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.

This is a short but good article that I found at Cleveland.com:

Mary Magdalene in fact and fiction
by David Briggs (The Plain Dealer columnist)

The thrust of this article is that one sexual fiction about Mary Magdalene-that she was a prostitute-has been popularly replaced by a different sexual fiction; namely, that she was Jesus’ wife and the mother of his children. This isn’t the first I’ve come across this point. Voiced mostly by feminists concerned that no woman, Mary Magdalene included, should be remembered primarily for her sexuality (positive or negative), the issue is even more volitile given that both seem to be imagined reputations anyway. Why not focus on things that we’re told Mary Magdalene actually did, rather than what she may or may not have done with her female plumbing?

But to manufacture a new sexual myth around Mary Magdalene and reduce her role to supportive spouse is hardly what people celebrating strong, independent women leaders in early Christianity consider helpful.

“It ultimately undercuts women’s leadership because it focuses on the fiction of Mary of Magdala’s marital status rather than the fact of her leadership as the primary witness to Jesus’ Resurrection,” according to Sister Christine Schenk, executive director of Cleveland-based FutureChurch, an independent Catholic group.

I don’t disagree. Although there is definitely some “looking the other way” going on in regards to what mythology today’s women find valuable about Mary Magdalene, I think it is extremely important to look at Mary Magdalene’s most likely historical identity. Far and away, this is the role she filled as apostle of the apostles. Within Christianity, this is definitely the most important aspect of Mary Magdalene’s story.

“Rather than speculate falsely that Mary of Magdala was married to Jesus,” Schenk said, “it would be better to imitate her generosity and courage in accompanying a condemned political prisoner through a torturous death; and her faith in proclaiming God’s resurrection.”

Not surprisingly, the only expert quoted in the article is Sister Christine Schenk, who has been working with FutureChurch for many years to get as many Mary Magdalene feast day celebrations started as possible. This organization lobbies for female ordination as well as a married priesthood, and Mary Magdalene is their “poster girl.” Although I’m supportive of the FutureChurch cause, it’s good to keep their goals in mind when considering their position on Mary Magdalene’s identity.