Mary Magdalene and The Da Vinci Code:
How Brown Interprets Feminine Leadership in Religion Christian Reyes One of the most recent controversies that have graced television and the covers of newspapers is the topic of Dan Brown’s newest novel, The Da Vinci Code. What makes this book so controversial is that Brown weaves a story about a museum curator with a secret life, a historian and how the church has been on a bloody rampage for several years trying to cover up the “truth” about Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. Much like other mystery novels before its time, The Da Vinci Code peppers evidence leading to the discovery of the perpetrator in various areas amongst the text and invites the reader to consciously thread the pieces together in the end with help from the author’s fictional extensions; the characters. Along with Mary Magdalene’s untimely historical death, Brown also incorporates the “homicide” of the concept of feminine divinity. Brown ties all these concepts together, much like a detective would, and likens these two separate, but similar, murders to one killer: the Church. Although Mary Magdalene’s role in the known Bible is relatively short compared to other characters, Mary Magdalene plays a critical role in the book The Da Vinci Code. Dan Brown shows how Mary Magdalene’s role in the Bible was deliberately downplayed and cast in a negative light. Brown also uses the written history of Mary Magdalene to represent the feminine leadership that was lost after Christianity took over the masses. Also important to note is that although The Da Vinci Code is categorized as a fictional novel, Dan Brown posts this disclaimer before the story starts: “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate”(1). This statement is important because it establishes and reinforces the fact that The Da Vinci Code is still largely a work of fiction, but any references or descriptions made to historical texts, quotations, rituals, etc. are not fictional. The disclaimer assures the reader that the story behind the story, per se, is legitimate. In The Da Vinci Code, Brown uses the Gnostic Gospels to suggest that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. However, for the scope of this article, sexuality is not something that would be emphasized. The relationship between Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene may very well have been of a sexual nature, but because this is textually difficult to attest, the strong spiritual bond will be emphasized. “By focusing on Mary Magdalene’s sexuality, Brown has perpetuated the tradition in which her sexuality takes precedence over her apostleship” (Calvert-Koyzis p46) and portraying Mary Magdalene in a negative light is something that is beyond the range of this work. The Gnostic Gospels are considered an apocrypha of the New Testament and were found largely in 1945 at the foot of the Jabel al-Tarif, a cliff near the town of Nag Hammadi in the
Middle Egypt area (Letting Mary Magdalene Speak p3), although there were other important codices found in other parts of Egypt and other various parts. A large part of the controversy is that the texts of which are being referred to in these claims is a text that has never been accepted by Christianity. The Gnostic Gospels reveal many controversial ideas and this also adds to the animosity that Christians have had towards the Gospels, making it exceedingly difficult for them to accept the texts as complete or legitimate. Gnostics and Christians have endured a very tumultuous relationship for sixteen hundred years, (David p4) causing Christians to reject any of the Gnostic ideals altogether. Firstly, Christians believe in the notion of “original sin”; that humans are felled spirits that must strive to become close to God. Gnostics, on the other hand, believe in a “divine spark”; that God is a part of us all, naturally (David p17). The early Christian “fathers” namely Iraneus, Tertullian and Epiphaneus wrote books against the Gnostics, the most popular work being Iraneus’ Adversus Heareses in which he writes that Gnostics were “insane, depraved, life-hating freaks who held orgies, practiced promiscuity and homosexuality aborted and devoured fetuses and refused to bear children” (David p.3). This belief held for several centuries until the Gnostic Gospels were found in Nag Hammadi and true Gnosticism was revealed to be a religion unlike what Iraneus had asserted. Brown attends to the feud that Gnostics and Christians have had, saying that “anyone who chose the forbidden gospels over Constantine’s version was deemed a heretic” (Brown 234). In The Da Vinci Code, Brown quotes the Gospels repeatedly. One such quote from the Gospel of Phillip says: “…and the companion of the saviour is Mary Magdalene. Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, ‘Why do you love her more that all of us?’”(Robinson 138 and Brown 246). Brown is trying to prove that Mary Magdalene was the favorite of all the disciples. What Brown is trying to prove is obviously very profound, and his use of ancient texts makes his argument very convincing. There are other things that he says about Mary Magdalene, “the Priory of Scion, to this day, still worships Mary Magdalene as the Goddess, the Holy Grail, the Rose and the Divine Mother” (Brown 255). Brown also writes that Mary Magdalene traveled to France after Jesus Christ’s resurrection and bore his child, Sarah (Brown 255). In the Bible, Mary Magdalene is officially introduced for the very first time into the life of Jesus in Luke 8:2 where it is said that seven demons had been exercised from her before she joined Jesus through his preaching (Nelson Study Bible). She had a brother named Lazarus, who was revived from the dead by Jesus himself (John 11:11-44). During Jesus Christ’s life and after his crucifixion, Mary Magdalene would anoint his body with oil (Mark 16:1, Mark 14:3, Matt. 26:7-12, John 12:3) which is a task that is historically reserved only for the spouse of the one who is being anointed (Walker 615). Mary Magdalene is also the first person to see Jesus after his resurrection (Mark 16:9). Mary is most commonly remembered for washing Jesus’ feet with her tears and wiping his feet with her hair (Luke 7:45).
Mary Magdalene’s role in the canonical Bible is downplayed severely in the New Testament; in fact, her name is only mentioned eleven times. Yet in spite of this, Mary Magdalene is the one of the most widely talked about women from the Bible, only second to Mary, the mother of Jesus. Although not enough information about Mary Magdalene is given in the canonical Bible, it is surprising to know that whatever little has been said about her in the Canon, has been severely misconstrued into a terrible myth. The myth that has somehow been preserved throughout the last few centuries is that Mary Magdalene was a former whore, who was shown mercy by Jesus Christ and allowed to join his ministry. Although it is one hundred percent true that Mary Magdalene was one of the apostles of Jesus, maybe even the apostle to the apostles, but what makes this claim outrageous is that it has never been expressly written that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. The only possible insinuation of this is in Luke 7:37-39, where it is said that Mary Magdalene was a “woman of the city, and she was a sinner…this man, [Jesus] if he were a prophet would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.” As simple as these verses are, the words “woman of the city” has been misconstrued grossly for centuries, placing Mary Magdalene in a negative light amongst the believers of the Christian faith. Somehow being “woman of the city” was exclusively defined as being a prostitute. No where else in the Bible has a story been procured proving Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. It is important to refute that rumor and to offer historical proof of its invalidity. This rumor, turned partially fallacious ‘fact’ was started officially on September 21, 591 by Pope Gregory in which he stated in a sermon that when Mary Magdalene was called a woman of the city who was a sinner in Luke 7:37-39, indicated that the woman’s sin was of a sexual nature. Also emphasized in this homily was that Mary Magdalene always wiped Jesus’ feet with her hair. Although this is true by what has been said of Mary Magdalene in the Bible (John 12:3), Pope Gregory said that Mary Magdalene having her hair loose proved that she was indeed a harlot, as only prostitutes would leave their long locks free (Tis Pity She’s a Whore: The Revision of Mary Magdalene in Contemporary Fiction 294). It is preposterous to make up such an enormous lie when Mary Magdalene’s character in the canonical Bible is so scant. However, although little is said specifically about her, one can come to legitimate conclusions about her life and her family by analyzing her surroundings in the Bible, releasing her of any ill conceived notions. Mary was sister to Martha and Lazarus and in John 11:1, it is said that all three siblings live in Bethany together. Bethany is a small town about two hours out if Jerusalem at Mount Olive (John 11:18) and Mount Olive is considered prime realty. Some proof of this is that the house that Lazarus had died in must have definitely large enough to house the enormous throngs of people mourning for his death (John 11:45). A private tomb would be a “somewhat flamboyant luxury in Jesus’ time, not only a sign of wealth, but also a status symbol attesting to aristocratic associations” (Baigent 335). The house also must have been large enough to house an elaborate dinner party for Jesus and his 12 apostles (Matthew 26:6-13). Why would Simon the leper, the Pharisee of whose house was used for the Last Supper, allow a woman rumored to be prostitute pour oil all over his halls? The reason why is because Simon the leper was Mary Magdalene’s father. Of course he would allow his daughter to pour the spikenard oil, as he knew her and also knew where the oil was from. Yet some additional proof to insinuate that Mary and her family were affluent was the fact that Lazarus had
a tomb, and it is probable that only the rich could afford a tomb of such magnitude and only a wealthy family could afford the amount of costly spikenard oil that Mary constantly pours on Jesus. So it can be assumed that Mary had siblings, her father was Simon the leper, her family was fairly wealthy and that she was more than likely not a prostitute. She had no reason to be downcast with such a well regarded family, so it is not textually or historically accurate to assume or say that Mary Magdalene was ever a prostitute, as the rumor has said. The Bible never specifically says nor implies this through its context. Tidbits of facts surrounding the life and family of Mary Magdalene suggest that she may have lived a very privileged and simple life with her family. However, Mary Magdalene recognized that she was a sinner, just like all other men and women who had wept at Jesus’ feet before her and begged for His forgiveness. In The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown commonly attributes Mary Magdalene to be a symbol of the lost goddess tradition before Christianity took over. Although Brown never refutes the history of Mary Magdalene as a disciple of Jesus, making her a devotee to the faith, he merely suggests that the way that the Church spread horrible rumors about Mary Magdalene and removing texts from the Bible that portrayed her in a favorable light is interestingly similar to how the Church eradicated the Pagan tradition which incorporated both genders into it’s worship and emphasized the equality of both and sometimes revered feminine leadership and divinity. Because of this analogy, Brown ties the two ideas together, suggesting that Mary Magdalene was intended to be the founder of Jesus’ church instead of Peter, placing the Church as a potentially female-led institution, much like ancient Paganism. In The Da Vinci Code, Brown writes, “As a part of the Vatican’s campaign to eradiate pagan religions and convert the masses to Christianity, the Church launched a smear campaign against the pagan gods and goddesses, recasting their divine symbols as evil” (37). This unfair and perverse treatment of divinity is strikingly similar to the way that the Church also removed any instances of female power or divinity in the predominantly male faith. Even though Mary Magdalene’s role is limited in the Canon, as previously stated her character plays a major part in some Gnostic texts and scriptures. The Pistis Sophia, a Coptic text, is almost completely a dialogue between Jesus and herself. The Gospel of Mary is a discourse between Mary Magdalene and the remaining disciples after Jesus’ crucifixion. She is also mentioned briefly in The Gospel of Phillip, the Gospel of Thomas, the First Apocalypse of James, the Dialogue of the Saviour and the second copy of The Sophia of Jesus Christ. In the Pistis Sophia, a fourth century codex also known as the Codex Askewianis, Mary Magdalene is one of the main characters. This Gospel is made up of an exclusive conversation between herself and Jesus after the resurrection. The Pistis Sophia states that Jesus stayed on earth for another 11 years after his death and resurrection and continued to preach to his disciples about the twenty four mysteries. Mary Magdalene appears to be more inclined towards the teachings of Jesus and asks many more questions than the rest of the apostles. Jesus tells her “you are she whose heart is more directed to the Kingdom of Heaven than all your brothers” (Schmidt Ch16) and also says to her that “I will not conceal anything from you from this hour, but I will reveal everything to you with certainty and openly. Hear now, Maria, and give ear, all
you disciples” (Schmidt Ch25). Yet another powerful scripture also from The Pistis Sophia where Jesus says to Mary Magdalene: “Excellent Maria. Thou art blessed beyond all women upon the earth, because thou shalt be the pleroma of all pleromas and the completion of all completions” (Schmidt Ch19) It can be clearly seen that Jesus completely entrusted the mysteries of the Lord to Mary, and may have intended her to be the founder of his Father’s church. Not only had Mary Magdalene been the first to speak to or see Jesus after his resurrection, but she was also given complete knowledge of the world according to the Gospels. However, because of Jesus’ apparent favor and exclusive attention to Mary Magdalene, Peter suffers great anger and jealousy toward her. “The portrayal of her as a harlot may well have been an over compensation of a vindictive following intention on impugning the reputation of a woman whose association with Jesus was closer to their own and thus inspired an all too human envy” (Baigent 335). Peters envy is displayed for the rest of the disciples to see in the Gospel of Mary: “…and Levi answered, ‘Peter, you have always been hot tempered. Now I see you contending against the woman like an adversary. If the Saviour made her [Mary Magdalene] worthy, who are you to reject her? Surely the Saviour knows her very well. That is why he loved her more than us’” (Robinson 473) Thankfully, Levi did protect his fellow apostle; however Peter had said this after disbelieving the words of Mary Magdalene. He refused to believe that Jesus had given special knowledge to a woman before the rest of the apostles. In the Gospel of Thomas, Peter “tries excluding Mary from their group claiming that ‘woman are not worthy of the life” (Mary of Magdala in Early Christian Coptic Literature p.7) It has been well documented within the Gnostic texts that Mary Magdalene was apparently the favorite of the bunch, and according to the amount of knowledge bestowed to her, she was intended to serve as a leader of the faith. “The power of the female…was once very sacred, but it posed a threat to the rise of the predominantly male Church, and so the sacred feminine was demonized and called unclean”(Brown 238). According to Karen King, a professor of Ecclesiastical History at the Divinity School at Harvard University, “the effect [of having portrayed Mary Magdalene in a negative light] was twofold: to undermine the appeal to Mary of Magdala as a warrant for women’s leadership, and to undermine the theological positions being promulgated under her name and her apostolic authority” (Mary Magdalene p3). So it is clear to see that Mary Magdalene’s role was deliberately downplayed and cast in a negative light for the purpose of eradicating any female leadership in the male Christian Church. Since the find at Nag Hammadi, the Gnostic Gospels have revealed that Mary Magdalene was intended to be the leader of the Christian movement, and suddenly people are faced with “one tradition where Peter plays a role of tremendous significance and Mary is on the margins, while in another tradition, Mary is the significant figure and Peter is the suspect”(Darman p18). It is the tradition that emphasizes Peter also known as orthodox Christianity, which people are most accustomed today. It is unfortunate that Mary Magdalene’s reputation suffered so greatly over so many centuries. Although having Mary Magdalene as a part of fictional and non-fictional literature is not relatively new, Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code most certainly shows how Mary Magdalene’s role in the Bible was deliberately downplayed and cast in a negative light by
limiting the mention of her name in the Biblical Canon as opposed to the exclusivity that she plays in the Gnostic Gospels. Brown also uses the written history of Mary Magdalene to represent the feminine leadership that was lost after Christianity took over the masses by showing how the Gnostic and Coptic texts hold Mary Magdalene in a high regard compared to other orthodox texts. Mary Magdalene has not been completely exonerated of the accusations that she has weathered throughout the ages, though on a large scale, many people have set the rumor to rest in their hearts and minds, and have accepted Mary Magdalene as “apostle to the apostles.” Please send comments and questions to Christian Reyes at crysti.reyes@gmail.com Works Cited Brown, Dan. The Da Vinci Code. New York: Doubleday, 2003. Brown, Kevin. “Tis’ Pity She’s a Whore: The Revision of Mary Magdalene in Contemporary Fiction.” Papers on Language and Literature 42.3 (2006): 291-316 Calvert-Koyzis, Nancy. “Re-Sexualizing the Magdalene: Dan Brown’s Misuse of Early Christian Documents in The Da Vinci Code.” Darman, Jonathan. “Religion: Who Was Mary Magdalene?” Newsweek 29 May 2006. MSNBC. 2006. 16 November 2006 . David, Phillip. “The Wheel Broken at the Cistern: The Divergence of Orthodox Christianity from Gnosticism.” “The Gospel of Philip.” Trans. Wesley W. Isenberg. The Nag Hammadi Library In English. Dir. James M. Robinson. San Fransisco: Harper & Row, 1977. 131-151. “The Gospel of Mary.” Trans. George W. MacRae and R. McL. Wilson. The Nag Hammadi Library in English. Dir. James M. Robinson. San Fransisco: Harper & Row, 1977. 471-474. King, Karen. “Letting Mary Magdalene Speak.” Beliefnet. 2006. 16 November 2006 < www.beliefnet.com/story/131/story_13186.html > King, Karen. “Mary of Magdala in Early Christian Coptic Literature.” Society of Biblical Literature. 2006. 16 November 2006 The Nelson Study Bible. New King James Version. Earl D. Radmacher, Th.D, editor. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Bibles, 1997.
Schmidt, Carl, trans. and Mac Dermott, Violet, trans. “Pistis Sophia: The Books of the Savior.” 1921. Pseudepigrapha, Apocrypha and Sacred Writings. 7 November 2006 . Walker, Barbara G. The Woman’s Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983.