What Became of God The Mother? - 2 Elaine H.Pagels.
What Became of God The Mother?
Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity
Elaine H.Pagels.
All of these are, of course, mythical explanations. To look for the
actual, historical reasons why these gnostic writings were suppressed
is an extremely difficult proposition, for it raises the much larger
question of how (i.e., by what means and what criteria) certain
ideas, including those expressed in the texts cited above, came to be
classified as heretical and others as orthodox by the beginning of
the third century. Although the research is still in its early
stages, and this question is far from being solved, we may find one
clue if we ask whether these secret groups derived any practical,
social consequences from their conception of God—and of mankind—that
included the feminine element? Here again the answer is yes and can
be found in the orthodox texts themselves. Irenaeus, an orthodox
bishop, for example, notes with dismay that women in particular are
attracted to heretical groups—especially to Marcus's circle, in which
prayers are offered to The Mother in her aspects as Silence, Grace,
and Wisdom; women priests serve the eucharist together with men; and
women also speak as prophets, uttering to the whole community
what"The Spirit"reveals to them.(33) Professing himself to be at a
loss to understand the attraction that Marcus's group holds, he
offers only one explanation: that Marcus himself is a diabolically
successful seducer, a magician who compounds special aphrodisiacs
to"deceive, victimize, and defile"These"many foolish women!"
Whether his accusation has any factual basis is difficult, probably
impossible, to ascertain. Nevertheless, the historian notes that
accusations of sexual license are a stock-in-trade of polemical
arguments.(34) The bishop refuses to admit the possibility that the
group might attract Christians—especially women—for sound and
comprehensible reasons. While expressing his own moral outrage,
Tertullian, another"father of the church," reveals his fundamental
desire to keep women out of religion: "These heretical women—how
audacious they are! They have no modesty: they are bold enough to
teach, to engage in argument, to enact exorcisms, to undertake cures,
and, it may be, even to baptize!" (35) Tertullian directs yet another
attack against"that viper"—a woman teacher who led a congregation in
North Africa.(36) Marcion had, in fact, scandalized his"orthodox"
contemporaries by appointing women on an equal basis with men as
priests and bishops among his congregations.(37) The teacher
Marcillina also traveled to Rome to represent the Carpocratian group,
an esoteric circle that claimed to have received secret teaching from
Mary, Salome, and Martha.(38) And among the Montanists, a radical
prophetic circle, the prophet Philumene was reputed to have hired a
male secretary to transcribe her inspired oracles.(39)
Other secret texts, such as the Gospel of Mary Magdalene and the
Wisdom of Faith, suggest that the activity of such women leaders
challenged and therefore was challenged by the orthodox communities
who regarded Peter as their spokesman. The Gospel of Mary relates
that Mary tried to encourage the disciples after the crucifixion and
to tell them what the Lord had told her privately. Peter, furious at
the suggestion, asks," Did he then talk secretly with a woman,
instead of to us? Are we to go and learn from her now? Did he love
her more than us?”Distressed at his rage, Mary then asks
Peter: "What do you think? Do you think I made this up in my heart?
Do you think I am lying about the Lord?”Levi breaks in at this point
to mediate the dispute: "Peter, you are always irascible. You object
to the woman as our enemies do. Surely the Lord knew her very well,
and indeed, he loved her more than us.”Then he and the others invite
Mary to teach them what she knows.(40) Another argument between Peter
and Mary occurs in Wisdom of Faith. Peter complains that Mary is
dominating the conversation, even to the point of displacing the
rightful priority of Peter himself and his brethren; he urges Jesus
to silence her—and is quickly rebuked. Later, however, Mary admits to
Jesus that she hardly dares to speak freely with him, because"Peter
makes me hesitate: I am afraid of him, because he hates the female
race.”Jesus replies that whoever receives inspiration from the
Spirit is divinely ordained to speak, whether man or woman.(41)
As these texts suggest, then, women were considered equal to men,
they were revered as prophets, and they acted as teachers, traveling
evangelists, healers, priests, and even bishops. In some of these
groups, they played leading roles and were excluded from them in the
orthodox churches, at least by A.D. 150-200. Is it possible, then,
that the recognition of the feminine element in God and the
recognition of mankind as a male and female entity bore within it the
explosive social possibility of women acting on an equal basis with
men in positions of authority and leadership? If this were true, it
might lead to the conclusion that these gnostic groups, together with
their conception of God and human nature, were suppressed only
because of their positive attitude toward women. But such a
conclusion would be a mistake—a hasty and simplistic reading of the
evidence. In the first place, orthodox Christian doctrine is far from
wholly negative in its attitude toward women. Second, many other
elements of the gnostic sources diverge in fundamental ways from what
came to be accepted as orthodox Christian teaching. To examine this
process in detail would require a much more extensive discussion than
is possible here. Nevertheless, the evidence does indicate that two
very different patterns of sexual attitudes emerged in orthodox and
gnostic circles. In simplest form, gnostic theologians correlate
their description of God in both masculine and feminine terms with a
complementary description of human nature. Most often they refer to
the creation account of Genesis 1, which suggests an equal (or even
androgynous) creation of mankind. This conception carries the
principle of equality between men and women into the practical social
and political structures of gnostic communities. The orthodox pattern
is strikingly different: it describes God in exclusively masculine
terms and often uses Genesis 2 to describe how Eve was created from
Adam and for his fulfillment. Like the gnostic view, the orthodox
also translates into sociological practice: by the late second
century, orthodox Christians came to accept the domination of men
over women as the proper, God-given order—not only for the human
race, but also for the Christian churches. This correlation between
theology, anthropology, and sociology is not lost on the apostle
Paul. In his letter to the disorderly Corinthian community, he
reminds them of a divinely ordained chain of authority: As God has
authority over Christ, so the man has authority over the woman,
argues Paul, citing Genesis 2: "The man is the image and glory of
God, but the woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman,
but woman from man; and besides, the man was not created for the
woman's sake, but the woman for the sake of the man.” (42) Here the
three elements of the orthodox pattern are welded into one simple
argument: the description of God corresponds to a description of
human nature which authorizes the social pattern of male domination.
A striking exception to this orthodox pattern occurs in the writings
of one revered"father of the church," Clement of Alexandria. Clement
identifies himself as orthodox, although he knows members of gnostic
groups and their writings well; some scholars suggest that he was
himself a gnostic initiate. Yet his own works demonstrate how all
three elements of what we have called the"gnostic pattern"could be
worked into fully"orthodox"teaching. First, Clement characterizes
God not only in masculine but also in feminine terms: "The Word is
everything to the child, both father and mother, teacher and
nurse.... The nutriment is the milk of the father... and the Word
alone supplies us children with the milk of love, and only those who
suck at this breast are truly happy.... For this reason seeking is
called sucking; to those infants who seek the Word, the Father's
loving breasts supply milk.(43) Second, in describing human nature,
he insists that"men and women share equally in perfection, and are
to receive the same instruction and discipline. For the
name 'humanity' is common to both men and women; and for us 'in
Christ there is neither male nor female.'" (44) Even in considering
the active participation of women with men in the Christian community
Clement offers a list—unique in orthodox tradition—of women whose
achievements he admires. They range from ancient examples, like
Judith, the assassin who destroyed Israel's enemy, to Queen Esther,
who rescued her people from genocide, as well as others who took
radical political stands. He speaks of Arignole the historian, of
Themisto the Epicurean philosopher, and of many other women
philosophers, including two who studied with Plato and one trained by
Socrates. Indeed, he cannot contain his praise: "What shall I say?
Did not Theano the Pythagoran make such progress in philosophy that
when a man, staring at her, said, 'Your arm is beautiful,' she
replied, 'Yes, but it is not on public display.'" (45) Clement
concludes his list with famous women poets and painters.
If the work of Clement, who taught in Egypt before the lines of
orthodoxy and heresy were rigidly drawn (ca. A.D. 160-80)
demonstrates how gnostic principles could be incorporated even into
orthodox Christian teaching, the majority of communities in the
western empire headed by Rome did not follow his example. By the year
A.D. 200, Roman Christians endorsed as"canonical"The pseudo-Pauline
letter to Timothy, which interpreted Paul's views: "Let a woman learn
in silence with full submissiveness. I do not allow any woman to
teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain silent,
for [note Gen. 2!] Adam was formed first, then Eve and furthermore,
Adam was not deceived, but the woman was utterly seduced and came
into sin.” (45) How are we to account for this irreversible
development? The question deserves investigation which this
discussion can only initiate. For example, one would need to examine
how (and for what reasons) the zealously patriarchal traditions of
Israel were adopted by the Roman (and other) Christian communities.
Further research might disclose how social and cultural forces
converged to suppress feminine symbolism—and women's participation—
from western Christian tradition. Given such research, the history of
Christianity never could be told in the same way again.
What Became of God The Mother?
Elaine H. Pagels
Notes
33. AH, 1.13.7.
34. Ibid., 1.13.2-5.
35. Tertullian, De Praescriptione Haereticorum (hereafter cited as DP), ed. E. Oethler (Lipsius, 1853-54), p. 41.
36. De Baptismo 1. I am grateful to Cyril Richardson for calling my attention to this passage and to the three subsequent ones.
37. Epiphanes, De Baptismo, 42.5.
38. AH, 1.25.6.
39. DP, 6.30.
40. The Gospel according to Mary, Codex Berolinensis, BG, 8502,1.7.1- 1.19.5, ea., intro., and trans. G. MacRae, unpublished manuscript.
41. Pistis Sophia, ed. Carl Schmidt (Berlin: Academie-Verlag, 1925), 36 (57), 71 (161).
42. 1 Cor. 11 :7-9. For discussion, see R. Scroggs," Paul and the Eschatological Woman," Journal of the American Academy of Religion 40 (1972): 283-303; R. Scroggs," Paul and the Eschatological Woman: Revisited," Journal of the Amencan Academy of Religion 42 (1974): 532- 37; and E. Pagels," Paul and Women: A Response to Recent Discussion," Journal of the Amencan Academy of Religion 42 (1972): 538-49.
43. Clement Alexandrinus, Paidegogos, ed. O. Sthlin (Leipzig, 1905), 1.6.
44. Ibid., 1.4.
45. Ibid., 1.19.
46. 2 Tim. 2:11-14.
Disclaimer: Our material may be copied, printed and distributed by referring to this site. This site also contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the education and research provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance freedom of inquiry for a better understanding of religious, spiritual and inter-faith issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.