Was the Beloved Disciple at Jesus’ side really John—or was it Mary Magdalene all along? This scroll, inspired by Cynthia Bourgeault’s teaching, reexamines the Gospel of John through Magdalene’s embodied witness. Lean in. The truth has a heartbeat.
"You don’t get to claim “apostolic authority” while denying the one person every gospel agrees was there. Their bias against Mary disqualifies their judgment. Period."
Good Teacher, many thanks for this amazing writing. To consider Mary Magdalene not only as the intimate companion of Jesus but also as the heir to his leadership is so wonderful. I had never thought of that possibility. If the other apostles had accepted her as their leader, it would have added a whole new meaning to Christianity’s development.
We should also demand her Gospel—the Gospel of Mary—alongside Thomas and Philip, to be included. Any reference to their so-called rejection is null and void—because the same bishops who tossed those texts out also rejected the undeniable fact that Mary Magdalene is named in all four canonical gospels as the first witness to the resurrection.
You don’t get to claim “apostolic authority” while denying the one person every gospel agrees was there. Their bias against Mary disqualifies their judgment. Period.
Jesus, revelation was considered the "New Covenant" and everlasting, between Heaven and Earth. By diminishing Mary Magdelene to a mere footnote (in a sense) they do the same injustice as was done to Eve, in my mind.
The patriarchal bias remains while her importance as his beloved. The same beloved beloverence that Eve as Adam's equal was misaligned. Representing both the male and female attributes of God.
How then can we say that we are all Made in God image without embracing the duality of God (male& female)?
Debra, you’ve named what too many have left veiled.
To diminish Magdalene is to rerun Eden’s error: dividing what was created whole. The exile of Eve and the erasure of Magdalene are not two stories—they’re the same wound replayed through time. Both carried the divine imprint. Both stood as mirrors of holy partnership. And both were cast aside when the story got rewritten to suit power over presence.
You’re absolutely right—the “image of God” is not a solo portrait. It’s a shared likeness. Male and female, human and divine, revealed in sacred relationship.
The tragedy is not that Magdalene loved Jesus—it’s that her love was theological, reciprocal, embodied, and dangerous to empire. That’s why she was footnoted, fragmented, and forgotten.
Debra, what you're sensing is not far from the heart of the matter.
Rather than look for a biological bloodline, Cynthia Bourgeault invites us to see Magdalene as the lineage bearer in another way. Not by womb, but by wisdom. Not by physical seed, but by spiritual transmission. She received what Jesus gave in full measure. She understood it. She embodied it. She carried it forward.
In this light, the Holy Spirit isn’t a third person on a genealogy chart. It is what flows between them. The current of divine knowing. The shared heart. The conscious union that could only take root in someone who had the inner capacity to hold it. Magdalene wasn’t just a companion. She was the vessel through which the living presence could continue.
So maybe it’s not either-or. Maybe she was the Spirit. Maybe she carried it. Maybe she became it.
The sacred continues through those who are willing to receive and return love in the same pattern.
"You don’t get to claim “apostolic authority” while denying the one person every gospel agrees was there. Their bias against Mary disqualifies their judgment. Period."
For 2025 years and more -- this!
They always hated her because he loved her.
I got to “breathe that in,” did so, then said out loud, “She’s Eve!” [to his Adam]
That makes sense. I can see that. Thank you VMB. 🙏
A piece that peeks through the veil of smoke and dust of centuries...
A good read..
Thank you
Good Teacher, many thanks for this amazing writing. To consider Mary Magdalene not only as the intimate companion of Jesus but also as the heir to his leadership is so wonderful. I had never thought of that possibility. If the other apostles had accepted her as their leader, it would have added a whole new meaning to Christianity’s development.
We should also demand her Gospel—the Gospel of Mary—alongside Thomas and Philip, to be included. Any reference to their so-called rejection is null and void—because the same bishops who tossed those texts out also rejected the undeniable fact that Mary Magdalene is named in all four canonical gospels as the first witness to the resurrection.
You don’t get to claim “apostolic authority” while denying the one person every gospel agrees was there. Their bias against Mary disqualifies their judgment. Period.
I can see it. Wow! You've got me re-thinking a lot (again). 😊
Jesus, revelation was considered the "New Covenant" and everlasting, between Heaven and Earth. By diminishing Mary Magdelene to a mere footnote (in a sense) they do the same injustice as was done to Eve, in my mind.
The patriarchal bias remains while her importance as his beloved. The same beloved beloverence that Eve as Adam's equal was misaligned. Representing both the male and female attributes of God.
How then can we say that we are all Made in God image without embracing the duality of God (male& female)?
Debra, you’ve named what too many have left veiled.
To diminish Magdalene is to rerun Eden’s error: dividing what was created whole. The exile of Eve and the erasure of Magdalene are not two stories—they’re the same wound replayed through time. Both carried the divine imprint. Both stood as mirrors of holy partnership. And both were cast aside when the story got rewritten to suit power over presence.
You’re absolutely right—the “image of God” is not a solo portrait. It’s a shared likeness. Male and female, human and divine, revealed in sacred relationship.
The tragedy is not that Magdalene loved Jesus—it’s that her love was theological, reciprocal, embodied, and dangerous to empire. That’s why she was footnoted, fragmented, and forgotten.
But the Spirit remembers. And so do we.
Yes ! And as I sat here pondering
Eve brought forth life, Adam the seed of life
Jesus and Mary Magdelene the same. I truly wonder if the sacred bloodline exists to this day?
Jesus born of a virgin
So Jesus the Father
Mary Magdelene - the Mother
Their bloodline the Holy Sprit
Or
Jesus the Father (son of God)
The Virgin Mary the Mother
Mary Magdelene embodies (d) the spirit
???
Debra, what you're sensing is not far from the heart of the matter.
Rather than look for a biological bloodline, Cynthia Bourgeault invites us to see Magdalene as the lineage bearer in another way. Not by womb, but by wisdom. Not by physical seed, but by spiritual transmission. She received what Jesus gave in full measure. She understood it. She embodied it. She carried it forward.
In this light, the Holy Spirit isn’t a third person on a genealogy chart. It is what flows between them. The current of divine knowing. The shared heart. The conscious union that could only take root in someone who had the inner capacity to hold it. Magdalene wasn’t just a companion. She was the vessel through which the living presence could continue.
So maybe it’s not either-or. Maybe she was the Spirit. Maybe she carried it. Maybe she became it.
The sacred continues through those who are willing to receive and return love in the same pattern.
And Magdalene did.
Thank you Alek for helping me understand better. For so long I've wondered and questioned what I was taught as a child in my Catholic upbringing.
Just as with the sacraments I was taught, it seemed to take me further than closer to God.
An example is confession and the confessional. In-Showering In God's Grace, I wrote about my experience with confession and receiving absolution.
Showering in Loves Grace , I mean
Beautiful 🦋🌹❤️🩹🇨🇦