new revelation. So, if you're going to go to all the trouble to write a book about Mary Magdalene, then going beyond the accepted gospels seems a good idea. And if you're a scholar, it seems a vital idea. I can read anything (and I often do), so reading this wasn't too difficult. Actually, reading is like panning for gold. Sometimes you can stand in a cold stream for a week before you find a nugget. In this book, I think you could pan for a year and find nothing but pebbles. Still, there's a lot of obvious hardwork put into this book and being a fan of hard work and dedication, I cough up my three stars. But as for inspiration or understanding, well on those grounds, I'd give it none.

Chilton illustrates to what extent MM acted as one of Jesus' disciples, how exorcism, annointing, and visions were valued, and how she was integral both as witness and herald of the Resurrection. This book uses MM more as a catalyst for great discussion of historical events, political influences, other writings, translation issues, fundamentalist interpretations, modern feminist theology, etc. as it is biographical. Even though Chilton quotes the Bible and many other writings throughout, including The Gospel According To Mary, I perceive that Chilton is helping the reader find Truth from the Bible. It is well-organized, well-written, and interesting.