*   *   *   *

“The Calling of St. Matthew,” by Hendrick ter Brugghen…                      (“Who?  Me?”)

*   *   *   *

The next major Feast Day is Monday September 21.  (Here the term “feast” does not refer to a “large meal” – typically a celebration – but rather to an annual religious celebration … dedicated to a particular saint.)  So September 21 is the Feast for “St Matthew, Evangelist.”

See also On St. Matthew, from last year.  On that note the Bible readings are the same as those for last year:  Proverbs 3:1-6, Psalm 119:33-40, 2d Timothy 3:14-17, and Matthew 9:9-13.

There’s more on St. Matthew further below, but first it’s time to do some reflecting.  For one thing, many churches have their “Rally Day” this time of year.  Such Rally Days mark the beginning of a new year of Sunday School, not to mention a new liturgical year.   They also mark the end of summer vacation – with its generally low attendance – and a time for welcoming new parish members.

Aside from that, September 20 is National Back to Church Sunday.  (“Strategically designed to help churches reach out and invite everyone to try church again.”)

So this reflection deals with some basics:  What do you get for going to church?  What does it mean to “become a Christian,” or “begin your journey toward Jesus.”  (See John 6:37.)  More basically, some potential converts may ask, “Who is this ‘God,’ and what can ‘He’ do for me?“

Yet a third variation:  “How can I get God – who created the universe – to do good things for me?”

Here’s my take:  Getting good stuff from God should be at least as hard as shooting the head off a match from 90 yards away.  “It’s hard as hell…  But now and then I’ll do it just right, and light one.”

Bear with me…

Over the millenia, two basic answers have been formulated on “does God exist?”  The first might be called the “Greek” view, which says there is no God and that we pitiful humans are at the whim of a merciless uncaring fate.  The other might be called the Hebraic view.

That view says that not only does God exist, but – that if you play your cards right – you can get Him to do good things for you, personally and as an individual. (Put another way, there is one God and that if you approach Him in the proper manner, He can make your life ever so much better.)

I explored this question in On the wisdom of Virgil – and an “Angel.”  That in turn was inspired by a series of lectures, Hebrews, Greeks and Romans:  Foundations of Western Civilization, via audiobook by Professor Timothy Shutt.  See also Job the not patient – REDUX.

Job REDUX noted Professor Shutt’s saying that when it comes to understanding the whole idea of God, we humans are “simply not up to the task.”  (We are no more up to the task of fully understanding God than “cats are prepared to study calculus.  It’s just not in our nature.”)

And Wisdom of Virgil noted Shutt’s observation that when it comes to such questions – like “does God exist?” – we humans tend to answer in terms of black or white.  (Or “all or nothing.”)   That is, most people say either that there is a “God who controls all things, or that there must be no God at all.”  In other words, there’s no middle ground.  (In our view.)

But Virgil – good old Virgil, at left reading his Aeneid – came up with just such a “middle view” that seems to make more sense than the black or white view:

There is … an overarching order at work in the world, a final coherence in the way that things work.  But it remains out of human reach, and despite our efforts, we can merely come to know it only in part…

The emphasized “only in part” would seem to be just plain common sense.  If there is indeed a Force that Created the Universe, then we pitiful human beings – living a mere 70 or 80 years, if lucky – would (logically speaking) be hard pressed to ever fully understand it.  (Or “Him.”)

But just because we can’t fully understand “Him” doesn’t mean “He” doesn’t exist.  Thus there is – most likely – an “overarching order,” and that overarching order could well be the very God who provides the “final coherence in the way that things work.”

The problem is that we “earthy” humans tend to think in terms of “all or nothing.”  We tend to think that if this “God” doesn’t cater to our every whim – or if “He” does something we don’t like, or just can’t understand – then “He” must not exist at all.  (“I guess I showed Him!“)

But the good news is:  We can still get to know God, even if “only in part.”

Which brings up the Hell’s Angel.

As noted in Virgil and an “Angel,” his name was Magoo (from the ‘Frisco chapter), and:

…on days when he isn’t working, he goes out to the dump and tries to shoot the heads off match sticks.  “It’s hard as hell,” he said.  “But now and then I’ll do it just right, and light one…” But the really strange thing is how many people think that dealing with God – the Force that Created the Universe – is somehow easier than trying to shoot the head off a match stick…

So again, here’s my take on the two key questions.  (Does God exist?  And if He does, how can I get good stuff from Him?)  The answer?  Getting good stuff from God should be at least as hard as shooting the head off a match from 90 yards away.   The good news:  It isn’t always that hard.

One thing you can do is accept the promise of Jesus in John 6:37.  Another thing you can do is read the Bible on a daily basis, to find out how other people have successfully approached this “God” person.   A third thing you can do is realize the process is both interactive and ongoing.  (The more you do it the better you get at it.)

And finally, the fourth – and perhaps the most difficult – thing you can do is simply realize the fundamental principle that just because something bad happens to you – or just because “God doesn’t cater to you every whim” – doesn’t mean He doesn’t exist.

*   *   *   *

Meanwhile, back to St. Matthew.  (See Matthew 9:9.)  I covered his Feast Day last year in On St. Matthew.  (Including the painting at right.)

This year I added some different paintings, including ter Brugghen‘s take on the calling of St. Matthew, at the top of the page.  See The Calling of St Matthew – Web Gallery of Art, which noted that Ter Brugghen spent ten years in Italy and likely studied under the noted Italian artist Caravaggio.  Caravaggio in turn “exerted a great influence on him” and sometimes ter Brugghen “repeated the subjects of Caravaggio, like in the Calling of St. Matthew.”

As to the ter Brugghen painting at the top of the page:

Christ and his follower appear to the left as dark figures in the foreground.  The main accent is on the brightly illuminated group on the right [including the] mercenary soldier pointing to the money on the table…  The light enters in a broad beam … from the left.  However, the quality of the light is original;  it is lighter, richer, and more atmospheric than Caravaggio’s, which seldom has the brightness or softness of real daylight.

Note also the “six gesticulating hands in the center.”  Thus in ter Brugghen‘s  interpretation, Jesus stands at the far left, in shadow and in profile.  St. Matthew – the one being “called” – sits near the center of the painting, pointing to himself with an expression of “Who?  Me?“

Note also that ter Brugghen did other paintings on St. Matthew’s “calling,” including the one at the bottom of the page.  (Immediately before the “notes” section.)

And finally, consider some of the things Isaac Asimov wrote about St. Matthew.

Asimov noted that Matthew’s name came from the Hebrew meaning “gift of God,” and that it was a common name in New Testament times.  This was due in large part to “the great pride of the Jews in the achievements of priest Mattathias” (seen at left on the head of a Jewish coin at the time).  Mattathias in turn was the “father of Judas Maccabeus and the heroic initiator of the revolt against the Seleucids.”  (167-160 B.C.)

But there were also good reasons why this author – and any other Gospel writer – might try and remain anonymous.  For one thing, such “holy books” were thought to carry a lot more weight – seem more “holy” – if the real authorship was “assigned to some ancient worthy:”

Indeed, there might be considered the very real force of the feeling that a truly holy book was inspired by God and that the worldly author acted only as a mouthpiece and deserved no credit.  (Emphasis added.)

Then there was the “mundane” consideration of personal mayhem.

The time when the Gospels were written “was a hard one for Christians.  Jewish hostility was pronounced and so was Roman hostility.”  Christians at the time had  vivid memories of Nero Persecuting the Christians, circa 64 A.D.  Then there was the great Jewish Revolt.  That revolt ran from 66 to 70 A.D. and turned out to be “one of the greatest catastrophes in Jewish life.”  It ultimately resulted in the Destruction of Jerusalem.  It also turned the Jewish people “from a major population in the Eastern Mediterranean into a scattered and persecuted minority” throughout the world.  (See also Jewish diaspora – Wikipedia.)

The upshot was that the Jews who had revolted against Rome “were resentful, indeed, of Christian failure to join the rebellion.”  Thus as Asimov noted, because of intense hostility from both Jews and Romans, “It might well be that a gospel writer preferred to remain anonymous out of considerations of personal safety.”  The bottom line is that Matthew “witnessed” at a time when it was dangerous for him to do so.  Thus as the Collect for Matthew’s Day says:

We thank you, heavenly Father, for the witness of your apostle and evangelist Matthew … and we pray that, after his example, we may with ready wills and hearts obey the calling of our Lord to follow him…

*   *   *   *

Another interpretation of Jesus “calling” Matthew…

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of  Brugghen, Hendrick ter – The Calling of St. Matthew.  As noted, the artist did different paintings on the same subject.  See for example ter Brugghen, Calling of Saint Matthew | MuMa Le Havre, and The Calling of St. Matthew – Hendrick Terbrugghen – WikiArt.org, which provided the lower image immediately above the “notes” section.

Re:  “Rally Day.”  See Rally Day | Article about Rally Day by The Free Dictionary, which noted:  

In liturgical Protestant churches, Rally Day marks the beginning of the church calendar year. It typically occurs at the end of September or the beginning of October.  Although not all Protestant churches observe this day, the customs associated with it include giving Bibles to children, promoting children from one Sunday school grade to the next, welcoming new members into the church, and [presenting] church goals for the coming year.

Re:  National Back to Church Sunday.  See also – from 2012 – Over 10,000 Churches Commit to ‘National Back to Church Sunday,’ from the Christian Post, a “nondenominational, Evangelical Christian newspaper based in Washington, D.C.”  The Post noted that since 2009, “National Back to Church Sunday has inspired churchgoers to invite more than 2.6 million family members, friends, neighbors and co-workers to their churches.”  

Re: “Virgil.”  The illustration, from Wikipedia, includes the caption:  “Virgil Reading the Aeneid to Augustus, Octavia, and Livia by Jean-Baptiste Wicar, Art Institute of Chicago.”

Re: “interactive.”  See On Mary Magdalene, “Apostle to the Apostles:”

[That] just goes to show the importance of the interactive – if not the mystical – part of your walk toward Jesus.  (Pursuant to John 6:37.)  In the end there’s simply no way to prove the existence of either God or Jesus, with enough courtroom evidence o convince the most jaded of skeptics.  In the end it all comes down to faith, and experience.

Re: Isaac Asimov.  The quotes about St. Matthew are from Asimov’s Guide to the Bible (Two Volumes in One),  Avenel Books (1981), at pages 771-72. 

Asimov (1920-1992) was “an American author and professor of biochemistry at Boston University, best known for his works of science fiction and for his popular science books.  Asimov was one of the most prolific writers of all time, having written or edited more than 500 books and an estimated 90,000 letters and postcards.”  His list of books included those on “astronomy, mathematics, theBible, William Shakespeare’s writing, and chemistry.”  He was a long-time member of Mensa, “albeit reluctantly;  he described some members of that organization as ‘brain-proud and aggressive about their IQs.’”  See also Isaac Asimov – Wikipedia.

The coin image of “Mattathias” is courtesy of Mattathias – Wikipedia, with the caption:  “Mattathias from Guillaume Rouillé‘s Promptuarii Iconum Insigniorum.”

Re: the Jewish Revolt of 66-70 A.D.  See also Jewish–Roman wars – Wikipedia. 

*   *   *   *

And speaking of reviews, here’s a portion of the “Welcome” portion of “Matthew 2014:”

[T]his Bible-blog is different…  It says that not only should we read the Bible with an open mind, but also that it was designed to liberate us, not shackle and shape us into some “pre-formed” spiritual straitjacket…  That runs contrary to a common perception these days, that way too many Christians are way too focused on a “one size fits all” Faith, on pain of which those who don’t think just like they do – or belong to their particular “club” – are going to hell.   For more on that topic and others like it see [The] Blog, which talks about how we can live fuller, richer lives of great spiritual abundance, and do greater miracles than even Jesus did, if only we open our minds…

*   *   *   *

Transfiguration, by Raphael (1516-20)

“The Transfiguration stands as an allegory of the transformative nature” of the faith of the Bible…

*   *   *   *

August 6 is the Feast Day for The Transfiguration, arguably the “greatest miracle in the world.” (Unlike the other miracles of Jesus, this one happened to Him.   All the others involved Jesus doing things for other people.)  The story of the Transfiguration is told in Luke 9:28-36:

About eight days after Jesus had foretold his death and resurrection, Jesus took with him Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray.  And while he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became dazzling white.  Suddenly they saw two men, Moses and Elijah, talking to him.  They appeared in glory and were speaking of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem…

See also Transfiguration of Christ, which noted this particular miracle is unique among those listed in the “Canonical gospels, in that the miracle happens to Jesus himself.” And St. Thomas Aquinas considered the Transfiguration “the greatest miracle.”  (E.A.)

The problem was that “Peter and his companions were weighed down with sleep.”  But they did manage to stay awake enough to see Moses and Elijah.  In fact, Peter thought that Moses and Elijah were planning on staying awhile.  That’s why he suggested that he make three “booths” – or primitive huts – for Moses, Elijah and Jesus to stay in. (Luke 9:33.)

See also Sukkot – Wikipedia, which described the type of “booth” that Peter was referring to.  (Sukkot is also known as the Feast of Booths.)  The thing is:  When we think of a “booth,” what comes to mind is a “stall, compartment, or light structure for the sale of goods or for display purposes, as at a market, exhibition, or fair.”  (Like the “kissing booth” at left.)  But Peter was thinking of a whole different structure.

During Sukkot, faithful Jews remember The Exodus by living in the kind of huts their ancestors stayed in while Wandering for 40 years in the Wilderness.  That kind of booth is a frail, lean-to-type structure, with two-and-a-half walls and covered with some kind of local plant material.  (Which hopefully won’t “blow away in the wind.”)  The feast is “intended as a reminiscence of the type of fragile dwellings in which … the Israelites dwelt during their 40 years of travel in the desert after the Exodus from slavery in Egypt.”  (See Judaism 101: Sukkot.)

But back to the Gospel.  We pick up after Peter spoke of the booths, “not knowing what he said:”

While he was saying this, a cloud came and overshadowed them; and they were terrified as they entered the cloud.  Then from the cloud came a voice that said, “This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!”  When the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone.  And they kept silent and in those days told no one any of the things they had seen.

Which brings up the painting above.  (Courtesy of Transfiguration (Raphael) – Wikipedia.)

Wikipedia said the painting “exemplifies Raphael’s development as an artist and the culmination of his career.”  And it’s unique for showing both the Transfiguration – in the upper half of the painting – along with another episode from the Gospels in the lower half.

The lower part of the painting illustrates Matthew 17 (verses 14-21), where Jesus had to step in and heal a boy possessed by demons, after the disciples couldn’t do it themselves.  (This comes right after Matthew’s account of the Transfiguration in Matthew 17, verses 1-13.)

The upper part of the painting shows Moses and Elijah “floating.”  On the ground, the three disciple-witnesses,  “from left to right, James, Peter and John, traditionally read as symbols of faith, hope and love; hence the symbolic colors of blue-yellow, green and red for their robes.”

In Christian teachings, the Transfiguration is a pivotal moment, and the setting on the mountain is presented as the point where human nature meets God: the meeting place for the temporal and the eternal, with Jesus himself as the connecting point, acting as the bridge between heaven and earth.

For another view, check out Feast of the Transfiguration of Our Lord.  That site presents a Greek Orthodox analysis, including that – in the story – Moses and Elijah “represent the Law and the Prophets.” (“Moses received the Law from God, and Elijah was a great prophet.”) So it was indeed a dramatic moment in time. Or as Aquinas said, “the greatest miracle.”

Or see What was the meaning and importance of the transfiguration.  The site noted that the three disciples “never forgot what happened that day,” which was probably exactly what Jesus intended.  John, one witness wrote in his gospel, “We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only.” (John 1:14)  Peter also noted, wrote of it, “We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with Him on the sacred mountain.” (2 Peter 1:16-18.)

The disciples, who had only known Him in His human body, now had a greater realization of the deity of Christ…  That gave them the reassurance they needed after hearing the shocking news of His coming death…  But God’s voice from heaven – “Listen to Him!” – clearly showed that the Law and the Prophets [noted above] must give way to Jesus.

And one last note:  See Readings for October 26 for more on this feast and how it fulfilled a centuries-old dream for Moses, who God kept from the Promised Land. (See Why was God so upset with Moses and Why Moses [couldn’t] enter the Promised Land.)  As Readings noted:

Moses finally entered the Promised Land – [at] the Transfiguration – albeit a Millennium after he expected.  In modern terms, Moses died some seven miles due east of the northern end of the Sea of Galilee, inside Jordan, while in the Transfiguration he “met up” with Jesus on Mount Tabor, inside Israel and 11 miles west of the Sea of Galilee.

Which is proof positive that while God may have His own time-table, He always keeps His promises.  (And that patience is definitely a virtue…)

*   *   *   *

*   *   *   *

A note on the painting by Raphael:  According to Wikipedia, “The iconography of the picture has been interpreted as a reference to the delivery of the city of Narbonne from the repeated assaults of the Saracens.  Pope Calixtus III proclaimed August 6 a feast day on the occasion of the victory of the Christians in 1456.”

Re:  The Greek Orthodox analysis.  Feast of the Transfiguration of Our Lord added that in addition to representing “the Law and the Prophets,” both Moses and Elijah experienced visions of God.  (“Moses on Mount Sinai and Elijah on Mount Carmel.”)  And the two men “represent the living and the dead (Elijah, the living, because he was taken up into heaven by a chariot of fire, and Moses, the dead, because he did experience death).”  But see the final note above…

The lower image is courtesy of Christian mysticism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, with the caption:  “Transfiguration of Jesus depicting him with Elijah, Moses and 3 apostles by Carracci, 1594.”  The site noted:  “[P]ractices such as the Eucharist, baptism and the Lord’s Prayer all become activities that take on importance for both their ritual and symbolic values.”  Further, “Jesus’ conception, in which the Holy Spirit overshadows Mary, and his Transfiguration, in which he is briefly revealed in his heavenly glory, also become important images for meditation.”

For related posts see On Exodus (Part II) and Transfiguration and On the Bible and mysticism.

“Christ in the House of Martha and Mary,” by Velázquez (1618)

 *   *   *   *

The next major feast day – after  Mary Magdalene, “Apostle to the Apostles” – is for Mary and Martha of Bethany, celebrated on July 29.   (Not counting July 25.  For that feast day see “On St. James the Greater,” from 2014.  The Bible readings are at St James, Apostle.)

The July 29 Gospel for Mary and Martha of Bethany is Luke 10:38-42:

Now as Jesus and his disciples went on their way, he entered a certain village, where a woman named Martha welcomed him into her home.  She had a sister named Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to what he was saying.  But Martha was distracted by her many tasks; so she came to him and asked, “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to do all the work by myself?  Tell her then to help me.”  But the Lord answered her, “Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many things; there is need of only one thing.  Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be taken away from her.”

As Wikipedia noted, this episode is usually interpreted as meaning “spiritual values [are] more important than material business, such as preparation of food.”  The article said this mirrored what Jesus said in Luke 4:4 (as part of His Temptation by Satan):  “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.'” (Citing Deuteronomy 8:3.)  Not to mention John 6:63, “The Spirit alone gives eternal life.  Human effort accomplishes nothing.”  (Referring to eternal life.)

Also, these two sisters had a brother, Lazarus.  See Martha – Wikipedia.  He’s the man that Jesus raised from the dead.  (As shown at right – by van Gogh – but not to be confused with the “beggar Lazarus.”  See Luke 16:19–31 and parable of the rich man and Lazarus.)

So anyway, here’s what Women in the Bible said of these two-sisters-and-a-brother.  First of all: “None of the three appeared to be married.”  That alone was highly unusual in Jewish society of the time, “where people were usually married before the age of 20.”  Thus the consensus is that all three siblings were “quite young, perhaps still in their teens.”

Another interpretation is that the three were “on the edge of society,” or otherwise worthy of being shunned, or seen as “unclean.”  Yet despite that possibility, “they seem to have been young, comparatively well-off, independent, and intelligent.”  Finally, the article said this:

[In this episode] Jesus was ignoring the traditional role of women, and encouraging Mary to think and learn.  He upheld her right to listen, think about ideas, and to develop her mind. She should not be limited to the tasks that society laid down for her, but be allowed access to ideas, as Jewish men were.

See also The Martha Syndrome and the Mary Solution – Religious tolerance  (as illustrated at left) which added:  “Our unbelief can block God’s miracles in our lives.”  (And that’s a point worth remembering.)  The article cited John 11:40, in the account of John’s Gospel, of the raising of Lazarus:

Jesus said, “Remove the stone.”  Martha, the sister of the deceased, said to Him,  “Lord, by this time there will be a stench, for he has been dead four days.”  Jesus said to her, “Did I not say to you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?“

See also Matthew 17:20 and Mark 9:23, not to mention Exodus 16:7, “you will see the glory of the LORD, because he has heard your grumbling against Him.”  (The emphasized portion adds an interesting “plot twist” to the concept of communicating with God…)

But getting back to the topic at hand, see Mary and Martha of Bethany 29 July:

Christian writers have seen Mary as representing Contemplation (prayer and devotion), and Martha as representing Action (good works, helping others)…  Contemplation has fewer results, but one of those results is Faith, without which it is impossible to please God.” (Hebrews 11:6)  Yet, there is a sense in which Action comes first – “If a man love not his brother, whom he hath seen, how shall he love God, whom he hath not seen?” (1 John 4:20)

Which brings up the question:  Which of these examples should we we follow?  Should we follow Mary’s path, and let our earthly concerns tend to themselves?  Or should we follow Martha’s way, a live a life of service to others?  Maybe the best answer is both…

See for example, Mary and Martha … who were they?  The site argued that far from being bickering sisters, these two were a team, each complementing the other:

Mary and Martha need not tame dragons [as shown at right] to engage the modern reader … they have much to offer beyond their imagined rivalry.  In Vermeer’s painting [shown below], Jesus points toward Mary, not as a rebuke to Martha but as a gentle reminder that leadership demands both the ability to listen and the ability to act.  Finally, Mary and Martha are not at odds but form two parts of a whole. (E.A.)

Which is another way of saying that the debate over which is the better path – faith or works – has been going for most if not all the 2,000 years since the Church was born.  See for example, Faith and Works – Reconciling the Two Doctrines:

[B]elievers are … declared righteous before God solely by faith…  Works, on the other hand, are the evidence of genuine salvation.  They are the “proof in the pudding,” so to speak. Good works demonstrate the truth of one’s faith.

So on this 29th day of July, 2015, Mary and Martha remind us that we need not “be at odds with each other” over religion.  Instead we need to work on becoming two – or more – “parts of the whole.”  (And – like many other efforts while we’re on this earthly pilgrimage – it may be easier to do it on your own, but it is definitely not as much fun…)

Christ in the House of Martha and Mary, (1655)

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of Jesus at the home of Martha and Mary.  The caption:  “‘Christ in the House of Martha and Mary,’ Diego Velázquez, 1618.”   There’s more input on the painting below.

The “bright yellow” image is courtesy of The Raising of Lazarus after Rembrandt – Vincent van Gogh.

The “tolerance puzzle” image is courtesy of  thesouthern.com/religious-tolerance.

Re: “if you believe.”  See also the Gospel for July 25, 2015:  Mark 6:1-13, on Jesus confronting a lack of faith in His home town:  “He could do no deed of power there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and cured them.  And he was amazed at their unbelief.”  (See Mark 6:6.)

Re:  Mary representing contemplation.  The quote included this:

They [Christian writers] see the same symbolism also in Leah and Rachel, the daughters of Laban (Genesis 29 and 35).  Leah was dim of sight, but had many children.  Rachel had few children, but one of them saved the whole family from destruction.  Leah represents Action, which is near-sighted and cannot penetrate very far into the mysteries of God, but produces many worth-while results.

Re: Faith and works.  See also The Controversy Over Faith And Works Continues.

The “St. George and dragon” image is courtesy of Collections of the National Gallery of Art, and/or Saint George and the Dragon (Raphael).

The lower image is courtesy of  Christ in the House of Martha and Mary (Vermeer) – Wikipedia.

*   *   *   *

Here’s that “more input,” from the Velasquez painting link as noted above:

The plight of Martha clearly relates to that of the maid in the foreground.  She has just prepared a large amount of food and, from the redness of her creased puffy cheeks, we can see that she is also upset.  To comfort her (or perhaps even to rebuke her), the elderly woman indicates the scene in the background reminding her that she can not expect to gain fulfillment from work alone.  The maid, who cannot bring herself to look directly at the biblical scene and instead looks out of the painting towards us, meditates on the implications of the story…

This is the most likely interpretation[, but some] have argued over the identities of the characters, suggesting that the maid in the foreground is actually Martha herself and the lady standing in the background is just an incidental character….  On the one hand, we may be looking at a mirror or through a hatch at the biblical scene.  If so, it would imply that the whole painting, foreground and background, is set in Christ’s time and would perhaps lend weight to the argument that the maid in the foreground is Martha.  On the other hand, the biblical scene may just be a painting which is hung in the maid’s kitchen.

Finally, the article noted that when he did this painting, “Velázquez was experimenting with the potential of the bodegones, a form of genre painting set in taverns (the meaning of bodegon) or kitchens … to relate scenes of contemporary Spain to themes and stories from the Bible.”   And that whatever the interpretation, “we can appreciate this as an early example of Velázquez’s interest in layered composition, a form also known as ‘paintings within the painting.'”  See also A Painting Within a Painting: Hidden Messages in Dutch Art.

A Penitent Magdalene, by Titian (1565)…

*   *   *   *

As noted in Mid-summer Travelog, I just got back from a two-week road trip.  (From Friday June 26 to Sunday July 12).  So now it’s time to get back up to speed.  I’ll do that with a post on the next major feast day.  That would be Wednesday, July 22, the feast day for Mary Magdalene.

As the Collect for her Day says, Jesus “restored Mary Magdalene to health of body and of mind, and called her to be a witness of his resurrection.”  She did that, and set an example for us all.

And she did all that despite a sordid past and a really lousy reputation.

To start off, “Mary” was an extremely common name at the time of Jesus.  This particular Mary was born in Magdala, which is where she got her name:   “Mary from Magdala,” or Magdalene.  Unfortunately it’s not clear where Magdala is, but most Christian scholars assume it’s “the place the Talmud calls Magdala Nunayya.”  (“Magdala of the fishes.”)  And the consensus is also that this is the site noted in Matthew 15:39, on what happened after Jesus fed the 4,000:

And those who ate were four thousand men, besides women and children.  [39] And sending away the crowds, Jesus got into the boat and came to the region of Magadan (below left).

As Wikipedia noted, this particular Mary has long had a bad reputation.  In Western Christianity, she’s known as “repentant prostitute or loose woman.”  But the consensus now is that “these claims are unfounded.”  Consider also what Isaac Asimov said.

He first noted that Magdala is usually considered a town on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee, and may have been a suburb of Tiberias.”  He also noted this Mary “has been considered, in tradition, to have been a prostitute and to have repented as a result of her meeting with Jesus.  (Thus the “devils” in Mark 16:9 and Luke 8:2 “might then be considered devils of lust.”)

Asimov also noted some confusion that arose from the placement of the story of Mary’s “devils” coming right after the story of the woman washing the feet of Jesus with her tears and drying them with her hair.  See also Wikipedia, noting there’s long been a mix-up between Mary from Magdala and the “unnamed sinner who anoints Jesus’ feet in Luke 7:36-50:”

Mary Magdalene, the anointing sinner of Luke, and Mary of Bethany, who in John 11:1-2 also anoints Jesus’ feet, were long regarded as the same person.  Though Mary Magdalene is named in each of the four gospels … none of the clear references to her indicate that she was a prostitute or notable for a sinful way of life, nor link her with Mary of Bethany.

Asimov put it this way:  The sinner in Luke 7:36-50 “was, indeed, a prostitute in all likelihood,” but there was no direct link in the Bible between this woman and Mary Magdalene.  He added that to be “possessed by devils” – as Mary was said to be – would be considered today as “mental illness, rather than anything else.”  Thus to Asimov, Mary Magdalene would be more accurately considered “a cured madwoman rather than a reformed prostitute.”

Which may be a problem for her account of Jesus’ resurrection, as will be seen…

Yet – notwithstanding any confusion about her “sordid past” – it’s clear that Mary Magdalene showed more courage and faith than the original 11 disciples.  That’s one reason St. Augustine referred to her as the “Apostle to the Apostles.”  See also Mary of Magdala | FutureChurch:

Mary of Magdala is perhaps the most maligned and misunderstood figure in early Christianity…  Since the fourth century, she has been portrayed as a prostitute and public sinner…   Paintings, some little more than pious pornography, reinforce the mistaken belief that sexuality, especially female sexuality, is shameful, sinful, and worthy of repentance.  Yet the actual biblical account of Mary of Magdala paints a far different portrait than that of the bare-breasted reformed harlot of Renaissance art.

The one indisputable fact seems to be that Mary Magdalene was both the first person to see the empty tomb of Jesus, and one of the first – if not the first – to see the risen Jesus.  (Which may have accounted for jealous males trying to  sully her reputation.)

As noted in John 20:1, “Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.” 

So she went to tell Peter and the disciple “whom Jesus loved.”  They both got there, looked inside and saw the burial clothes lying there.  (And no body.)  Then they “went back to where they were staying.”  But Mary – ever faithful Mary, who ended up with the lousy reputation – stayed there, as noted in the Gospel for her feast day, John 20:11-18.  She saw two angels, who asked why she was crying, then turned to see another man she thought was a caretaker:

Supposing him to be the gardener [as seen in the bottom painting by Rembrandt], she said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.”  Jesus said to her, “Mary!”  She turned and said to him in Hebrew, “Rabbouni!” (which means Teacher).  Jesus said to her, “Do not hold on to me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father.  But go to my brothers and say to them, `I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”  Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord;”  and she told them that he had said these things to her.

Which is why this Mary – from Magdala – is rightly known as the “Apostle to the Apostles.”

Or as it was put in Who Was Mary Magdalene, the “history of western civilization is epitomized in the cult of Mary Magdalene.  For many centuries the most obsessively revered of saints, this woman became the embodiment of Christian devotion, which was defined as repentance.”

So why doesn’t this Mary get much better “press” than she does?  For one thing:

…since Mary Magdalene, as a repentant sinner, is always shown in paintings with her eyes red and swollen with weeping, the word “maudlin” (the British pronunciation of “magdalen”) has come to mean tearfully or weakly emotional.

(See also maudlin – Word of the Day | Dictionary.com.)   In other words, this Mary became a bit of a cliche.  Then there’s fact – noted by Asimov – that Mary was not only the first one to see the risen Jesus, but that she was arguably the only person to have seen the risen Jesus:

[It] all might conceivably have rested entirely upon the word of one witness, Mary Magdalene…  Yet Mary Magdalene had been possessed by “seven devils.”  She had been a madwoman or, in any case, seriously disturbed, and her behavior might have remained erratic enough to give her the reputation of being “touched.”  Even if she had shown marked improvement under Jesus’ influence, the shock of the arrest, trial and crucifixion might well have unhinged her once more and made her an easy target for hallucination…  The people generally would have shrugged off anything she had to say as the ravings of a madwoman.

As Asimov concluded:  “The existence of Mary Magdalene may explain a puzzle concerning the resurrection – why it was believed, and yet not believed.”  Or as the last phrase might be expanded:  “why it was believed by some, and yet not believed by others.”

Which just goes to show the importance of the interactive – if not the mystical – part of your walk toward Jesus.  (Pursuant to John 6:37.)  In the end there’s simply no way to prove the existence of either God or Jesus, with enough courtroom evidence o convince the most jaded of skeptics.  In the end it all comes down to faith, and experience.

Apart from scripture, experience is the strongest proof of Christianity…   Although traditional proof is complex, experience is simple:  “One thing I know; I was blind, but now I see.”

To those who’ve interacted with God in their John 6:37 walk toward Jesus – as for example through the discipline of Daily Office Reading,it just doesn’t matter what kind of sordid past Mary from Magala may have had.  They’ve experienced the risen Jesus themselves…

*   *   *   *

The Risen Christ Appearing to Mary Magdalen, by Rembrandt  (1638)…

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penitent_Magdalene_(Titian,_1565):

The Penitent Magdalene is a 1565 oil painting by Titian of saint Mary Magdalene, now in the Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg.  Unlike his 1533 version of the same subject, Titian has covered Mary’s nudity and introduced a vase, an open book and a skull as a memento mori.  Its coloring is more mature than the earlier work, using colors harmoni[z]ing with character.  In the background the sky is bathed in the rays of the setting sun, with a dark rock contrasting with the brightly lit figure of Mary.

That is, Titian did a “racier” version in 1533.  See Penitent Magdalene (Titian, 1533) – Wikipedia.

For more on this Mary see also MARY MAGDALENE, Bible Woman: first witness to Resurrection, and What Did Mary Magdalene look like?

Re: Isaac Asimov.  The quotes about Mary Magdalene are from Asimov’s Guide to the Bible (Two Volumes in One),  Avenel Books (1981), at pages 899-902. 

Asimov (1920-1992) was “an American author and professor of biochemistry at Boston University, best known for his works of science fiction and for his popular science books.  Asimov was one of the most prolific writers of all time, having written or edited more than 500 books and an estimated 90,000 letters and postcards.”  His list of books included those on “astronomy, mathematics, the Bible, William Shakespeare’s writing, and chemistry.”  He was a long-time member of Mensa, “albeit reluctantly;  he described some members of that organization as ‘brain-proud and aggressive about their IQs.’”  See Isaac Asimov – Wikipedia.

Re: Magdala Nunayya:  See History & Culture Archives – Tour Magdala, which noted that the term means “Magdala of the fishes,” as opposed to Magdala Gadar.  The former is the “better known Magdala,” located near Tiberias “on the shores of the Sea of Galilee.”  The latter, Magdala Gadar, is “in the east on the River Yarmouk,” the largest tributary of the Jordan River. 

Re: courtroom evidence:  “The main concept behind correct evidence handling is that the item recovered is the same as that produced in the court room.”

Re: faith and experience.  See Wesleyan Quadrilateral – Wikipedia, referring to “a methodology for theological reflection that is credited to John Wesley, leader of the Methodist movement in the late 18th Century…  This method based its teaching on four sources as the basis of theological and doctrinal development, scripture, tradition, reason, and experience.”  Also, a complete quote:

Apart from scripture, experience is the strongest proof of Christianity…   Wesley insisted that we cannot have reasonable assurance of something unless we have experienced it personally.  John Wesley was assured of both justification and sanctification because he had experienced them in his own life.  What Christianity promised (considered as a doctrine) was accomplished in his soul.  Furthermore, Christianity (considered as an inward principle) is the completion of all those promises.  Although traditional proof is complex, experience is simple: “One thing I know; I was blind, but now I see.”  Although tradition establishes the evidence a long way off, experience makes it present to all persons.  As for the proof of justification and sanctification Wesley states that Christianity is an experience of holiness and happiness, the image of God impressed on a created spirit, a fountain of peace and love springing up into everlasting life.

As noted elsewhere in this blog, Jesus promises – in the most important part of John 6:37 – “I will never turn away anyone who comes to me.“

The lower image is courtesy of File: Rembrandt – The Risen Christ Appearing to Mary Magdalen.  See also On Easter Season – AND BEYOND.