It’s ironic that I recently chose to renew the magdalene.org domain after allowing it to lie fallow for so many years. I let it expire but after a few days decided it wasn’t time yet to let it go, gave in and paid to renew it once more.
Now I’m glad I did. Look at what I almost wasn’t able to share:
I haven’t had time to do much analysis of the draft of her upcoming paper (January 2013, Harvard Theological Review), but what I’ve seen is compelling, with a couple of reservations.
First, the same reservation that King herself has had, which is the authenticity of the fragment. When something comes along that so perfectly addresses an outstanding hot-button, it is automatically suspect. She has apparently become satisfied that it is genuine, and I trust her scholarship, so I’m going to take that leap of faith. It is a leap of faith though.
Second, it’s such a small fragment that its placement in the context of its parent manuscript could give it a new meaning. The chance of the context shifting to such a degrees seems unlikely, but still I mention it because even though this fragment of text, its translation and interpretation are being delivered to the public by a very reputable scholar, we still must approach it critically.
There is an exciting time on the horizon. I wish the Da Vinci Code craze hadn’t happened already because really, all of that speculation should have been saved for news like this rather than a sensational novel. Be that as it may, I’m VERY glad that I renewed my domain. Even though I’m a few years out from any serious work in the area of Mary Magdalene studies, real scholarship occurs at a relatively slow pace. I’m hoping there won’t be TOO much to catch up on. What’s a few years to a woman who has a 2000 year history?