Martha and Mary [19]
Scripture Readings: Luke 10: 38-41; John 12: 1–7
It is always a dangerous, even foolhardy, venture to speak to a company of ladies on the subject of women. Already I am treading on fragile ground by alternating between ladies and women. My great grandmother who had the reputation of being a bit of a hot-head once walked out of a Guild meeting in Turriff because she felt patronised when a “Ladies’ Choir” came to sing to the “women” of the Guild. So, I feel a certain difficulty although I would rather not go for the “female person” alternative.
Let me also say that over many centuries, men in the church have managed to dismiss or patronise the contribution of women amazingly effectively. We are steadily moving towards a time of equal rights and opportunities for men and women.[20] Does the church need to catch up – or does the church need to go back to its roots and see what the practices actually were in the early church? We may get some surprises as we look at this question further. Anyway, do we always have to go back to the practices of the early church, assuming that they give us a template of perfection?
Of course, there are some people who would say that church is really a women’s organisation already. There is no doubt that their contribution to the Church of Scotland at all levels is not only substantial but also crucial. In so many ways, it is the women-folk who keep the show on the road.
Where I find most difficulty is in knowing whether the distinctive and complementary roles of men and women are something to be encouraged or not. My inclination is to say that they should be, since men and women are created different even although of equal status and worth in the sight of God. In other words, we are not just male or female persons. Also, both ministry and eldership are available to men and women on an equal basis.[21]
In Genesis 2:20, Eve is referred to as a helper [22] to Adam which seems to hint at a subordinate role. Yet in the Hebrew tradition a mother (and the Hebrew tradition did not think in terms of bachelors or spinsters) was to be:
· Honoured (Exodus 20: 12)
· Feared (Leviticus 19: 3)
· Obeyed (Deuteronomy 21: 18)
Men and women were expected to be married, and to be married within their tribe. Women could attend religious gatherings but had to be separate from the men. This is still the case today in Orthodox Jewish synagogues. A woman could inherit property, but only if there were no male heirs, so it was still very much a man’s world. For women, monogamy was the ideal state. It was not easy when men could have more than one wife, as in the earlier Old Testament times. Women were expected to bear children. For a woman to be “barren” was, very harshly, seen as a disgrace.
If we think of women in the Old Testament, some of the goodies who come to mind are:
Miriam
Deborah
Ruth
And the bad guys include:
Delilah
Jezebel
All of these could make fascinating studies in themselves.
In the world into which Jesus was born, women had a rather rough time in many ways. It had become very easy for a Jewish man to divorce an inconvenient wife. Widows and divorced women had to rely basically on family charity. If a Jewish man was walking along the street and his wife was coming in the opposite direction, he would not normally acknowledge or even recognise her!
Although the Christian church is often portrayed as being somewhat behind the times in its attitude to women, the real truth is that Jesus revolutionised the status of women, largely because he talked to so many of them, which was unheard of for a Jewish rabbi.
Jesus was born of Mary, who is described as being “blessed among women”. He had encounters with such diverse characters as Peter’s mother-in-law, the woman who came out of the crowd, the syro-phoenician woman, the women at the well and many others. Most of all, he spent a lot of time with Martha and Mary, sisters of Lazarus at their home at Bethany. I want to come back to Martha and Mary in a moment.
Jesus then had many encounters with women – he forgave them, healed and taught them and they in turn made provision for his journeys, gave him hospitality and extended other deeds of love.
It was women who stood at the foot of the cross, came to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus and were the first witnesses of the resurrection.
So the attitude of Jesus toward women was certainly revolutionary. He gave them a new status. They were clearly offered the Gospel in exactly the same way as men.
In the early church, the women were with the men in prayer and supplication with the other followers of Jesus in active fellowship with them.[23] They were among those who received the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It was (probably) in the home of John Mark’s mother that this took place and it became a centre for the young church in Jerusalem.
Paul’s first convert in Europe was Lydia, a seller of purple goods.[24] Priscilla, along with her husband (note the order of priority) taught Apollos the full truths of the Gospel.[25]
There are a great many influential women in the history of the church of the first few centuries, including a very impressive array of martyrs. There were certainly many holy women in the Celtic Church. At the great Synod of Whitby in 644 AD, Saint Hilda the formidable Abbess of Whitby, sat next to the King of Northumbria and was clearly a trusted scholar, advisor and confidante. There was considerable learning and scholarship in the many convents and monasteries that existed throughout what we are pleased to call the “Dark Ages”. When learning moved out of such places into the universities, which were only open to men, this was a great set-back to women. Even now, few people would see a nunnery or a convent as a place of learning and scholarship.
There is no time to speak of other influential women such as Hildegard of Bingen, Teresa of Avilla and Joan of Arc – and a great many others. I want to turn back now to Martha and Mary and look at them more closely.
Martha
There is only one person of that name in the Bible, which comes as somewhat of a relief.[26] She was the sister of Mary [27] and Lazarus (who was raised from the dead). All three seemed to live together in a house at Bethany. She seems to have operated as head of hospitality in the household. This would have been a relatively affluent home. Bethany was about two miles from Jerusalem and would today count as a desirable residential area. There is no record of Martha being married, although spinsters were unusual at this time. She could have been a widow, but we just do not know.
It says that she was “cumbered with much serving” – and the scholars can tell us that the root meaning behind the words gives a sense of being dragged around. In Scotland we would say she was “trauchled”. She could not get done all the things she wanted to do as a good hostess, so she got angry with her sister Mary and then with Jesus.
Yet, when her brother Lazarus died, it was Martha who went out to speak to Jesus. Do not make the mistake of thinking that because she was busy and efficient, she was unspiritual. It is interesting too to see in the next chapter, it says “Martha served”.[28] She was still getting on with her job but maybe now she saw things in a better proportion. She always wanted to do her best for Jesus. Jesus did not for a moment object to the many things that she did; but he did point gently to the one thing that had been forgotten.
And it certainly does not mean that it is always more spiritual to sit around. I know of some Christians who genuinely believe that the more services, Bible studies and prayer meetings they clock up by attendance, the more spiritual they will be. It reminds me of the indulgences and merits against which Martin Luther preached. However, worship, teaching and prayer are very important; it is matter of balance.
Mary
Although less is said about Mary at this point, she is, in many ways, a much more complex character. One of the obvious problems is that Mary is a common name and it is not always easy to know which one we are looking at. She is normally identified with the woman who anointed Jesus. However, there are accounts of anointing in all four Gospels [29] and it is difficult to fit them all neatly together.
The four accounts have in common the fact that the event took place in a house, at a meal and was carried out by a woman. In every account, someone objects. Matthew, Mark and John all identify the event as taking place in Bethany. Mark and Mathew record that the ointment was poured over the head of Jesus. John and Luke say that it was poured over his feet and that the women wiped them with her hair. (Are you still with me?)
Mathew and Mark simply state that it was a “woman” whereas Luke described her as a sinner, taken to imply that she was a prostitute. John alone identifies her as Mary of Bethany. Matthew and Mark state that this took place in the home of Simon the Leper, whereas Luke says it took place in the house of Simon the Pharisee. Although John identifies the event as taking place in Bethany, no particular house is mentioned.
Are there two events here or only one? The scholars argue and the truth may never be known. I take this little digression to show just how difficult it can be to make positive identifications of some characters of the Gospels. In mediaeval times, a conflated Mary appeared who seemed to be a mixture of the unnamed women in Luke’s Gospel, Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene.[30] The ancient wrong, going back to the time of Pope Gregory the Great, that identified Mary Magdalene as a repentant prostitute has been corrected in modern times but still lives on in popular perception.
In any event, Mary of Bethany knew that devotion to Jesus demanded more than service alone. We can get lost sometimes (and this applies to ministers just as much as lay people) in church affairs and good works and yet to forget our relationship with Jesus Christ. Mary could see just that bit further than her well intentioned and competent sister Martha. There is the wonderful little addition that wherever the Gospel is preached, the story of her devotion will be told.
As I ponder the story of Mary, the feeling of my heart is that I would rather be in succession to her than the whole company of the apostles. (G Campbell Morgan)
Contrast the two women.
They were alike in that both:
· Believed
· Had been converted
· Honoured Jesus
· Broke convention
· Did not radically change yet both went a stage further in their spiritual journey
·
But they were also very different
· Martha is portrayed as loving, honest, active, competent, impatient, someone who said what she thought. When she saw Jesus, she wanted to do something – but one thing still was needful.
· Mary is portrayed as being more thoughtful, with deep feelings but not so ready to express them in words nor was she as practical as her sister.