Review of Lincoln H. Blumell, Lady Eclecte: The Lost Woman of the New Testament (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2025). 314 pages. $48.00 (hardcover).
Abstract: For centuries, the consensus reading of 2 John 1 maintained that the epistle was written to a local church, metaphorically addressed as an “elect lady.” This has most especially been the case over the last 150 years of scholarship. However, new findings from Lincoln Blumell challenge the consensus reading, restoring the elect lady to her proper place as an actual individual in the early Christian world. This lady, moreover, can be identified by name, and it is only through haplography that confusion over her identity has been introduced at all. Blumell’s restoration of the text of 2 John 1, based on papyrological and manuscript evidence, is groundbreaking work that will shape scholarship on the New Testament and early Christianity for years to come.


Before my review formally begins, a disclosure is needed. During my studies at Brigham Young University, I was fortunate to work as a research assistant for Lincoln Blumell. During this time, he came across his findings that would eventually be published as Lady Eclecte: The Lost Woman of the New Testament.1 I reviewed and read each chapter of the book at various stages of the writing process, often multiple times. Aware of any bias I may have, I nonetheless [Page 72]highly encourage any and all readers interested in the New Testament to read this book.
Blumell’s work revisits an often-overlooked epistle in the New Testament, 2 John. Moreover, it focuses almost entirely on a single verse—in fact, it could be more accurate to say that it focuses almost entirely on the first four words in the Greek text of 2 John 1, typically translated as “The elder, to the elect lady” (Ὁ πρεσβύτερος ἐκλεκτῇ κυρίᾳ). The opening address to this letter has been so securely steeped in tradition that various attempts to understand the irregular Greek formula (and otherwise unattested form of address) have been presented over the years, without considering the possibility that the received reading is incorrect. Blumell, however, argues precisely that—and provides plenty of evidence for why the received reading should be emended (p. 83–84).
Utilizing his training in papyrology and the New Testament, Blumell is uniquely qualified to address this letter. This letter, after all, notes that it was originally written on papyrus: “Although I have much to write to you, I would rather not use papyrus and ink” (2 John 1:12; translation found on p. 59). Indeed, Blumell shows many correspondences between 2 John and other Greco-Roman papyri that have been preserved, showing that it is a typical letter of the first century AD, rather than an imagined “literary fiction” as other scholars have attempted to argue (pp. 58–70). And, as this epistle matches other papyri in length, style, and phraseology, so too did its original address: “The elder, to the lady Eclecte” (Ἐκλέκτῃ τῇ κυρίᾳ), meaning this epistle was written to an actual woman in the early Christian church (p. 83).
By emending the address in this way, the word elect is translated as a name, followed by the definite article (τῇ), followed by the word lady in the dative as a modifier. This address “conforms to the typical pattern of address in Roman-period letters that is also attested in 3 John 1,” with the definite article having been lost in a simple case of haplography (pp. 70, 83). This reading does, however, result in a few questions: 1) How does this reading make sense of the epistolary evidence? 2) Is this reading even attested in the manuscript evidence? And 3) Is the name Eclecte even attested?
Blumell answers each of these questions in full,