MARY
This
act
of
Mary
bears
a
strong
resemblance
to
that
recorded
in
Lk
7*"-,
and
so
similar
is
the
general
picture
presented
by
the
two
narratives
that
many
have
thought
them
different
accounts
of
the
same
event.
The
agreement
between
the
narratives
is
strilring;
in
both
are
presented
to
us
acts
of
love
on
the
part
of
devoted
women;
in
both
the
house
is
said
to
belong
to
a
'Simon';
in
both
the
depth
of
the
devotion
is
shown
by
the
feet
being
anointed,
and
being
wiped
with
the
loosened
hair.
On
the
other
hand,
however,
many
differences
are
to
be
noted.
The
hosts,
though
both
named
Simon,
are
distinct,
the
one
being
described
as
a
Pharisee,
the
other
as
a
leper;
the
scene
is
different,
for
in
one
case
it
is
laid
in
Galilee,
in
the
other
in
Judaea;
the
women
are
different,
for
one
is
Mary
'whom
Jesus
loved,'
the
other
is
an
unnamed
notorious
sinner,
such
as
we
cannot
suppose
Mary
ever
to
have
been.
The
lessons
drawn
from
the
incidents
by
our
Lord
are
different;
in
the
one
case
He
teaches
love
to
God
based
on
His
f
ormving
mercy,
in
the
other
He
foretells
that
the
deed
which
Judas
had
described
as
'waste'
would
for
all
time
be
an
object
of
universal
praise.
It
must
further
be
borne
in
mind
that
anointing
was
a
usual
courtesy;
and
that
not
unnaturally
two
deeply
loving
women
would
very
probably
at
different
times
be
impelled
to
show
their
devotion
by
humbly
outpouring
their
precious
gifts
upon
His
sacred
feet.
Very
possibly
Mary
never
had
heard
of
the
poor
sinful
woman's
act,
occurring
as
it
did
probably
two
years
previously
and
many
miles
away
in
Galilee;
but
even
if
she
had,
why
should
she
not
act
similarly
when
her
heart
impelled
her
to
a
Hke
act
of
devotion?
3.
Mary
Magdalene,
probably
so
called
as
belonging
to
Magdala
(possibly
el-Mejdel,
3
miles
north-west
of
Tiberias),
a
place
not
mentioned
In
NT,
as
Magadan
is
the
correct
reading
of
Mt
15''.
She
is
first
men-tioned
in
Lk
8^
as
one
of
the
women
who,
having
been
'healed
of
evil
spirits
and
infirmities,
.
.
.
ministered
unto
them
(i.e.
Jesus
and
the
Apostles)
of
their
sub-stance.'
Seven
demons
had
been
cast
out
of
her
(cf.
Mk
16')
—
a
fact
showing
her
aflBiction
to
have
been
of
more
than
ordinary
maUgnity
(cf.
Mt
12«,
Mk
5»).
An
unfortunate
tradition
identifies
her
with
the
unnamed
sinful
woman
who
anointed
our
Lord
(Lk
7");
and
she
has
been
thus
regarded
as
the
typical
reformed
'fallen
woman.'
But
St.
Luke,
though
he
placed
them
consecutively
in
his
narrative,
did
not
identify
them;
and
as
possession
did
not
necessarily
presuppose
moral
failing
in
the
victim's
character,
we
need
not
do
so.
With
the
other
women
she
accompanied
Jesus
on
His
last
journey
to
Jerusalem;
with
them
she
beheld
the
crucifixion,
at
first
'from
afar,'
but
afterwards
stand-ing
by
the
Cross
itself
(Mt
27",
Jn
192^);
she
followed
the
body
to
the
burial
(Mk
15"),
and
then
returned
to
prepare
spices,
resting
on
the
Sabbath.
On
the
first
day
of
the
week,
while
it
was
yet
dark,
she
visited
the
sepulchre
(Jn
20'"-).
Finding
the
grave
empty,
she
assumed
that
the
body
had
been
removed,
and
that
she
was
thus
deprived
of
the
opportimity
of
paying
her
last
tribute
of
love.
She
ran
at
once
to
Peter
and
John
and
said,
'They
have
taken
away
the
Lord,
and
we
know
not
where
they
have
laid
him.'
They
all
three
returned
to
the
tomb,
she
remaining
after
they
had
left.
Weeping
she
looked
into
the
sepulchre,
and
saw
two
angels
guarding
the
spot
where
Jesus
had
lain.
To
their
question,
'Why
weepest
thou?'
she
repeated
the
words
she
had
said
to
Peter
and
John.
Apparently
feeUng
that
someone
was
standing
behind
her,
she
turned,
and
saw
Jesus,
and
mistook
Him
for
the
gardener.
The
utterance
of
her
name
from
His
lips
awoke
her
to
the
truth.
She
cried,
'
Rabboni,'
('my
Master')
—
and
would
have
clasped
His
feet.
But
Jesus
forbade
her,
saying,
'Touch
me
not;
for
I
am
not
yet
ascended
unto
the
Father.'
She
must
no
longer
know
Him
'after
the
flesh'
(2
Co
5"),
but
possess
Him
in
spiritual
commtmion.
This,
the
first
appearance
of
our
Lord
after
His
resurrection
(Mk
16°),
conferred
a
special
honour
on
one
whose
life
of
loving
ministry
had
proved
the
reality
and
depth
of
her
devo-tion.
She
has
been
identified
with
Mary
the
sister
of
Lazarus,
but
without
any
grounds.
MARY
4.
Mary
the
Virgin.—
(l)
Scripture
data.—
The
NT
gives
but
Uttle
information
regarding
her.
In
the
Gospels
she
is
directly
mentioned
only
three
times
during
Christ's
ministry
(Jn
2,
Mk
S"-
",
Jn
IQ^s'),
and
indirectly
twice
(Mk
6',
Lk
11").
Outside
the
Gospels
she
is
mentioned
only
once
(Ac
1").
The
Apocryphal
Gospels
are
full
of
legendary
stories
connected
with
her
childhood
and
after-life.
In
them
we
are
told
that
she
was
miraculously
granted
to
her
aged
and
childless
parents,
Joachim
and
Anna;
that
at
the
age
of
three
she
was
dedicated
to
God
at
tlie
'Temple,
where
she
remained
until
she
was
twelve;
that
during
these
years
she
increased
in
virtue,
angels
ministering
unto
her;
that
at
twelve
she
was
betrothed
to
Joseph,
an
aged
widower,
who
was
selected
for
her
by
a
miraculous
sign.
"The
visit
of
Gabriel,
the
journey
to
Bethlehem,
and
the
Saviour's
birth
in
a
cave
are
mentioned.
It
is
added
that
at
the
moment
of
the
birth
of
Jesus
all
nature
was
stilled;
the
fowls
of
the
air
stopped
in
their
flight,
men
with
uplifted
arms
drew
them
not
down,
dispersing
sheep
stood
still,
and
kids
with
their
Ups
to
the
water
refrained
from
drinking.
The
legendary
character
of
the
apocryphal
records
renders
them
worthless
as
evidence
of
the
events
that
centre
round
the
birth
of
our
Lord,
and
we
are
therefore
confined
to
the
opening
chapters
of
the
First
and
Third
Gospels.
It
has
been
felt
that
more
evidence
than
two
Gospels
can
supply
might
reasonably
be
expected
for
such
a
transcendent
miracle.
But
con-sideration
will
show
that
the
evidence
could
not
be
essentially
greater
than
it
is.
For
from
the
nature
of
the
case
the
circumstances
would
be
known
only
to
Mary
and
Joseph.
Mary
must
have
known;
and
Joseph
must
also
have
known,
if
he
were
to
continue
to
act
as
protector
of
his
espoused
wife.
Now,
the
First
Gospel
narrates
the
events
of
the
miraculous
birth
from
the
point
of
view
of
Joseph;
while
the
narrative
of
the
Third
Gospel,
with
its
intimate
knowledge
of
the
events
which
it
so
calmly,
deUcately,
and
yet
clearly,
sets
forth,
must,
in
the
first
instance,
have
been
obtained
from
the
Virgin
herself.
St.
Luke
has
been
proved
to
be
a
writer
of
great
historical
accuracy,
and
we
may
be
certain
that
he
admitted
nothing
within
his
record
of
which
he
had
not
thoroughly
tested
the
truth:
and
it
is
diflScult
to
believe
that
he
would
open
his
Gospel
with
a
statement
that
he
had
accurately
traced
the
course
of
the
Gospel
history
from
the
first
(1'),
and
then
immediately
proceed
to
insert
untrust-worthy
information.
Indeed,
the
wide-spread
belief
of
the
early
Church
in
the
Virgin
-birth
can
be
reason-ably
accounted
for
only
by
the
occurrence
of
the
fact
itself.
The
date
of
St.
Luke's
Gospel
is
too
early
to
allow
of
ideas
of
a
Virgin-birth
to
pass
into
the
Church
from
Gentile
Christians;
while
to
Jewish
Christians
the
whole
idea
would
be
alien.
To
the
Jew
maternity,
not
virginity,
was
praiseworthy,
and
to
him
the
thought
of
Jehovah
becoming
incarnate
would
be
incredible;
in
fact,
the
Virgin-birth,
so
far
from
being
an
invention
of
Jewish
Christians,
must
have
been
a
severe
stumbling-block
to
them
in
accepting
their
new
faith.
The
angel
Gabriel,
when
sent
to
announce
to
Mary
that
she
was
to
be
the
mother
of
our
Lord,
greeted
her
with
the
words,
'
Hall,
thou
that
art
highly
favoured,'
or
'thou
that
art
endued
with
grace'
(Lk
1^').
(The
Rhemish
Version,
following
the
Vulgate,
renders
'full
of
grace';
a
translation
correct
enough
if
meaning
'fully
endowed
with
grace,'
but
incorrect
if
meaning
'fully
bestowing
grace'
—
a
rendering
the
Gr.
word
cannot
bear.)
With
absolute
submission
she
received
the
announcement,
merely
replying,
'Behold
the
handmaid
of
the
Lord;
be
it
unto
me
according
to
thy
word'
(Lk
1").
Soon
she
hastened
to
her
'kins-woman'
(v.")
Elisabeth,
who
greeted
her
with
in-spired
utterance
(vv.'^-").
The
Virgin
then
in
reply
uttered
her
noble
hymn
of
exultation.
The
Magnificat
is
largely
based
on
the
song
of
Hannah
(1
S
2).
Natu-rally
at
such
a
time
of
deep
spiritual
emotion
she
fell
