Mary Magdalene: Part I
Mary, called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils.
Luke, viii. 2.
This female, it has commonly been supposed, was a woman of infamy, and the sinner who in the house of the Pharisee washed the Saviour’s feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head; and hence it is that a place in our own metropolis, appropriated to an unhappy class of beings, is named after her, and called “The Magdalene.”
If we do not accede to this conclusion, it is not from a wish to be singular, or from a disposition that seems offended at the sovereignty of divine goodness. For has he not a right to do what he will with his own? and is our eye evil because he is good? “If God, willing to make his power known,” and “to show the exceeding riches of his grace,” sometimes calls the vilest of the vile, it surely becomes us to adore the author, and to congratulate the subject of such a wonderful salvation. But it is because we ought not to believe without evidence; and th’ere is no evidence, whatever, to prove that she was such a character as she has generally been imagined.
She was of Magdala, and all we know of her concerns her singular affliction; the regard she paid to her deliverer; and the honor she received from him.
Her affliction is expressed by her having “seven devils.” This is several times mentioned as something well known, and by which she was distinguished. The question is, what does the expression import?
Some suppose that she was possessed with a number of real individual personages or beings, called demons. According to them, about the time of our Saviour’s. incarnation, evil spirits were permitted to inhabit even the bodies of men, in order to render his dominion over the powers of darkness more obvious; and to show, by sensible instances, that he came to “destroy the works of the devil.” Much has been said in favor of this notion, and it has been defended principally by two arguments. First, that, in several places, the possessed of devils are distinguished from all other patients; and second, that things were uttered by them, implying consciousness and intelligence, which could not have proceeded from any who were only physically diseased.
Others have been disposed to inquire, how the phrase was understood by those among whom it was originally and familiarly used. Now, say they, it is certain that the Jews were accustomed to personify mental and bodily quahties, and that they employed the words “evil spirit,” and “devil,” to signify any noted malady or grievous infirmity.
Thus, Saul’s mprbid melancholy was called an” evil spirit, and which, therefore, music drove away.
Referring to what they judged the mopish and ill-natured reserve and abstemiousness of John, his enemies said, “He hath a devil.” With regard to the supposed extravagance of our Saviour, the Scribes and Pharisees said, “He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?” And, regarding the woman bowed down with a spirit of infirmity, our Lord says, “Ought not this daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, to be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath-day?” For it was supposed that, as Satan was the first introducer of evil and the original of all misery, so he exercised a peculiar agency still, in the production of evils, as was seen in the story of Job’s successive inflictions.
The word “seven devils” means not a precise and certain, but a large and an indefinite number; and hence we see in what a state of dreadful suffering and peril this woman was found laboring.
But from this complication of evils and maladies, our Saviour had delivered her; nor was she insensible of the obligations she was under to his pity and power on her behalf. “We read of her, therefore, “with Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many other women,” as “ministering unto him of their substance.”
This, with regard to our Saviour himself, implies indigence and dependence. He who “was rich for our sakes became poor “^ — so poor as that, while “foxes had holes and the birds of the air had nests, the Son of man had not where to lay his head” — so poor as to be a pensioner, suppHed by the very creatures he made and sustained.
With regard to Mary, this reminds us of three things: —
1st, Of her condition in life. She was a woman of “substance.” A very few of such adhered to our Lord in the days of his flesh; and in no age of the Church have they been numerous. To them his cause has never been greatly indebted, and they have seldom done so much for its support and spread as the lower classes and common people. Their mode of life often disables them. They live up to their means, if not beyond them. They are not satisfied with a decent and allowable distinction from the vulgar. They must be fine and splendid — others must not outshine them. The same system also must be perpetuated in their family; and hence so much anxiety to lay up for the children. It is lamentable to think that a small part of what is often wasted in dress and furniture, in table luxury and fashionable amusement, would be sufficient to evangelize a village, support a school for the children of the needy, succor the poor who are ready to perish, and make the widow’s heart to sing for joy.
Secondly, It reminds us of Mary’s generosity and liberality. She was aware of the design and value of property. She answered the claims, and enjoyed the pleasure of benevolence. She did good, was “rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate.”
Thirdly, It shows her gratitude. Her liberality, indeed, in this case, was not so much charity, as a proper return for the benefits she had received from her Lord. What was a little property to the freedom, and ease, and health, and enjoyment to which she was now restored? Had her maladies continued, how mncli would she have expended upon hired attendants, useless remedies, and physicians of no value? If religion makes frequent calls on the liberality of Christians, Christians should remember what demands it has upon them. How much do we owe to it, even as to temporal good things, for “godliness has the promise of the life that now is,” as well as “of that which is to come.” Had not the Gospel taught them to abstain from vices which consume property, and enervate the constitution; induced them to nise early instead of wasting their strength by lying late in bed, and to be active and diligent instead of being slothful and self-indulgent — what poor creatures might they have been, and how much of what they now possess might they have expended in vanity and vexation of spirit.
But where have I led you? Mary was under greater obligations to her Lord and Saviour than what were derived from her bodily deliverance. He had saved her soul with an everlasting salvation; he had blessed her with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places; he had numbered her with his saints, and admitted her into the household of faith; — and would not his love in all this, constrain her to live not to herself but to him?
Come forward. Christian, and tell us what he has done for thy soul. Has he not delivered thee from the wrath to come? Has he not freed thee from the bondage of ‘corruption, and brought thee into the glorious liberty of his children? Has he not called thee to inherit a kingdom prepared before the foundation of the world? Has he not redeemed thee by his precious blood? And is he not ever living to make intercession for thee, and to make all things work together for thj good? And will you refase him a little pecuniary assistance? What ought to be the one question with you, but “What shall I render to the Lord for all his benefits towards me?” and what your resolution, but —
AH that I am and all I have,
Shall be for ever tbiue;
Whate’er my duty bids me give,
My cheerful bauds resign.
Yet, if I might make some reserve,
And duty did not call,
I love my God with zeal so great.
That I should give him all.
But you ask, can we “minister” to him now? Had I lived when he was upon earth, I would gladly have shown him every token of regard, I would have pressed him to my dwelling, and I would have made every sacrifice to meet not only his wants but his desires.
Well, he is still in the world; not indeed corporeally, yet in such a manner as to try and prove the sincerity of your professed affection. Look to his church, look to his ministers, look to his members, look to his poor, and hear him say, “he that receiveth these receiveth me;” “inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye did it unto me.”
He who cured Mary by a miracle, could, by the exertion of the same power, have easily maintained himself without her ministrations; but he was pleased to be indebted to her bounty, and to make the relief she dispensed, the means of dignifying her charajcter. And thus it is now. He is Almighty, and independent of us in his resources, bvit not in his dispensations and condescension. He could fulfd his designs and carry on his work without us; but he chooses to engage and employ us, for our sakes rather than his own; to evince our dispositions, to exercise our talents, to improve our graces, and to honor and reward our services.
But we are led to view this female not only as a grateful and generqusontributgrjo his support, but Y as an attendant on his ministry. “He went throughout every city and village, preaching and showing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God; and the twelve were with him, and certain women which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities;” and the first of the number is said to be Mary, called Magdalene.” We cannot wonder at this part of her conduct. Who would not, if it had been in their power, have followed such a teacher whithersoever he went, hanging upon his lips, and wondering at the gracious words that proceeded out of his mouth? Yet this part of her conduct is, perhaps, liable to an exceptionable kind of imitation. It may be necessary therefore to observe that there was something peculiar in this case. The excitement was extraordinary, “never man spake like this man,” Our Lord was near to justify her. Mary was a woman of property, and it would seem had no family ties; nor is it likely that she thus always attended our Saviour, but only on particular and occasional excursions. However this may be, we -are sure that her example is not recorded to sanction those females who are idle, wandering about .from house to house, even in religious habitudes, and roving after favorite preachers, to the neglect of common and relative duties. Eccentric zeal is commonly more hurtful than beneficial; public and ostentatious actions are much more to be suspected than the regular sober engagements of our stations; which, being performed without notice, require principle to produce them. In the course of my own observation, I have met with females whose zeal has exceeded their discretion; they have been led astray by their favorite preachers; and through their unseasonable absences from home, and the frequency and lateness of their services, they have injured maternal economy, disaffected the minds of their husbands, deranged domestic order, and caused their good to be evil spoken of. Yet when reproved, they have resented it; and when reproached, they have considered themselves as suffering for righteousness’ sake. The Lord preserve you from errors on the right hand as well as on the left; may he teach and enable you to “walk circumspectly, not as fools but as wise;” and may “your love abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment, that you may approve things that are excellent,” and be not only “sincere,” but “without offence till the day of Christ.”
Mary attended our Saviour in his last journey from Galilee to Jerusalem, and was a mournful spectator of his crucifixion, “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleopha and Mary Magdalene.” These good women were not there with any view to his deliverance; for what in silch a case could they have effected? — but to sympathize with him, to observe his behavior, to hear and record his dying words, and to show how willing they were to be known as his followers, and to suffer with him.
And herein they appear to peculiar advantage: for when all the disciples, (except John, and he at first fled,) had forsaken their Lord, tli£sc females were not deterred bj the dreadfulnoss of the scene, the reproaches of the priests and scribes, or the furj of the populace. What affection and courage were here! and one of these was produced by the other; for “perfect love casteth out fear.” In difficult duties and trials, much depends upon conviction, but more upon affection. “Love is strong as death — many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it.”
Our Saviour has now yielded up the ghost, and we find Mary Magdalene one of the few who attended his burial. For when Joseph had gone “to Pilate and begged the body of Jesus, he took it down and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid;” and “the women, also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid, and they returned and prepared spices and ointments.” This was in order to embalm his precious corpse. The action was of a mixed nature. It was expressive of attachment, but it betrayed a want of reflection and faith. Had they remembered the language of David’s prophecy, had they believed what he himself had often told them, that he should rise again the third day, they would not have thought of embalming him who could see no corruption. But “a bruised reed he will not break, and smoking flax will he not quench.” He will not cast away his people for their imperfections. He looketh to the heart, and in their endeavors to honor him, he pardons the evil and accepts the good. Mary’s conduct, therefore, notwithstanding its infirmity and error, is recorded with approbation.
Nothing can be -more interesting than the remaining passages of her history, but the review of these must be reserved to another opportunity.
In the meantime keep in memory what you have received, and be experimental and practical proofs, that “whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.” — “Be ye not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.”