The Magdalene Review

Hey, hey, my, my.

I’ve tried thus far to make it a point to avoid discussing much about my non-Mary Magdalene activities in this blog, because, well, it’s a blog about Mary Magdalene. But in light of my reduced posting frequency, I thought an explanation might be appropriate.

Actually, there are a couple of reasons for the lack of activity here. First, I’ve started a new job that doesn’t have the flexibility for posting during the day, and my evenings are usually devoted to the always-bouncing three-year-old in our house. There is always a period of adjustment when I start a new job until I find a place in my new schedule for Mary Magdalene work. I’m sure it will open up fairly soon.

Second–and this is probably the more relevant reason–I’m still suffering from a bit of Da Vinci Code burnout. It isn’t that Mary Magdalene or Biblical studies or Christian art are any less important to me than they were six months ago, it’s just that I feel like I’m hearing the same song on the radio every time I turn it on. That’s enough to tarnish even a favorite melody for a time.

In spite of my posting inactivity, I do have a couple of things that I’m working on. I’ve started collecting more personal stories about Mary Magdalene for what I hope will be a book-length project. I’ve also started gathering references and resources for a web page / essay about the recent gossip that Mary Magdalene was represented as pregnant in many famous works of art. As far as I know, this rumor started with Margaret Starbird, and it has always bothered me deeply. I think it’s a case of viewing works of art way outside of their intended context, so what I’m attempting to do is establish some context for people who might not be aware of it otherwise. My husband, Chris, has been conversing with some medieval costume historian-types to support me in this endeavor, so we have yet another list of titles to check out from the UW library. I’ve also been in touch with a few art and fashion historians myself, with mixed success.

My to-do list is growing stagnant and neglected (and you should see my email inbox!), so I’ll be trying to get down to more Mary Magdalene business soon!

MM in the news

From The Australian:

Righting wrongs about Mary
by Jill Rowbotham

Focusing on the opinion of one Elizabeth Fletcher, author of a book and website about women in the Bible, Rowbotham emphasizes Mary Magdalene’s Gospel importance and makes a few arguments against the DVC perspective, including:

The chief reason to believe Mary did not have a sexual relationship with Jesus was that his enemies never accused him of sexual misbehaviour.

After his death they accused him of illegitimacy, regarded as scandalous for a religious teacher, and of being “too fond of eating and drinking, especially with the wrong kind of people”.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if Jesus was actually married to Mary Magdalene, he wouldn’t be accused of sexual misbehavior either. The above represents a rather weak argument, in my opinion. Still, it’s interesting to see the creativity being exercised in addressing this question.

Nancy Qualls-Corbett

I was happy to see the following article at Everything Alabama this morning (from The Birmingham News):

Jungian realizes pull of `Da Vinci’
by Kathy Kemp

Birmingham resident, Nancy Qualls-Corbett, is a Jungian psychologist whose perspective on ideas of masculine and feminine principles/qualities I find deeply interesting. Author of The Sacred Prostitute: Eternal Aspect of the Feminine, it seems to me that Qualls-Corbett has come the closest to putting her finger on why Margaret Starbird’s “sacred union” mythology has struck a nerve in our society. From the article:

She’s particularly interested in Mary Magdalene’s role in the story and the world’s increasing fascination with her. “My speculation is that people are seeing the need for balance in the world, and that would be the feminine side – of relating to each other, of appreciating the arts as well as science.”

A vast simplification, but very in line with my thinking as well.

Dr. Qualls-Corbett is giving a lecture in Birmingham on Friday; details are in the article.

Tradition prevails

In the article that follows, found at the CatholicHerald.com, we see a member of Catholic clergy defending Mary Magdalene’s traditional reputation as a sinner. This is interesting to me since it seems that the choices on this issue are:

1. Disregard the tradition entirely
2. Embrace the tradition and defend it

Embracing the tradition simply because it is tradition, without defending its historical likelihood, doesn’t appear to be an option.

Here is the article:

Straight Answers: Myths, Truths about Mary Magdalene
by Fr. William P. Saunders

Not a word uttered about the fact that Rome has distanced itself from the tradition. After concluding his defense of the sinner reputation by agreeing with Pope Gregory the Great, Fr. Saunders goes on to say (emphasis is mine):

As far as The Da Vinci Code is concerned, what one cannot construe is some of the misconceptions they erroneously present: for instance, that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, the mother of Jesus’ child, a participant at the Last Supper, His prophetic successor, and a priestess. Such conclusions, despite the best efforts of pseudo scholars, have no foundation in sacred Scripture, sacred tradition, other historical resources or even heretical texts.

I find this amusing for some reason, even though he is clearly echoing the most commonly cited reasons for Mary Magdalene’s conflation with the other women. Maybe because one tradition is being overwritten by another for which there is about just as much evidence.