by D. N. Carter
“Why do you need even tell us all this for a foundation for our minds… what end does that serve?” the farrier asked quizzically and looked at Simon as if for support.
“So that what I tell you later does not shock you nor surprise you,” the old man answered.
“So…you are playing with our minds. I cannot see how any of this has relevance to a sword,” the Genoese sailor exclaimed.
“But…but you don’t understand. Jesus’s marriage to Mary was a secret. These texts only give tiny clues. The real truth of Jesus’s marriage was hidden, and that’s why the non-canonical gospels say so little about it. Of course this could be true, theoretically speaking. And this is where it all comes down to faith. But as I continue this story, I will proffer other clues and evidence that show a different side to this story,” the old man explained as everyone around the table looked at one and other, with an air of suspicion entering the room almost.
“Can it not be argued that proponents of the marriage of Jesus myth, or truth, have an agenda and are simply trying to strip Jesus of his uniqueness, and especially his deity? They want a Jesus who was a mere human being, one with spiritual insight, but otherwise ordinary. The supposed marriage of Jesus is taken by many to be proof that he really wasn’t God in the flesh, but only a mortal man. Along with Christians throughout the ages, I believe that Jesus was fully God and fully human. To be sure, I can’t fully comprehend or explain this mystery, but I believe it nevertheless. My faith in the unique nature of Jesus doesn’t demand that he was single, ironically enough. Jesus could have married and maintained his sinless, human-divine nature surely, or is sex truly a sin in itself then?” the Templar stated and asked quietly. His brother looked at him surprised. “What?”
“You surprise me, brother, for I did not expect such an eloquence of you,” the Hospitaller joked. Miriam looked at the Templar adoringly as was plain for all to see.
“Briefly, in answer all I can say is that, historically, many Christians think that sex is somehow intrinsically sinful. Although the Old Testament makes it abundantly clear that sex was a part of God’s good creation, you only have to read Genesis 1-2 or the Song of Solomon, but as Christianity was pressed through the mould of Greek philosophy and early Christian asceticism, it emerged with a different shape, one in which sexual intimacy between husband and wife was a physical necessity, but not a wonderful part of God’s creation. Christians who reject the goodness of sex argue that Jesus didn’t marry because it would have been wrong for him to be sexually intimate with his wife. This view is not consistent with biblical revelation, which celebrates sexual intimacy in marriage. So it wasn’t the wrongness of sex that kept Jesus single if indeed he ever was,” the old man explained as the wealthy tailor hurriedly pulled out his own Bible and started to flick through the pages to Genesis.
8 – 25
“Well, Jesus couldn’t have been married because, if he had been, then he might have fathered a child, and this would lead to all sorts of theological problems,” Simon argued.
“Exactly…I agree that it would be hard to figure out theologically what to do with the child of Jesus. But that is precisely why any hint of Jesus being married and having children would be so guarded. And would any child inherit a sinful nature? Would that child be three-fourths human and one-fourth God? Of course God could have kept a married Jesus from conceiving a child. So it’s possible that Jesus didn’t marry because of the complications associated with his fatherhood, but a pragmatic reason for the singleness of Jesus some have argued was because he knew that he wouldn’t be able to fulfil his marital and parental obligations adequately. If Jesus knew, even years before his itinerant ministry began, that he’d be roaming around the Galilean countryside preaching and healing, then he might well have determined that this wasn’t a good basis for family life. Moreover, if Jesus knew that his ministry would lead to confrontation with the authorities and ultimately death at the hand of Rome, then he might have thought that this was not suitable for a husband and or father,” the old man detailed.
“Much like the dilemma Paul found himself in then with Alisha?” Gabirol said quietly as he thought aloud. All looked at him briefly before the old man continued.
“A theological reason for the singleness of Jesus is detailed in Matthew 19 when he is asked about the circumstances in which divorce is lawful. His answer makes it clear that he holds marriage in the highest regard, and that divorce is therefore legal in rare circumstances only (vv. 3-9). In response to Jesus’s ‘hard line’ on divorce, his disciples say, ‘If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry’ (v. 10). Jesus responds: ‘Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can’ (vv. 11-12). Most believe, and I agree, that Jesus is not speaking here of literal eunuchs, but of those who are celibate, and, in most cases, unmarried. Some people, Jesus explains, chose to be celibate ‘for the sake of the kingdom of heaven’ (v. 12). To put it differently, some people might choose to devote all that they are to proclaiming and living out God’s kingdom. They would find earthly responsibilities, such as those that go with marriage and parenting, a hindrance to their kingdom calling. Such as priests and nuns of course. This is similar to the situation of the disciples, who were called away from their professions, fishermen, tax collectors, et cetera, in order to follow Jesus with singular purpose. So, in light of the coming of God’s kingdom, and in light of Jesus’s commitment to announce and inaugurate the kingdom, he might have chosen to remain single so that nothing would distract him from his primary calling and purpose. I am sure most knights who have sworn vows can fully understand this? Although Jesus does not say specifically ‘The agenda of the kingdom explains why I am not married’ I believe that this passage from Matthew 19 provides a theologically satisfying reason for why Jesus remained single. If Jesus were not married, at least one of the Bible’s gospels would have mentioned it and offered some explanation for his unnatural state of bachelorhood. The explanation, in Jesus’s own words, is that the kingdom of God calls some people, including Jesus himself, to a wholehearted commitment and investment that precludes getting married. Christianity isn’t a figment of the imagination. It’s not wishful thinking. It’s based upon what God has done in history, most of all through Jesus Christ. Thus we should make every effort to find out what really happened. Wild theories that depend on unreliable evidence produced centuries after an event might make for entertaining stories and myths but they aren’t the stuff of genuine faith. Perhaps the most amazing facts concerning the relationship of Mary Magdalene and Jesus are those that emerge from the pages of Scripture, and which, ironically, are also supported in much of the non-canonical gospels as well. Mary was a close follower of Jesus, who accompanied him on his journeys, helped to support him financially, learned from him, remained faithful to him even in his darkest hour when his male disciples fell away, was the first to see him after the resurrection, and was the first person in history to announce to others the good news that Jesus is risen. Jesus’s intentional inclusion of Mary, in a day when Jewish teachers almost never had female disciples or taught women, is a striking symbol of the inclusiveness of the kingdom of God. Most women living under God’s reign will still fill traditional roles of wife and mother, though single women have new freedom and power to serve God in their singleness (1 Corinthians 7). But women will not be defined primarily by their roles in the family, but by their relationship to Jesus as his disciple. This was true of Mary Magdalene in the first century, and it’s true of every female Christian today. But here”, the old man said and removed a small 8cm by 4cm fragment of parchment, “this is but one copy of many. Some will say it is fake or forged. It could be argued that its very content undermines centuries of Church dogma by suggesting the Christian Messiah was no
t celibate. This fragment contains a phrase where Jesus, speaking to his disciples, says ‘my wife’. In the text, Jesus appears to be defending her against some criticism, saying ‘she will be my disciple’. Two lines later he then tells the disciples: ‘I dwell with her.’ If genuine, the document casts doubt on the centuries old official representation of Magdalene as a repentant whore and overturns the Christian ideal of sexual abstinence. It elaborates an ancient and persistent undercurrent in Christian thought that Jesus and Magdalene were in fact a couple. The incomplete manuscript is as you can see written in the ancient Egyptian Coptic language and that single fragment cast’s doubt on the whole Catholic claim of a celibate priesthood based on Jesus’s celibacy. This so-called ‘Gospel of Jesus’s Wife’ may have been discarded ‘because the ideas it contained flowed so strongly against the ascetic currents of the tides in which Christian practices and understandings of marriage and sexual intercourse were surging. What this shows is that there were early Christians for whom…sexual union in marriage could be an imitation of God’s creativity and generativity and it could be spiritually proper and appropriate. It was probably composed in Greek a century or so after the crucifixion, then subsequently transcribed into Coptic. Its significance instead lies in the possibility that an early Christian sect drew spiritual succour from portraying their prophet as having a wife. This representation of Jesus as a man with earthly passions and needs has not survived in the doctrines of the established Churches, which emphasise celibacy and asceticism as a spiritual ideal. It is of the second half of the fourth century AD and its probable origin is in Upper Egypt. These manuscripts, including the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip and the Secret Revelation of John, outline the so-called Gnostic version of Christianity, which differs sharply from the official Church line,” the old man said as he passed the parchment to the Templar.
“What is this word Gnosticism?” Simon asked.
“It is from Greek meaning knowledge. Gnosticism is a very young term for a set of esoteric religious beliefs found among earlier Christian groups who believed the realisation of intuitive knowledge is the way to salvation. In general, they believe that the material world was created not by God but via some intermediary ‘being’ sometimes identified as Ahriman, Satan or Yahweh. Jesus is identified by some Gnostics as an embodiment of the supreme being who became incarnate to bring gnosis to the earth. Others deny that Jesus was God made flesh, claiming him merely to be a human who reached divinity through enlightenment and taught his disciples to do the same. The movement spread in areas controlled by the Roman Empire and Arian Goths, and the Persian Empire; it continued to develop in the Mediterranean and Middle East before and during the second and third centuries. Persecuted and often cut off from each other, ancient Christian communities had very different opinions on fundamental doctrines regarding Jesus’s birth, life and death. It was only with the establishment of Christianity as the state religion of the Roman Empire that the Emperor Constantine summoned three hundred bishops to issue a definitive statement of Christian doctrine. This so-called Nicene Creed, named for Nicaea, the town where they met, affirmed a model of Christian belief that is to this day taken as orthodoxy. Those who disagreed with the official line as established by the Council of Nicaea were in time branded by the Roman Church as heretics and their teachings suppressed. But much of what is written within all the accepted canonical and non-canonical gospels carries the same code anyway. The symbolism and hidden mathematics, as I shall reveal,” the old man said and took a deep breath.
“But, all that aside, I want to know what happened to Paul and Alisha and how they got married,” Sarah interrupted almost.
“Well, for Paul and Alisha, much had to be discussed, especially how they would bring up their child especially in regard to Jesus,” the old man started to explain when Simon interrupted.
“Why?” he demanded.
“Why? Because Muslims revere Jesus, known to them as ’Isa, as a great prophet, but do not believe he is divine. Knowing this, would Paul shy away from describing Jesus as the Son of God, or praying in Jesus’s name, even if he and Alisha agreed to raise their children Christian? If it had been decided to raise the child as a Muslim, wouldn’t they be teaching the doctrine of tawhid, the absolute Oneness of God, and the Muslim belief that Jesus is a prophet but not divine? Both would feel pressured to play down certain aspects of their faith for the sake of harmony. Firgany had explained to them that they should focus upon beliefs held in common to increase family unity, but it would be naive to believe that there would be no problems. According to the law in force in the Latin Church, a mixed marriage needs for liceity the express permission of ecclesiastical authority. In the case of disparity of cult an express dispensation from this impediment is required for the validity of the marriage. This permission or dispensation presupposes that both parties know and do not exclude the essential ends and properties of marriage; and furthermore that the Catholic party confirms the obligations, which have been made known to the non-Catholic party, of preserving his or her own faith and ensuring the baptism and education of the children in the Catholic faith. Islamic men may marry outside of their faith only if their spouse is Christian or Jewish. In fact, the prophet Muhammad had a Christian wife and a Jewish wife. A non-Muslim wife is not required to adopt any Muslim laws, and her husband cannot keep her from attending church or synagogue. However, Islamic women are forbidden from marrying non-Muslim men unless the spouse agrees to convert to Islam. So this aspect could prove a major hurdle to Paul and Alisha. Paul said he had no problem converting if that was the only way he could marry her. Also there is much confusion about the detail of the laws of ownership and property and why going to Alexandria was a good idea. There is no harm if a priest is present at the ceremony of marriage, and he should be present if he is the guardian of the bride, because it is not permissible for a Muslim to be a guardian of a non-Muslim. The same applies for the person who conducts the marriage. There is no harm for the priest to conduct the marriage if he is entrusted to do so by the guardian of the bride and the marriage is not valid without the consent of the guardian, so in this sense, if Firgany agreed, as Alisha’s father and guardian he could consent to Niccolas marrying them so long as he obtained all and every special dispensation required. With his contacts and influence, and primarily for the safety of Alisha, he obtained these,” the old man explained.
“But why and how could he obtain those?” Gabirol asked.
“That, I will likewise reveal in good time also. But know that Islam sets some conditions which should be fulfilled for the marriage to be valid and without these conditions, the marriage is invalid: one, defining the bride and bridegroom; it is not permissible for the guardian to say, ‘I agree to marry my daughter to you’ while he has other daughters older and not married and the bride has to be designated by name. Two, agreement of both the bride and bridegroom. Three, the Wali, guardian, should be present, Ahmed and Abu Dawud reported that the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, said: There is no marriage without a Wali. Four, two witnesses should be present. Five, the bride and bridegroom should have no marriage impediments, as in one of them should not be forbidden to the other due to lineage or suckling, and they should not be in a state of Ihram, like when performing the rituals of Hajj. Entering the church for the purpose of conducting the marriage is not permissible for a Muslim, because if he or she does so, they approve of their disbelief, and helps them in their religion and other very serious matters. In addition to this, the husband is not permitted to prevent his Christian wife from practising her religion.”
“So how did they get around that as it states clearly a Muslim woman may not marry a Christian?” Sarah asked.
“Yes a Muslim man is allowed to marry a Christian woman, but a Christian man is not permitted to marry a Muslim woman yet Muslims claim that Islam is open and tolerant. Islam means equality and no discrimination. But it is simply not permissible for a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim man. It is permiss
ible for a Muslim man to marry a Christian or Jewish woman strictly under these two conditions: She is a true Christian or Jew, not by name and or ancestral background. She did not turn away from Islam and become a Christian or Jew. The Qur’an in Sura 5:5 says, ‘likewise you are permitted to marry chaste believing women (Muslims) or chaste women among the people who were given the Scripture, as in Jews and Christians…’ (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 427). This verse says that Islam permits Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women who are Christians and Jews, but a Jewish or Christian man may not marry a Muslim woman. What is the rationale behind the ruling? Beyond any doubt, Islam is patriarchal, so a Muslim man must have final control in the relationship. For example, Sura 4:34 says that a husband may hit his wife, but no verse in the Qur’an says a wife may hit her husband, as if domestic violence in any form is acceptable?” the old man shrugged. “It may be true that Mohammad at first respected Judaism and Christianity, but he turned against them later on in his life, so this meant that in seventh-century Arab culture a Muslim man may dominate his wife or wives, but not a Christian man, who would dominate his Muslim wife. Islam allegedly is the best and final religion for all humankind and the Muslim man may convert his submissive wife. Perhaps in Muhammad’s mind no woman could ever convert a Muslim man, if he is a traditionalist. Therefore, Christian women must be careful about marrying Muslim men. Islam does not give the same rights to women as it does to men in this respect.”