Daily Readings | 21 Feb 25 | 2 John; the Death of Christ & the Women Onlookers
Scripture Readings: 2 John 1–13; Mark 15:22, 25, 33–41
Saint/Feast Day: St. Timothy of Symbola in Bithynia
“St. Timothy lived the ascetic life at the Monastery of Symbola on Mount Olympus in Bithynia. Through constant prayer and ascetic labours through many years, he received the gift of dispassion, remaining serene in spirit even when faced by the persecution of the iconoclasts. He entered into eternal rest about 795.”
From, L. Farley, Eastern Saints.
Readings: 2 John 1–13; Mark 15:22, 25, 33–41
For today’s reflection, I would like to focus on a more marginalized aspect of the Crucifixion scene. All too often are we distracted—and rightfully so, as I have done recently—by the features of Christ’s death: the timing, the actions taken by others, and (possibly most importantly) the final words.
But, who remains beside Jesus when he is enthroned on the cross at the end of Mark’s Gospel? Is it Peter and the other disciples? Is it James and John? Is it the High Priest and Pilate?
No. It was the women:
|40| There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Mag′dalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salo′me, |41| who, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered to him; and also many other women who came up with him to Jerusalem. (Mark 15:40–41)
The dearth of (male) followers and disciples/apostles should be striking to the reader. Throughout the Gospel, it has been the men who have been center stage when it comes to Jesus’ ministry, e.g., those called (1:16–20; 2:13–17; 3:7–12) and the beneficiaries of his healings (2:1–12; 3:1–6; 5:1–20; 7:31–37; 8:22–26; 10:46–52).
That said, there are significant passages where women are the focus of the narrative: The girl healed and the woman with a hemorrhaging (5:21–43); The Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (7:24–30). Simon’s mother-in-law is also described as serving Jesus (1:31). These, though, are certainly the exception.
This climactic moment in the Gospel, as I have been reiterating in the daily reflections, is tinged with irony and unexpected—if not antithetical—fulfillments of foreshadowing in the Gospel on a narrative level. So here, it is most fitting that those whom you would expect to be at Christ’s (mocking) coronation and (ironic) enthronement—the men—are nowhere to be seen.
Their absence is the fulfillment of Jesus’ words that Peter and the disciples would abandon him:
|26| And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. |27| And Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away; for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.’” (14:30, quoting Zech 13:7)
So now, let us look a bit closer at the scene and its significance.
Who is at the Foot of the Cross in Mark?
According to Mark, there are three named women present: “Mary Mag′dalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salo′me.” So, who are these women? Joel Marcus, Mark 8–16, 1059 comments, “We know virtually nothing about these women.”
Mary Magdalene is first identified here in Mark—though she has a more significant role in the other Gospels. Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses has been identified by some to be Mary the mother of Jesus, but this is exceedingly unlikely—see Marcus, Mark 8–16; A. Collins, Mark; R. T. France, Mark. And finally, Salome is a complete mystery; E. Boring, Mark, 437 notes, “Salome is mentioned only in Mark and is otherwise unknown, though apparently recognized by the Markan readership (cf. “Alexander and Rufus,” 15:21).”
It is shocking, then, that in Mark there is a significant absence here (at least by name). First, though, who is present in the other Gospels?
Matthew seemingly identifies Salome as “the mother of the sons of Zebedee” since he has changed this detail from Mark—yet, this is speculation. Luke eliminates all the named women. And John may be identifying other “women [who were] looking on from afar”: Mary—the mother of our Lord—her sister, and Mary the wife of Clopas (which could be his identification of Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses?—that is, assuming he is attempting to clarify the Synoptics).
It really is a mess attempting to identify all these Marys,—and Salome—especially “since about half of the Jewish women in Palestine in the Second Temple and Mishnaic periods bore these names (see Ilan, “Notes,” 191–92)” (Marcus, Mark 8–16, 1060).
At least on Mark’s narrative level, it appears that Mary, Jesus’ mother, is missing at the crucifixion. It is from John that we learn this detail.
Since this is only a short reflection, I will not attempt to unravel the Gordian Knot. Rather, I will just say that these differing details are largely due to the theological emphases of these documents. The Gospel writers do not all record the same details, nor do they describe all events in the exact same way.
The Gospels are, first and foremost, theological/christological records and reflections. Their purpose is not primarily historical, so it should be kept in mind that the narrative details provided or omitted are done so for a reason. The thrust of the document should be the focus rather than speculating why a detail was removed or altered. Let each Gospel writer speak for himself and then put them in conversation.
So finally, for Mark, these women would have been known when the Gospel was written in all likelihood. What may seem as oblique references to us would probably have been fully intelligible to early Christian readers. This is what makes identifying people mentioned in the NT so maddening—e.g., those named at the end of the Pauline epistles. The knowledge is presumed, so little clarification is provided.
Ultimately, the driving question that must be asked now near the end of the Gospel is this: who among all of Jesus’ followers was present at the cross? It was the women.
The Significance of Women at the Cross
In true Markan fashion, the unexpected has come to pass. The men have abandoned Christ when he has come into his glory, and it the most unreliable who have witnessed his death—as will also be the case at the empty tomb (16:1–8).
R. T. France, Mark 665 notes,
And it will be to them [the women] first that the message of the resurrection is entrusted. In a society which gave no legal status to the testimony of women (e.g., Josephus, Ant. 4.219; m. Roš HaŠ. 1:8; m. Šebu. 4:1; Sipre on Dt. 19:15), everything will nevertheless come to depend on their witness to what they have seen and heard. Thus, as Myers, 396–97, points out with gusto, ‘these women now become the “lifeline” of the discipleship narrative.… They are the true disciples.… This is the last—and, given the highly structured gender roles of the time, surely the most radical—example of Mark’s narrative subversion of the canons of social orthodoxy.’
Mark has chosen the most unlikely to be the witnesses of the death of Christ and his resurrection. It is the unreliable, the disenfranchised that will first preach the Gospel to the men who scattered when the Shepherd was struck.
This, on a narrative level, fits perfectly into place. The number of ironic and unexpected occurrences to fulfill the messianic mission of Christ has been mounting:
Peter proclaims the Christ, yet denies him (8:29; 14:66–72)
The High Priest’s unintentional declaration that Jesus is the Christ (14:61)
Pilate’s unintentional declaration that Jesus is the King of the Jews (15:2)
The Crowd’s assent that Jesus is King of the Jews (15:12–14)
Jesus’ mock coronation (15:16–20)
Jesus’ ironic enthronement on the Cross (15:21–32)
Jesus drinking “fruit of the vine” in the Kingdom of God (15:36)
And at the cross, who comprises the audience for the ushing in of the Kingdom? It is the Women.
It is the women who have the honor of first witnessing Jesus’ messianic fulfillment. It is the women who are at the empty tomb. It is the women who will first pronounce the Gospel to the (male) disciples (in Galilee).
This subversion of what might be expected is significant in the grand scheme of Mark’s dramatic play. Throughout the Gospel, the men have had such a prominent role, yet here they have forsaken their Christ. Only the women have remained faithful of those who followed Jesus, and it especially would have been a striking detail in the first century.
Concluding Remarks
This (shocking) occurrence should remind us as readers that the Lord does not always pick the reliable, the strong, the socially prominent, or the most anticipated to enact his will.
Jesus himself in the Gospel of Mark became an unexpected Christ who does not embody the Messiah that the Jews of the first century would have chosen.
It is only natural, in turn, that the women take a prominent position here at the climax of the Gospel. The perceived most loyal followers of Christ—Peter, James, and John—are not the ones who have this honor. Rather, the focus is on three women, who have not played a central role.
This, in turn, dramatically colors the idea of what discipleship is. The closest followers of Christ were unwilling to pick up their cross and follow him (8:34–38) when the opportunity arose. The women, rather, were willing, even if from “afar.”
It was the women, who were far closer to answering Jesus’ call to discipleship at the climax of the Gospel.
If you have enjoyed this brief reflection on today’s Byzantine readings and wish to read more about NT studies, would you kindly share this post and subscribe.
