sign in sign up
<<
Home , Anointing of Jesus, Four Evangelists, Simeon (Gospel of Luke)

Images of in Christian Tradition: A Case of Prostituted Identity

Jerry Camery-Hoggatt

Christian tradition is sometimes remarkable for the liberties it • three of the four hint that she is to be remem- takes with the reputations of its , and in this regard no bered as a member of the followers of who merited example springs so readily to mind as that of Mary Magdalene. the title “.” Tradition has had its field day with the reputation of this once deeply troubled woman; the recent blaze of controversy set by Mary: A Disciple of Jesus Dan Brown’s incendiary novel, The Da Vinci Code,¹ is only the latest in a series of firestorms stretching back almost two Mark’s story of the rich ruler refers to the act of abandoning one’s thousand years.² former life to accompany on his itinerant missions (10:21, Mary Magdalene has been confused with Mary the mother 28; cf. 3:14, 5:18); in 8:34, a necessary condition of discipleship is of Jesus, with , with Mary of the sister “following” even to the point of death. of Lazarus, with the daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman in It is important that this calling to discipleship is not restricted , with the prostitute who anointed Jesus’ feet in , to the twelve only. In 8:34 the call to radical discipleship is extend- and with the woman taken in adultery in certain manuscripts of ed explicitly to the multitude, in 10:21 to the rich young ruler. :53–8:11. She has been called Jesus’ consort, his wife, and If these, then, are the criteria of discipleship more broadly his lover; in one ancient document, she is identified as “she who defined, surely in Mark’s view Mary Magdalene qualifies: Jesus used to kiss many times on the mouth.”³ • She has left her home in order to accompany Jesus on his The Western tradition conjectured some sort of deeply seated itinerate mission (15:41; cf. 10:21, 29f); rivalry with Peter, though this stands in sharp contrast with a • she has committed her resources to the good of the very favorable portrait in the East. She has been called the apos- kingdom (15:41b; cf. 3:14; [5:18], 10:21); tola apostolorum, the “apostle to the apostles.” She is demeaned • she has followed at great personal risk, even to the in the Talmud as a hairdresser and a harlot. Christian legend itself (15:40; cf. 8:34–38, and in contrast, 14:27, 66–72). finds her with John the Beloved in Ephesus, with and Lazarus in France, a thirty-year penitent in a cave near Arles, and Also implicit in John’s reports concerning her are hints that alone in Rome, accusing Pilate before Caesar for his unrighteous she has been with Jesus for some time (NB. Mark notes Mary judgment against her Lord. “used to follow him in the and minister to him,” 15:41). In contrast, the shows remarkable restraint In 1975, Raymond Brown published a short study of “Women in its dealings with the Magdalene. Her name occurs a total of in the Fourth ,” in which he surfaced the suggestion that only twelve times. These are confined to the gospels and—except “John has no hesitation in placing a woman (specifically Mary for :2f—to parallels of three scenes. All three take place Magdalene) in the same category of relationship to Jesus as the within a period of fewer than 36 hours: Twelve.”⁷ Brown’s comments regarding Mary deserve to be quoted at length: 1. the scene at the crucifixion,⁴ 2. the scene at the burial,⁵ In the allegorical parable of the John com- 3. the scene at the .⁶ pares the disciples of Jesus to the sheep who know their shepherd’s voice when he calls them by name (10:3–5). This A survey of the biblical material leads to the following gen- description is fulfilled in the appearance of the risen Jesus to eral observations about the character and background of Mary Mary Magdalene as she recognizes him when he calls her by Magdalene: her name “Mary” (20:16). The point that Mary Magdalene • She is always referred to with the designation Magdalene; can belong to Jesus’ sheep is all the more important since in • she has been delivered from severe demonic oppression; 10:3–5 the sheep are twice identified as “his own,” the almost • she appears to have been a woman of some means; identical expression used at the beginning of the : • she maintained a devotion to Jesus remarkable even “Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them among the women; to the end” (13:1).⁸

18  Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004 Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004  19 The designation Magdalene of] salted fish) described in Josephus’War (II.xxi.8; III.ix. 7–x.5), a good deal more can be known about its character: All refer to Mary as “Magdalene,” but nowhere is there a clear explanation of what that might mean. Within the • Magdala was a sizeable city, with a population of perhaps tradition, three possibilities emerge. 40,000 (II.xxi.4);¹⁶ 1. Magdalene means “Hairdresser.” Perhaps the least likely • the presence of a hippodrome (II.xxi.3) suggests a suggestion is that of the Talmudists: She is Miriam Megdella, significant contingent of gentiles, which might explain and is described in Shabbat 104, in which the migdala derives the relatively small size of the synagogue, as well as the from piel of gadol; “to twine or plait.” Apparently the Talmudists city’s somewhat unsavory reputation; construed from this that Mary Magdalene was a woman’s hair- • walled on the land side, it was open to the sea (III.x.3); dresser—a disreputable occupation.⁹ Lightfoot accepted this • it was the site of intense fighting during the revolt under designation, pointing out that the participle kaloumene in Luke Titus (III.x.1). 8:2f would be awkward preceding a place of origin.¹⁰ Recent excavations have uncovered several first century struc- The suggestion is curious, but will raise the suspicions of the tures, including a small synagogue, 26.8 feet by 23.8 feet, with Christian because it serves an anti-Christian calumny. Against five stone benches along the North wall, seating comfortably this view, we should note that early Christian preachers never perhaps 55 people. made this connection, even though it would have supported the These points are interesting, but they tell us little about Mary identification of Mary with Luke’s prostitute (7:36–50). herself. Closer to our own interests is the tradition that Magdala 2. Magdalene means “great” or “tower.” The possibility that had been destroyed by the Romans because of its “adulteries” the name Magdalene could be made to yield greater meaning (Mid. Lament. 2:2). This note has been central in an elaborate in Hebrew was exploited among Christian interpreters. Origen case worked up to demonstrate that Mary of Magdala was the (185–254) found in the Magdalene’s name a reference to her “spiri- “sinful women” who anointed Jesus’ feet in Luke 7:36–50. More tual greatness,” deriving that meaning from the Hebrew gadol.¹¹ on this question follows. (342–420) commented on the similarity between her single most important recorded act and the basic meaning of migdol as Exorcised demoniac “watchtower”: She is a steadfast watch-tower at the crucifixion and the . But perhaps this is only an astute parono- Luke records an early tradition in which Mary Magdalene was said masia rather than an allegorical liberty taken with her name. to have been exorcised of seven demons (8:2). This tradition was Such liberties were not unheard of. The twelfth century biog- surely part of Luke’s special source, and it is perhaps—but only rapher Jacobus formulated a purely homiletical approach to the perhaps—corroborated by the longer ending of Mark (16:9). meaning of Magdalen: According to Jacobus, the name means, “remaining in bondage.” In this way it describes her life before Special devotion to Jesus her conversion, bound in the dissolute lifestyle of the demoniac We can be clear that Mary Magdalene maintained a devotion to and the prostitute.¹² Marjorie Malvern responds to Jacobus with Jesus special even among the women. In a sense, her presence this dry remark: at the tomb demonstrates as much.¹⁷ John places her name last As is his custom, he prefaces the story with an etymological in 19:25, but that may be to accommodate an exchange of words explanation of the ’s name, for to the medieval Jacobus between Jesus and Mary his mother. In 20:1–18, John mentions the meanings of a person’s name reveal the individual’s char- only Mary at the tomb, and there he details considerably the role acter. If the name does not reveal the expected character, she plays in the passion and resurrection. etymology is distorted to bring out the traits Jacobus wishes In summary, Mary is identified as a disciple of , not to emphasize.¹³ of the twelve, certainly, but equally clearly as part of the larger band of disciples who also followed in that capacity. This much 3. Magdala was her city of residence. Most likely the term is indicated implicitly in Mark and John and more forcibly in “Magdala” identifies her city of residence, a well-established town Luke. It is supported by the following facts: at the place where the Plain of Gennesaret meets the Sea of the Galilee, four miles north of Tiberias. The site is generally identified • She accompanied Jesus on his mission as an itinerant; with present-day Khirbet Mejdel, although the New Testament¹⁴ • she actively employed her material resources for the and Talmudic sources gave it other names.¹⁵ If—as is almost cer- advancement of the Kingdom; tain—Magdala can be identified with Taricheae Tarixeae( = [place • she willingly followed Jesus closely at great personal risk

20  Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004 Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004  21 and, in contrast to the men, remained relatively close even The Magdalen Legend. In conflated form, the “Magdalen to the crucifixion; Legend” might be reconstructed as follows: • there is the implication in John’s gospel that she is to be Mary was born in Bethany, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. reckoned among the “sheep,” and that the designation the Leper was her father. Some time early in her “sheep” refers to members of the disciple band; adult life, before she encountered Jesus for the first time, she • there is the fact that the at the tomb expects the fell into dissolute morals, and—either through association, women to recall information from the passion predic- or through an actual remove—her name became associated tions, to which only the disciple band had had access. with that of Magdala, a city notorious for its harlotry. The Of these five things, then, we can be certain, and little more can seven demons mentioned in Luke 8:2 refer to “demons of be said without straining the evidence. We shall see, however, that the Church has felt a need to exploit to the fullest any possible associations between Mary Magdalene and the other “The Magdalen Legend is women of scripture. not historically credible.”  Mary Magdalene in Early Catholicism unchastity,” and they indicate the pervasive nature of her Within more orthodox circles, the tradition encouraged the moral depravity. identification of Mary with various unnamed women, all of In time she heard of the , repented, and whom were in one way or another guilty of sexual indiscretion was forgiven. She was at once accepted into the fellowship of or some other vice. Here we have concrete evidence of an almost the women who accompanied her Lord and was restored as universally accepted form critical maxim that increasing detail well to the fellowship of her family. Her attentive listening is a discernable tendency of the evolution of tradition.¹⁸ Rudolf to Jesus’ teaching at one point embroiled her in a domes- Bultmann claims that as tic controversy with her sister Martha, in which her Lord’s narratives pass from mouth to mouth, or when one writer endorsement confirmed the legitimacy of her vocation as a takes them over from another, their fundamental character contemplative. remains the same, but the details are subject to the control of The death of Lazarus, and his return to life, became the fancy and are usually made more explicit and definite.¹⁹ occasion for her renewed gratitude to Jesus, which she dem- onstrated by Jesus at the banquet her family had Surely something similar has happened to the identity of given in his honor. She remained with Jesus at the terrifying Mary Magdalene, who in popular Christian thought has come ordeal of his death, attended his burial, and witnessed his to be identified with a number of unnamed characters in resurrection. scripture. Often, those habits of identification were created—or exploited—by Christian preachers in the interests of promoting Hereafter the traditions diverge radically: a certain sort of ascetic piety. In one version, she is said to have accompanied Lazarus, Martha and Maximin on a pilot-less boat that landed Daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman miraculously at Marseilles, on the shores of southern France. Nicephorus (H.E. i.33) preserves for us an isolated tradition Leaving the others to more active work, she retired to a cave that Mary was the demoniac daughter of the Syro-Phoenician near Arles, where she lived for 30 years in strictest penance. woman in Mark 7:24–30. This curiosity of history is chronologi- At her death, a church was built on the site of her hermitage, cally impossible. The child is called a paidion in v. 30, while Mary and miracles were wrought at her tomb. is a fully-grown woman during Jesus’ ministry. In another version, she is said to have accompanied the Mary and John the beloved to Ephesus, where she The “prostitute” in Luke 7:36–50; died. The emperor Leo the Philosopher, in the ninth century, was said to have removed her body to Constantinople, where Perhaps the most influential conjecture of the Church about it was laid to rest in the Church of St. Lazarus. Mary’s identity is that which traditionally has been known as “The Magdalen Legend”: she is the ‘sinful woman’ (hamartolos) The history of the Magdalen Legend is impossible to reconstruct. who anointed Jesus’ feet at the house of in J. M. Lagrange, in his study of the patristic references, observes Luke 7:36–50.

20  Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004 Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004  21 a curious anomaly: bold enough to have accompanied Jesus on his itinerant preach- ing tours, and her presence at the crucifixion and at the tomb The exegetes either draw no conclusion, or declare that suggests a remarkably forthright character. the sinful woman is not Mary of Bethany, at the same time It is also not possible to identify Mary Magdalene with the sin- that all preachers, even those who as exegetes think otherwise ful woman directly, without reference to Mary of Bethany. The (Ephrem, and Jerome, the allegorist) consistently identify and details of the anointing all militate against it. The woman in the rhetorically exploit this identity.²⁰ story is “a woman of the city” (Luke 7:37 [= Nain? v. 11]), and is Suffice it to say that as early as Tatian’s Diatessaron the two known to Simon, but apparently not to Jesus (v. 39). If this were anointing stories are identified, and Mary Magdalene, one would expect the erratic behavior of a demoniac, that by the time of Gregory the Great “The image of Mary (540–604) all three women had been and perhaps an exorcism; here Jesus identified in the popular Christian Magdalene preaching to the says nothing about demons. Neither mind in the West. twelve is a recurring theme in the does the Pharisee—who knows the woman—even though the accusa- To be viable, the Magdalen Legend history of Christian art.” requires the following: tion of collusion with satanic powers  would well have been a primary vis- • The various accounts of the ceral reaction (cf. :14–23). How anointing of Jesus in Luke 7:36–50, :6–13, much more powerful it would have been to declare: “If this man :3–9, and :1–8 all must refer to a single were a prophet, he would know this woman is a demoniac!” event, or, if to two events, to the same woman. In v. 50, Jesus dismisses her with the blessing, “Go in peace,” • John identifies that woman as Mary of Bethany 11( :2; 12:3). which surely would have been inappropriate for a member of his • Mary of Bethany must be the same as Mary Magdalene. entourage. Whether or not the seven demons are to be taken literally, Of these, the second is given, and the first is debatable. It is on it remains an insuperable difficulty that a personality so pro- the third that the innocence of the Magdalene is established: foundly disturbed as to warrant the description—or who would Mary Magdalene cannot be the same as Mary of Bethany. be known as a demoniac—would be capable of carrying on such One single point of identity exists between the two women: a profession as prostitution in a social and religious setting such Both of the women named Mary brought “spices” or “ointment” as this one. in preparation for Jesus’ burial (aromata kai mura: :56; Finally, it is important that in the immediately following cf. to muron, John 12:5 [NB. v. 7]), just as the sinful woman in pericope (8:2f), Luke introduces Mary Magdalene as though she Luke 7:36–50 brought spices (aph’ muro eleipsen tous podas mou) is new to the narrative, without a single backward glance to the to anoint Jesus at the house of (v. 46). In the story of the sinful woman which immediately precedes. end, though, it is simply impossible to merge these events. It is noteworthy that, while Mary Magdalene and Mary of The woman taken in adultery in John 7:53–8:11 Bethany are never found in the same scene, neither are they ever substituted for one another in cross-references and biblical par- Occasionally one reads in popular Christian literature that Mary allels. Mary of Bethany is mentioned a total of ten times, always Magdalene is to be identified with the woman taken in adultery in association with Martha, Lazarus or both. Mary Magdalene is in John 7:53–8:11. Surely this represents the subordination of crit- never in any case associated with Lazarus or Martha. Luke intro- ical thought to devotional sentiment, but ultimately it depends duces Mary Magdalene into the narrative for the first time in 8: on the Magdalen Legend, which is not historically credible. 2f, and then in 10:38f he introduces Mary of Bethany for the first To sum up thus far: the number and character of the women time. All four evangelists mention Mary Magdalene, and only whose identities have been assimilated to that of Mary Magdalene Luke and John mention Mary of Bethany, but it seems clear that is astonishing. Perhaps it is the very poverty of biblical data con- the designations of their cities of origin are intended specifically cerning her which has given occasion for the voluptuous images to distinguish the two women from one another. her name has evoked in the popular Christian mind. Marjorie The character of each of the two women is internally con- Malvern is certainly correct in her observation that the conflated sistent, but the two are quite distinct from each other. Mary of personality of the Magdalen Legend—sinful woman, Mary of Bethany seems to have been something of a homebody. Only in Bethany, Mary Magdalene—has served a positive mythical :28–44 is she found outside the house. Mary of Magdala is function in the religiosity of ascetic : Mary rep-

22  Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004 Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004  23 resents the idealized penitent woman. She leaves behind once singled out for her disobedience. and for all the dissolute life of sexual license, becomes a chaste • Just as Jesus—the anti-typical —has redeemed female counterpart of Christ himself, and typifies the model mankind through “justifying obedience,” so now Mary female contemplative. Magdalene—the anti-typical Eve—has evidenced “justifying obedience.” Mary Magdalene: Apostle to the Apostles In this way, Mary Magdalene is designated “apostle,” but the implication of that designation is extended to an almost salvific If the tendency of tradition has been to impute to pre-conver- plane: it is because of her obedience that women are now worthy sion Mary a sordid past, surely its purpose has been to present a to be part of Christ. foil with which the magnitude of her conversion and the depth of her piety could be contrasted. Her name is therefore deeply Conclusion reverenced in Christian history. The respect with which she is held is manifest in other ways as well. One particular accolade In the end, if we picture Mary Magdalene once again in a garden, it warrants special attention: she is apostola apostolorum, the would be one badly overgrown with misconceptions, eloquent tes- “apostle to the apostles.” Even Gnostic speculation—express- timony to the fertility of the Christian imagination coupled with the ing its enlightenment in ways quite different than those of lack of a good gardener. More importantly, the extravagant growth its more orthodox counterparts—evolved a complex series of of the Magdalen Legend tells a good deal about the Church’s her- affirmations of this woman “teacher” of the apostles. The image meneutic generally. For one thing, it indicates a fascination with the of Mary Magdalene preaching to the twelve is a recurring theme characters of the , a deep desire to know more than the texts in the history of Christian art, her gracefully curved finger raised allow us to know. Herein lies a cautionary tale: If we take seriously in a medieval gesture of pedagogy. The liturgical calendar defers the historical nature of our faith, it is not legitimate to combine and to her status: as apostle to the apostles, she is the only woman re-combine the facts in the interests of Christian piety, if in doing so beside the mother of Christ on whose feast day—July 22—the we distort both the scripture and the historical truth. creed is read aloud in the liturgy of the Western Church. The history of this designation is difficult to reconstruct. About the Author Bernard of Clairveaux described her as apostle to the apostles in the twelfth century, and in the ninth century Rabanus Marus Jerry Camery-Hoggatt holds a (776?—856) presented a complex defense of her designation as Master of Theological Studies from evangelist. (354–430) did the same. So far as I Gordon-Conwell Theological Semi- can tell, the earliest and most explicit reference to Mary as apostle nary and a Ph.D. in Early Christian is found in the writings of (170?–235): Origins from Boston University. He is Professor of New Testament and Nar- Christ Himself sent [Mary Magdalene], so that even women rative Theology at Vanguard Universi- become the apostles of Christ and the deficiency of the first ty in Costa Mesa, California. Dr. Cam- Eve’s disobedience was made evident by this justifying obedi- ery-Hoggatt’s area of expertise includes the interpretation of ence. O wondrous advisor, Eve becomes an apostle! Already the Gospels and the role of narrative in theological reflection. recognizing the cunning of the serpent, henceforth the tree He is the author of Irony in Mark’s Gospel, Speaking of : of knowledge did not seduce her, but having accepted the Reading and Preaching the Word of God, and Grapevine: The tree of promise, she partook of being judged worthy to be Spirituality of Gossip. part of Christ.…Now Eve is a helpmate through ! Therefore too the women proclaimed the Gospel.²¹

One point sometimes overlooked in Hippolytus’ saying is the implicit parallel drawn between Mary Magdalene and Eve, a

parallel remarkably like that which Paul draws between Christ Leave a Legacy and Adam: for Tomorrow’s Christian Leaders Remember CBE in your Will • Just as Adam is the proto-typical man, so now Eve is taken for the proto-typical woman. http://www.cbeinternational.org/new/help_cbe/will_to_cbe.shtml • Just as man through Adam fell into sin, so now woman is

22  Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004 Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004  23 Endnotes (Osnabruck: Ott Zeller, 1965), 408; qtd. in Malvern, Venus in 1. Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code (New York: Doubleday, Sackcloth, 91. 2003). 13. Malvern, Venus in Sackcloth, 90. 2. NB. the bibliographies of Marjorie Malvern (Venus 14. Magdala or more likely Magadan at Matt. 15:39; at : in Sackcloth: The Magdalene’s Origins and Metamorphoses 10 the mss. are divided between eight variations, which need not [Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1975], 207–212), concern us here. and Victor Saxer (Le culte de Marie Madeleine en Occident des 15. On the whole question, see the discussion and bibliography origins à la fin du moyen âge [Auxerre: Publications de le Societe in J. F. Strange, “Magdala,” Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible des Fouilles Archeologiques et des Monuments historiques de (Supplementary Volume; 1975), 561, and the notes in M. Avi- l’Yonne, 1959], xv–l; idem. Bibliotheca Sanctorum 8 (Rome, Yonah, Map of Roman Palestine (London: Oxford University Instituto Giovanni xxiii nolla Pontificia Universita Lateranensa), Press [Humphrey Milford], 1940), 37. cols. 1078–1104: s.v. “Maria Maddalena.” 16. My colleague, William Williams, who visited the site of 3. Gospel of Philip 63. Magdala in 1979, informs me that the current dimensions of the 4. Matt. 27:55 = :40f = Luke 23:49 = :25. city are much too small to support a population of that size. 5. Matt. 27:61 = Mark 15:47 = :1–11 = :1–18. 17. The Gospel of Peter, 50f, casts her in the role of organizer 6. Matt. 28:1–10 = :1–8 = Luke 24:1–11 = John 20:1–18. of the women, a possibility underscored by her pre-eminence on 7. Raymond Brown, “Women of the Fourth Gospel,” all but one of the gospel lists. Theological Studies 36 (1975): 688–99. 18. Bruce Metzger, “Names for the Nameless in the New 8. R. Brown, “Women of the Fourth Gospel”: 694f. Testament: A Study in the Growth of Christian Tradition,” in 9. Gustav Dalman finds compounded here a confusion between Kyriakon (Festschrift Johannes Weiss; Münster, Aschendorff, Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of Jesus, in Jesus Christ 1970), 96–98; against this, however, one should note no less in the Talmud, Midrash, Zohar and the Liturgy of the Synagogue an authority than E. P. Sanders, The Tendencies of the Synoptic (New York: Arno Press, 1973), 16f. Both women are named Mary; Tradition (Cambridge: University Press, 1969), 88–189. both have tarnished reputations (Mary Magdalene: see discussion 19. Rudolf Bultmann, “The Study of the Synoptic Gospels,” in below; Mary the mother of Jesus: 67, Hagigahi 4); and , ed. F. C. Grant (New York: Harper, 1962), 32. both are identified as hairdressers (Mary Magdalene: Šabbat 110; 20. J. M. Lagrange, “Jesus a-t-il ete oint plusiers fois et par Mary, the mother of Jesus: Sanhedrin 67). plusiers femmes?” Revue Biblique n.s. 9 (1912), 504–532; qtd. in 10. J. B. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. in Matt 25:56; Harm. Ev. on Luke Peter Ketter, The Magdalene Question, 67 n 1 (emphasis mine). 8:2. Cf. also Peter Ketter, The Magdalene Question (Milwaukee: 21. For these references see Leonard Swindler, Biblical Bruce Publishing Co., 1935), 30 n 4. Affirmations of Women (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979), 209f, 11. Trac. in Matt. Xxxv. following altogether too closely Brown, “Women in the Fourth 12. Jacobus a Varagine, Legende Aurea, ed. Th. Grässe Gospel”: 693 n 14. Special�Recognition CBE is pleased to announce the publication of Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy this November. Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Ronald W. Pierce, with the aid of Gordon D. Fee, have assembled a distinguished array of evangelical scholars firmly committed to the authority of Scripture to explore the whole range of issues surrounding gender roles—historical, biblical, theological, hermeneutical and practical. They offer a sound, reasoned case that affirms the complementarity of the sexes without requiring a hierarchy of roles. CBE President Mimi Haddad and Mark Strauss will moderate a panel critique and discussion of Dis- covering Biblical Equality at the annual convention of the Evangelical Theological Society on Nov. 18. They will also moderate a panel interview and discussion of the topic, “Living Together as Husband and Wife: What are the Differences between Egalitarian and Complementarian Marriages?” on Nov. 19. To help out at our booth or come to a CBE members and friends dinner while at ETS contact [email protected]

Receive 25% off from CBE’s on-line bookstore, www.equalitydepot.com list price: $25.00 your price: $18.75

24  Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004 Priscilla Papers • Vol. 18, No. 4 • Fall 2004  25